Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
Doesn't the President's repeatedly mentiond desire of "a balanced approach" imply PoliticAverse Dec 2012 #1
I hope not democrattotheend Dec 2012 #6
You're right. Obama said to keep pressure on representatives of both parties to disallow changing freshwest Dec 2012 #2
This keeps John2 Dec 2012 #3
I think this weekend gives POTUS a whole new stance to argue from. Myrina Dec 2012 #4
Where is there any mention of the Pentagon's budget? Dustlawyer Dec 2012 #5
Exactly, we could cut a trillion from the pentagon and never miss it. grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #7
How do you cut a trillion from a $700 billion budget? mostlyconfused Dec 2012 #12
Over 10 years, that's what they were talking about in the article, although grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #13
Cutting half of the defense budget mostlyconfused Dec 2012 #14
Off the top of my head? grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #17
"Our real revenue would come from taxing the rich at pre-Reagan levels"? Doubtful. mostlyconfused Dec 2012 #15
Well, now we're talking about paying off the debt.... grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #18
Lets see how well that works for France. dkf Dec 2012 #26
The last time they did that, it worked out really well for them, but for the rich, grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #29
No need to kill them, people who want to pay will stay and others will leave. dkf Dec 2012 #34
I wonder if other current issues will allow significant entitlement cuts plethoro Dec 2012 #8
No cuts to Medicare, Social Security or Medicaid. JDPriestly Dec 2012 #9
a trillion from the rich, a trillion from the poor. Seems a little unfair to me. olddad56 Dec 2012 #10
The rich never pay humbled_opinion Dec 2012 #11
Really wish they'd talk annual numbers, not 10 year numbers mostlyconfused Dec 2012 #16
It's just talk. I don't think Boehner can keep the Tea Party on board. Redfairen Dec 2012 #19
It's a revenue problem, NOT a spending problem (except for the bloated military, which is 60% of it) grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #20
You can't raise enough revenue to fix the problem mostlyconfused Dec 2012 #21
Ahem, but Bull Hockey grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #22
Sadly, that would get maybe 10 votes in the Senate democrattotheend Dec 2012 #23
Thing is, we can tax our way out of this debt that the wealthiest Americans have led us into - grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #24
Simple if we don't live in the real world, or have to do real math mostlyconfused Dec 2012 #25
One correction to my math... mostlyconfused Dec 2012 #27
How about a 79.6% rate or a 94% rate? mostlyconfused Dec 2012 #28
The President's numbers come from the CBO, and have been fully vetted, grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #30
CBO also says Obamacare will cost twice as much as originally projected mostlyconfused Dec 2012 #31
Disagree, thanks! grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #32
Disagree with tax return data direct from the IRS? mostlyconfused Dec 2012 #33
my mom with Alzheimer's gets $2200/mo Soc. Sec, her expenses are $14,000/mo wordpix Dec 2012 #35
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Fiscal Cliff Talks Center...»Reply #7