PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues Obama tells Congress to "watch your spending"


petegz28
06-09-2009, 10:45 PM
LMAO.....this is not a joke...he really said that...


http://www.reuters.com/article/governmentFilingsNews/idUSN0938720120090609
WASHINGTON, June 9 (Reuters) - President Barack Obama sought on Tuesday to show he was serious about improving the U.S. budget picture as he called on Congress to pass new limits on tax cuts and spending programs to avoid adding to deficits.

Obama urged passage of "pay-as-you-go" legislation that would require any new tax cut or automatic spending program to be paid for within the budget.

Obama urged passage of "pay-as-you-go" legislation that would require any new tax cut or automatic spending program to be paid for within the budget.

Entitlement increases and tax cuts need to be paid for. They are not free," said Obama, who has been criticized by Republicans for proposing a hefty domestic agenda that includes overhauling the health care system, bolstering education and tackling global climate change. ROFLROFLROFL




This guy is a ****ing joke Of course he goes on to say he "inherited" all this shit.....

SBK
06-09-2009, 10:46 PM
This is pretty insulting actually. It's like going on a spending binge unseen in human history then saying that spending like that is unsustainable. Err, wait?

petegz28
06-09-2009, 10:48 PM
Obama contends that much of the budget deficit was inherited from the Bush administration, which presided over a shift from record surpluses to huge increases in the deficit fueled by the financial crisis and spending for the Iraq war.

"The reckless fiscal policies of the past have left us in a very deep hole," Obama said. "Digging our way out will take time and patience and tough choices."


I gues photo-ops and fly-overs in NYC aren't covered in said "touch choices"??? And who approved the Bush spending over the last 2 years?

SBK
06-09-2009, 10:52 PM
I gues photo-ops and fly-overs in NYC aren't covered in said "touch choices"??? And who approved the Bush spending over the last 2 years?

Blame Bush that his deficit is more than 4x what Bush did, and Bush was out of f'ing control. LMAO

The way things are shaping up Obama may pass ol Jimmah Carter's lowly standing on the Presidential totum pole before he's a year in.

Chiefshrink
06-09-2009, 10:58 PM
Pot meet Kettle!

Scorp
06-10-2009, 06:07 AM
Blame Bush that his deficit is more than 4x what Bush did, and Bush was out of f'ing control. LMAO




Jesus F'n Christ are you f*cking stupid? Look I am not Republican nor Democrat. Bush was the worst President this country has ever seen. His reckless spending f*cked this country for decades to come. Whomever followed f*cknuts Bush was destined for failure.

You god damned right blame Bush. We will be suffering from that f*cking douche for many many moons. We haven't even begun to see what that prick screwed up the 8 years he was in office. He belongs in Jail.

petegz28
06-10-2009, 06:25 AM
Jesus F'n Christ are you f*cking stupid? Look I am not Republican nor Democrat. Bush was the worst President this country has ever seen. His reckless spending f*cked this country for decades to come. Whomever followed f*cknuts Bush was destined for failure.

You god damned right blame Bush. We will be suffering from that f*cking douche for many many moons. We haven't even begun to see what that prick screwed up the 8 years he was in office. He belongs in Jail.

LMAO......so two wrongs make a right?

And we will be suffering from Obama for many more moons after


Obama: "watch your spending, but don't mind the $350k I spent on a flyover in NYC that caused a city-wide panic".

patteeu
06-10-2009, 06:31 AM
Jesus F'n Christ are you f*cking stupid? Look I am not Republican nor Democrat. Bush was the worst President this country has ever seen. His reckless spending f*cked this country for decades to come. Whomever followed f*cknuts Bush was destined for failure.

You god damned right blame Bush. We will be suffering from that f*cking douche for many many moons. We haven't even begun to see what that prick screwed up the 8 years he was in office. He belongs in Jail.

:LOL: You sold your Haliburton stock when Dick Cheney resigned to become VP didn't you? That's rough. I sold Apple right before they turned things around too. I'm pissed at Steve Jobs.

Amnorix
06-10-2009, 06:45 AM
Wow. Obama can't win with you guys.

Maybe the insane and reckless spending is short term, unsustainable, and only in reaction to a global economic pandemic? Maybe Obama recognizes this becuase, you know, he's not that stupid. In fact, almost nobody is that stupid.

And maybe he's paving the road back to fiscal responsibility by raising an issue that helped steer us back to the black under Clinton?


But you geniuses can just sit around and wail about Obama being the debbil until you lose your voice. It's fine.

BucEyedPea
06-10-2009, 06:49 AM
Massive projection. :p

BucEyedPea
06-10-2009, 06:50 AM
And maybe he's paving the road back to fiscal responsibility by raising an issue that helped steer us back to the black under Clinton?


We got another one.

No restraint anywhere.

memyselfI
06-10-2009, 06:56 AM
Bahahaha. He sounds like he's selling abstinence to teenagers. ROFLROFLROFLROFL

jjjayb
06-10-2009, 06:59 AM
Jesus F'n Christ are you f*cking stupid? Look I am not Republican nor Democrat. Bush was the worst President this country has ever seen. His reckless spending f*cked this country for decades to come. Whomever followed f*cknuts Bush was destined for failure.

You god damned right blame Bush. We will be suffering from that f*cking douche for many many moons. We haven't even begun to see what that prick screwed up the 8 years he was in office. He belongs in Jail.

Wow. Did you forget to take your meds? And when did they start allowing internet access in the padded rooms?

Saul Good
06-10-2009, 07:01 AM
Wow. Obama can't win with you guys.

Maybe the insane and reckless spending is short term, unsustainable, and only in reaction to a global economic pandemic? Maybe Obama recognizes this becuase, you know, he's not that stupid. In fact, almost nobody is that stupid.

And maybe he's paving the road back to fiscal responsibility by raising an issue that helped steer us back to the black under Clinton?


But you geniuses can just sit around and wail about Obama being the debbil until you lose your voice. It's fine.

No, he can't. He can't win by going trillions further into debt, and he can't win by socializing the largest companies in our country.

I'm sure that spending like a drunken sailor on shore leave is "paving the road back to fiscal responsibility."


"The reckless fiscal policies of the past have left us in a very deep hole," Obama said. "Digging our way out will take time and patience and tough choices."

He has literally proposed digging his way out of a hole. I think that tells you everything you need to know about him right there. Rule number 1 of holes: If you're in one, stop digging.

mikey23545
06-10-2009, 07:04 AM
Wow. Obama can't win with you guys.

Maybe the insane and reckless spending is short term, unsustainable, and only in reaction to a global economic pandemic? Maybe Obama recognizes this becuase, you know, he's not that stupid. In fact, almost nobody is that stupid.

And maybe he's paving the road back to fiscal responsibility by raising an issue that helped steer us back to the black under Clinton?


But you geniuses can just sit around and wail about Obama being the debbil until you lose your voice. It's fine.

Obviously, only dishonesty is a necessary trait to become a lawyer - certainly critical thinking is not.

KcFanInGA
06-10-2009, 07:12 AM
Wow. Obama can't win with you guys.

Maybe the insane and reckless spending is short term, unsustainable, and only in reaction to a global economic pandemic? Maybe Obama recognizes this becuase, you know, he's not that stupid. In fact, almost nobody is that stupid.

And maybe he's paving the road back to fiscal responsibility by raising an issue that helped steer us back to the black under Clinton?


But you geniuses can just sit around and wail about Obama being the debbil until you lose your voice. It's fine.

You cannot be serious. Paving the road to fiscal responsibility. So the stimulus package was fiscally responsible. You must play frisbee golf, b/c about 250 grand got dropped on one in that bill. Fiscal respnsiblity my ass. Wake up douchebag!

KcFanInGA
06-10-2009, 07:13 AM
Serious Obama koo-aid on the planet today. Drink up sheep, drink up.

KcFanInGA
06-10-2009, 07:13 AM
kool-aid, I know

Scorp
06-10-2009, 07:15 AM
Serious Obama koo-aid on the planet today. Drink up sheep, drink up.

DIE IN A FIRE!

Amnorix
06-10-2009, 07:26 AM
You cannot be serious. Paving the road to fiscal responsibility. So the stimulus package was fiscally responsible. You must play frisbee golf, b/c about 250 grand got dropped on one in that bill. Fiscal respnsiblity my ass. Wake up douchebag!

As a n00b I'll accept that you're unaware of my long history fo posting on here about deficits and the debt and fiscal responsibility.

Nobody said the stimulus package was the best thing to do in terms of deficit/debt. Far from it. It may or may not have been necessary to save the country and/or world from a massive depression. That's a separate debt.

What is clear is that continuing to spend along these lines is completely unsustainable, and we need to return to sounder financial practices. MUCH, MUCH sounder...

Amnorix
06-10-2009, 07:29 AM
Obviously, only dishonesty is a necessary trait to become a lawyer - certainly critical thinking is not.

Thank you for another of your stellar one sentence contributions to the debates that rage on this forum. They are truly insightful and an invalued contribution.

Stinger
06-10-2009, 07:39 AM
Obama to Congress: Watch your spending!!!!!!!!!!!! But while I have you all here let me say it is OK to borrow BILLIONS for health care.


Obama: It's OK to borrow to pay for health care
Obama-proposed budget rules allow deficits to swell to pay for health care plan

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Barack Obama on Tuesday proposed budget rules that would allow Congress to borrow tens of billions of dollars and put the nation deeper in debt to jump-start the administration's emerging health care overhaul.

The "pay-as-you-go" budget formula plan is significantly weaker than a proposal Obama issued with little fanfare last month.

It would carve out about $2.5 trillion worth of exemptions for Obama's priorities over the next decade. His health care reform plan also would get a green light to run big deficits in its early years. But over a decade, Congress would have to come up with money to cover those early year deficits.

Obama's latest proposal for addressing deficits urges Congress to pass a law requiring lawmakers to pay for new spending programs and tax cuts without further adding to exploding deficits projected to total about $10 trillion over the next decade.

If new spending or tax reductions are not offset, there would be automatic cuts in so-called mandatory programs -- although Social Security payments and the Medicaid health care program for poor and disabled would be exempt and cuts to Medicare would be sharply limited.

"The 'pay-as-you-go' rule is very simple," Obama said. "Congress can only spend a dollar if it saves a dollar elsewhere."

Last month Obama suggested a tougher plan that would prohibit Congress from swelling the deficit in one year by putting off until later years the tax increases or spending cuts to pay for it.

The requirement for legislation to be financed over the coming decade generally mirrors existing congressional rules and reflects the likelihood that Obama's health care plan will add many billions of dollars to the deficit in the early years. Savings and revenues in later years would have to make up for the initial deficits.

Congress lived under a so-called "pay-go" regime in the 1990s and the early years of this decade. But it didn't stop lawmakers from passing President George W. Bush's landmark 2001 and 2003 tax cuts and big increases in farm subsidies without making the required spending cuts elsewhere. A $127 billion surplus in 2001 subsequently turned into deficits over the next four years of $159 billion, $377 billion, $413 billion and $319 billion.

The rules still exist and lawmakers routinely find ways around them. For example, a bill to effectively double GI Bill education benefits was enacted last year. Congress also regularly waives the rules to pass an annual "patch" to the alternative minimum tax, sparing some 20 million families from a $2,000 tax increase on average.

Still, Democrats profess a faith in pay-as-you-go rules.

"It is no coincidence that this rule was in place when we moved from record deficits to record surpluses in the 1990s -- and that when this rule was abandoned, we returned to record deficits that doubled the national debt," Obama said.

In fact, the surpluses of the late 1990s were largely due to a huge influx of tax revenues from a booming economy.

Rep. Dennis Moore, D-Kan., said the House is likely to pass Obama's latest proposal next month. The plan faces far tougher sledding in the Senate, where Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., has expressed serious reservations.

Conrad said Obama's proposal does nothing about the fiscal perils the country already faces, including deficits that the Congressional Budget Office predicts will average nearly $1 trillion a year over the next decade.

"I remain concerned about the potential effect of this proposal on American farmers, seniors and veterans," said Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the Senate Finance Committee.

Republicans said new budget rules ring hollow in the wake of the Obama-championed $787 billion stimulus package and other deficit spending. They said legal limits on appropriations should be put into place as they were in the 1990s, though such "caps" were easily evaded when surpluses appeared.

Congress is just ramping up the annual appropriations process, which in the House would award increases averaging 12 percent to non-defense programs. Obama's proposal does not include the comparable "caps" from the 1990s.

"Time after time this year, Democrats have ignored calls for fiscal responsibility," said House GOP leader John Boehner of Ohio. "We don't need more rhetoric and gimmicks. We need action to tackle the tremendous fiscal challenges facing this nation."

Obama's proposal would require future tax cuts to be financed by tax increases elsewhere. But again, he carves out several exceptions, including for an extension of Bush's tax cuts due to expire in 2011 and relief from the alternative minimum tax.

The federal deficit is on pace to explode past $1.8 trillion this year, more than four times last year's all-time high. The record borrowing is credited with pushing up interest rates, which could imperil chances for a recovery later in the year.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Obama-Its-OK-to-borrow-to-pay-apf-15483626.html?.v=13

Radar Chief
06-10-2009, 07:57 AM
Wow. Obama can't win with you guys.

Maybe the insane and reckless spending is short term, unsustainable, and only in reaction to a global economic pandemic? Maybe Obama recognizes this becuase, you know, he's not that stupid. In fact, almost nobody is that stupid.

And maybe he's paving the road back to fiscal responsibility by raising an issue that helped steer us back to the black under Clinton?


But you geniuses can just sit around and wail about Obama being the debbil until you lose your voice. It's fine.

And in today’s lesson Amnorix finds out how the other half lived for 8 years. ;)
It’s basic human nature that it’s easier to bitch than rationally discuss. By posting a verbose bitch one can appear to know what they’re talking about without actually knowing the subject.
Most people that post on teh interweb BBs like this one want to think of themselves as scholars and “to a scholar not knowing something is criminal.” – Lao Tzu

KcFanInGA
06-10-2009, 08:01 AM
As a n00b I'll accept that you're unaware of my long history fo posting on here about deficits and the debt and fiscal responsibility.

Nobody said the stimulus package was the best thing to do in terms of deficit/debt. Far from it. It may or may not have been necessary to save the country and/or world from a massive depression. That's a separate debt.

What is clear is that continuing to spend along these lines is completely unsustainable, and we need to return to sounder financial practices. MUCH, MUCH sounder...

Firstly, I apologize for my temper this morning. Secondly, we are in agreement that spending is out of control. My question to anyone is this...I ask what can be done, and I am told the same thing...write my congressman, continue to vote, etc. But this is not working, or doesn't seem to be. So my question still, is what can we the people do?

SBK
06-10-2009, 09:24 AM
I'd like to ask a serious question. Why is it that what Obama does is not looked at and what he says it what people believe?

Like in this thread, he says we need to watch our spending, so people are thrilled that we're on our way to fiscal restraint, and moving away from the policies of George Bush overspending.

BUT

What is overlooked is the fact that Obama has spent more in a few months than any President before him ever did in their full term. He's bypassed W's deficit by more than 4x, a number that is sure to go up with the tax receipts coming in lower than expected.

Honestly I'd like to know why saying we need restraint means so much more than spending like he has?
Posted via Mobile Device

Cannibal
06-10-2009, 09:33 AM
You cannot be serious. Paving the road to fiscal responsibility. So the stimulus package was fiscally responsible. You must play frisbee golf, b/c about 250 grand got dropped on one in that bill. Fiscal respnsiblity my ass. Wake up douchebag!

Better go start your underground revolution! LMAO

petegz28
06-10-2009, 09:34 AM
I'd like to ask a serious question. Why is it that what Obama does is not looked at and what he says it what people believe?

Like in this thread, he says we need to watch our spending, so people are thrilled that we're on our way to fiscal restraint, and moving away from the policies of George Bush overspending.

BUT

What is overlooked is the fact that Obama has spent more in a few months than any President before him ever did in their full term. He's bypassed W's deficit by more than 4x, a number that is sure to go up with the tax receipts coming in lower than expected.

Honestly I'd like to know why saying we need restraint means so much more than spending like he has?
Posted via Mobile Device

Probably because his internal polling is telling him he looks like a jackass with all this spending on date nights, fly overs and bankrupt companies.

BigRedChief
06-10-2009, 09:35 AM
I'd like to ask a serious question. Why is it that what Obama does is not looked at and what he says it what people believe?

Like in this thread, he says we need to watch our spending, so people are thrilled that we're on our way to fiscal restraint, and moving away from the policies of George Bush overspending.

BUT

What is overlooked is the fact that Obama has spent more in a few months than any President before him ever did in their full term. He's bypassed W's deficit by more than 4x, a number that is sure to go up with the tax receipts coming in lower than expected.

Honestly I'd like to know why saying we need restraint means so much more than spending like he has?
Posted via Mobile Device
most of that spending was to rescue jobs and industry and also we have a hope that it will be repaid. It's not a done deal that we will never see that money again.

A lot of people on this board said we would never see a dime of that tarp money back. While thats true....I'll take $70 billion over a dime.

SBK
06-10-2009, 09:38 AM
most of that spending was to rescue jobs and industry and also we have a hope that it will be repaid. It's not a done deal that we will never see that money again.

A lot of people on this board said we would never see a dime of that tarp money back. While thats true....I'll take $70 billion over a dime.

That didn't answer my question. Why is what he says believed while what he does ignored?

KC Dan
06-10-2009, 09:45 AM
most of that spending was to rescue jobs and industry and also we have a hope that it will be repaid. It's not a done deal that we will never see that money again.

A lot of people on this board said we would never see a dime of that tarp money back. While thats true....I'll take $70 billion over a dime.
Geithner is not giving that $70 billion back. He said yesterday to Congress when asked if it would be returned to the general fund as required by the TARP law and he stated that it could be used as more slush money for other companies (not in those words). That money is gone, they will throw it down a rat hole that won't let it come back.

KC Dan
06-10-2009, 09:47 AM
What is clear is that continuing to spend along these lines is completely unsustainable, and we need to return to sounder financial practices. MUCH, MUCH sounder...
How do you reconcile the proposed $3.6 TRILLION budget? Is that sounder financial practices?

Baby Lee
06-10-2009, 09:55 AM
most of that spending was to rescue jobs and industry and also we have a hope that it will be repaid. It's not a done deal that we will never see that money again.

A lot of people on this board said we would never see a dime of that tarp money back. While thats true....I'll take $70 billion over a dime.

We'll get the money back, when inflation blows up to where it might buy a two bedroom in Canarsie.

patteeu
06-10-2009, 01:29 PM
Wow. Obama can't win with you guys.

Maybe the insane and reckless spending is short term, unsustainable, and only in reaction to a global economic pandemic? Maybe Obama recognizes this becuase, you know, he's not that stupid. In fact, almost nobody is that stupid.

And maybe he's paving the road back to fiscal responsibility by raising an issue that helped steer us back to the black under Clinton?


But you geniuses can just sit around and wail about Obama being the debbil until you lose your voice. It's fine.

Either that or it's not intended to slow down runaway spending on Obama's pet projects at all but will be relied upon as an excuse for raising taxes later. I'm going to go with the latter and I don't even think there's much chance that I'm wrong in this case.

patteeu
06-10-2009, 01:32 PM
Baaaa

http://www.enasco.com/prod/images/products/72/AC013240l.jpg

.

Chief Faithful
06-10-2009, 01:35 PM
I can't tell if this is a good first step or not. How does not increase the deficit mean reduce the deficit?

patteeu
06-10-2009, 01:36 PM
And in today’s lesson Amnorix finds out how the other half lived for 8 years. ;)
It’s basic human nature that it’s easier to bitch than rationally discuss. By posting a verbose bitch one can appear to know what they’re talking about without actually knowing the subject.
Most people that post on teh interweb BBs like this one want to think of themselves as scholars and “to a scholar not knowing something is criminal.” – Lao Tzu

There are plenty of things I don't know. For example, I don't know how anyone could have voted for Obama. And I don't know how anyone with Obama's track record on spending can have the audacity to tell anyone to watch their spending. I also don't really know the difference between an under tackle and a 3 technique if there even is one. ;)

patteeu
06-10-2009, 01:42 PM
most of that spending was to rescue jobs and industry and also we have a hope that it will be repaid. It's not a done deal that we will never see that money again.

A lot of people on this board said we would never see a dime of that tarp money back. While thats true....I'll take $70 billion over a dime.

Yeah, but the 150,000 jobs he "rescued" were at the expense of 2,300,000 jobs that he either destroyed or allowed to be destroyed. FAIL

wild1
06-10-2009, 01:48 PM
this is like Sally Struthers telling someone to eat less.

Chief Faithful
06-10-2009, 01:59 PM
this is like Sally Struthers telling someone to eat less.

ROFL

You have brought it to a level I can now understand.

wild1
06-10-2009, 03:45 PM
ROFL

You have brought it to a level I can now understand.

:evil:

CoMoChief
06-10-2009, 03:46 PM
global climate change?!?!? Democrats are full of shit on this one.

SNR
06-10-2009, 06:15 PM
Keith Richards says to not do drugs.
Mark Mangino says obesity is a problem.
Larry Johnson says abusive relationships need to be stopped.

Shall I continue?

Saul Good
06-10-2009, 06:45 PM
Yeah, but the 150,000 jobs he "rescued" was at the expense of 2,300,000 jobs that he either destroyed or allowed to be destroyed. FAIL

2,300,000 lost jobs creates a lot of new jobs. You'll need to hire more people at the cardboard box factories so that people can clean out their desks. You'll need more people staffing the unemployment offices. What about squeegee manufacturers? They will have to hire more people in order to keep up with the demand for more bums washing windshields on the side of roads. Same goes for shopping carts.

That's got to be 150,000 right there.

SBK
06-10-2009, 06:45 PM
Keith Richards says to not do drugs.--while doing 100 lines of pure coke
Mark Mangino says obesity is a problem.--while he enjoys a lunch of 15 racks of ribs and 2 gallons of Pepsi
Larry Johnson says abusive relationships need to be stopped.--while he beats the $hit out of a few hoes.

Shall I continue?

:thumb:

Saul Good
06-10-2009, 06:48 PM
Keith Richards says to not do drugs.
Mark Mangino says obesity is a problem.
Larry Johnson says abusive relationships need to be stopped.

Shall I continue?

It's jAZ saying that we shouldn't blindly defend Democrats in power.

TEX
06-10-2009, 07:45 PM
This is pretty insulting actually. It's like going on a spending binge unseen in human history then saying that spending like that is unsustainable. Err, wait?

Exactly. And the spending binge called health care, that is soon to come, will be even more insulting. :shake:
It's almost as if they're making it up as they go...:hmmm:

TEX
06-10-2009, 07:49 PM
Yeah, but the 150,000 jobs he "rescued" was at the expense of 2,300,000 jobs that he either destroyed or allowed to be destroyed. FAIL


But the media won't tell that story...:shake:

KcFanInGA
06-10-2009, 08:49 PM
The Nazi's had their blood purity argument, liberals have their people caused global warming.