How grave is the situation

[snafu]

If the proposed, Republican draconian cuts were imposed, what would the impact be on consumer spending? 18% of American personal income [2010] came from government payouts like social security, medicare, food stamps, unemployment benefits and an array of programs like FEMA.

How much of this current financial mess lays at the feet of eight years of Republican Administration.

[DRILLINDK]

I don't know if draconian is an appropriate word for doing the responsible thing to reduce our bloated government spending. We live in a twisted society where people think its appropriate and their right to steal money/distribute wealth from hard working Americans and give it to others.

It's pretty well known that the upper 15% of Americans make up 60% of consumer spending.

[snafu]

I may not have worded it well but what do you think the results would be on the consumer based economy if the government stopped social security, unemployment benefits,food stamps, FEMA assistance, medicare and the plethora of other programs?

Drillindk: You've just described Communist China where it's ok for people to be hungry, veterans with missing limbs crawl on the street begging for food, the unemployed and their families live under bridges and their one child is totally responsible for the sustenance of elderly parents who no longer work and no longer have benefits. If people can't pay for medical care up front, they do without. The saving grace is that doctors are paid like civil servants. You prepay 5 thousand RMB [USD350] for hospital admittance. The Chinese are thrifty and value savings, it's part of their very old culture.

Still, the PRC government is terrified of the idea of hundreds of thousands of people rioting for food.

[krantcents]

It doesn't matter what you call the cuts! I am in favor of balancing the budget and reducing debt, but the cuts are politically motivated! Why don't they cut defense? Ground troops are not effective when fighting terrorists! The Republicans want to cut entitlements which materially affect poor people. When is Congress going to really look at problems objectively? Probably never!

[maat55]

If the proposed, Republican draconian cuts were imposed, what would the impact be on consumer spending? 18% of American personal income [2010] came from government payouts like social security, medicare, food stamps, unemployment benefits and an array of programs like FEMA.

How much of this current financial mess lays at the feet of eight years of Republican Administration.

I'd say half. Both parties are just as guilty for our current situation. This has been a build up over time of too much government and not enough personal responsibility.

The current crisis was caused by Fannie & Freddie, after years of CRA and liberal policies towards home ownership. These liberal policies are not based only in democratic party policies, republicans are just as reponsible.

Bush spent only 1 trillion on the wars over eight years. This mess started with Carter, built up under Clinton and was exasberated under Bush.

The fundamentals of free market have been distorted for many many years.

[maat55]

It doesn't matter what you call the cuts! I am in favor of balancing the budget and reducing debt, but the cuts are politically motivated! Why don't they cut defense? Ground troops are not effective when fighting terrorists! The Republicans want to cut entitlements which materially affect poor people. When is Congress going to really look at problems objectively? Probably never!

Our current budgets are heavy in SS/medicare and defense. You have to cut all of them to balance the budget.

[Angio333]

If the proposed, Republican draconian cuts were imposed, what would the impact be on consumer spending? 18% of American personal income [2010] came from government payouts like social security, medicare, food stamps, unemployment benefits and an array of programs like FEMA.

How much of this current financial mess lays at the feet of eight years of Republican Administration.

We had a Republican president, but the House AND Senate were Democrat controlled for 4 of those years. So, many of those polices were the result of a Democrat House and Senate with a Republican president. Why put the blame only on the Republicans when the Democrats were involved as well?

[dczech09]

Why do we put so much emphasis on who was at fault? Republican or Democrat? It doesn't matter. Obviously the government is dysfunctional; there are people running it. Do people really think those elected officials are the most intelligent people in our society? No, they are some of the best salespeople and that is it.

When push comes to shove, the economic problem is overall a sympton of a much bigger problem. Our national debt is a symptom of a larger problem. The government spends more than it takes in, and we keep allowing it to happen. The government also does the most insane things with money; they keep spending on the same stuff even though the past showed that this spending does not work.

Bottom line is it does not matter if the people are Repub or Demo. Those titles really do not mean anything anymore. A party government is so pointless cuz all these people do is further the best interest of their part. We need to eliminate this system, elect honest people, and stop depending on the government.

I am in favor of eliminating entitlements all together. If we cut these entitlements, it will force people to either A)get out and work or B) find a way to make money themselves. We live in the most free country ever and we rely on the government to take care of us. FOR SHAME! People need to rely on one person: numero uno!

[DRILLINDK]

I am in favor of eliminating entitlements all together. If we cut these entitlements, it will force people to either A)get out and work or B) find a way to make money themselves. We live in the most free country ever and we rely on the government to take care of us. FOR SHAME! People need to rely on one person: numero uno!

Couldn't agree with you more! Entitlements breed dependance and promote waste.

Again, I ask...who gave them the right to take MY hard earned money and give it to someone else. If I feel like giving to charity I will do so on my own accord. This system is bloated and the freebies must end.

[maat55]

Our biggest problem is the idiolism that people will die in the streets without federal government programs.It is a fallacy and a huge detriment to personal responsibility and free will charity.

I stand by this truth, if we as a nation will send an 18 year old to die for freedom, then you have no entitlement to anything after that age. I would rather live in a free country where I am responsible for myself and family, as to live in one where people believe I am obligated to those I do not know.

Plain and simple, the federal government has crossed its Constitutional limits and is destroying the fabric of freedom and prosperity.

[snafu]

Employment growth has halted; the middle class is on the chopping block. Digitalized documents are read by software, a radiologist in India can read an x-ray as well as one in Indiana. If you're not an active learner you may be next. Fastest job growth is for communication analysts, bio medical engineers, athletic trainers, financial examiners, medical scientists, @ home nursing aids and physician's assistants.

On their way out: postal workers, operators in textiles, shoes, extruders, semi conductor processors

[LivingAlmostLarge]

You can't blame anything. And if you believe that cutting entitlements will make you richer, i doubt it. Everything will skyrocket in cost and you'll be paying more for goods period.

Both parties are completely irresponsible when it comes to balancing a budget. Why? Because a truthful politician who says to get this mess in order we need to raise taxes (increase income) while cutting expenses would never be elected. Which I find odd because so many people I've heard both Republican and Democratic complain about the budget, yet aren't willing to do either.

Democrats may not mind taxes but won't cut expenditures. Republicans don't want taxes but will cut expenditures. But the truth? You have to do both to get out of the mess, kinda like normal people getting out of debt. Either way overspending means you need more income and less expenses, like dieting.

Yet from neither party could an honest person say I need more taxes and less expenses and get elected.

[Frugal]

Obviously, i think consumer spending would continue its downward spiral...many, many people are living off of food stamps and gov't payments, and doing whatever they can to cut their spending...

All you have to do is drive around even a newer neighborhood, yes, even a BRAND new one, and see all the garage sales, more than I have ever seen before in one season in my entire life. People are hurting, and doing whatever they can to CUT their spending and make an extra few bucks to tide them by for basics like bills.

I think the policies of many administrations for the past sixty years or so since World War Two and actually perhaps earlier back to the Great Depression bear at least some blame for the current fiscal crisis our country finds itself in. I no longer consider myself to have a political affiliation other than independent, but I think that all the parties are to blame.

[Snodog]

Both parties are equally inept. The republicans want to cut spending and the democrats want to raise taxes. Both are deflationary. If the republicans get their way and govt spending is reduced 25% I am pulling my money out of the stock market. 1937 Redux.

[maat55]

Both parties are equally inept. The republicans want to cut spending and the democrats want to raise taxes. Both are deflationary. If the republicans get their way and govt spending is reduced 25% I am pulling my money out of the stock market. 1937 Redux.

So, you have no problem with living beyond your means, giving yourself raises you cannot afford and counterfeiting? At some point, an unsustainable status quo has to be recognized and dealt with like an adult.

Do you think it is your grandchildrens responsibility to maintain your selfish status quo?