world

Supercommittee fails mission to cut U.S. debt

34 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2011 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

34 Comments
Login to comment

Anyone ever seen a strata of society as defensive and downright hostile as a conservative defending tax breaks for millionaires?

Conservatives need to wake up – Bush gave you guys everything you wanted – tax breaks, freed up regulations….and look what happened – cowboys in the financial sector took the industry and players for a ride and – boom – they give you a national and global recession.

Let me make that clear – YOU HAVE ALREADY BEEN GIVEN WHAT YOU ARE CRYING OUT FOR NOW: lower taxes and fewer regulations.

You got a global recession to show for it.

You want more?

5 ( +9 / -4 )

Where was the executive? Where was the president? Why don't people let him do his job. This has Hillary written all over it...

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

Sushisake...Yes..sure..Americas tax cuts and reduced regulations caused a GLOBAL recession. Ergo BUSH caused the global recession. Are you really Obama using a false name?

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

This result show how little they care as elected officials, for the majority of the american people, who put them in office to represent them. SHAME on all of you who say you represent the wishes of the people of America. As I keep saying , politics and big business are a big club , and we mere citizens are not members.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

More downgrade ahead.That word is gonna define the O man if he isn't careful.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

It is important to be clear on a few points. First, there will be no downgrade as no one and I mean no one expected them to reach a deal. S&P and Moody’s have already stated that they do not plan to downgrade the US rating. Why? Because as most know, there are automatic cuts and the repealing of the Bush Tax cuts if the (not-so)Super Committee failed, and that is what has occurred. So you will see some DOD cuts and the Bush Tax Cuts as well as some domestic spending automatically occurring starting in 2013 and the overall GDP to debt ratio will drop and so US T Bills will stay the safest bank in transnational capitalism. Obama has already threatened a veto if the Congress were to try and undo the automatic cuts. In reality all this proves is that Americans are divided on how to attack the economic problems and congress is actually representing the people and not caving to anything. That is both sides are not ultimately bending. However, the Republicans should be called out as they have no political need to act and their inaction is what ultimately sunk any deal from being made. Whereas the Democratic Party wants to do something that will help the economy sooner rather than later, the Republicans are more than fine sitting back and doing nothing, despite knowing how much it will hurt many US citizens. They can do this because they know that in the end their base, the Tea Party, will blame Obama no matter what in Nov of 2012. Plus if the GOP can hurt the economy in a way that doesn’t make them out to be openly against the US they will hurt Obama’s chances of reelection. Now remember that their number one priority, by their own words, is to make Obama out to be a one termer. As a bit of Lagniappe they can hurt the economy and Obama by defending low taxes for the obscenely rich (This was the issue that they would not bend on). An extra bit of American political insanity is found in that the Democratic Party drew the line on serious cuts to Social Security and Medicare. This was the point that they were not willing to be flexible on. Of course the reactionary and perpetually frightened senior voters will reward the Democratic Party for defending their SS and Medicare by voting overwhelmingly for Republicans, at least if statistic stay true to form.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Where was the executive? Where was the president? Why don't people let him do his job

Jeremiah, According to the Washington, it was planned that way from the beginning, so that the issue does not become too politicized before the election 2012. FYI

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

notasap, very good comment here. Thanks.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

When you have a dysfunctional public, one shouldn't be too surprised to have a dysfunctional system of government. By the people, and for the people.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Jeremiah, According to the Washington, it was planned that way from the beginning, so that the issue does not become too politicized before the election 2012. FYI

The president will get to improve his golf game. I'm stoked.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

However, the Republicans should be called out as they have no political need to act and their inaction is what ultimately sunk any deal from being made.

Respectfully disagree. The Supercommittee was a hardfought compromise between the Republicans and President Obama and the Democrats in the first place. It was the only way that the debt ceiling could be raised with approval of the Republicans, who were totally against piling on more debt on the national credit card. The Republicans had plenty at stake here for the supercommittee to do the very job it was suppose to do mainly to cut the out of control spending. The Democrats are the ones who had everything to gain and nothing to lose by stalling and never offering any serious proposals to actually cut spending. They can demonize the Republicans as favoring the rich, playing the class warfare card to the hilt. Bet on the Republicans never agreeing to manditory massive cuts in Defense spending giving the Democrats leverage to not have to cut any programs at all and most importantly paint the Republicans as extremist do-nothings that just can't compromise for the good of country. The Democrats are the reason this failed and are playing crass politics not the Republicans. The Republicans are going to feel the heat from their own constituents for agreeing to the supercommittee in the first place and sticking their necks out thinking the Democrats were actually serious about cutting spending.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Obama is leading from behind ,I guess. Here's the spin they can put on this failure: It might be bad for the markets, but it won't mean that working families are gonna face a sudden "spending reduction in the tax code".The jobs saved or created numbers won't change. But I still think Hillary is winning. I am worried.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Of course it would have failed.....the Republicans want massive cuts and privatization of social programs (which the majority Americans despise: especially if it is Medicare, Medicaid, and SS) without tax increases on the rich.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

It's not all bad: there's still the $1.2 trillion automatic cuts. Better than nothin'.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

This mess was not just by Bush Jr, but also by George Bush SR! These idiot republicans screwed us and the world by getting us into the first Gulf War then when Mr.Clinton WON old Bush Sr, was nice enough to start the first Gulf War go a few years in the future and idiot son Bush Sr got us into not only Iraq but Afghanistan wasting $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ and finally Mr.Obama is trying to CLEAN UP THIS MESS made by the evil republicans so now we have not only debts but also people hungry and desperate on the streets of America with the Occupy Wall Street Movement etc..Refute this??

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Sailwind - "It was the only way that the debt ceiling could be raised with approval of the Republicans, who were totally against piling on more debt on the national credit card."

Strange that, not to mention incredibly hypocritical considering the GOP under Bush voted to raise the debt ceiling something like 13 times.

I wonder how the GOP leadership could explain that?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Sailwind, I added some comments (in caps) to your last post:

The Supercommittee was a hardfought compromise between the Republicans and President Obama and the Democrats in the first place. It was the only way that the debt ceiling could be raised with approval of the Republicans, who were totally against piling on more debt on the national credit card. [THE GOP SPEEDILY AND WITHOUT DELAY VOTED TO RAISE THE DEBT CEILING 13 TIMES UNDER BUSH.]

The Republicans had plenty at stake here for the supercommittee to do the very job it was suppose to do mainly to cut the out of control spending. The Democrats are the ones who had everything to gain and nothing to lose by stalling and never offering any serious proposals to actually cut spending. [WRONG: DEMOCRATS HAVE OFFERED AND MADE THE MOST CONCESSIONS.]

They can demonize the Republicans as favoring the rich [WHICH THEY CLEARLY DO], playing the class warfare card to the hilt [WHICH THE GOP LEADERSHIP QUITE HAPPILY DO].

Bet on the Republicans never agreeing to manditory massive cuts in Defense spending giving the Democrats leverage to not have to cut any programs at all and most importantly paint the Republicans as extremist do-nothings that just can't compromise for the good of country. [REPUBLICANS HAVE SHOWN THIS TIME AND TIME AGAIN]

The Democrats are the reason this failed and are playing crass politics not the Republicans. [NEWSFLASH: PIGS FLY]

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

It seems pretty clear at this point that liberal policies have brought the American economy to its knees and that these failed liberal policies just don't work. Now the Democrat party is trying to hold up a solution in the super committee.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

1.2 trillion in automatic cuts is a victory, even if the majority gets taken out of America's bloated military instead of its bloated entitlement system. The next victory will come in 2013, when Obama is gone and the Republicans get control of the Senate. Then you'll see some real progress. In an ideal world, they'd even eliminate some of the parasitic "make-work" government departments, such as the Department of Energy, HUD and the Department of Education. I would also like to see them raise taxes on those making under $50,000, so they have some skin in the game, too. You have have half of the so-called workers in America paying no income tax. How is that a "fair" system?

-6 ( +3 / -9 )

Sure is funny..... YEARS AFTER the Bush's are gone (especially SR.) the LIBS still want to blame them (Elbuda, etc...). The simple FACT is that Obama is in office and HE is failing, ON A GRAND SCALE.

When are you all going to realize that sometimes you have to cut bait and move on. Spending is bigger than it has EVER been and to what end? And the tired answer of "Well, it would have been worse" is honestly getting old.

Bebert got my thumb up for the "under 50k" statement. Until the entitlement society has a stake in the game then nothing will change. The RICH Libs give (our tax money) for votes to stay in power, the poor (er) LIBS TAKE (our tax money, those of us that pay) one the promise that they will put their "SUgar Daddy" back in power. Quite a symbiotic relationship, unfortuanately it is also a parasitic relationship since there is only so much blood to suck. SIMPLE BIOLOGY ECONOMICS!!

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Simply put, republicans refused to cross their ideological line against increasing taxes. Democrats refused to allow cuts in popular programs that serve the elderly and poor without a compensating growth of government income, especially from the wealthiest Americans.

Note the subtle false equivalency here. The republicans refuse to cooperate, period. End of story. The Democrats refuse to make further consessions without SOMETHING in return from republicans.

And somehow that's supposed to be equal.. It's not. The Democrats have already put Social Security and Medicare on the table and the republicans just said, "no that's not enough. We want tax cuts personally made out in our names too."

The way a compromise works is that both sides have to be willing to give. The republicans have not shown the abiliity to do anything other than obstruct. Both mccain and boehner have made statements that they will not support this president. michele bachman had ads on her official congressional homepage calling to make president Obama a one-term president. Not her campaign page, but her congressional website. She's since quit using it to campaign (I'm sure she got into some trouble over that; I hope so at least) No president has suffered such indignity. His patriotism has been attacked. His citizenship has been attacked. His wife has been attacked. Hell, HE'S been attacked. There's been a 200% increase in threats against the president by the right wing in this country and they somehow feel justified and patriotic in their feelings.

That's some sick sh#t in my opinion.

The political right in this country would rather see the country fail than give President Obama a win. There's something wrong with people like that.

Taka

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

The political right in this country would rather see the country fail than give President Obama a win. There's something wrong with people like that.

LOL. President Golfpants voted 'present' on this matter as well. He is derelict in the duties he was elected to do.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

LOL. President Golfpants voted 'present' on this matter as well. He is derelict in the duties he was elected to do.

Derelict you say? He has been traveling the country trying to push a jobs bill, that is now, being passed in pieces (as a veteran, I thank you Mr. President) to put Americans back to work and stimulate the economy.

I would have figured that you would know more about the president, having your life totally consumed by the man and all.

Guess I figured wrong.

Taka

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

The Republicans are dinosaurs fighting hard against extinction. Just look at their Presidential candidates. They're mostly looking to be slaves to keep their narrow-minded contingency happy. In the end thy are just fragmented fractions. They know they have no chance at the White House anymore so they are just looking to protect what they have left and if it means dragging us all down then so be it.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

He has been traveling the country trying to push a jobs bill, that is now, being passed in pieces (as a veteran, I thank you Mr. President) to put Americans back to work and stimulate the economy.

Yeah. That was my first thought, watching Obama punt yet again on the Keystone pipeline. That right there was a few hundred thousand jobs. Dems want Canada to sell that oil to China?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I think it's really funny to watch the blame game going around and around when, in fact, there is enough blame to damn them all.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Think about it, if no deal is reached then AUTOMATIC cuts across the board BUT NO AUTOMATIC TAX INCREASE.

SO why the Republicans want to make a deal at all ?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Keep infighting....good jobs, the republicans, you guys were really great ! The longer delay of america's recovery is good for world peace! By the way, please attack Iran, I want to see America in a bigger chaos!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Derelict you say? He has been traveling the country trying to push a jobs bill, that is now, being passed in pieces (as a veteran, I thank you Mr. President) to put Americans back to work and stimulate the economy.

Traveling he has been.... begging for re-election, trying to show he can do something! But he has your vote so at least he has that going for him!

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Note the subtle false equivalency here. The republicans refuse to cooperate, period. End of story. The Democrats refuse to make further consessions without SOMETHING in return from republicans.

And you were in the room to confirm? You are going off of idology adn talking points, of which both sides have, so please come off the high horse. Both sides failed in the matter (super committee) but the President is to blame since he is, well .... THE PRESIDENT. You blamed Bush when he was in since he was the President so turn about is fair game.

It's a real BI%$# being in charge of a bunch of kids that have guarenteed salary increases, lifelong pensions after one (4 year) term and basically are out of touch with reality (let alone the public that put them there). Until, and not until, the public realizes this (ON BOTH SIDES) we have no hope in sight! BUT one must, when only offered two options, chose. Even if this choice is for the lesser of two evils!! I just hope that my choice is the right one and it prevails, as do you I am sure!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

As ever not nearly enough talk about cutting military spending, still out of control and still way way overkill for what little tangible benefit there is for the country. As if it would kill America to reduce spending from same as the rest of the world, to say 1/2 of the rest of the world.

But, oh yeah, lets cut off Granny's money for meds. Lets talk a few billion rather than a few trillion. Let's talk pennies rather than dollars, because I can imagine Hannibal at the gates even if there is no Hannibal.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

As if it would kill America to reduce spending from same as the rest of the world, to say 1/2 of the rest of the world.

Actually bookbag, if the U.S reduces defense spending the nations under our security umbrella they will have to ramp up their defense expenditures to make up the difference. Japan would have to increase her defense spending for instance as a percentage of her GDP just to maintain her security. There is a reason why the U.S spends more than any other nation, our allies benefit from our security our defense expenditures provide and we benefit by having reliable allies that we can trade with in the global economy. Take our leadership role away and our allies will spend more for self defense and heighten the prospect that our current strategic alliances will start to fade in the future and also increase the prospect of war once again between nations that were once friends if more malevolent forces start to hold sway again in a nations political life.......Japan and Germany would be prime examples of this prior to WW 2.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

if the U.S reduces defense spending the nations under our security umbrella they will have to ramp up their defense expenditures to make up the difference.

For one I am not paranoid enough to belief that Hannibal is actually at the gates.

For two, I cannot see anything wrong with countries taking over most of their own self defense.

For three, America is broke. And wishful thinking won't change that.

Take our leadership role away

Is the only way you can imagine leadership at the point of gun?

our current strategic alliances will start to fade in the future and also increase the prospect of war once again between nations that were once friends

Has war ever really abated? Also, given today's technology, I don't believe a large war could happen so suddenly. Not only would we have time to prepare, but with expenditures stilll at one-half the world's, I do believe America could still be well prepared for just about anything. The idea that America needs to equal the rest of the world is not sound, militarily or financially. And equal to half the world is definitley preferable to implosion.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

America can start with bringing its troops home from Europe and canceling the missile defense system in Europe. It is pissing off the Russians and believe with the failure of the negotiations is doomed anyway. It is sad these politicians are putting their petty politics ahead of the needs of those they swore to "serve".

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites