Surprise, Senate Passes a Budget After Four Years.

@Fatcat44 (1141)
United States
March 23, 2013 10:01am CST
Harry, I knew you guys could do it. Only after the whole nation pretty much was on your back on how terrible of a job you guys have been doing, and only have the sequester kicks in because you guys have not done your job. A 3.7 Trillion budget. That's 800 billion less than they have been spending for the last four years. Can the democrats hold their spending down that much, or is the number an arbitrary number for political reasons to try not to lose the senate in 2014.
3 responses
@stealthy (8181)
• United States
23 Mar 13
And with a $1 trillion tax increase. They claim they want to help the economy and grow jobs and then they do that. Eventually if the Democrats stay in control, the Chinese are going to stop lending to the U. S. and just take us over because of the enormous amount the Democrats will cause us to owe them.
@Fatcat44 (1141)
• United States
23 Mar 13
How can they forget the rule that you do not raise taxes when the economy is done, In 2009 they lower FDIC tax to help out. They are so hipocritical
@bobmnu (8157)
• United States
24 Mar 13
Democrats and Liberals only think in two terms Tax and Spend. President Obama got his tax increase in January, then he wanted another to avoid the sequester now he want more in this budget. President Coolage had the right idea in the recession / depression of 1920. He cut taxes and reduced government spending and in a few months it bottomed out and the recovery started. Some economists claim that the 1929 depression was starting on a recovery when President Roosevelt (FDR) started massive spending and the economy took a down turn. As President Regan said "Government is not the answer it is the problem"
• Mojave, California
24 Mar 13
Government is only a problem when it sabotages itself. In my opinion many of these right wing politicians purposely sabotage policies they do not like. The post office is perfect example, social security is another. They would like to privatize them. Instead of reforming them and fixing them right. They pass policies so there is no way these programs can succeed. Then they tell the people see we have been telling you along these things are bankrupting our country so they can get their ways to privatize it. The problem with privatizing these things is look at how the private sector works now. where 93 percent of all profits go to the top one percent. Pretty much killing any chance at keeping a middle class and giving poor people a chance of moving up to middle class will be gone for the most part. That's why these things were created by the government in the first place. To help everyone have a chance to succeed. The private sector only cares about profits and very rarely put in a system where whole communities can succeed. That is why the country has to have socialistic programs and also have capitalistic too. Of course you would not need government socialistic programs if the private sector would realize that they need to take care of their own people. Until they realize that then the government needs to do this. I wonder how many people sabotaging the current system actually used government assistance to get where they are at in their life right now. Ones that their parents used welfare and food stamps. ones that used government grants to go to school or start a business. Sorry, many of these right wing politicians are the biggest hypocrites. What they got theirs, so now lets get rid of all these things that helped them succeed. So everyone else in this country, who are in similar situations won't be able to "pull their self's up by their boot strap's," as the right likes to say. If they really want to get rid of these programs then they need to get on the private sector to start making sure everyone can get a job or go to school or to start their own business. I am not talking about people that come from money either. I am talking about the poorest of poor people too. You know the ones that live in ghetto's in the biggest cities. The parts of the city that even the police hate going in and sometimes refuse to go in. Until they can do that, then they need to do their jobs and quit sabotaging their own country. One more last thing is, I would love to see how this Republican sabotage strategy would work in the private sector. Oh it would't, because they would be fired in a heart beat for sabotaging the company they were working for. So why do the American people allow these people to sabotage their own country?
• United States
25 Mar 13
Think MyLot is happy, just so you will SHUT UP about it. No offense, but this is not like your family budget. They don't hold themselves to it, they find ways around it, and then they just leave out a TRILLION in spending as if it never happened. I understand you are upset about this, but you make it sound like this actually means something. It would be nice if it did, but we all know that it doesn't. I also have to laugh when you talk about spending on the left. We all know that republicans have had a very hard time controlling their spending. Remember that in 2006 the United States had a budget DEFICIT after two years of 100% republican control that was more than 2004 when they took over.
• United States
25 Mar 13
At least the Republicans had a budget. Which meant that they actually did their jobs. Unlike Harry Reid who has been sitting on his butt for the last four years and has only managed to pass Obamacare. That's it. That's all he has done since President Obama has taken office. That's sad that you support a party who has managed a single monstrosity the entire time they have been in office. You also forgot that President Obama spent more than all of the Presidents combined. That is just his spending. That is just the bills that he personally signed into law. That is his legislative spending. That's about a 1000x times worse than the 100% you claim the Republicans spent in two years in 2004. It certainly wasn't anywhere near $10 trillion.
• United States
26 Mar 13
Sierras, do you understand what a budget is? If you IGNORE $1 TRILLION as if it doesn't exist than are you really doing anything? NO!!!!! Reid could have done the same thing as republicans, but instead of insulting the intelligence of the country he pointed out that compromise between right wingers and democrats wouldn't create an actual budget (which probably won't happen now either). So let me get this right, Reid hasn't passed ANY bills, but Obama has signed imaginary bills that increased spending? Do you understand how our government works? The president doesn't create bills, he doesn't vote on bills, and he doesn't pass bills. He only signs them. The two wars that Bush got us into cost $1 TRILLION a year, and those wars lasted 10 years now. Do you need a calculator to do the math?
@Fatcat44 (1141)
• United States
26 Mar 13
debater, to you first reply. You are being hypocritical yourself. Bushes average over spending was about 500 billion or, 0.5 trillion. Which I agree is terrible. Obama's average overspending with a democrat control congress 1.2 trillion a year. Over double of that of Bushes. You criticize Bush for over spending but compliment Obama, when Obama and the dems are doing twice as bad as the Bush did. And remember, the last four year of Bush, the democrats controlled congress. But I never hear you criticize Obama and Dems. You are being hypocritical and do not make sense. How can a person carry on a conversation with you when you appear not to make sense and do not realize what you are talking about. Bush had recessions all though out his president he had to deal with because of the way Clinton had left things. 2000-2001 a recession had started. In 2001, 9/11 put the country into recession and unemployment climbed. And if you guys praise Obama for overspending to try to raise the economy, how can you hate Bush for over spending then. I think his and Obama's over spending is uncalled for and is hurting things worse than helping. Debater, by the way you talk, you don't care that the government overspends and cannot do a budget? Everyone should be upset about it. That is one of the reason's congress approval is about 10%. And the 10% must becoming from people that that have no clue on what is going on in congress. If are not upset about this overspending and our high debt, you need re-evaluate the situation.
@matersfish (6306)
• United States
23 Mar 13
I'm certainly surprised. I thought "budget" was Spanish for "no mas sentido" for the longest time.