Dems running out of ways to mask spending

[30ashopper]

?Frankly it was fiscally imprudent ... to have taken those offsets that basically were agreed upon in the Senate, had been passed in the Senate, had been supported on a bipartisan basis and then were removed and used for health care reform in order to have more spending in that legislation,? said Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine). ?We had an agreement, and they should have made that sacrosanct in that legislation.?


Democrats admitted Thursday that they?ve created a problem in how to pay for unemployment benefits and have no consensus on where to find the money now.
​

​

Pay-Go rules come back to bite Dems - Meredith Shiner - POLITICO.com

Pretty funny actually. They scarfed a whole bunch of "savings" for healthcare from all sorts of other bills, like unemployment, so the healthcare bill wouldn't look as bad as it is. But now they have to find the money someplace else, and they are running out of options.

 

[Will B]

Sadly, even though they know they have this problem that didn't stop them from pushing through the unemployment extension, this week, with a 10 billion dollar price tag and no way to pay for it.

 

[Lynnie]

Printing Press perhaps?

I guess we already learned it is a big no-no to mess with unemployement benefits, regardless of whether or not we can actually pay for it..........in retrospect, I should have made claim on mine; afterall, I paid for the dern thing.

 

[AlphaCrab]

Sadly, even though they know they have this problem that didn't stop them from pushing through the unemployment extension, this week, with a 10 billion dollar price tag and no way to pay for it.[/QUOTE]


Talk about U.S. price tags with no way to pay for it....3 TRILLION vs.10 billion, 3 TRILLION vs.10 billion...hmmmm, chump change really.

The $3 Trillion War | Politics | Vanity Fair

 

[Will B]

Sadly, even though they know they have this problem that didn't stop them from pushing through the unemployment extension, this week, with a 10 billion dollar price tag and no way to pay for it.[/QUOTE]


Talk about price U.S. price tags with no way to pay for it....3 TRILLION vs.10 billion, 3 TRILLION vs.10 billion...hmmmm, chump change really.

The $3 Trillion War | Politics | Vanity Fair

True...I agree that a billion is a small fraction, but it all goes on the same tab. The government has turned into the neighborhood drunk who keeps putting drinks on his tab and, then, gets indignant when he is actually asked to pay for it...

 

[scooterbug44]

I know how to pay for it - take away the credit card/expense account of every politician and consultant the government has.

Next!

 

[30ashopper]

Sadly, even though they know they have this problem that didn't stop them from pushing through the unemployment extension, this week, with a 10 billion dollar price tag and no way to pay for it.[/QUOTE]


Talk about price U.S. price tags with no way to pay for it....3 TRILLION vs.10 billion, 3 TRILLION vs.10 billion...hmmmm, chump change really.

The $3 Trillion War | Politics | Vanity Fair

Well that explains a lot, Alpha Crab gets his news and figures from VanityFair.

 

[Lynnie]

Well that explains a lot, Alpha Crab gets his news and figures from VanityFair.

This actually impresses me greatly!

 

[AlphaCrab]

Well that explains a lot, Alpha Crab gets his news and figures from VanityFair.

And maybe you sir, or madam, in your infinite wisdom or through your main news source Fox News, you can supply us with a very different accurate total, maybe one that is substantially less and more "palatable", perhaps. Obviously though, you got my point at some level.

 

[30ashopper]

The real number you're looking for AC is about 750 billion, spent over six years. We deposed an evil dictator and built a fledgling democracy with that money. Now, don't misinterpret me, Bush should have fully funded the war. As been stated many times by conservatives on the board, that was unacceptable.

But since the left just loves to pull that figure out every time someone mentions Obama's fiscal record, lets do some comparing:

During Bush tenure of eight years, of which five had republicans controlling congress, and included tax cuts, two wars (one justified in my book), a recession he inherited from Clinton, and the beginnings of a recession he passed on to Obama, the public debt outstanding grew by about 2 trillion dollars. That's really bad. But Obama supporters have nothing to trumpet either. Obama has been in office now for about 15 months. Over his tenure, during which dems have had control of congress, public debt outstanding has grown by... 2 trillion dollars.


8 years vs. 15 months, and Obama's own forecasts paint a bleak picture going forward. If you want to compare Bush v Obama, no problem, I'll take that comparison any day of the week. Your man is doing a dismal job of managing the nations finances right now.