Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

News & Politics News & Politics

A Balanced Plan to Avert the Sequester and Reduce the Deficit

Posted by on Mar. 7, 2013 at 6:57 PM
  • 27 Replies
1 mom liked this


A Balanced Plan to Avert the Sequester and Reduce the Deficit


President Obama believes that our guiding focus must be growing the economy and strengthening the middle class. That’s his North Star, and it's why he won't accept cuts that force the middle class to bear the burden of deficit reduction.

The President has put forward a specific plan that will avoid sequestration's harmful budget cuts and reduce the deficit in a balanced way — by cutting spending, finding savings in entitlement programs and closing tax loopholes.

Both parties have already come together to cut the deficit by more than $2.5 trillion and today the deficit is coming down at the fastest pace since then end of World War II.

President Obama's plan builds on this progress and would cut the deficit by another $1.5 trillion, bringing it below its historic average.

Learn More 




by on Mar. 7, 2013 at 6:57 PM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-10):
BlueRay
by Member on Mar. 7, 2013 at 7:03 PM
Id say 'yay' but I'll believe it when I see it.
Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
soonergirl980
by Member on Mar. 7, 2013 at 7:20 PM

He already got his revenue and where are the changes to discretionary spending? He needs to grow some balls and go after entitlement spending as well.

I also like how it includes "savings could be achieved by" reducing payments to drug companies. How? Where exactly is that going to come from? Encourage efficient care at hospitals? What exactly does that mean? Encourage beneficiaries to to seek high value health care and ask the more fortunate to pay more? Oh you mean take more from the people you are already taking the most from? What "other health savings'? Reform postal service and tsa agent fees? Oh you mean charge us more? Reform Federal retirement programs? Oh you mean cut benefits people earned in retirement while refusing to even look at entitlement programs.

nanaofsix531
by Platinum Member on Mar. 7, 2013 at 7:40 PM

Here you go.Call the speakers office and ask them.

CONTACT THE SPEAKER

  • Office of the Speaker
  • H-232 The Capitol
  • Washington, DC 20515
  • Phone: (202) 225-0600
  • Fax: (202) 225-5117
Quoting BlueRay:

Id say 'yay' but I'll believe it when I see it.


grandmab125
by Platinum Member on Mar. 7, 2013 at 7:57 PM
2 moms liked this

 BS.  He  just makes generalized statements, as he always does.  No where are there specifics in his so called plan.

cLanief
by Member on Mar. 7, 2013 at 8:04 PM
Aka.. cut military(possIble thousands of jobs lost)... make people pay more for everything... make sure the irs can take as much money as possible. Fuck everyone. Fuck government employees except politicians.
Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
143myboys9496
by Gold Member on Mar. 7, 2013 at 11:01 PM

 "Encourage beneficiaries to seek high value health care and ask the most fortunate to pay more."

Leads me to think this includes the taxes and fees imposed on those that will be able to maintain their employer sponsored health care...

Riiiggghhtt..because NONE of those people would be middle class...

 

"Reform postal service and TSA passenger security fees."

Wait..has there been a TSA surcharge for being felt up? And who from the postal service would need security?

 

"Reform federal retirement programs."

Can we start with congressional retirement? How about the fact they get paid their congressional salaries for life? how about NOT paying them extra money to sit on commitees?

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

Are we moving forward yet??

 

"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is a government big enough to take away everything that you have."---Thomas Jefferson

SallyMJ
by Ruby Member on Mar. 7, 2013 at 11:06 PM
1 mom liked this

The plan is balanced.

Obama already got his tax increases in the fiscal cliff negotiation in Dec. 2012.

Now, part 2: the cuts to increases in spending items. These smarter cuts will take the place of the sequester.

Very easy.

But Obama is a bit greedy, and wants to put his hand in the cookie jar again.

Sorry, Mr. President!! :)

29again
by Gold Member on Mar. 7, 2013 at 11:56 PM

Why is it so important NOW that requires the sequester to be changed/averted?  It was Obama's baby, and he said back in '11 that he would VETO any attempt by the Repubs to avert it.  How is the situation different now?  It was part of a deal made in the summer of 2011.  Does this mean that Obama does not mean what he says when he makes a deal with Congress?  That he will only implement the parts that benefit him?  It sure does sound like it.

For some reason, that chart of savings that "could be" achieved seems to be so superficial.  As do the "cuts" that he claims have already been made. 

grandmab125
by Platinum Member on Mar. 8, 2013 at 12:04 AM
1 mom liked this

 WTF is that first sentence you quoted supposed to mean?  Obamacare is already going to be taxing employees for their gold plated insurance.  Oh, and let's not forget, companies that provide health care plans, are getting a tax on those plans too.

Congress and Senate pension system is insane.  Even if you only serve one term, you get the same full retirement benefits as some one who has been doing it for 30 years.  Of course, I think they all should be limited to one four year term each, with no pension plan.  Texas state gov't is even better in that respect.  They only meet a certain number of times a year.  Their legislators have to actually have other jobs to support themselves.

The guy speaks with a forked tongue, and out of both sides of his mouth.  He's never really specific, and you can't decode what it is he is actually saying. 

Quoting 143myboys9496:

 "Encourage beneficiaries to seek high value health care and ask the most fortunate to pay more."

Leads me to think this includes the taxes and fees imposed on those that will be able to maintain their employer sponsored health care...

Riiiggghhtt..because NONE of those people would be middle class...

 

"Reform postal service and TSA passenger security fees."

Wait..has there been a TSA surcharge for being felt up? And who from the postal service would need security?

 

"Reform federal retirement programs."

Can we start with congressional retirement? How about the fact they get paid their congressional salaries for life? how about NOT paying them extra money to sit on commitees?

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

Are we moving forward yet??

 

 

grandma B

143myboys9496
by Gold Member on Mar. 8, 2013 at 12:13 AM

 The first sentence I quoted came from the table in the OP..I couldn't copy and paste so I had to type it.

So because I pay $437 per week for health insurance I'm most fortunate? And I should pay MORE?

I'm a little confused at your 1st paragraph comments.

Quoting grandmab125:

 WTF is that first sentence you quoted supposed to mean?  Obamacare is already going to be taxing employees for their gold plated insurance.  Oh, and let's not forget, companies that provide health care plans, are getting a tax on those plans too.

Congress and Senate pension system is insane.  Even if you only serve one term, you get the same full retirement benefits as some one who has been doing it for 30 years.  Of course, I think they all should be limited to one four year term each, with no pension plan.  Texas state gov't is even better in that respect.  They only meet a certain number of times a year.  Their legislators have to actually have other jobs to support themselves.

The guy speaks with a forked tongue, and out of both sides of his mouth.  He's never really specific, and you can't decode what it is he is actually saying. 

Quoting 143myboys9496:

 "Encourage beneficiaries to seek high value health care and ask the most fortunate to pay more."

Leads me to think this includes the taxes and fees imposed on those that will be able to maintain their employer sponsored health care...

Riiiggghhtt..because NONE of those people would be middle class...

 

"Reform postal service and TSA passenger security fees."

Wait..has there been a TSA surcharge for being felt up? And who from the postal service would need security?

 

"Reform federal retirement programs."

Can we start with congressional retirement? How about the fact they get paid their congressional salaries for life? how about NOT paying them extra money to sit on commitees?

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

Are we moving forward yet??

 

 

 

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)