Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: tobyhill

WHAT “balanced approach”?

As Speaker Boehner stated, it is like working with Jell-O - there is no “there” there.

If the titular head of the now failing obama regime cannot or will not commit any plans as to what he is willing to deal with, on paper, somewhere, then this really has been an exercise in futility.

And that cannot be good for anybody’s digestion.


4 posted on 07/15/2011 4:53:12 PM PDT by alloysteel ("Devastate your rivals, take no prisoners, smash mouths, glare meaningfully.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: alloysteel
"WHAT “balanced approach”?"

That would be where the balance was handicapped by starting with Moose Shell on one side.

7 posted on 07/15/2011 5:01:54 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: All

In general, the GOP should reluctantly accept a 4:1 ratio of spending cuts to tax increases, making the increases non zero.

BUT.

The spending increases front load and the tax increases back load. Simply that. They want to talk about 10 years? Fine, 2.4 trillion over 10, with 300 billion in cuts in FY 2012, 30 billion in tax increases in FY2012.

And NO BS about it. When we say cuts, we mean cubicles empty. Government workers shown the door. And the tax increases? Those real, too. Wanna close a loophole for 20 billion in revenue? Go ahead. But if the economy sinks and you don’t get your 20 billion, tough. Those cubicles stay empty.

Now that’s a deal. Just remember, everyone. The whole subterfuge is about out years. The 10 year manure is manure. They want 10 years? Fine. But the cuts front load.


8 posted on 07/15/2011 5:02:01 PM PDT by Owen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson