<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: CBO: Long-term budget outlook still ‘daunting’</title>
	<atom:link href="http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/cbo-long-term-budget-outlook-still-%e2%80%98daunting%e2%80%99/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/cbo-long-term-budget-outlook-still-%e2%80%98daunting%e2%80%99</link>
	<description>Control Congress is a multi-partisan, issue-oriented political forum that brings together the Left, Right, and everyone in between.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 22:06:58 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: David O'Rear</title>
		<link>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/cbo-long-term-budget-outlook-still-%e2%80%98daunting%e2%80%99/comment-page-1#comment-48422</link>
		<dc:creator>David O'Rear</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Aug 2007 02:18:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/cbo-long-term-budget-outlook-still-%e2%80%98daunting%e2%80%99#comment-48422</guid>
		<description>So, back to just lying through your teeth with no evidence whatsoever, huh?

You&#039;re not even going to try to cite any authority or evidence at all, are you?

Pathetic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So, back to just lying through your teeth with no evidence whatsoever, huh?</p>
<p>You&#8217;re not even going to try to cite any authority or evidence at all, are you?</p>
<p>Pathetic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bb</title>
		<link>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/cbo-long-term-budget-outlook-still-%e2%80%98daunting%e2%80%99/comment-page-1#comment-48411</link>
		<dc:creator>bb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Aug 2007 01:49:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/cbo-long-term-budget-outlook-still-%e2%80%98daunting%e2%80%99#comment-48411</guid>
		<description>Both parties have a spending problem.  But at least the GOP historically reduces taxes while cleaning up messes left by dem predecessors, especially over the past four decades.

If we could just skip the occasional collective American brain fart that results in election of big tax and spend libs like Carter and Clinton, maybe the GOP could accomplish both tax and spending cuts.  08 is the next big chance.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Both parties have a spending problem.  But at least the GOP historically reduces taxes while cleaning up messes left by dem predecessors, especially over the past four decades.</p>
<p>If we could just skip the occasional collective American brain fart that results in election of big tax and spend libs like Carter and Clinton, maybe the GOP could accomplish both tax and spending cuts.  08 is the next big chance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David O'Rear</title>
		<link>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/cbo-long-term-budget-outlook-still-%e2%80%98daunting%e2%80%99/comment-page-1#comment-48363</link>
		<dc:creator>David O'Rear</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Aug 2007 03:01:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/cbo-long-term-budget-outlook-still-%e2%80%98daunting%e2%80%99#comment-48363</guid>
		<description>Just a reminder, http://tinyurl.com/2qwtol

That’s the US Federal Budget numbers, in a user-friendly spreadsheet, for 1962-2006.

And, what it says is that &lt;b&gt;GOPers increase federal revenues&lt;/b&gt; by an average 47.4% per term, and Democrats 42.4%. 

Of course, it isn’t &lt;i&gt;corporate&lt;/i&gt; tax revenue that goes up (24.7%, vs. 51.6% for Dems), but &lt;i&gt;individual&lt;/i&gt; taxes (46.7%, vs. 44.7% for Dems).

And, social security taxes (+69.2% vs. +45.0%), but not estate duties (+32.35 vs. +49.6%).

Question: who pays into the GOPer campaign war chest?

.

When it comes to spending, however, the Republican’ts really shine. &lt;b&gt;Discretionary spending up 43.6% (vs. 25.3% for Democrats),&lt;/b&gt; program spending up 74.2% (vs. 34.1%). 

&lt;b&gt;Total spending up an average of 56.3%&lt;/b&gt; for the so-called conservatives, vs. 31.1% for the real party of fiscal responsibility.

.

And, let’s remember the state of affairs &lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;before&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/i&gt; the current clowns stole power [ http://tinyurl.com/3b8t8r ]:

&lt;b&gt;CBO projections for the change in public debt, 2001-06&lt;/b&gt; (projection made January 2000): -$1,375 billion.

&lt;b&gt;CBO actual results for the change in public debt, 2001-06&lt;/b&gt; (results from January 2007): +$1,419.2 billion.

Difference? Only $2.8 trillion.

.

See, the Republican’ts work on a very simple formula:
--Blow out spending, particularly that which favors your campaign contributors;
--Slash revenues from campaign contributors but jack it up for the common man;
--Ramp up the deficits and sock it away as debt paid for by T-bills;
--Let the Democrats clean up the mess; and
--Blame the Democrats, regain power and do it again.

.

&lt;b&gt;bb,&lt;/b&gt;

When you try to refute this, please be sure to put in the URL for the spreadsheets that comprise your evidence.

Name calling just won&#039;t do.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just a reminder, <a href="http://tinyurl.com/2qwtol" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/2qwtol</a></p>
<p>That’s the US Federal Budget numbers, in a user-friendly spreadsheet, for 1962-2006.</p>
<p>And, what it says is that <b>GOPers increase federal revenues</b> by an average 47.4% per term, and Democrats 42.4%. </p>
<p>Of course, it isn’t <i>corporate</i> tax revenue that goes up (24.7%, vs. 51.6% for Dems), but <i>individual</i> taxes (46.7%, vs. 44.7% for Dems).</p>
<p>And, social security taxes (+69.2% vs. +45.0%), but not estate duties (+32.35 vs. +49.6%).</p>
<p>Question: who pays into the GOPer campaign war chest?</p>
<p>.</p>
<p>When it comes to spending, however, the Republican’ts really shine. <b>Discretionary spending up 43.6% (vs. 25.3% for Democrats),</b> program spending up 74.2% (vs. 34.1%). </p>
<p><b>Total spending up an average of 56.3%</b> for the so-called conservatives, vs. 31.1% for the real party of fiscal responsibility.</p>
<p>.</p>
<p>And, let’s remember the state of affairs <b><i>before</i></b> the current clowns stole power [ <a href="http://tinyurl.com/3b8t8r" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/3b8t8r</a> ]:</p>
<p><b>CBO projections for the change in public debt, 2001-06</b> (projection made January 2000): -$1,375 billion.</p>
<p><b>CBO actual results for the change in public debt, 2001-06</b> (results from January 2007): +$1,419.2 billion.</p>
<p>Difference? Only $2.8 trillion.</p>
<p>.</p>
<p>See, the Republican’ts work on a very simple formula:<br />
&#8211;Blow out spending, particularly that which favors your campaign contributors;<br />
&#8211;Slash revenues from campaign contributors but jack it up for the common man;<br />
&#8211;Ramp up the deficits and sock it away as debt paid for by T-bills;<br />
&#8211;Let the Democrats clean up the mess; and<br />
&#8211;Blame the Democrats, regain power and do it again.</p>
<p>.</p>
<p><b>bb,</b></p>
<p>When you try to refute this, please be sure to put in the URL for the spreadsheets that comprise your evidence.</p>
<p>Name calling just won&#8217;t do.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Divided We Stand United We Fall</title>
		<link>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/cbo-long-term-budget-outlook-still-%e2%80%98daunting%e2%80%99/comment-page-1#comment-48313</link>
		<dc:creator>Divided We Stand United We Fall</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Aug 2007 16:05:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/cbo-long-term-budget-outlook-still-%e2%80%98daunting%e2%80%99#comment-48313</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Chalk up another one for divided government....&lt;/strong&gt;

Stephen Sliviniski, economist, author of Buck Wild, Director of Budget Analysis for the Cato Institute, and DWSUWF favorite, comments on recently released CBO budget estimates in &quot;Finally, Some Not-So-Bad News on the Budget&quot; posted at Cato@Liberty:...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Chalk up another one for divided government&#8230;.</strong></p>
<p>Stephen Sliviniski, economist, author of Buck Wild, Director of Budget Analysis for the Cato Institute, and DWSUWF favorite, comments on recently released CBO budget estimates in &#8220;Finally, Some Not-So-Bad News on the Budget&#8221; posted at Cato@Liberty:&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bb</title>
		<link>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/cbo-long-term-budget-outlook-still-%e2%80%98daunting%e2%80%99/comment-page-1#comment-48269</link>
		<dc:creator>bb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Aug 2007 16:20:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/cbo-long-term-budget-outlook-still-%e2%80%98daunting%e2%80%99#comment-48269</guid>
		<description>hoads....lol!

Even worse, let&#039;s let dems raise taxes so that revenues flowing in will decrease while social spending continues to rise.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>hoads&#8230;.lol!</p>
<p>Even worse, let&#8217;s let dems raise taxes so that revenues flowing in will decrease while social spending continues to rise.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hoads</title>
		<link>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/cbo-long-term-budget-outlook-still-%e2%80%98daunting%e2%80%99/comment-page-1#comment-48263</link>
		<dc:creator>hoads</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Aug 2007 14:36:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/cbo-long-term-budget-outlook-still-%e2%80%98daunting%e2%80%99#comment-48263</guid>
		<description>So let&#039;s add an entitlement for every American to receive the taxpayer funded benefit of universal health care--that should solve the problem.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So let&#8217;s add an entitlement for every American to receive the taxpayer funded benefit of universal health care&#8211;that should solve the problem.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hugh</title>
		<link>http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/cbo-long-term-budget-outlook-still-%e2%80%98daunting%e2%80%99/comment-page-1#comment-48254</link>
		<dc:creator>Hugh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Aug 2007 12:59:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/cbo-long-term-budget-outlook-still-%e2%80%98daunting%e2%80%99#comment-48254</guid>
		<description>Never fear, Bernake will save the day!
http://tinyurl.com/2ce3g7</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Never fear, Bernake will save the day!<br />
<a href="http://tinyurl.com/2ce3g7" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/2ce3g7</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
