Why can't Republicans just tell us what they want to cut?

[SiriusDawg]

If Republicans are going to agree to a deficit reduction bill containing a big tax increase, then obviously they're going to want large domestic spending cuts. And if we want the basic operations of the federal government to continue, large domestic spending cuts need to contain meaningful reductions in entitlement spending. But while Democrats have been out there banging the table for their preferred tax increases, it's not at all clear what Republicans negotiating objectives on the entitlement side are.

Link

“Republicans want the president to own the whole offer upfront, on both the entitlement and the revenue side, and that’s not going to happen because the president is not going to negotiate with himself,” the official said. “There’s a standoff, and the staff hasn’t gotten anywhere. Rob Nabors [the White House negotiator], has been saying: ‘This is what we want on revenues on the down payment. What’s you guys’ ask on the entitlement side?’ And they keep looking back at us and saying: ‘We want you to come up with that and pitch us.’ That’s not going to happen.”

Link

The problem with this is that while the Democrats' position is quite clear—the Bush tax cuts should expire for income over $250,000—the Republicans' position is extremely vague, on both the tax side and the entitlement side. Let's take taxes first. [Rate increases? Deduction caps? Or what?]....Then we get to the price Republicans are going to want to exact for any agreement to stop the Austerity Trap, and this is where they're vague. They want "reform" of entitlements. And what is "reform," you ask? Well, nobody ever says.

Link

[MatthewT]

wait, isn't it on the President to say what he wants to cut, in exchange for "taxing the rich"?

[SiriusDawg]

wait, isn't it on the President to say what he wants to cut, in exchange for "taxing the rich"?

Democrats said what they wanted....and asked what the Republicans wanted....and you are somehow trying to say that it should be on the Democrats to come up with an idea of what the GOP may or may not want?

Do you intentionally act this stupid?

[MatthewT]

Democrats said they wanted to keep the tax hikes on the rich

and in exchange, the Democrats are willing to ________________________________________?

[FlaFlaFlunkie]

Hey, if the Republicans insist on calling government/social services "entitlements," then they should easily be able to indicate which of these "entitlements" they think should be cut.

I'm sure Planned Parenthood will be on that list, along with care for the mentally ill who are shooting people in movie theaters and shopping centers and college campuses.

[HeinousMark]

Democrats said they wanted to keep the tax hikes on the rich

and in exchange, the Democrats are willing to ________________________________________?

That might make a good thread, too.....but aaaaaaaaaaaanyway, what about the question OP asked? Another question is not an answer.

[MatthewT]

OP begs the question; if one side wants something in a negotiation, it is incumbant upon them to present a compromise. the spineless repubicans have already caved on wanting tax cuts, and signalled weakness in agreeing to tax "the rich", yet the "leader" of the country has not made any statement i am aware of as to what he is willing to compromise.

oh, wait, this is the guy who says "i got elected, you do what i say."

forgot about that bit.

[HeinousMark]

I don't think he's going to answer the question, guys.....

[MatthewT]

Hey, if the Republicans insist on calling government/social services "entitlements," then they should easily be able to indicate which of these "entitlements" they think should be cut.

I'm sure Planned Parenthood will be on that list, along with care for the mentally ill who are shooting people in movie theaters and shopping centers and college campuses.

homosexuality, killing babies, and narcotics

the basic building blocks of all great societies

holy fuck

[SiriusDawg]

I don't think he's going to answer the question, guys.....

It really is incredibly straight-forward.

[MatthewT]

taxes. if they were conservatives, they would want to cut taxes. there you have it. what conservatives want to cut.

taxes.

[MatthewT]

MSA for everybody
Opt-out at 1/2 social security input for anyone under 55
No federal Medicare

[MatthewT]

cut government in half, across the board. that would be a good start. lay off 50% of all government employees, and declare all government unions illegal.

[MatthewT]

Cut the following departments:
interior
EPA
education
HHS

[MatthewT]

Cut the following programs:
abortion mills
public art

[HeinousMark]

taxes. if they were conservatives, they would want to cut taxes. there you have it. what conservatives want to cut.

taxes.

I applaud you for posting what you really think, sociopathic as it is.....but on this point, I'm wondering: Just how much more should taxes be cut? And for whom. Like no taxes at all, for anyone? Anyway, more to the point, if we keep cutting taxes, how do we keep up our infrastructure, defense, government (are you an anarchist? I agree government is bloated, far too invasive, but I'd think we need some sort of governing?). And in all seriousness: what, do we do, with all those awful, lazy, Democrat voting "Entitlement" people who subsist on welfare, SSI, gubbermint cheeze, etc.? Be honest, what do you think will happen if all these "Entitlement Programs" were eliminated overnight, and how should we, as a nation, respond to it? I know I'm leaving out most of your points, but I don't THINK these are unreasonable questions, are they?

[BeetTheBoxer]

meltdown building nicely

[BeetTheBoxer]

Boner has been incredibly specific. Too bad Oblacky doesn't want to be serious about this. The American public can see who is intransigent here

[SiriusDawg]

Boner has been incredibly specific.

Like what? Maybe you can clear it all up. I have seen his speeches....and I see absolutely zero plans for actual cuts.

Oh, lets cut a few million here...in that area? Brilliant