Suppose the republicans put the following on the table.

We will agree to roll back the "Bush tax cuts" (all of them, or just the ones for the "wealthy," you take your pick) if you agree to cut spending to get us the rest of the way to a balanced budget (and we have to approve the military cuts).

If you are a democrat, would you take that offer or not? If you take it, do you roll back all the "Bush tax cuts" or just the ones for the "wealthy"?

I am not a Democrat, but I don't believe the actual Democrats in Washingon right now would accept that offer. Not unless the spending "cuts" were gradually phased-in over the next 500 years or so.

I think they'd offer to take the deal but then throw up barriers that guarantee that it's never implemented (such as offering to cut all pork within Republican barriers). Granting that, it's a no-brainer that they'd rescind cuts on the wealthy as they wouldn't want to be accused of increasing taxes on the middle class. I hope someone can make the case that I shouldn't be so cynical.

Imagine a world with no hypothetical situations...

(08-22-2011 07:58 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Suppose the republicans put the following on the table.

We will agree to roll back the "Bush tax cuts" (all of them, or just the ones for the "wealthy," you take your pick) if you agree to cut spending to get us the rest of the way to a balanced budget (and we have to approve the military cuts).

If you are a democrat, would you take that offer or not? If you take it, do you roll back all the "Bush tax cuts" or just the ones for the "wealthy"?

The only "cuts" that would result in anything close to a Balanced Budget would involve dumping Obamacare, and radically restructuring Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

To the Democrats those four are untouchable.

Owl, I think at this time there are remarkable concessions required of both sides.

Slightly, ever so slightly, I am being swayed to the left on tax increases and military budget cuts. I'd be willing to increase taxes and cut the military budget quite dramatically if we also cut spending (however you want to define spending) to the bone, to include a vast reduction in regulations and government employees.

(08-23-2011 09:33 AM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  I'd be willing to increase taxes and cut the military budget quite dramatically if we also cut spending (however you want to define spending) to the bone, to include a vast reduction in regulations and government employees.

(emphasis added)

I get the impression that the Democrats in Washington and around the country feel that has already been done, that they have already made "remarkable concessions", and that they are unwilling to concede anything more.

I think it will take one (or two) more landslide defeats in a national election, in order to "move the needle" on the Democrats' willingness to address these issues in a serious, credible manner.

(08-22-2011 07:58 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Suppose the republicans put the following on the table.

We will agree to roll back the "Bush tax cuts" (all of them, or just the ones for the "wealthy," you take your pick) if you agree to cut spending to get us the rest of the way to a balanced budget (and we have to approve the military cuts).

If you are a democrat, would you take that offer or not? If you take it, do you roll back all the "Bush tax cuts" or just the ones for the "wealthy"?

I think you give just a little more rope to hang themselves... A separate 1% tax on the top 10% of wage earners while current combat operations are going in in Iraq or Afghanistan.

The dems would still refuse it because it would involve cutting a ton to make the budget balanced..

(08-23-2011 08:37 AM)WMD Owl Wrote:  The only "cuts" that would result in anything close to a Balanced Budget would involve dumping Obamacare, and radically restructuring Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

To the Democrats those four are untouchable.

I understand what you are saying but I have to ask this question.

How can these items, which will complete the bankrupting of America, be untouchable?

The only way democrats accept any republican proposal is when they are defeated in the senate, WH, and House, with a supper majority in the senate. Right now they think they got this handled. Why compromise?