October 20th, 2013
03:30 PM ET
9 years ago
Lew pushes to eliminate spending cuts
New York (CNNMoney) - Only days after the debt ceiling and government shutdown showdown ended, Treasury Secretary Jack Lew promptly waded into the next fiscal fight: forced spending cuts known as the sequester.
He laid out the Obama administration's case in an op-ed for The International New York Times that the failure to replace the across-the-board "blunt spending cuts" would hurt the U.S. economy.
FULL STORY
Spending cuts are a drag on our economy that can't be replaced, you can name the GOP for holding the economy back.only investment in infer structure , the farmbill and imagration reform and tax reform that the GOP will sabatuage can get our economy up to spead!!!!!
Thank you Ted Cruz and the Speaker of the house !
For NOTHING !
Do the right thing and give your whole paycheck to Uncle Sam that will get this country going....
these repubs shouts about budget deficit all daylong and on the other hand is doing the opposite to bring it down. lesson folks, each dollar the government spends in this country brings back 3 dollars to the economy. these repubs philosophy of gutting our economy spending money and give to the rich to invest in china and india puzzlesl me. lesson folks money need to be here in our economy and not too much in the rich global market adventures. our infrastructure is crumbling down right in front our eyes while other countries are modernizing and moving in the 21st century. its time we open our eyes as Americans and smell the coffee.
He's a RINO to the Guns Over People tea potty so I can't wait to see the GOBP stuff Jeb Bush down the tea potty's throats Mitt the twit style.
How do you refinance $2 trillion in short term debt. 3.5 trillion is what? 30% of our GDP? Bankrupt to the Treasury Secretary is not an option, more like a reality. Hmmm.
$17 Trillion and growing...
A roadmap to budget surpluses is what Americans want. This means HIGHER TAXES on the wealthy Individuals AND wealthy corporations. It also emans curbs on sociietal spending [ACA, Medicare, Social Security]. These tax changes should eliminate all subsidies that violate FREE MARKET economics. These spending curbs must balance outlays to projjected income; 1st thru means testing, then through eliminatiion of FICA & Medicare caps. Finally ordinary [working man's] income should be taxed at the most favorable rate, NOT CAPITAL GAINS. Defense spending needs to be reduced also.
And Fiscal Reponsibilty goes out the window. Re-Invent Old Soviet Union ? No, sorry.
Tighten immigration, cut H1-B visas. It is hurting Americans, so should residencies. Hospital it's are charging patients, insurance too. Nab.
The cut could move forward if they were better targeted or the head of the department be able to make better decisions to reduce the spending.
And u thought losing 24B in 17 days was bad. Imagine what 6 months has been like. And what any longer will b.
lew sound no?better than that other guy they had in office obama really pic them
Spending cuts are indeed a drag on the economy: If people are unemployed and living off unemployment insurance – which tops out at $400 a week REGARDLESS of how much you used to make (my husband was in this boat 4 years ago when his company shut down their office here) – how are they supposed to spend money, which creates demand, which causes companies to hire more people to meet that demand?
Better question: Is there any way to make November 4, 2014 come any faster? Because I really, really, REALLY want to send all the repub obstructionists PACKING.
Here's an idea for helping our nation's finances: Start garnishing the wages of every single repub who 1) voted against the clean continuing resolution and 2) vote for changing the House rules so only Eric Cantor could bring the clean continuing resolution to a full House vote (H.R. 368), which guaranteed the shutdown.
And, like any garnishment, their wages will continue being dinged until the bill is paid in full – even if those repubs are no longer employed by the government.
The Democratic Party should be called the Parasite Party. It's all about taking from people who work for a living to support those who vote for a living. Most of all it is about the political dirtballs who benefit from that racket.
There seem to be confusion in everything now, no thanks to the Republicans. The technical glitches in ACA rollout had everyone talking but the very knowledgeable experts in the field. Eventually no one could really pinpoint the actual cause of the problems. So also the budgetary concerns. The politicians are at best all after the individual party gains from the budget instead of thoroughly getting the experts to really decipher what is actually necessary for the country struggling economy. Any minor attachment then could be effected based on its budgetary impact. You obviously dont derail a planned budgetary outcome with political desires only to turn back and criticise the budget for ineffectiveness. The Administration needs to prepare its budget, the GOP would come up with list of its items for inclusion. Then experts (economists & financiers, not politicians) will have to craft out the reconciliation based on desired budgetary impact, and strategies. This will restrain the politicians from pushing forward measures that would derail the budgetary considerations.
I seriously think there is a major yawning gap existing on the need to reconcile US election programs with the budgetary concerns/demands of US Congress.
The US Budget/Economy lacks the ability to address every demand of the entire country's electorial districts. It becomes foolhard for every Member of Congress to struggle to include all electorial district demands in the budget. So what happens....how does effective monetary adjustments done or reconciled then.
The US Presidential Election is the only arena American people evaluate the party programs and shift or determine the party programs they want. The rest budgetary insertions should be leftouts based nature/structure of demands, needs, budgetary harmonisations, etc. Congress duties are are to principally to check budgetary excesses, argue rationales, make laws, BUT NOT, insists on economic policies and strategies which are determined in elections. There are other gray areas on this discuss but its illogical and misguided for party programs to be rejected by the people in elections only for the Congressmen/women to turn around to insist on their implentations in Congress.