Rubio Rips Obama's Budget Busting as Missing 'Golden Opportunity'

[rockin'robin]

U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio lambasted President Barack Obama's budget proposal today, issuing the following statement:

“Sadly, the president has missed a golden opportunity to have an adult conversation with the American people about the seriousness and urgency of our debt crisis. The president’s budget falls far short of tackling our national debt in a serious way. Although we face a $1.6 trillion deficit and a staggering national debt that exceeds $14 trillion, the president’s proposal would add $7.2 trillion of new debt over the next ten years. The fact that the president’s 10-year proposed ‘savings’ is less than this year’s budget deficit alone is proof that this is a budget that cannot be taken seriously.

“While the president insists he will take the commendable step of vetoing earmarks, his silence on entitlement reform, the absence of meaningful spending cuts and his reliance on anti-competitive tax increases will cause more economic uncertainty, stifle job creation and keep America on a path towards a diminished future.

“Today’s excruciating problems are the legacy of decades of profligate spending by both parties. We have a job-crushing debt because Washington has repeatedly postponed the tough decisions for someone else to deal with down the road. The American people have every reason to be disappointed by the president’s budget and by Washington politicians who either don’t understand the seriousness of our fiscal crisis, or who are simply not willing to confront this challenge head-on.”



Rubio Rips Obama's Budget Busting as Missing 'Golden Opportunity'

 

[TWA]

Translation: not enough handouts for the rich, so I'm going to whine like a baby.

 

[darkdog]

Translation: not enough handouts for the rich, so I'm going to whine like a baby.

What handouts for the rich?

 

[TWA]

What handouts for the rich?

Taxcuts, but of course.

 

[darkdog]

Taxcuts, but of course.

It's their own money. Tax cuts just mean the government's confiscating less of it. There's a difference between giving someone something that wasn't their property to begin with and taking less of something that is their property to begin with.

 

[TXgolfer]

U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio lambasted President Barack Obama's budget proposal today, issuing the following statement:

“Sadly, the president has missed a golden opportunity to have an adult conversation with the American people about the seriousness and urgency of our debt crisis. The president’s budget falls far short of tackling our national debt in a serious way. Although we face a $1.6 trillion deficit and a staggering national debt that exceeds $14 trillion, the president’s proposal would add $7.2 trillion of new debt over the next ten years. The fact that the president’s 10-year proposed ‘savings’ is less than this year’s budget deficit alone is proof that this is a budget that cannot be taken seriously.

“While the president insists he will take the commendable step of vetoing earmarks, his silence on entitlement reform, the absence of meaningful spending cuts and his reliance on anti-competitive tax increases will cause more economic uncertainty, stifle job creation and keep America on a path towards a diminished future.

“Today’s excruciating problems are the legacy of decades of profligate spending by both parties. We have a job-crushing debt because Washington has repeatedly postponed the tough decisions for someone else to deal with down the road. The American people have every reason to be disappointed by the president’s budget and by Washington politicians who either don’t understand the seriousness of our fiscal crisis, or who are simply not willing to confront this challenge head-on.”



Rubio Rips Obama's Budget Busting as Missing 'Golden Opportunity'

Maybe 2012 after all

 

[TXgolfer]

It's their own money. Tax cuts just mean the government's confiscating less of it. There's a difference between giving someone something that wasn't their property to begin with and taking less of something that is their property to begin with.

There it is folks......in plain english.

 

[Foxrac]

This country is going screw up, no doubt and none of their budget fix that will help USA to get out of huge debt, except for all political game crap on between Dem and GOP.

 

[Foxrac]

Taxcuts, but of course.

I think that combined of spending cut and increase in tax are best way to fix the debt issue but no one want to side with either of them so that's all up to American voters, including you, me, anyone to make decision for our country.

I believe that Senate will probably reject the spending cut bill from the House and put both of House and Senate into hot battle that leading to government shutdown so I'm going wait and see about what's up in next month.

 

[TWA]

It's their own money. Tax cuts just mean the government's confiscating less of it. There's a difference between giving someone something that wasn't their property to begin with and taking less of something that is their property to begin with.

Sure, and they can feel free to build their own roads to drive on, their own schools to educate their children (well, most of them do that already, but not all), hire their own (corrupt) police force to protect them, emergency systems to watch out for them, create their own infrastructure to support their businesses, their own federal insurance agencies to protect their assets, and so on, and so on...

 

[webexplorer]

I thought that Obama already revenged that he added 1 trillion dollars awhile the wealthy corporation owners demand the tax cuts for their income. It looks that the owners will be sucker.

 

[posts from hell]

Translation: not enough handouts for the rich, so I'm going to whine like a baby.

Sure, and they can feel free to build their own roads to drive on, their own schools to educate their children (well, most of them do that already, but not all), hire their own (corrupt) police force to protect them, emergency systems to watch out for them, create their own infrastructure to support their businesses, their own federal insurance agencies to protect their assets, and so on, and so on...

forgive me, as I am on dilaudid...

im not seeing your point here... you say that the rich are whining that they're not getting enough tax cuts, but in the second post you essentially are saying that they would do all the other stuff - ie; hiring construction workers for roads, schools, emergency stations, insurance offices, hiring personnel for teachers, police, insurance agents, human resource for all the above while getting tax cuts...

sounds like a good deal for me. anything to generate more jobs - which is what this country needs.

 

[darkdog]

Sure, and they can feel free to build their own roads to drive on, their own schools to educate their children (well, most of them do that already, but not all), hire their own (corrupt) police force to protect them, emergency systems to watch out for them, create their own infrastructure to support their businesses, their own federal insurance agencies to protect their assets, and so on, and so on...

Most of those things you cite are local in nature. As for federal taxes, high income earners pay the majority of the tax bill. The bottom 50% pay around 3%. It's simply wrong to say the rich aren't paying their fair share.

What concerns me is that our fiscal house is on fire and an entire side of the political debate is obsessively focusing on the rich. The real issue is federal spending which has exploded over the past decade or so. Now, we have 13 figure (!) deficits as far as the eye can see. This cannot go on forever and whining about the rich won't make the problem go away.

 

[posts from hell]

Most of those things you cite are local in nature. As for federal taxes, high income earners pay the majority of the tax bill. The bottom 50% pay around 3%. It's simply wrong to say the rich aren't paying their fair share.

What concerns me is that our fiscal house is on fire and an entire side of the political debate is obsessively focusing on the rich. The real issue is federal spending which has exploded over the past decade or so. Now, we have 13 figure (!) deficits as far as the eye can see. This cannot go on forever and whining about the rich won't make the problem go away.

thats true

 

[TWA]

Most of those things you cite are local in nature. As for federal taxes, high income earners pay the majority of the tax bill. The bottom 50% pay around 3%. It's simply wrong to say the rich aren't paying their fair share.

What concerns me is that our fiscal house is on fire and an entire side of the political debate is obsessively focusing on the rich. The real issue is federal spending which has exploded over the past decade or so. Now, we have 13 figure (!) deficits as far as the eye can see. This cannot go on forever and whining about the rich won't make the problem go away.

Many of those things still receive federal funding, even if they originate at the local level.

I didn't say the rich aren't paying their fair share, but they are certainly whining that they are paying more than their fair share, and that's not true. Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, and others agree on that.

However, with all the tax loopholes, I think it's fair to say that many wealthy folk find ways to reduce their tax burden to a marginal amount. I am actually of the idea that there should be a just a flat sales tax across the board and no income tax. Now that's a straight up conservative ideal, no?

 

[posts from hell]

Many of those things still receive federal funding, even if they originate at the local level.

I didn't say the rich aren't paying their fair share, but they are certainly whining that they are paying more than their fair share, and that's not true. Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, and others agree on that.

However, with all the tax loopholes, I think it's fair to say that many wealthy folk find ways to reduce their tax burden to a marginal amount. I am actually of the idea that there should be a just a flat sales tax across the board and no income tax. Now that's a straight up conservative ideal, no?

I wouldn't be for that. It doesn't promote spending, which is what every country needs.

 

[Jiro]

Many of those things still receive federal funding, even if they originate at the local level.

imagine what we could accomplish if most of the money goes to local level rather than federal tax.

I didn't say the rich aren't paying their fair share, but they are certainly whining that they are paying more than their fair share, and that's not true. Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, and others agree on that.

However, with all the tax loopholes, I think it's fair to say that many wealthy folk find ways to reduce their tax burden to a marginal amount. I am actually of the idea that there should be a just a flat sales tax across the board and no income tax. Now that's a straight up conservative ideal, no?

They do get to complain about their money being put to waste. They are paying far more than the actual cost it takes to fix the problem. that's the issue.

 

[Foxrac]

I think that combined of spending cut and increase in tax are best way to fix the debt issue but no one want to side with either of them so that's all up to American voters, including you, me, anyone to make decision for our country.

I believe that Senate will probably reject the spending cut bill from the House and put both of House and Senate into hot battle that leading to government shutdown so I'm going wait and see about what's up in next month.

I should make clarity about taxes, my post regards tax increase isn't about income tax only, also could be somethings like high tariff on imported stuff, national sale tax, capital gains tax, etc.

I supported expansion of Bush tax cut so they are more benefits to economic but my concern is about debt/deficit is increasing, also we are closer to debt ceiling limit too and wasteful of spending should be trimmed too.

However, I'm no financial expert.

 

[TWA]

imagine what we could accomplish if most of the money goes to local level rather than federal tax.

That would be a really nice thing, actually. Possible? :roll:

They do get to complain about their money being put to waste. They are paying far more than the actual cost it takes to fix the problem. that's the issue.

Meh, I have known plenty of wealthy people who are able to reduce their tax burden to almost 0%. The people I see getting hit hardest by taxes are the middle class. But who screams the loudest? The already well-to-do of course.

 

[Jiro]

That would be a really nice thing, actually. Possible? :roll:

Meh, I have known plenty of wealthy people who are able to reduce their tax burden to almost 0%. The people I see getting hit hardest by taxes are the middle class. But who screams the loudest? The already well-to-do of course.

I'm trying hard to see how does a tax cut for riches hurts us a lot