Tuesday, January 15, 2013

Obama Flip Flops on Debt Ceiling

I just thought this was an amusing article.

Thoughts?

FOX News Obama in Crabby Trap

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

My understanding is that if we don't pay our debts, the country will default, with untold disastrous consequences. I am not sure how Obama's comments at some prior time change that. Has Fox News offered an explanation? Is it, for example, Fox News' claim that Obama's remarks from several years ago will have an impact on financial markets as they react to a refusal by America to pay it's debts?

--Hiram

Anonymous said...

I get a kick out of the use of euphemism here, particularly with respect to the word "reform". Reform isn't really the issue here, because there is no particular reason to think that reform would result in a decrease in costs. For all we know, it might lead to an increase in expenditures. What reform stands for here is a cut in costs, and of course to be meaningful, they have to be cuts in the three areas where we spend money: the military, Social Security, and health care. It is not largely within the the president's power to cut costs in these areas. That can happen only through laws passed by Congress. So why doesn't Congress do exactly that?

John said...

Apparently they did and the Senate did not pass it.

"A competing plan, called The Path to Prosperity, was announced by House Republicans, led by House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan, on April 5, 2011. This plan would cut $5.8 trillion in spending over ten years, but would also reduce tax income by $4.2 trillion below current projections. The plan would make no further reduction in defense spending beyond the Obama administration's plan, but would make major changes to Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, which was expected to pass more of the cost of these programs onto individuals. It would also cut energy research and other applied research and development. This plan was criticized by Democrats for disproportionately cutting programs which benefit the disadvantaged and stifling innovation, while not cutting defense spending further and containing deep tax cuts. The House Republican plan was defeated in the Senate by a margin of 40–57 votes on May 25, 2011, the same day that the Obama budget was also defeated."

Wiki 2012 Budget

Anonymous said...

I am sorry, paying for tax cuts to the wealthy by cutting Social Security and Medicare just isn't politically acceptable. That's what the election was about, and Republicans lost it.

==Hiram

John said...

Well, now the wealthy are paying more.

Now it seems that the rest of us will either have to give up some benefits or start paying more.

Pew Entitlement Survey

The results are probably a bit off. First because school food is subsidized, so anyone that has kids has benefitted from that. And companies pay unemployment insurance premiums, so technically people that are unemployed for a short period really aren't on the dole.

But overall it looks like many are getting more out of the system than they are putting in.

Anonymous said...

Well, now the wealthy are paying more.

They always have. And nobody really seems to have a problem with that, something I find curious. Lots of people have problems with the progressive income tax, for example, which generally provides that tax rates increase as income level rises. But no one seems to have a problem with the assumption that underlies the progressive income tax, that for some reason rich people should pay more in taxes. I have often wondered about that.

===Hiram

Anonymous said...

But overall it looks like many are getting more out of the system than they are putting in.

That's characteristic of an insurance approach, by the way. Some always take out more, often considerably more, than they put it. Insurance socializes risk.

--Hiram

John said...

Correct, however most insurance is between the customer and the company providing the insurance. The customer can shop around for the best value. And providers have to control their costs and keep their customers mostly happy.

Not so with government entitlements.

Anonymous said...

Correct, however most insurance is between the customer and the company providing the insurance. The customer can shop around for the best value.

Yes, but it's also incredibly important to bear in mind that particularly with the most important and the most complex insurance, health care insurance, the customer is generally not the beneficiary.

--Hiram

John said...

Oh yes it certainly is. We select the companies we work for and we pay part of the premium.

And the Mgmt and HR personnel are usually just employees like us that are trying to get insurance that takes good care of their families. While trying to ensure the company's benefits attract and retain good employees.

Few companies are stupid enough to provide non-competitve benefits. If they are their turnover and employee frustration would likely bankrupt them sooner or later.

Anonymous said...

Oh yes it certainly is. We select the companies we work for and we pay part of the premium.

In my experience, the choice of health insurers was made by management. Employees pretty much had to like it or lump it. If employees had the choice, they would be able to tell. And it's important to understand the differences here. Because it's the employers choice, not yours, you get lower rates. Because it's the employers' choice not yours, insurance is tailored to their interests, not yours.

--Hiram

Anonymous said...

Few companies are stupid enough to provide non-competitve benefits

Possibly, but companies also understand that in this economic environment, the need to offer competitive benefits sets a pretty low standard.

--Hiram

John said...

A. I think "managers" are usually also employees.

B. You must have worked for some really poor companies. The 2 that I have worked for have had very good benefits. Of course, I don't probably expect nearly as many freebies and as much job security as you do.

Anonymous said...

I think "managers" are usually also employees.

Aren't managers the folks in business who make the decisions?

--Hiram

John said...

And they are also typically employees who usually live with the consequence of those decisions.

Not like or politicians...