Seems to me that Boehner has a better chance of Dems pushing the button for him to remain Speaker IF he does decide to do the right thing for the country. It is past time for him to ditch the tea party and have good faith negotiations with people who know they were elected to govern.

The TEA Party Plan...

There is an awful lot of money to be made on the back of policy dislocations . From the rape of the Russian middle class to the Iron Ladies stand off with the Coal Miners , the crushing of the civilian union for the aircraft landing people , etc . Manufactured crisis's all . Which coincidently unfailingly displayed the motives of the executives , more for the Haves , and less to none for the rest .

I use to have great faith in my party and believed they wanted the best for the country, as the name Republican implies. Now I keep hoping that the Democrats will all walk out of Congress someday as some mass protest and a gas leak takes out all the Republicans (not kill them, just make them unable to finish out their term and run again, then they can get better).

I think you nailed it memo...

It sounds like you want programs that cost far too much to remain as is. How the heck can the government justify those expensive programs when it is So far in debt that the interest alone is fastly becoming the biggest bite out of our budget. Unless spending is curtailed, our future is grim. Everything that you hear from both parties is the desire to maintain programs for those already in the programs, but look at revamping them for future generations. I would like for the programs to be reformed so that future generations could have the same safety nets that my generation has enjoyed than for them to go totally broke and fail to exist at all. If they exist to a little lesser level, but still exist, I far prefer that. We must preserve our overall systems to a level at which they can operate effectively in the black without borrowing the vast majority of the money to do so.

#8.2 Jes, that is the big lie! SS has run a surplus for 30years and did so for most of the years before that. It will continue to run a surplus for another decade, unless we cut the payroll tax again.

The payroll tax has to go up. Reducing it was not a very smart move. SS is one program that needs to be reformed in order to survive. Fewer people are in the work force paying the taxes. Baby Boomers are retiring. People are living longer and taking out more than they pay in. Disaster in the making.

A tax increase is not a tax increase if it is perceived as an opponents responsibility . There is the greater concern that if a tax , fee , or other financial burden has a greater percentage of generation on paychecks as opposed to dividends income . Should the case be that money earning money is viewed as a taxable resource little babies and bigger ones weep . It is a concern in the laughable sort of way that arming firefighters , nursery school guardians , teachers , crossing guards etc is reasonable . When paychecks are involved the urgency of congressional fainting couch drama queen division 101 tails off from required to elective .

Jes,

Even with the payroll tax holiday, Social Security and Medicare systems have collected more in taxes than they have paid out since over the last 30 years.

The current deficit is due to an imbalance between the federal taxes and fees outside of the payroll tax and discretionary spending including the military. We have waged two wars on a credit card, and now the bill is due.

We need to either slash the military and other federal programs, such as nursing homes for frail retirees (Medicaid), by roughly half, or we need to raise income taxes and make more modest cuts. Increasing payroll taxes would only allow Congress to continue looting Social Security to pay for other parts of the government.

Jes, The payroll tax cut's net effect is to defund Social Security and Medicare. Think of it as you spending your 401k contributions now instead of having that retirement around later.

John, Congress can't loot the funds unless they renege on the investment vehicle; special issue T-bills. The SS surplus merely hides the enormous deficit spending they do in other areas.

Congressional Obfuscational Dictionary; reform: verb, to eliminate a detested program while convincing the rubes they are making it better.

The Republicans think tax cuts are great,
These were always the top of their slate,
Unless Democrats call
Payroll taxes to fall,
Now that is a tax cut they hate...

Ronald,

When the Speaker of the House says that there is no money in the Social Security Trust Fund, as Speaker Boehner has repeatedly said, then the ruling majority in the House intends to never honor those bonds. They will do this by insisting on cuts to Social Security benefits so the payroll tax will on average be in surplus for all time.

The GOP position is to address the deficit by cutting entitlement payments. This allows Congress to loot entitlement funds to cover other parts of government, as they have done since 1986.

why on earth would you cut funding to nursing homes? Most of them are slums, now.

To be clear, I do not favor cutting Medicaid funding for the frail elderly in nursing homes. But if non-defense discretionary spending is to be cut then Medicaid is one of the few big pots of money available.

The Feds have essentially two major sources of tax revenue: the Federal Income Tax and Federal Payroll Taxes. Payroll taxes and their surpluses over the last 30 years pay for entitlements for at least the next 12 years. The Federal Income Tax has underfunded the rest of government for over 30 years, and is over 900 billion dollars short of covering federal expenses this year. That is the source of our current deficit.

So, to honestly address the deficit we need to cut spending and increase income taxes by about 900 billion dollars a year. The parts of the discretionary federal budget big enough for cuts to matter are:

Defense (the Big Boy)(~35% goes to current pay and benefits)

Veteran benefits and retirements (growing fast with a decade of wars)

Homeland Security/Intellegence (Big and Secret)

Medicaid (~70% goes to nursing homes for the poor and frail)

SCHIP (healthcare for poor kids)

Agriculture (Food Stamps and aid to wealthy farmers and psuedo-farmers, like my cousin)

Head Start (preschool and social services to poor families with young children)

Student Loans and Grants (what is the tuition at your State U?)

Transportation (how are the bridges in your community?)

Energy (most to secure and clean up nuclear weapons, material, and waste.)

The rest of the discretionary federal budget is made of smaller programs (unless I am forgetting one of the bigger ones in the list above). What should we (cut to the bone or) eliminate? Defense? Nursing homes for the frail? Preschool and healthcare for poor kids? Cleaning up nuclear waste? Veterans' benefits?

Or should we trim programs and gradually increase income taxes by eliminating deductions and increasing rates?

Shouldn't we pay for the services we demand government provide?