The largest reason Greece defaults are so big, is that that were hidden until it became too big to hide…
The problem if noticed earlier, could have been corrected by now, without letting the debt balloon into the crises we have now.
Republicans want to use the same scoring method used by the Greeks to hide our their proposed deficits.
Remember, Newt Gingrich’s deficit is $7 trillion higher than Obamas. Santorum’s deficit is $6 Trillion higher than Obamas. Romney’s deficit is $2 Trillion higher than the deficit…..
So, the idea is that if you “pretend” that growth will be “off the charts”, because you cut taxes “too low”, then all that “growth” will generate tons of revenue that will magically appear….
Before we jump into this, has this ever been tried before?
Yes… as mentioned, it was done in Greece… Look how that turned out.
Yes, ..Bush W… taxes were cut too low… and instead of growth, we got this Depression…….
Yes,..Ronald Reagan. 86. taxes were cut too low, and instead of growth, we got a Massive Recession in 89.. Had Clinton not been elected it would have continued on into a Depression.
Yes, The 1920’s… Taxes were cut too low, and instead of growth, we got “the” Great Depression…….
And now they want to do it again, with dynamic scoring….
Because they have a problem. That problem is the CBO (Congressional Budget Office) by law is required to cost out budgets to see where they end up. They’ve gotten pretty accurate lately. So when a Republican puts up a budget, it like the candidates listed above, look pretty bad… So, Republicans want to change the formula.
The reason they want to use it is obvious. Their idea that cutting taxes increases both jobs and revenue, is a fairy tale.. If it was true, it would have worked the four examples I gave above….
Cutting taxes leads to lower revenue and larger budget deficits. There are no two ways about this…
Republicans think this is not true. Just like they think global warming is not true. Just like they think the separation of Church and state is not in the Constitution. Just like they think birth control is too important a topic to let women decide how it should be used…..
Republicans are wrong on all counts.
And so, if we get a Republican Congress in 2012, we will then get dynamic scoring to deny how much their policies are costing us, as we too, will wind up bankrupt……
So if you don’t want America to turn into Greece ( who would?)…… it is imperative that no Republicans make it into Congress this next time….
Their steadfast belief in nothing but psuedo-science, will be their undoing…..
kavips 
3 comments
Comments feed for this article
March 4, 2012 at 9:30 am
annoymous
Death Spiral of a Planet; (or what republicans like to refer to as – the climate hoax.)
“EPA researchers are working to better understand climate change and how the effects will vary by region and over time, and how societies and the earth’s environment will adapt to or cope with climate change. EPA’s climate change research is focusing on those areas where EPA has the most to offer assessments of the consequences of climate change on air quality, water quality, human health and ecosystem health.” EPA
‘How the effects WILL vary,” ………. ‘how societies and the earth’s environment WILL adapt to or cope -with climate change ”
What don’t republicans understand about the first paragraph? Oh, that’s right. Republicans want to eliminate EPA
The June 2010 Department of Homeland Security Strategic Sustainability Performance Plan states “climate change has the potential to accelerate and intensify extreme weather events which threaten the nation’s sustainability and security.”
This plan also noted: “Many USCG [Coast Guard] and Customs and Border Protection facilities, by their mission, are located in the coastal zone which will be adversely impacted by sea level rise. Costs will increase for protecting existing facilities from the impacts of sea level rise and some facilities might have to be abandoned in the longer term.” “Headlines, 2010 CNSNews.com)
Doesn’t Santorum think Homeland Security, the Coast Guard Border Protection, would believe in “the hoax?”
2/24/12, FEMA Administrator and former Director of the Florida Division of Emergency Management Craig Fugate: “Ignoring the effects of climate change — until disaster has already happened and we are forced to clean up the mess on an emergency footing — is not a sustainable strategy. If lawmakers in Washington actually intend to make the fiscally responsible decisions they preach about, then they will follow the administrator’s warning and immediately develop a national strategy that at once mitigates the negative effects of climate change and begins to build resilience on the local level. Investing in climate resilience means reducing pollution and preparing for its unavoidable effects. Failure to act now will be paid for in ever-increasing amounts of America’s blood and treasure.”
“Failure to act now will be paid for in ever-increasing amounts of America’s blood and treasure.”
That’s a very bold statement. Are Republicans saying …. FEMA is also part of the same ” hoax?”
How can Americans tell republicans, the problem needs to get fixed?
Ask republicans and their candidates: Are Home Land Security, USCG, EPA, FEMA, NOAA, IPCC, – all lying?
The economy is a problem, that is a small part of the larger picture of America’s ills. (The economy is a missing piece of puzzle,(perhaps the medicine,) that republicans are holding back.
Obama offers mass transportation projects, infrastructure rebuilding, regulation of harmful pollutions, clean energy initiatives, etc.
A healthy free economy should be thriving, considering all that we need to accomplish in a small window of time; but everyone knows, republicans would rather fight Obama’s every step forward. Republicans would rather blame Bush’s economic downfall on Obama, rather than see a nation recover under Obama’s leadership.
Kavips says, ” The other bills not getting paid, are taking a back-seat….” This is true. But it’s like a card game; the poor man asks his wife to get their last dollar she saved, from the cookie jar. Then he sends her to the ATM, as the fat cats are puffing on cigars, their pockets overflowing, money stacked around them, as they sit at the table, with aces stuffed up their sleeves. They invest their winnings overseas, and have their talking heads cry, the economy, jobs, boo hoo, the poor man can’t pay his bills.
Like an economic recovery, there needs to be an environmental recovery.
An environmental recovery – a recovery from pollution that is heating the planet. A recovery that will examine product extraction methods, production methods, governmental regulation of hazardous waste by-products known as greenhouse gases; an end to unnecessary, wasteful usages of energy; the conservation of energy, the research and development and immediate use of clean, alternative energies, etc. This is not included in the republican budget figures. Instead, republicans condemn even the thought of an environmental recovery, by simply saying – the environment’s fine, democrats lie; climate change is a “hoax.”
Imagine that; some devil claiming, the earth is ours to destroy, for the sake of fossil fuel greed.
http://video.ca.msn.com/watch/video/santorum-s-views-on-the-earth-is-questionable/17yfsulbt?cpkey=f1ed3bf0-feac-4fe9-a3ad-591cb1cf3efd%7c%7c%7c%7c
March 5, 2012 at 8:40 am
annonymous
The planet will be bankrupt.
Could there be an ‘economic recovery, if there is no ‘environmental recovery’
Does climate change exist, if republicans reject it.
Does money matter, if the earth is destroyed.
Republicans offer nothing but continuing run away CO2, as their motivation. Considering what the world would be like at 3,5,8 degrees Fahrenheit higher, no one might be left so how would money matter? What republicans neglect to mention, is that their path to immediate riches, is the path to environmental ruin for future generations. Denial equals republican equals ‘zero values;’ as republicans ignore everything else related to their immediate cash flow through CO2 free releasing.
The problem with fossil fuels is, the industry isn’t smart enough to deal with it’s industrial by products in a safe way. (By the way, clean coal is a hoax.) Instead they free release tremendous amounts of CO2 (and other chemicals,) into the atmosphere. Scientists have found, man made levels of CO2 are effecting climates in adverse ways. What needs to be done is, reduce free releasing of CO2; increase meaningful clean energy alternatives.
Too often, people who want to become politicians do so for the wrong reasons or they are people who are incapable of performing at a capacity necessary for managing complex problems, or getting elected counts, foremost. I would equate such politicians, with a nineteen year old, still in third grade, reading at second grade level, who comes to school for the hot chicks and wants to come back next year, to run for class president. Like republicans, he’s wasting time, space and taxpayers money and frankly, he’s a danger out roaming the halls.
Republican politicians have their eye on a prize named Washington, go to pep rallies, skipping the classes on climate science, instead developing a sinister interest in crack coal and it’s unregulated smoking stacks. Ignoring the lessons of today, including an ‘international team of climate scientists, the environmental protection plans, homeland security’s advisement of impending threats, the federal emergency management’s announcements on unpreparedness, etc.
There should be no free hall pass for ‘thugs in denial’ to roam the halls to score. Republicans would cause untold trillions in damages while procrastinating, perhaps passed a survivable point for future generations. They need to be held accountable for damages they cause and kept from causing more. Time to tell the big thug, time to move on in the real world. But I want to be president, he says.
Republicans need to immediately ‘PROVE’ their unscientific climate incompetency isn’t just bogus denial; prove that their plan for more CO2 releasing, is harmless. It’s more complex than Santorum handing out white caps that read, coal = jobs, when clean energy equals jobs and an improving future.
Republicans aren’t reacting to the truth, but are simply stalling, ‘pretending’ – there is no problem. It looks like this:
Let’s instead, have an all out (fossil fueled economy vs. climate recovery economy) debate begin. Fossil fuel industries, et al will say, we’re not causing any climate damages and we’re not going to paying for climate damages, in fact, we want to release much more atmospheric CO2.
Voters should realize, there is no difference in:
1) Calling climate change a hoax and not taking action;
2) saying climate change isn’t being caused by man-made over releasing of CO2 and not taking action;
3) knowing climate change is real and not taking action.
The truth is; greenhouse gases are increasing at an alarming rate. It’s not a hoax that CO2 level (2/12) is now at 393.88 ppm and rising rapidly. (That’s not including GHG’s other than CO2.) Climate scientists now call 350 ppm, the level to strive for.
Two things are sure, A) offenders don’t want to acknowledge damages, but they do B) want to make a lot more money, free releasing a lot more CO2.
The question someone needs to ask of republican candidates is, whether he, as President would support, the reduction of CO2 pollution, the mitigation of climate changes’ negative effects, and take necessary steps to protect life, property and natural resources. Santorum speaks in the negative of these issues: that he supports more CO2; that there is no climate change; that the earth itself, is a disposable product.
If republican candidates are allowed to cling to lies, concocted conspiracy theories and delay costs to the public, their costs to a nation, the world, will become incalculable. The planet will be bankrupt.
Soon a republican candidate will have to face our President, with history, science and Americans on his side, who will challenge republican excuses for wanting to do away with EPA and EPA regulation of CO2.
The Economy – would not be difficult to fully recover from, if we had a clean, nature environment. But we don’t.
Lowering the levels of fossil fuel CO2 being poured into the atmosphere, will take an enormous economic effort, a lifetime of worldwide, co operation that republicans reject. We know coal plants that won’t even stop harming their neighboring children.They treat the planet, the same way. Republicans need to realize, more than coal = jobs, needs to be considered.
Perhaps ‘the environmental recovery,’ will require not only tax increases on the 1%, but tax increases on those fossil fuel energy interests and large offenders, that add further environmental damages.
What are the economic costs of republican climate change denial? These costs need to be calculated into the republican economic plans now, as delays are resulting in mounting costs.
Republican voters need to be able to separate science from fiction. Voters need to be know the real costs of having republicans in Washington.
Democracy will not survive without sound leadership. Republicans are supporting the inherent, overwhelming greed and corruption by mindless, reckless enterprise, unencumbered by needed regulation.
Extremist republicans, who would put fossil fuel’s free reign before our country, would cause America to fail.
Someone needs to tell Santorum, federal lands belong to the people and that no regulations on CO2 releasing – is total idiocy. Someone needs to tell Santorum, that earth isn’t fossil fuel’s hazardous waste dump site and that Fossil Fuels, Inc., isn’t a religion.
Notice republicans always say the opposite of what is true – that more CO2 would solve the economy’s problems, for example. The problem isn’t keeping government from controlling business; the problem is keeping Fossil Fuel, Inc. from controlling government.
If a republican candidate, cannot state that he will protect Americans and their futures from climate change, why is he running for president? To be president of Fossil Fuels/Government, Inc.
As Santorum calls for no regulation, more CO2 production, the elimination of the Environmental Protection Agency, he sticks with his, “it’s a hoax.” theory.
A scientist cautiously offers the following regarding recent weather events:
“…..what we can say with confidence is that heavy and extreme precipitation events often associated with thunderstorms and convection are increasing and have been linked to human induced changes in atmospheric composition.”
http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2012/03/04/437185/tornadoes-extreme-weather-climate-change/?amp&mobile=nc&replytocom=370730
http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2008/06/23/202812/sorry-deniers-delayers-part-1-even-us-gov-says-human-emissions-are-changing-the-climate/
March 5, 2012 at 8:50 am
annonymous
.