Our goal is to have intelligent discussion of the topics of the day. We realize everyone has their opinion and they should be allowed to express it in a discussion forum without calling each other names. We learn from discussion and not from name calling or argument.We use cookies to personalise content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners. See details
Contact Form
Showing posts with label Entitlement programs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Entitlement programs. Show all posts
Have you heard? China is set to pass America as the world’s No. 1 economy — this year.
For many years now, we’ve been told this day of reckoning was years, if not decades, away. We always knew it would come someday. But under the leadership and economic policies of President Barack Obama, it’s suddenly jumped way ahead of all previous projections.
What an embarrassment. The United States has had the unchallenged No. 1 economy in world since 1872 (when we passed the United Kingdom). Since 1872. Eighteen hundred and seventy-two. Let that sink in for a while.
One hundred and forty-two years of world dominance erased in only six years under one man’s leadership.
But wait. As an infomercial pitchman might say, “There’s much more.”
The same thing happening to the economy is happening to the American quality of life. Under Obama, for the first time in history our middle class isn’t No. 1 in the world. Canada’s middle class is now No. 1. And the entire rest of the world is catching up fast. Soon we’ll be No. 10, then No. 20. How low can we go?
The same thing is happening to entrepreneurs and small business. For the first time in history, businesses in America are being destroyed faster than they are starting. Amazing.
Under Obama, there are now more food-stamp recipients than the number of women working full-time in America.
Under Obama, the average full-time male employee now earns less (adjusted for inflation) than 40 years ago.
Under Obama, there are now 70 percent more Americans collecting entitlement checks than working in the private sector (148 million “takers” versus 86 million “makers”). This isn’t a conservative opinion. It’s a fact provided by the U.S. Census Bureau.
Under Obama, the number of working-age Americans not in the labor force is at all-time highs.
Under Obama, the workplace participation rate of men is the lowest in history.
Under Obama, the workforce participation rate of women is the lowest on record.
Under Obama, the workforce participation rate for black Americans is the lowest in history.
More than 800,000 people dropped out of the workforce last month. That’s almost 1 million Americans who have given up… in a month.
Because millions of the unemployed have given up looking for work, the unemployment rate has dropped to 6.3 percent. Obama calls that good news. Heck, at this rate the whole nation might give up looking for a job by the time Obama leaves office; and he’ll report we have reached full employment.
One man – Obama — has done that much damage. So forget the debate over whether Obama is a radical Marxist intent on the destruction of capitalism and America or whether he’s an inexperienced, incompetent, economically ignorant megalomaniac.
Does it really matter?
Obama is like the old joke about a dying man lying in the hospital with his wife of 50 years:
Murray is lying on his death bed in a hospital room. His wife Ida sits by his side.
Murray says, “Ida, you’ve always been by my side.
“You were there when I flunked out of college.
“You were there when I was fired from my first job.
“You were there when I opened a business and it failed.
“You were there when I filed for bankruptcy.
“You were there when I was paralyzed in the car crash.
“Now you’re here by my side as I lay dying of cancer.
“I’ve given this a lot of thought.
“Ida, darling, you’re a jinx. Get the hell out of my hospital room!”
At some point, you just have to conclude that Obama is our jinx. It doesn’t matter if it’s on purpose, or by mistake. The man is ruining our lives, our economy, our jobs and, most importantly, our children’s future.
And by the way, it isn’t just America he’s brought bad luck to. Obama hasn’t exactly been a good-luck charm for the people of the EU, Israel, Egypt, Syria, Libya, Iran, Afghanistan, North Korea or Ukraine either.
Obama is quite simply a jinx. Bad news. A storm cloud from hell. A walking disaster. He destroys whatever he touches — except for China and Russia. Those two evil empires suddenly turned best friends forever are thriving. All of our losses appear to be their gains.
Remember when Obama leaned over and whispered to the President of Russia that after his re-election he’d have “more flexibility” to help out Putin? Don’t look now, but it’s happening exactly as Obama whispered. I’m just surprised he didn’t whisper in Russian.
It seems every country in the world has been badly damaged by the policies of Obama — except Russia and China. Our decline is their shining moment. Suddenly, the world is Putin’s oyster. Suddenly, our military is a feckless joke, incapable of stopping Russia’s expansion plans. Suddenly, our obsession with green energy allows Russia’s economy to soar with energy revenues. Suddenly, our economy is stuck in reverse, while China’s economy explodes. Coincidence?
Funny how all this worked out. Makes you think, doesn’t it?
I’m Wayne Allyn Root for Personal Liberty. See you next week. God bless America.
Murray and Ryan Race the Clock for New Budget Deal
By Eric Pianin6 hours ago
The private and painstaking talks between Democratic Sen. Patty Murray and House Republican Paul Ryan are coming to a head, as the two sides press to craft a new budget plan to meet a Dec. 13 deadline. If they fail, the federal government will face a second round of automatic spending cuts and yet another possibility of a shutdown early next year.
The two sides long ago abandoned any hopes for a “Grand Bargain” of sweeping entitlement and tax reforms to address the nation’s long term debt and fiscal problems while authorizing more immediate measures to spur a lagging economic recovery.
Exhausted by a year of relentless partisan sniping over the budget and debt ceiling that culminated in a 16-day government shutdown in October, Senate Democrats and House Republicans are searching for a minimalist plan that protects their most cherished priorities while still being able to pass muster with both parties.
If they can’t cut a deal, the House, Senate and President Obama will find themselves back in crisis mode in early January, with only a week or so to hammer out an emergency measure to prevent another shutdown.
The biggest question hanging over the negotiations is whether Congress will block a second round of automatic spending cuts under the 2011 Budget Control Act or allow the sequester to continue.
The sequester was designed to achieve $1.2 trillion of savings over the coming decade absent congressional intervention. But with so many complaints from the Pentagon and federal agencies about the hardships being caused by the across the board cuts, Congress has been under pressure to do something about it.
The Senate is pressing to replace the sequester with a package of alternative spending cuts, tax loophole closings to raise almost $1 trillion in new revenue over 10 years, and some reforms of Medicare and other entitlement programs. The House, meanwhile, insists on authorizing $91 billion less in domestic spending in the coming year than the Senate favors and it unalterably opposes raising tax revenues for more spending.
"If we focused on doing some big grand bargain, like those prior efforts ... then I don't think we'll be successful because we'll focus on our differences,” Ryan, the House Budget Committee Chairman from Wisconsin, told Reuters earlier this fall. “Each party will demand that the other compromises a core principle and then we'll get nothing done."
Murray, the Senate Budget Committee chairwoman from Washington State, has been consistently more upbeat and optimistic than Ryan since the two began presiding over a bipartisan House-Senate budget conference committee and meeting privately.
“She is encouraged that the talks continue and hopeful that they continue to make progress to get to a deal,” Eli Zupnick, Murray’s chief spokesman, said this week.
The private talks and a series of tangential public hearings held by the committee have lacked the drama and suspense of previous negotiations going back to the budget and debt ceiling crisis of 2011, which led to the passage of the Budget Control Act and imposition of the sequester. With public approval of President Obama and Congress at record lows, neither party can afford another budget crisis or threat of default on the U.S. debt heading into the 2014 mid-term elections.
What’s more, while Democrats are eager to spare the president’s domestic agenda from additional automatic cuts, many Republicans are comfortable with the current budgetary status quo, even if it’s far from their ideal.
The automatic sequestration cuts locked in deficit savings, while the fiscal cliff deal at the start of this year locks in tax rates, so it takes a legislative change to increase revenues.
Neither party was happy with the $85 billion worth of automatic cuts in domestic and defense program this year, under the sequester. The next round of cuts will be even larger, in the range of $109 billion, throughout the fiscal year that runs through next Sept. 30.
A growing chorus of Republican defense hawks is particularly concerned that a second round of sequester cuts to the Pentagon budget would hollow out the nation’s armed forces.
In an Oct. 23 letter to Ryan and Murray, Republican members of the House Armed Services Committee warned, “Continued sequester would lead to the reduction of an additional 100,000 soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen from our Armed Forces, and cancellation of important programs providing key technologies and capabilities.”
Democrats are counting on this mounting GOP concern about defense to force Ryan into a compromise that would give them additional domestic funding and tax revenues. But several Republicans on the budget conference committee -- including Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) -- have suggested that another round of automatic cuts in defense is preferable to taking a bad deal.
“Obviously, [Ryan] would like to change the sequester to protect defense, but I think he has made it pretty clear in the past that if agreement cannot happen, we’re not just going to just walk away from sequester,” said a House GOP staffer.” We fought for those spending cuts back in 2011, we’re proud of them, and we’re not just going to give them up. . . .I think at the end of the day, we’re going to have a sequester if agreement is not reached.”
It might be obvious to many, but what Jeb Bush says is so true. We cannot continue to give away money and not expect the country to maintain its strength. It is like having a small bleed in your stomach. It doesn't cause you pain but over time, it becomes a problem when you become anemic, sluggish and depleted of strength. We have been giving money away since the Depression and serious bucks since the 1960's. How much longer can we continue down this road. Our belief is not long. What do you think? Conservative Tom
Jeb Bush: Entitlement System Will Collapse If We Don’t Act Now
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush has written the cover story for the April edition of Newsmax magazine, offering an optimistic view of America’s future — and straight talk about its problems — with the resounding message: “Growth is the answer” to our nagging economic woes.
And the leading Republican sat down with Newsmax for a wide-ranging interview elaborating on a number of topics he discusses in his magazine feature, arguing that America can be great again if we open up the doors to economic opportunity.
Bush, who served two terms as Florida’s governor, has earned a nationwide reputation for reform proposals in the fields of education and immigration. He is founder and chairman of the Foundation for Excellence in Education, author of the new book “The Immigration Wars: Forging an American Solution” — co-written with constitutional law expert Clint Bolick — and is considered a strong contender for the GOP presidential nomination in 2016.
Bush’s Newsmax magazine piece stresses the need for economic growth to deal with the nation’s debt and deficit problems.
In his exclusive interview with Newsmax TV, he was asked if growth alone will solve those problems.
Story continues below.
“If we grew at 2 percent more per year than what’s projected, which is anywhere from 1 to 1.5 percent per year in real terms, we would create a Germany in terms of incremental economic output in the 10th year,” he says. “And that Germany would be taxed at the current rate at least to the tune of about $1 trillion.
“There is no tax plan that could come close to [that].
“The president, almost every time he has a chance to speak, talks about the need for high growth, but his policies do the exact opposite. His policies have created the most tepid recovery in modern American history.
“The dual effect of high growth creating higher income that’s taxed by government at all levels, combined with lessening demands placed on government that occurs during economic prosperity, is a worthy objective.
“Right now we have this discussion of austerity versus government spending, when in fact what we ought to be doing is [determining] how we can invest in the private sector, creating investment opportunities and job creating opportunities that create the kind of growth that lessens government’s involvement in all this. That’s what’s missing and the president has a duty to outline specific proposals that will create economic growth. Up until now I don’t think he’s done it.”
Bush suggests that Republicans could be talking too much about the debt and deficit instead of growth.
“It’s a principled position to say that we have to live within our means, and over time you can do that and we should do that. But the fastest way to get to that is in combination with high growth. It’s also a winning political message to embrace the dynamic nature of our economy. It’s much better than just saying, ‘world coming to end. Memo to follow.’
“We should be much more hopeful and optimistic about the future of our country. If you just see the trends in the life science area and telecommunications and information technology, we’re living in the most wondrous time ever in human history, and globally the United States is a leader. We should be excited about the future and creating strategies to ensure that we create long-term, sustained economic growth.”
Reform should start with energy, immigration policy, regulations, the tax code, and education, Bush states.
“They’re the set of policy objectives that we should embrace, not all of which are ideological either. The sad thing is the dysfunction in Washington right now limits the ability even when there’s enough consensus to move forward.”
During the presidential campaign, Mitt Romney was criticized for not putting specifics on the table, particularly regarding entitlement cuts and taxes. But Bush believes lawmakers and candidates can get specific without getting bogged down in minutiae.
“First of all you have to inform. You can’t just assume that everybody has the facts,” he maintains.
“Most of the cuts we’re talking about are cuts in the growth of spending, not actual cuts, and there are people in Washington that have [offered] specific proposals, Paul Ryan being perhaps the most obvious one. He was Mitt Romney’s running mate and a courageous and inspired choice, and they did defend those so-called cuts for a while, then they kind of reverted back to trying to make the election about the president, exclusively a referendum on his job performance.
“. . . The lesson of 2012 is be bold, be specific, persuade, don’t follow polls, don’t be driven by what people’s feelings are here and now because those opinions can shift if you make a compelling case.”
But Bush does agree that the entitlement system is “unsustainable” and “no one argues that we can keep doing what we’re doing. So either we have it collapse or we change it to protect it.”
Among the changes he suggests are “raising the retirement age to reflect the life expectancy increase that’s been dramatic, means testing some of the entitlement programs over time. We have to reform healthcare underneath the entitlement system as well so that the cost curve is dealt with, which means we should move toward catastrophic coverage as the form of insurance and reward healthy lifestyle decisions and focus on prevention to lessen cost by improving healthcare outcomes.”
Bush favors eliminating tax loopholes and reducing taxes to the lowest possible rates
“If you eliminate as many of the deductions as possible, you would create a boom of economic activity. You would lessen compliance costs. Right now, whether it’s a small business guy or a private person, people pay an arm and a leg for just the simple compliance costs. Now, you have to pay a lot of money because our code’s way too complex. My personal belief is the simpler the code, the better it is.”
Asked if he would be willing to give up the mortgage interest deduction if tax rates are lowered, Bush responds: “I would. To me, the better way of doing this would be to say, all of the tax code expires” and must be rebuilt from the ground up.
“That would be a better approach because people could see the benefits of a simpler code and the empowering nature of that. People could keep more of their own money, make decisions for themselves, and not effectively get in line to get their version of some tax expenditure or tax credit. [We would] lower the rates significantly and create a burst of economic activity for our country.”
In his Newsmax magazine article, Bush never once mentions President Obama or the Democrats.
He tells Newsmax TV that other Republicans could be too focused on talking about what the opposition is doing instead of what they have to offer.
“We’ve gotten a little far removed from where we once were not that long ago, which is the party of reform, the party of new thinking, the party of ideas, the party that embraces the future.
“There’s a reason why in my recent speeches and the Newsmax article that I didn’t mention the president. The president’s record on economic policy is a failed one, but we’re not going to win the day unless we have a compelling alternative and that’s where the focus needs to be.
“In Washington, particularly, the loyal opposition has a job to be the opposition. But you can’t stop there. You have to oppose in a principled, civil way but you also have to offer alternatives.
“There are a lot of reasons why the election turned out the way it did. All I know for sure is that I wish Mitt Romney was president right now because he’d be a practical person trying to forge common-sense solutions to these big, dysfunctional challenges we face.”
On education, Bush writes in his magazine cover story about the need to increase the choices that are available to parents and students.
To do that, he tells Newsmax we need to “change laws. We have 50 states that are the governance model or the catalyst for how governance operates. We have 13,000 government-run monopolies, heavily unionized. And in that kind of setting, it should not be a surprise that the economic interests of the adults is really a dominant part of education life in America today.
“We have a third of our kids that don’t make it through the system, even though we spend more per student than any country in the world. And a lot of students could be doing college-level work by the time they’ve graduated from high school but in effect they’re held back because we’ve got this adult-centered homogenized learning model.
“What the Foundation for Excellence in Education is trying to do is to help policymakers in our 50 states open up their laws to allow more innovation to take place.
“We’re putting too much emphasis on the college experience. The country’s moving towards fewer standards that require critical thinking skills both for going to college as well as for being able to get a job in some technical skill or career-oriented avocation. So the skills necessary for both paths need to be higher.”
Bush in his magazine article cites the need to strengthen family values as a way to boost our economy.
“It’s really important to recognize that family life in America has changed pretty dramatically,” he tells Newsmax TV.
“For the first time in American history there are fewer married women than unmarried women in the age cohort that’s measured. We’ve had dramatic increases in out-of-wedlock birth rates. Every study that I’ve seen suggests that if a young woman doesn’t have a child before she’s married and she can defer marriage [until] she’s 25 and can graduate from high school, the chance of her living in poverty is dramatically reduced, and similarly with men.
“If we get that right then we can have a chance of creating economy prosperity over the long haul. If we don’t get it right, it really does change who we are as a nation and it creates enormous strains.“
Bush also says there is an “inverse relationship” between liberty and the size and scope of government, and agrees with Sen. Rand Paul that the Republican Party needs to embrace more libertarian ideas.
He also talks at length about the immigration policies espoused in his controversial new book.
And he ends his Newsmax interview on an optimistic note, stating that “I just have total confidence that a dynamic world will yield benefits that we can’t even imagine.
“If you believe like I do that the world is abundant with possibilities, then we need to make sure we build capacity so that everybody is successful or can be successful in the pursuit of their dreams — not the dreams of someone from government, but their own dreams.”
