Posted on 12/09/2012 1:17:09 PM PST by Orange1998
Republican Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) told me Sunday on ABC News' "This Week" that he is willing to accept tax rate increases as a component of a fiscal cliff deal, as long as Democrats put "significant entitlement reform" on the table.
"What we ought to be working on is the other 93 percent, because even if you do what [Obama] wants to do on tax rates, you only affect 7 percent of the deficit," Coburn said. "What we have done is spend ourselves into a hole, and we're not going to raise taxes and borrow money and get out of it."
"And so will I accept a tax increase as a part of a deal to actually solve our problems? Yes," he said.
But his Republican colleague in the House, Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas), disagreed.
He said that Republicans shouldn't vote for a tax increase which they believe will harm the economy.
"No Republican wants to vote for a rate tax increase," Hensarling said. "I mean, what that is going to do, according to the National Federation of Independent Business that commissioned a study by Ernst & Young, is cost 700,000 Americans to go from having paychecks to unemployment checks."
Hensarling said that President Obama pulled a "bait and switch" on Congressional Republicans by adding a demand for tax rate increases after the election. In 2011 Obama had suggested that $1.2 trillion could be raised by closing loopholes and pursuing tax reform alone, without raising rates.
"The president, again … if he would do what he said before the election, as opposed to the bait-and-switch, what Republicans feel like is a little bit like Charlie Brown running to kick the football and Lucy pulls it away," Hensarling said.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
If they are all so eager to accept tax increases then just go over the fiscal cliff and they will get the tax increases and the spending cuts. No need to negotiate.
The GOP seems to forget that they agreed to all this last year. Now that its time to eat their peas maybe they wish they had stood firm on the last go around.
“government run healthcare”=Strawman
SS isn’t healthcare it is living expenses.
Flat tax. Remove ALL loopholes.
Eliminate corporate welfare and 90% of all foreign aid.
Cut back entitlement growth to the rate of inflation. Eliminate Departments of Energy, Commerce and Education.
Budget problem solved.
Medicare is free? Who told you that? My mother paid into it from every paycheck she ever got and now pays over $3,000 per year in premiums for her Medicare supplemental insurance. That’s over $3k that comes out of her $16k per year SS. To support two people’s entire yearly living expenses.
Where to?
Let me add that she hasn’t used her Medicare much at all. One broken wrist and a couple of emergency room visits.
Then you should have said “Medicare.”
You were attempting to conflate the Social Security program with `Obamacare,’ something everyone here opposes.
You were taking a swing at something easy.
`Age and treachery overcomes youth and enthusiasm—24/7’
Medicare Supplment is private insurance not Medicare, so you like a good liberal like to attack the private sector.
Medicare on average costs the taxpayers almost $12,000 per beneficiary, and only Part A is covered by the Medicare payroll tax. Both Part B and Part D are paid by general tax revenue, so neither your mother or anyone else “pre-paid” for Part B or D.
Explain how JohnsonCare(Medicare) is different than ObamaCare.
“Your ignorance and hatred are beyond words. Do yourself a favor and STFU.”
Please see posts 10 and 21, I’m not the only person that sees this SELFISHNESS here.
“I’m an elderly conservative....and I take exception to your post.”
You’re not alone, but at best you only represent half of the older people on this site. They rest want THEIR MONEY. But, I agree, there are a good number of people just like you that love the country and understand, full well, that the money is GONE, it’s been spent, it’s not there, and that my kids (and your kids and grandkids) are going to have to pony-up for them.
And every dollar taken from her was given as welfare to someone else. Nothing was saved or invested to pay future disbursements upon her retirement. Now she is on welfare and those who still have jobs are paying for her.
and now pays over $3,000 per year in premiums for her Medicare supplemental insurance.
That's private insurance, nothing to do with the government welfare.
Everybody hates pork and entitlement spending, except for the pork and entitlements that they benefit from.
And if she didn't have that she wouldn't have any Medicare. Part D is for drugs and that also requires paying for a private insurance policy. We dropped that because we dropped all of her drugs. It isn't an attack on the private sector to point out the reality that she has to pay $3.2k per year for Medicare. Nice Alinsky tactic on the ad-hominem there, DUmmie.
“How old are you?”
In the middle - lots of years of work behind me, a good number ahead of me.
I made a point of making sure that my kids got through college with NO DEBT - and that meant staying clear of the “top tier” universities and doing other stuff to pay their way, real-time. I don’t like debt to begin with, but I HATE IT when it’s put on the backs of MY KIDS and they can’t do jack about it.
I guess I didn't understand the bills I'm paying for her then. She can just drop that and the FedMob will pick up the whole bill from now on?
And she's the selfish one for not dying or living on the streets? (assuming she could still understand a word of this which she can't)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.