What Is Obama's Long-Term Plan to Rival the Romney/Ryan Plan?

[krazen1211]

Obama has a plan and he will implement it when the economy is not in danger of falling back into recession thanks to draconian cuts.

In other words, this ad captures the essence of the campaign if you replace Reaganomics with Romneynomics and Mondalenomics with Obamanomics:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mT3AwIrLQSE

Obama is actually a very large tax cutter, in terms of the legislation he has signed.

I presume his plan is here.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2013/assets/tables.pdf



The plan is of course to simply borrow $600 billion per year into perpetuity, or at least 6 years beyond his hypothetical second term. As a result he will accumulate $2.8 trillion in debt in his second term.

[krazen1211]

And SHORT TERM STIMULUS

This is one of the biggest lies ever told. Short term stimulus merely leads some pigs squealing for more short term stimulus.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Democratic Rhetoric

Your point is duly noted. Does Obama have a plan for the long-term or does he just plan on kicking the can down the road?

If Romney loses, at least we can remind everybody in four years that we had a plan for America's long-term while Democrats wallow in their support of the presidential version of Gray Davis.

Two Words: SIMPSON-BOWLES

Two words describe the Simpson-Bowles plan: MORE TAXES

Is Obama ready to double-down on this?

Why the hell shouldn't he be? It's a bipartisan plan with significant cuts including raising the retirement age, it just doesn't subscribe to Ryan's brand of troglodytic lunacy that it's possible or even desirable to cut the deficit without extensive use of revenue.

[Politico]

Democratic Rhetoric

Your point is duly noted. Does Obama have a plan for the long-term or does he just plan on kicking the can down the road?

If Romney loses, at least we can remind everybody in four years that we had a plan for America's long-term while Democrats wallow in their support of the presidential version of Gray Davis.

Two Words: SIMPSON-BOWLES

Two words describe the Simpson-Bowles plan: MORE TAXES

Is Obama ready to double-down on this?

Five more words to describe the Simpson-Bowles plan: LONG TERM BALANCED DEFICIT REDUCTION

Romney/Ryan does that without raising taxes.

Romney/Ryan: Cut taxes, cut spending, restore growth, create incentives for jobs

Obama/Biden: Raise taxes, raise taxes, raise taxes, raise taxes

Easy choice for America to make. Hope you're braced for a 1980-style loss. Even if you somehow dupe America, you're stuck with another Gray Davis except this time in the White House.

[Politico]

Obama has a plan and he will implement it when the economy is not in danger of falling back into recession thanks to draconian cuts.

In other words, this ad captures the essence of the campaign if you replace Reaganomics with Romneynomics and Mondalenomics with Obamanomics:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mT3AwIrLQSE

Obama is actually a very large tax cutter, in terms of the legislation he has signed.

I presume his plan is here.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2013/assets/tables.pdf



The plan is of course to simply borrow $600 billion per year into perpetuity, or at least 6 years beyond his hypothetical second term. As a result he will accumulate $2.8 trillion in debt in his second term.

Yep.

Obama is kicking the can down the road RIGHT NOW. He is either going to raise taxes or simply kick the can down the road. He has no serious plan to get America back on track. He has a bureaucratic budget plan in the form of Simpson-Bowles that raises taxes, and he will not even commit to that. He will not commit to a long-term plan, unlike Romney/Ryan. All Obama/Biden offer is attacks and lies. It reminds me a lot of the 2002 Gray Davis campaign.

[Politico]

And SHORT TERM STIMULUS

This is one of the biggest lies ever told. Short term stimulus merely leads some pigs squealing for more short term stimulus.

Yep. And other little piggies are happy to retreat to the Ritz Carlton in return for rewarding their special interest masters.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Is this the worst thread on Atlas? Discuss with maps.

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

Democratic Rhetoric

Your point is duly noted. Does Obama have a plan for the long-term or does he just plan on kicking the can down the road?

If Romney loses, at least we can remind everybody in four years that we had a plan for America's long-term while Democrats wallow in their support of the presidential version of Gray Davis.

Two Words: SIMPSON-BOWLES

Two words describe the Simpson-Bowles plan: MORE TAXES

Is Obama ready to double-down on this?

Five more words to describe the Simpson-Bowles plan: LONG TERM BALANCED DEFICIT REDUCTION

Romney/Ryan does that without raising taxes.

Romney/Ryan: Cut taxes, cut spending, restore growth, create incentives for jobs

Obama/Biden: Raise taxes, raise taxes, raise taxes, raise taxes

Easy choice for America to make. Hope you're braced for a 1980-style loss. Even if you somehow dupe America, you're stuck with another Gray Davis except this time in the White House.

The Ryan budget doesn't actually give you numbers. It advocates a 20 percent reduction in the Bush Tax Cuts and says they'll be revenue neutral. 4 Trillion dollars is revenue neutral? And they'll be payed for by closing loopholes, but doesn't say which ones. That's not a plan. And if we did adopt the plan, we'll be plunged back into recession and be adopting, to borrow a Newt Term,  European Style Capitalism. Plus the budget wouldn't be in balance til about 2030 or 2040.
Simpson-Bowles balances it in 2020.

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

Is this the worst thread on Atlas? Discuss with maps.

Definitely.

[Beet]

Obama has a plan and he will implement it when the economy is not in danger of falling back into recession thanks to draconian cuts.

This actually means his plan is to do nothing for 4 more years....at which point the next recession will be upon us or close to it based on the typical length of the US business cycle.

Except recent business cycles have been based on the credit cycle, which is only now beginning to turn around. Corporations are sitting on trillions of cash, will they will continue to invest as returns are quite high. Since the credit cycle has been particularly long, the natural business cycle will be, too. If the economy falls into a recession, it will most likely be due to some external shock such as the Euro crisis, a Middle East war, or something like that. It will not be due to natural business cycle conditions in the US.

As for Obama's plan, I would assume it's what he was willing to agree to in July 2011, before Boehner pulled the rug out from under him (or rather, before Boehner got the rug pulled out from under him by his own caucus).

[krazen1211]

This is what these people said a couple years back.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY/pdf/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY.pdf


Spending was supposed to be at $3.6 trillion in 2012, with a deficit of $557 billion.

Whoops. For some reason they ended up spending far more money than planned on welfare benefits for the Democrat base voters.

[Politico]

So are we getting a commitment from Democrats on here to PRESSURE the Obama/Biden campaign to fully endorse and commit to Simpson/Bowles? Or are Democrats satisfied with kicking the can down the road, which is the current plan of Obama/Biden?

I prefer Romney/Ryan, but Simpson/Bowles is infinitely preferable to the current trajectory of Obama/Biden.

Romney/Ryan is now committed to spending their political capital on tax reform and their long-term plan. America wants to hear what plan the Obama/Biden team is going to spend their political capital on if they win.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

So are we getting a commitment from Democrats on here to PRESSURE the Obama/Biden campaign to fully endorse and commit to Simpson/Bowles? Or are Democrats satisfied with kicking the can down the road, which is the current plan of Obama/Biden?

I prefer Romney/Ryan, but Simpson/Bowles is infinitely preferable to the current trajectory of Obama/Biden.

We'll commit to that if you commit to coming up with some new disgraced politician to unfairly compare the President to.

[Beet]

Clinton 1996, what is the point of your signature? It seems to be a mix of positive things that Obama is campaigning on, as well as abhorrent things that are sure to be unpopular. If it's supposed to be an attack on Ryan, it sends mixed messages. For instance, I'm no fan of Ryan, but I applaud him for voting the unemployment benefits extension. That makes me think more highly of him.

[Politico]

So are we getting a commitment from Democrats on here to PRESSURE the Obama/Biden campaign to fully endorse and commit to Simpson/Bowles? Or are Democrats satisfied with kicking the can down the road, which is the current plan of Obama/Biden?

I prefer Romney/Ryan, but Simpson/Bowles is infinitely preferable to the current trajectory of Obama/Biden.

We'll commit to that if you commit to coming up with some new disgraced politician to unfairly compare the President to.

Gray Davis was not disgraced and is actually a good guy just like Barack Obama, whom I like as a person. That did not make up for the fact that he simply had no plan for the future. He had to run a scorched-earth campaign to win re-election, which barely worked. But then he had nothing he could do for the future because he had no plan to deal with some serious fiscal issues and the special interests he was beholden to. Barack Obama is simply Gray Davis all over again except on a higher level (obviously a recall is not an option this time around).

[krazen1211]

Obama has a plan and he will implement it when the economy is not in danger of falling back into recession thanks to draconian cuts.

This actually means his plan is to do nothing for 4 more years....at which point the next recession will be upon us or close to it based on the typical length of the US business cycle.

Except recent business cycles have been based on the credit cycle, which is only now beginning to turn around. Corporations are sitting on trillions of cash, will they will continue to invest as returns are quite high. Since the credit cycle has been particularly long, the natural business cycle will be, too. If the economy falls into a recession, it will most likely be due to some external shock such as the Euro crisis, a Middle East war, or something like that. It will not be due to natural business cycle conditions in the US.

As for Obama's plan, I would assume it's what he was willing to agree to in July 2011, before Boehner pulled the rug out from under him (or rather, before Boehner got the rug pulled out from under him by his own caucus).

That's a possibility. Unfortunately, the current growth rate of the economy is far too low to provide with the massive revenue spikes that team Obama seems to be forecasting. He of course forecast that same massive revenue spike back in 2010 that never happened.

Without that revenue spike, there will undoubtedly be more borrowing. Doubly so if we behave like Clinton1996 and use another 'short term' stimulus. Perhaps that $2.8 trillion of debt is understated.


The nice thing for these people I guess is that they can then leave office, and the 2017 Democratic Party can continue screeching about 'draconian' spending cuts.

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

So are we getting a commitment from Democrats on here to PRESSURE the Obama/Biden campaign to fully endorse and commit to Simpson/Bowles? Or are Democrats satisfied with kicking the can down the road, which is the current plan of Obama/Biden?

I prefer Romney/Ryan, but Simpson/Bowles is infinitely preferable to the current trajectory of Obama/Biden.

I completely agree. Obama needs to grow some balls and formally endorse it. I like to think of myself as a Clintonian New Democrat fiscal conservative. We need to get our house in order and tough choices need to be made. Tax Increases And Spending Cuts.
It's known that he supported it in 2010 but didn't come out as he was advised against it by those on the commission because it was believed GOPers would go against it just because he supported it.

[Brittain33]

This thread needs to be drowned in prayer.

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

Clinton 1996, what is the point of your signature? It seems to be a mix of positive things that Obama is campaigning on, as well as abhorrent things that are sure to be unpopular. If it's supposed to be an attack on Ryan, it sends mixed messages. For instance, I'm no fan of Ryan, but I applaud him for voting the unemployment benefits extension. That makes me think more highly of him.

I found it funny so I traded in the Clinton photo in my signature for this. It points out the contradictions in what Romney is proposing and attacking Obama for, and what the VP he chose has done in the past.

[mondale84]

Well he obviously want to cut military spending which is what we should do. We should also use means-testing for Medicare and Social Security, rather than privatizing and couponing both. Also, Politico, don't just spew your Reagan talking points since we know how good Reagan was at eliminating the deficit and paying down the national debt

[Politico]

Well he obviously want to cut military spending which is what we should do. We should also use means-testing for Medicare and Social Security, rather than privatizing and couponing both. Also, Politico, don't just spew your Reagan talking points since we know how good Reagan [Tip O'Neill and Co.] was at eliminating the deficit and paying down the national debt

Fixed.

[mondale84]

Well he obviously want to cut military spending which is what we should do. We should also use means-testing for Medicare and Social Security, rather than privatizing and couponing both. Also, Politico, don't just spew your Reagan talking points since we know how good Reagan [Tip O'Neill and Co.] was at eliminating the deficit and paying down the national debt

Fixed.

LOL

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

GENERIC BUMPER STICKER RHETORIC

[krazen1211]

Well he obviously want to cut military spending

Lol. Pay no attention to my first 4 years!

[mondale84]

Well he obviously want to cut military spending

Lol. Pay no attention to my first 4 years!

He's cut military spending more than Romney ever would.