If the government shuts down due to defunding who is at fault? The Republicans? The Democrats? The President? Who do you believe would be at fault if congress doesn't pass a spending bill that funds the government? Please explain your answers.
The last continuing resolution that passed the House, the one that expires this week, needed Democratic support to get through. Radical Republicans are once again showing their inability to be reasonable, accept fair compromises or govern responsibly.
Both parties hold some blame, however I put more blame on the Democrats as they had complete control of government when the Budget should've initially been passed and didn't get it done, and is now expecting great compromise out of a group that just took one of the houses in part on the basis of spending cuts so its unrealistic to expect that side to significantly compromise at this time.
The last continuing resolution that passed the House, the one that expires this week, needed Democratic support to get through. Radical Republicans are once again showing their inability to be reasonable, accept fair compromises or govern responsibly.
Both the congressional Republicans and Democrats are at fault. The president less so.
I hate the entire way we do annual budgets in this country. People shriek that spending is too high without even considering that in some cases, more spending now means less spending in the long run. I wish we had 5 year plans (or even better, 10 year plans) like they do in China, instead of annual budgets. Then we could worry more about how to reduce costs in the long run and minimize the structural deficit, instead of trying to minimize spending right now, which is stupid and counterproductive.
The last continuing resolution that passed the House, the one that expires this week, needed Democratic support to get through. Radical Republicans are once again showing their inability to be reasonable, accept fair compromises or govern responsibly.
Both the congressional Republicans and Democrats are at fault. The president less so.
I hate the entire way we do annual budgets in this country. People shriek that spending is too high without even considering that in some cases, more spending now means less spending in the long run. I wish we had 5 year plans (or even better, 10 year plans) like they do in China, instead of annual budgets. Then we could worry more about how to reduce costs in the long run and minimize the structural deficit, instead of trying to minimize spending right now, which is stupid and counterproductive.
Unlike China, America is run by the people and actually exspects the people to have a personal responsibility for themselves to improve this country, because we have liberty and are free.
celticwar17 said:Give the people more money, NOT the government.
Those "radical republicans" were sworn into office literally just THREE months ago in large part due to their voters desire for siginificant cuts in the budget. It is absolutely unrealistic to expect them to significantly and sizably compromise even more than they already have (that 63 million is already a great deal less than what they originally promised) literally 3 months after gaining office in part to NOT do exactly what you're saying they must do.
… Your idea of a "radical" republican is one that, upon immedietely entering office, gives their constituents the finger and says "HAHA, **** you, you gotta deal with my lying ass for 2 years".
And this has what to do with what I wrote?
Sometimes the best way to do that is to spend more now so that we don't have to spend as much later. For example, bridges are far cheaper and easier to maintain than to rebuild after they collapse. Or it's far cheaper for the government to chip in for preventative health care than to wait until the person is on Medicare and serious health problems develop. Or it's far cheaper to educate our kids well than to pay for a lifetime of unemployment, prisons, and antipoverty programs. Etc, etc.
The whole mindset that we need spending cuts RIGHT NOW is silly. The government is not in imminent danger of going bankrupt. Yes, we have some serious problems with the long-term structural deficit that need to be solved, but that's no reason to cut off valuable spending now.
If the government shuts down due to defunding who is at fault? The Republicans? The Democrats? The President? Who do you believe would be at fault if congress doesn't pass a spending bill that funds the government? Please explain your answers.
Republicans could easily say the same thing about the Democrats who are unwilling to compromise. Both parties are in a stale mate regarding the budget bill. However, I believe most of the blame is with the Democrats who didn't pass a budget when they had governing monopoly. I agree with Zyphlin's points. America voted in a largely Republican House mainly due to government spending, the Democrats need to recognize this and work with Republicans instead of trying to force them to comply to a large budget that Republicans and the American people want to greatly reduce.
No no no no...
I love how Liberals are trying to portray that their policies are the 'norm'. Their philosophies are waaaaayyy off base to the constitution.
We need drastic spending cuts, because of drastic un-balanced spending..... it's very simple
That might be true...if they had been elected with sizable mandates to control the House of Representatives, the Senate, and the White House. But they weren't. They control HALF of Congress and don't have the presidency.
Whether they like it or not, they are going to have to compromise in some way.
I guess it comes down to which is worse: the government shutting down, or not getting enough spending cuts in the bill?
As someone working for the government and will be significantly affected by a shut down...
Not getting enough spending cuts.
They already compromised from their campaign promises by dropping from 100 Billion to 63 billion. Now they're being told they need to compromise on their compromised number. This House was elected in large part due to the desire for Fiscal Responsability. If they bend to the point that their line may as well start resembling a circle just THREE MONTHS into being in office then they may as well kiss any hope for fiscal responsability with regards to the budgets to the curb for the next 2 years, and any good hope of Republican wins in 2012 and continued control of the budget can go right along with it.
So in my mind...yes, if it takes 2 weeks or a month of government shut down to actually show that they, and the people who elected them, are serious about cutting spending then so be it. The short term harm is worth the long term gain.
If they honestly didn't care about a government shut down at all there never would've been the past two CR's that they passed.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?