believer;736787 wrote:This is the type of political cowardice on the part of DC politicians that will eventually doom the country to complete financial chaos and relegate this great country to second-class rather than world-class status for future generations.

fan_from_texas;736846 wrote:My concern with the Paul Ryan plan is that it eliminates the mortgage interest deduction. As I've pointed out elsewhere on here, eliminating the mortgage interest deduction benefits people who have paid off more of their mortgage, e.g. older people. This is a change that would disproportionately hurt young people while benefiting old people. It likely would drive down home prices, and it certainly would be disastrous for us personally (and would cost us somewhere on the order of an extra $800-1,000/mo.).

ptown_trojans_1;736941 wrote:If it took us nearly to shutdown the government and a deal in the 11th hour over small portions of a 5 month budget, I honestly do not see both parties coming to any agreement on any of the large measures in the Ryan budget. Just my realistic outlook.

Let’s keep this in perspective and focus on the big picture, which is trillions of dollars of debt that are oncoming, not tens of billions for the rest of this fiscal year…We are in divided government, we are not going to be able to dictate the terms of everything by just controlling the House of Representatives…We can define ourselves with our actions, we can make great proposals, but we’re deluding ourselves to think that everything we want is going to pass into law with Harry Reid in the Senate and Barack Obama in the presidency. What we can do is make proposals and define ourselves with actions that show where we want to go in this country and then give the American people a real choice in 2012…So let’s not sweat tens of billions, let’s look at trillions and see where we’re headed.

And honestly, I don't subscribe to the "sky is falling" chicken little theory. We'll be fine, we'll find a way out of this, we always have. It will just be a long, slow haul

stlouiedipalma;737194 wrote:If the mortgage interest deduction is all that stands between someone and economic doom, they are already dead.


And running around crying about how the country is going to be second class or inferior is another example of chicken little thinking.

Manhattan Buckeye;737209 wrote:It isn't just one person, it is the entire industry. We drop the mortgage deduction tomorrow and we can see home values fall another 20-30%, in other words an entire nationwide collapse - that isn't chicken little, it is reality.

Any type of mortgaget interest reform would have to be phased in a 15-20 year period.

stlouiedipalma;737194 wrote:If the mortgage interest deduction is all that stands between someone and economic doom, they are already dead.

fan_from_texas;737466 wrote:I think losing a thousand bucks a month would screw up most people's budgets, regardless of how well they planned. And eradicating the deduction would cause home prices to drop further, which means that people like us who suddenly got hit with an extra $1,000/mo. in taxes would be further underwater and not able to sell. This would likely push many young professionals who just bought homes into foreclosure, even if they were otherwise in pretty good shape before.

believer;737491 wrote:Exactly...myself included. Basically I'm doing OK financially but if the MD were eradicated in one fell swoop, just about my only option would be to give the house back to the bank and take the credit hit. I obviously don't want to do that but I won't hesitate to do it and won't feel the slightest bit guilty in doing so.

I have a hunch there are a lot of people in similar positions.

Eliminating the MD may sound like a quick fix to some of the gubmint's financial issues but I sincerely believe they'll have a much larger financial and political issue on their hands if they play games with the deduction.

Perhaps an incremental reduction over time (10-15 years?) might be better policy.

I Wear Pants;734242 wrote:Really surprising that he doesn't make any worthwhile cuts to defense.

What's funny is cuts to entitlements will hurt red states more than blue states contrary to what people generally think.

gut;737897 wrote:I also wonder if this chart isn't including corporate taxes, which would be a real tricky way to manipulate the point.

tk421;739564 wrote:So, they finally agreed on a "compromise" to cut 38.5 Billion from the budget? You know what is hilarious and sad at the same time about our Congress acting like children over around a 1% cut from the budget? They borrowed more in that week to 10 days or so that they were arguing than they agreed to cut from the entire budget for this year. Outrageous, and pathetic the lack of leadership on both sides.

This country is doomed fiscally. If they bitch and moan and act like this over 1% of the budget, there is no way they will be able to balance a budget, let alone find a way to pay down our debt.

tk421;739564 wrote:This country is doomed fiscally. If they bitch and moan and act like this over 1% of the budget, there is no way they will be able to balance a budget, let alone find a way to pay down our debt.

believer;739997 wrote:Exactly. There are a few on OC who have posted, "I'm not buying-in to the doom & gloom nonsense. We'll find a way out. We always do." I've used this argument myself on some issues OTHER THAN government over-spending.

We have a bunch of supposedly grown-up men & women in DC who play "we gonna shutdown the gubmint if we don't git our way" eleventh hour horse shit to claim they've done great things by cutting spending 1%. Then we learn that we actually had to go into MORE debt than we allegedly saved in the cuts to keep Big Ass Government running.

You don't need an MBA in finance or head the Federal Reserve to see the writing on the wall folks. The clowns on both sides of the political aisle lack the courage and the brains to do the right thing.
National bankruptcy is not a matter of if anymore but when.

jhay78;740068 wrote:I disagree. Boehner and the Republicans had to deal with the 2011 budget because the Democrats didn't deal with it last year. Any cuts whatsoever from the 2011 budget should be looked at as a bonus, as technically it wasn't "our" budget to begin with (from a Republican perspective). And they can't keep debating and passing CR's into infinity- there are bigger fish to fry coming soon (debt ceiling, 2012 budget, etc.).

What were we hoping to accomplish under the circumstances- a) last year's budget, with new budget debates on the table and b) Republicans having control of one House of Congress?

And it looks like Tea Party members of Congress may not fall in line with the $38 Billion this week anyway . . .

I Wear Pants;740628 wrote:Republicans just want to cut some areas and increase spending in others while telling your they're morally superior for it. Democrats want to cut some areas and spend in others while telling you their smarter for it.

Both make me sick.

jhay78;740633 wrote:I'm curious what areas the Republicans want to increase spending in . . . And don't say "tax cuts for the rich".

stlouiedipalma;740640 wrote:I haven't seen any specific spending increases from the R's. Most of their talk has been about cutting spending and revenue.

stlouiedipalma;740640 wrote:I haven't seen any specific spending increases from the R's. Most of their talk has been about cutting spending and revenue.