A big reason why the European countries are in the position they're in right now is because they cut spending so deeply without any means of generating revenue or putting money back into the economy (ie, spending). It has deepened their recession and instead of the economy growing like ours has done, their economy is actually shrinking. The most amazing part of the recoveries is that the US has done better with it than anyone despite the root cause of world-wide recession being attributed to Americans defaulting on their home loans. It's curious to see that the European countries that have bounced back the best have kept unemployment from rising as quickly as others. These same countries have workforces led by strong unions which prevented massive layoffs.


So what is the Republican answer to the current crisis? Is it more of the same that has kept us from plunging into the same recessions that plague the European countries? No. They propose the same. exact. solutions. that prevented Europe from recovering as well as the US did despite a mountain of evidence supporting those who disagree with them.

The problem isn't that there no programs that can be cut. The problem is that cutting "entitlement programs" while is does reduce spending, creates more problems than the ones we already have. Reducing what we spend on Medicaid does indeed reduce the budget, but it also means we now have more people who already struggle with healthcare coverage put at an even bigger disadvantage. Lowering the number of people with healthcare coverage is not the solution to any problem.

This shows a complete lack of understanding of even the most basic of knowledge into those countries economies. This is incredibly, unbelievably, hilariously ignorant of you.

This shows a complete lack of understanding of even the most basic of knowledge into those countries economies. This is incredibly, unbelievably, hilariously ignorant of you.

MLU I understand one thing everything costs money. The debate is who decides what services are provided and who pays for them. Your reasoning is muddled though because all of the western economies were on a spending spree prior to 2008. The mortgage/banking criscis was the straw at best. Only Germany of the western economies with its export focused economy has a balance of payment surplus to afford the spending. The reason Portugal, Spain et al first got into trouble was that they borrowed easy money from France & Germany to support their social systems. The massive cuts in spending did make the problem worse but only changed the date the piper would need to be paid.

If you don't like Portugal as an example how about closer to home and look at California. Unfunded state obligations for state retirement and healthcare that the state Dems and unions working in concert piled on the state have ruined its finances. They cannot meet the day to day obligations of governing and cities throughout the state are going bankrupt.

You say that cutting social spending would cause people to pay more. No shit sherlock. Maybe if people understood what costs were they would manage their health care better. I am sorry but a morbidly obese smoker should pay for his/her choices. I know that is a radical example but everyone needs to understand that there is a cost impact for choices. The idea that government should provide painless life for its citizens without cost has been promoted by the dems for 40 years and the European socialists for a hundred. Guess what the R's have adopted the same attitude recently. The US government has $63 TRILLION in UNFUNDED obligations coming due by 2030. This can't be sustained and taxing every penny of whoever you consider wealthy won't make the slightest dent.

There are two steps required to address this. First we need to grow the economy. We need to increase real growth significantly for the forseeable future to have the ability to pay for these obligations. I agree we need to invest in the infrastructure and build on what we did after WW2 build roads, improve waterways, harbors, train pathways, airports & airways and most of all our energy infrastructure. Much on that list is private and incentives will be needed. Much is public and tax $ will need to be spent. ALL will be the 2nd best investment in our future we can make. The best investment we can make is in our youth. REAL education reform to educate and invest in youth and allow them to reach for their potential. What we have now is failing and needs radical revision. I have a few ideas but that is room for another thread. BTW we need to carry that investment to the immigrants among us legal & illeagal.

MLU to say we can't cut spending is as blind and frankly stupid as those who say we can't raise or must cut taxes. There is much change required to revitalize our country and reclaim our vitality. I do have faith we will do that and over the next several years but neither side can fall back on the old bromides.

Red you are right BUT the Pres and Senate are Ds.Each side has veto power of a sort and can stop the other and neither can force a solution through the other. It will take work and adjustment on both sides to reach a viable solution. For either side to point at the other as a sole or even the greater cause of the problem is both blind and foolish. Right now there seems to be little but grabbing for position and laying of blame by BOTH Rs and Ds.
Neither has to give up their principles but they have to find a way to make things work. People can have major dissagreement about almost everything yet find ways to make things work.
Our history proves it... Look at the constitution it was not a carefully laid out plan but the result of finding a way to satisfy competing interests (free & slave; small state & large; agricultural & city, west and east) so that each had a stake in the game. Only when the south fearing submersion by the growing free state population quit compromising di we fail as a state (see the civil war).

Hey we don't even have to like each other Thomas Jefferson and John Adams hated each other for 30 years or more yet one followed the other as president and both worked for Washington.

The point is philosophy can't over rule reality.

What you don't understand is that the Dems hold the majority of power in the country. Period....


Stop passing the blame and get something done..

Whats funny is that Dems refusing to cut spending is fine, but Republicans holding on spending is terrible.


The point is that the Dems are the final say in what gets cut. Therefore they need to offer what CAN be cut. Though they wont Because they are a bunch of bitches.

I don't understand why there is a debate. The people that have money pay for it because the people who don't have money can't. Our current economic conditions are a direct result of their greed, so I fail to see why the people who have been paying the price for the crimes of others should continue to pay the price while the people who have been unaffected suffer no negative effects whatsoever.[/quote]

My reasoning is as clear as fresh, filtered, spring water. It is only muddled to someone who has not educated himself to the root cause of our current fiscal issues. There is no excuse as there are several books available for anyone who wants to educate themselves to what was basically a pyramid scheme hatched by a handful of people on Wall Street that every financial industry in the world was invested in under a plan that was impossible to pay out that few people understood.

We're not talking about state economies that hold a very different set of responsibilities and depend upon federal funds for many programs. That is even more hilariously inappropriate. However, you cannot discuss the fiscal woes of California unless you go back to the tipping point of when it all went wrong back in 2007 with the housing crisis and was drug out longer than necessary because of partisan bickering over the budget.

The costs I am talking about are not direct financial costs. Some things are more important than money, you know.

Yes, that's why we're in trouble. Because Middle Class America, the section of this country that has been wages stagnate whole jobs are shipped out of the country don't understand the costs. It has nothing to do with the lobbying advantages of the uber-wealthy or the mismanagement of taxes by the Republicans who financed two wars with a blank check while cutting tax revenue for those wealthy people who lobbied for them. It's all because Joe Sixpack that lost his manufacturing job to Jose Martinez in Monterrey didn't suck it up and refuse government assistance, letting his family starve while looking for a job that no longer existed in this country so Mr Rockefeller's shares of GM could get another 3 points last quarter.

He will. He'll die young, never seeing his children grow up or their kids grow up and we get to keep the money he paid into Social Security and Medicaid. I'm not sure why his kids should pay the price, though and suffer through bankruptcy that his wife has to deal with after their finances are wiped out to pay for his hospital bills.

Can you provide a link for this "painless life" that has been promoted for 40-100 years?

You're not going to do that cutting spending or without raising taxes substantially.

I never said that we can't cut spending. Not once. Not ever. I don't feel that cutting social programs will improve this country one bit, but there are places we can cut. Of course we would be better served if we took that money and diverted it to massive public works projects and technology. It's a proven roadmap to economic growth, but because it requires a short term goal of spending people ignore the long term benefits. We have three decades of giving the wealthy tax breaks and reducing their taxes which according to Republican talking points stimulates job and economic growth. We have a living, breathing example of how to **** things up more just across the pond in Europe and all you want to do is imitate it. For some reason people still cling to this nothing despite four decades of evidence that that belief is nothing but utter bull****. The funniest part about it is that people like you who lobby for it. suffer for it.

Still unclear as to what you think we are trying to imitate. Below you can clearly see that your model we imitate is none of the sort. Europe is taxed far more than the US and your model, is well, to imitate them. Is it not? One thing we can adjust is the corporate tax rate, though that is almost certain. In all, all of Europe is taxed far more than the US and look at the shit they are in.

What does this mean? Controlled spending. Something we don't have on both sides..... Republicans more recent if you insist on passing blame.

Like most issues, this issue is SO SIMPLE if we could get to the honest positions.

The Republicans hate giving money to the welfare, entitlement class.
The Dems hate rich entities (corporations and the uber rich - republicans).

Just get it out in the open and go from there. All this other crap just gets in the way.

I bet that if we could get to the point of we are going to cut "X" from welfare handouts and we are gonna tax the rich "Y" this could be solved in moments.

Unfortunately, like so much else, everything is couched in terms and the result is a bolixed up mess.

I say again, "Our problems cannot be solved by the democratic process."