Imagine a married man with two kids, and a great executive position in a multi-national company. Because of his position he makes excellent money that allows his wife to shop at her pleasure, but also makes his family a target for threats and kidnapping. He uses his money to hire security guards to protect his family, and to pay for a high-end alarm system for his home.

Now imagine that this man loses his job, but the threats to his family persist. He cannot afford both the shopping of his wife and the security guards for his family. To reduce expenses, he gets rid of the guards, and the alarm system, but keeps giving his wife money to shop for shoes as she wishes.

Doesn’t that scenario seem a bit odd? Wouldn’t it be more responsible to cut the shopping and continue to pay for the needed security of the man’s family?

The scenario painted above is the exact one facing the U.S. regarding the security and defense of the country. In the real world, President Obama is the man, and his family is the United States population. His decision last month to reduce the size and scope of the military is just like the man’s decision to get rid of security guards that are protecting his family from kidnapping, to save money.

The United States is facing a fiscal crisis that has the potential to send the country into an economic tailspin. With a national debt of 16 trillion dollars, and yearly spending at a 1.3 trillion dollar deficit, President Obama knows that cuts need to be made in spending.  Following in the grand tradition of liberal Democrats before him, he is trying to solve the problem by raising tax rates, and of course going after defense spending. This is wrong-headed, dangerous, and short sighted.

In his defense, President Obama, is not doing anything that other politicians have not done. Long before Obama stepped onto the scene, President Herbert Walker Bush began cutting troop levels. Clinton followed suit with the closing of numerous bases and offering what he termed, a “peace dividend.” Truth be told, politicians have been cutting the military first, ever since the time of Rome and Carthage.  It is an easy foil, but always has consequences that are bad.

The problem is that no one, politicians or generals, are any good at predicting the future of military conflicts. During the Korean War, it was determined that since we had long-range missiles on our fighter jets, we didn’t need guns on them or needed to bother teaching dog fighting (aerial combat) skills. The result? U.S. planes were getting shot out of the sky left and right. Forcing the air force to spend money to retro fit the planes with guns, and bringing fighter pilots out of retirement to teach dog fighting.

At the start of the Iraq war, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld determined that the U.S. would use a lean and mean war effort. The result was huge casualties, because troops were spread thin, and fatigued from multiple tours that came because of the troop reductions that Bush and Clinton made in the 1990’s.

Now, President Obama is doing the same thing. Cutting troops, reducing spending on hardware like fighters and aircraft carriers. Instead, they will use more drones, and a focus on elite forces like the Seals, and Special Forces. The rationale being that there will be no large-scale wars in the future.

Aside from the fact they cannot know that, even current conditions could point to that view being totally wrong. Drone air attacks have been very successful, but that’s partly due to the desert environment of the Middle East. Drones are practically useless in the jungles of Southeast Asia, or South America. Drones will not be able to see through the canopy of jungle trees, so they cannot be fully utilized as though they are in Afghanistan, or Iraq.

China is continuing to build up its military—new fighters, ships, drones– Russia is a sleeping bear that reared its ugly head two years ago in Georgia, and who knows what will happen in the middle east between the Muslim world and Israel. All around the globe there are warm spots of conflict, a spark away from flaring into hot spots of war and strife.

Lastly, relying on elite forces ignores the fact that the people in them take a long time to train, and do need breaks in deployment. Have we not learned that lesson from the wars of the last ten years? By reducing the force numbers,—already too low—we hamper our ability to handle conflict in different locations.

It’s not a stretch to see us mired in the Middle East again, while simultaneously dealing with terrorists in African, Asia, and problems in South America. Of course, it’s easy to say, “We just don’t need to get involved so much.’ But who says we have a choice? We were not in some protracted war before 9/11, but they attacked us anyway.

The reality is that we increase our troops, and spend money on military hardware, not for what happens three years from now, but what happens 10, 15, or 20 years from now. The hardware we used in the first Iraq war was developed during the Reagan years. President Obama, and our military leaders have no clue about what will happen in the next 10 years. They can guess, but every time they decisions like this in the past, they have been wrong. So it is better to over prepare, and under utilize, rather than be under prepared and have to scramble to catch up.

The world is a complicated and dangerous place. A weak America makes it more dangerous, not less. Especially for American citizens that may live or die based on the decisions our leaders are making today. If we cut the military, the country, and indeed some places in the world, shall end up paying the price. A price far higher in blood and tears than the price of what we’re spending on the military now.

The article Obama’s Military Cuts Continue Legacy of Politicians’ Mistakes appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo is all about talking the talk, but does not follow his own advice. After the Associated Press obtained state records under the Freedom of Information Act, it was discovered that Cuomo used the state aircraft for personal travels.

Although Cuomo may be entitled to use the state plane, it doesn’t sit well in the state that is threatened by his office to be decimated by budget cuts. While the governor was advocating massive state cuts that would destroy education and the infrastructure, Cuomo was traveling to Westchester County to visit his girlfriend on the state’s dime.

The records show Cuomo used a state plane and helicopter to return to Westchester County at the end of statewide tours more than a dozen times from when he took office in January through June, the end of his first legislative session. The state plane was then flown from Westchester, where Cuomo lives with his girlfriend, to the capital of Albany to return the aircraft to its hangar as required.

Even though Cuomo used state aircraft far less than his predecessors, there is no record of any politicking or fundraising in the trips.  According to state law, the governor is allowed to use the aircraft  only for “official events.” This includes his trips Westchester home, which the Democrat lists as his official address, Cuomo spokesman Josh Vlasto said Saturday.

Cuomo’s girlfriend Sandra Lee owns the home, and Cuomo’s daughters live there much of the time. Cuomo himself spends far more time at the executive mansion in Albany than other recent governors.

“The governor uses the plane in furtherance of state business,” Vlasto said. “Every trip is approved by the counsel’s office and the secretary to the governor and to the extent Governor Cuomo’s use of the plane is noteworthy, it’s for its limited use and anyone familiar with the relevant law or practice would know that.It’s outrageous that due to an apparent lack of news, The Associated Press has now decided to fabricate stories.”

Even though this may be a normal and common practice, it seems to be hypocritical. At a time when politicians keep talking about “sacrifice” and “budget cuts,” it appears the only people they are talking about is the middle and lower class.

Apparently, the rich or politicians do not have to sacrifice at all. Cuomo could make the two hour drive from Westchester to Albany and it would not disrupt his life too much.

lev radin / Shutterstock.com

The article Governor Cuomo Uses State Plane-Real Story or Pretend Controversy? appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The debt ceiling was raised in the last possible moment in a deal that has no one really satisfied. The debt ceiling was raised along with a creation of a “secret super committee” that will dramatically slash spending.

Democrats in the Senate supported the bill despite the huge spending cuts. Forty-five voted “yes” on the bill and six voted “no.” Meanwhile 28 Republicans voted in favor of the bill and 19 opposed it. Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) voted “yes” and “no,” respectively.

The compromise allows Obama to increase the borrowing limit by $400 billion immediately but also mandates $917 billion in cuts over the next decade. The bill also sets up a committee of 12 lawmakers that will find another $1.5 trillion cuts over the next decade.  The bill “puts in place a powerful committee that will ensure further much-needed reform,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)

“There must be a sharing of sacrifice,” Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said. “It’s very unfair for millionaires and billionaires not to be contributing.”

Very few lawmakers had positive reactions to the deal.

“This compromise that we reached is not perfect,” said Reid. “We settled for less than we wanted, but so did my friend [McConnell].”

He also complained that the country was forced to such an impasse because of the “very, very disconcerting” impact of the Tea Party.

McConnell was more satisfied with the outcome. “It was a debate that Washington very much needed to have,” he said. “The American people agree with us on the nature of the problem … if you’re spending yourself into oblivion, the solution isn’t to spend more, it’s to spend less.”

“The bill doesn’t solve the problem, but it forces us to admit we have one,” McConnell added.

Other tea-party backed Republicans were less optimistic over the outcome. “To me it comes close to violating our oath of office,” said Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) about the potential cuts to military spending.

Economists also have mixed reactions about the deal. Raising the debt ceiling provides some stability in an already fragile economy however the huge spending cuts will continue to slow the economy.

“The federal government spends huge amounts of money, and to the extent, in the short-term, that it’s not spending that amount of money, there will be an impact to the economy,” said Ernie Patrikis, a banking partner at White & Case and former vice president of the New York Federal Reserve. He said that while he thought the stability would encourage more investment, “the impact on unemployment is not terribly helpful.”

“It’s definitely a drag — the only question is how much,” said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. “We’re going backward when we desperately need to go forward.”

According to the Huffington Post, the Democrats began the debate stating that the hike in the debt ceiling be “clean” and not tied to spending cuts. They gave ground continually for months, and McConnell happily pointed out that the White House once labeled any linkage to future spending “insane.”

The article Debt Ceiling Deal is Lose-Lose for Everyone appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

In an interesting turn of events, the Congressional Budget Office rating Senator Harry Reid (D-NV)’s debt ceiling plan. Just one day after the CBO scored Speaker John Boehner’s plan, the non partisan congressional scorekeeper released their findings on Reid’s plan.

On Tuesday, the CBO stated that the Speaker’s plan would save $850 billion over the course of 10 years. Reid’s plan would reduce the deficit by $2.2 trillion over the next decade, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said. The Speaker was already forced to pull his bill over the low score from the CBO and stated that he was going to “rework” it. Reid’s plan also included no tax hikes or increases in revenue, a demand of the Republican Party.

Two major differences account for the conflicting scores. In Reid’s plan, the very expensive wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will completely end. Also, Boehner’s plan only raised the debt ceiling by one trillion dollars and was only trying to find a trillion cuts to match the amount of raising the debt ceiling. Under Reid’s plan, the debt ceiling would be raised until 2013.

Rep. Boehner defends his plan, calling the CBO results “misleading.” Boeher spokesman Michael Steele explained why the report was misleading.

This report shows the Senate plan for what it is: a grab-bag of gimmicks that gives the President a blank check. In contrast to the bill House Republicans have offered, the Senate Democratic bill counts as ‘savings’ a trillion dollars in war money that would never have been spent — and on top of that, slashes the defense budget in a manner that would hurt our men and women in uniform in a time of war.

It relies on smoke and mirrors for half of its ‘savings,’ yet still cuts $500 billion less than promised. In reality, the Reid plan would only save taxpayers about $1 trillion while giving the President the largest debt limit increase in history. Despite previous claims, it significantly falls short of the requirement that we cut more than we increase in the debt limit.

President Obama and other Democrat leaders are supporting Reid’s plan. Reid has hinted that Congress may be working on a compromise. “Magic things can happen here in Congress in a very short period of time under the right circumstances,” said Reid, the Senate majority leader.
Image Courtesy of  http://www.flickr.com/photos/americanprogressaction/

The article Reid’s Plan Saves More Money Than Boehner’s Plan appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The Congressional Budget Office, the non-partisan group that provides cost and data analysis for legislation, released its findings on House Speaker John Boehner’s debt plan. According to the CBO, the Budget Control Act of 2011 would save roughly $850 billion over the course of ten years and just $1 billion in 2012.The findings disappointed Speaker Boehner who said he rewrite the bill in order to save more money.

These savings will not satisfy Boehner’s conservative and tea party base. House Republicans have demanded immediate cuts, however under Boehner’s plan the cuts would not be felt for a few years.

“Americans deserve immediate spending cuts that demonstrate that we are charting a swift path toward a balanced budget. We must implement discretionary and mandatory spending reductions that would cut the deficit in half next year,” read a May 2011 letter from the conservative Republican Study Committee.

“Any move to raise the debt limit must be accompanied by immediate spending cuts and binding reforms so that we don’t continue to push our country down the road to bankruptcy,” House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) said in early May.

Boehner has also made similar statements. Early this month, he rejected a suggestion by Democrats that the majority of cuts be concentrated in future years. But, his new proposal does find the immediate cuts that Boehner himself demanded. Because programs already have budgets and operating costs, spending cuts that take effect immediately are nearly impossible to achieve. A simple fact that Boehner and others from the tea party seem to forget.

“We’re here to change Washington – no more smoke-and-mirrors, no more ‘phantom cuts.’ We promised that we will cut spending more than we increase the debt limit – with no tax hikes – and we will keep that promise,” Boehner spokesperson Michael Steel said in a statement after the CBO analysis was released.

“As we speak, Congressional staff are looking at options to re-write the legislation to meet our pledge. This is what can happen when you have an actual plan and submit it for independent review – which the Democrats who run Washington have refused to do.”

Image Courtesy of  http://www.flickr.com/photos/speakerboehner/

The article Boehner Reports He Will Rework Proposal After CBO Findings appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

As the deadline for the debt ceiling draws near, the insane and pointless debate continues. Dragging out the inevitable raising of the debt ceiling is extremely dangerous. Never before has the U.S. economy come so close to reaching the debt ceiling. Never before have politicians played this game of chicken with the debt in order to get their way. The latest GOP plan asks for huge and immediate spending cuts in all discretionary spending in exchange for only a six-month debt ceiling increase.  That is insane by anyone’s measures.

Furthermore, spending cuts during a recession is asinine. Every other economic slump that America has been in has been solved by government spending. The government operates differently than a household budget so let’s stop making that comparison. Yes, if I am in debt I will reduce my spending. But, I am not responsible for 300 million citizens. I reduce my spending and it only affects me, my husband and pets. If American utilizes these big spending cuts that BOTH parties are now entertaining, it will increase unemployment further draining states’ economies.  When states cut services, as many already have, like unemployment and food stamps, people are homeless, hungry and aren’t spending money. The economic recession that we have been struggling to get out of for years quickly becomes a depression with spending cuts. When average families do not have money to spend, businesses will lay off people. Factories will close. The tax revenue that the United States gets will decrease even further as less and less people are working. Houses will not sell. The economy will come to a complete stand still. Don’t believe me? Nobel Prize winner economist Robert Reich states the same thing.

Not raising the debt ceiling is stupid. I cannot figure out why, in this fragile economy, the Republicans want to mess with this. The GOP was elected last November with their vague promises of creating “jobs, jobs jobs.” Nothing will cause jobs to disappear faster than this plan of raising the debt ceiling for six months while cutting spending and hurting average Americans. If the debt reduction is so important, there is no plausible explanation on why taxes aren’t being raised. I don’t want to pay more taxes, but if the GOP wants to reduce the deficit, you really have to increase taxes. It is just common sense. The Republicans state that raising taxes on the wealthy will somehow make the economy tank. But, that is the ass backwards trickle down crap that has never, ever worked. The rich people spend the same amount of money whether their tax rate is 35 percent or 50 percent. The average family though will not spend money if they are unemployed. But, they certainly will spend if they have money which will increase the economy leading business owners to hire. Business owners do not add employees just because they have extra money. THAT IS THE STUPIDEST THING I HAVE EVER HEARD. Employees are only hired if there is a DEMAND. No demand if people don’t have money. This is so simple it makes me want to scream.

Hopefully, the voters will figure out simple economics and encourage their representatives to take a crash course before the U.S. falls off the cliff. Once we default on our loans, there is no turning back. The end results will be disastrous for everyone involved.  We are in a barrel and Niagara Falls is coming up quickly.

The article Op-Ed: Raise the Freakin Debt Ceiling, You Morons appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

As the United States is hurling closer to the point of no return on the debt ceiling, President Obama addressed the nation on Monday evening calling the partisan politics a “dangerous game.” Obama criticized the temporary Republicans plan and urged Congress to raise the debt ceiling before the quickly-approaching August 2^nd deadline.

“The American people may have voted for divided government, but they didn’t vote for a dysfunctional government,” the president said in a hastily arranged prime-time speech. He appealed to the public to contact lawmakers and demand “a balanced approach” to reducing federal deficits. “It is a dangerous game we’ve never played before,” Obama said, “and we can’t afford to play it now.”

Obama discussed the importance of raising the debt ceiling and the consequences if the ceiling is not raised in time. “Republican House members have essentially said that the only way they’ll vote to prevent America’s first-ever default is if the rest of us agree to their deep, spending cuts-only approach,” Obama said. “If that happens, and we default, we would not have enough money to pay all of our bills – bills that include monthly Social Security checks, veterans’ benefits, and the government contracts we’ve signed with thousands of businesses.”

The president suggested that Republicans consider raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans. He pointed out that it is not fair to ask for average American families to deal with deep spending cuts while the wealthiest Americans get off scot-free. “Most Americans, regardless of political party, don’t understand how we can ask a senior citizen to pay more for her Medicare before we ask corporate jet owners and oil companies to give up tax breaks that other companies don’t get,” the President stated.

“How can we ask a student to pay more for college before we ask hedge fund managers to stop paying taxes at a lower rate than their secretaries? How can we slash funding for education and clean energy before we ask people like me to give up tax breaks we don’t need and didn’t ask for?”

Arguing that Republican leaders were acting outside of the interests of their constituents, President Obama called on voters to “make your voice heard.”

Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) unveiled a plan earlier on Monday that would raise the debt ceiling temporarily for six months. Obama addressed the plan stating, “In other words, it doesn’t solve the problem,” he said. Speaker Boehner issued his own rebuttal speech immediately following Obama’s address.

The article Obama Calls the Debt Ceiling Debate a “Dangerous Game” appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The Republicans “Cut, Cap and Balance” plan will get nowhere. President Obama has vowed to veto the plan if it makes it to his desk. The plan would condition a debt ceiling hike on a constitutional amendment requiring the federal government to balance its balance each year. The proposal would also demand significant spending cuts and a spending cap in order to raise the debt ceiling.

President Obama released a statement on Monday threatening to veto the bill. “Neither setting arbitrary spending levels nor amending the Constitution is necessary to restore fiscal responsibility,” reads the statement released by the White House. “The bill … would set unrealistic spending caps that could result in significant cuts to education, research and development, and other programs critical to growing our economy and winning the future. It could also lead to severe cuts in Medicare and Social Security, which are growing to accommodate the retirement of the baby boomers, and put at risk the retirement security for tens of millions of Americans.”

The proposal also “sets out a false and unacceptable choice between the Federal Government defaulting on its obligations now or, alternatively, passing a Balanced Budget Amendment that, in the years ahead, will likely leave the Nation unable to meet its core commitment of ensuring dignity in retirement,” the statement continues.

Ultimately, the bill “is inconsistent with this responsible framework to restore fiscal responsibility and is not an appropriate method of reducing the Nation’s deficits and debt,” it concludes.

The White House and Congress continue to try to find a compromise in order to raise the debt ceiling by the fast approaching deadline. Republicans are using this opportunity to try to force Obama and the Democrats to make drastic cuts to spending while refusing to raise taxes on the wealthy. A strange position to be in, for sure. The Republicans don’t see it that way though. Incredulously.

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said Obama’s veto threat is “disappointing.”
“While American families have to set priorities and balance their books, this White House obviously isn’t serious about making the same tough choices,” Boehner said in a statement. “This unfortunate veto threat should make clear that the issue is not congressional inaction, but rather the President’s unwillingness to cut spending and restrain the future growth of our government.”

“The House will proceed as planned with its vote on the Cut, Cap and Balance Act,” Boehner added.

The article Obama Vows to Veto GOP Plan appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Recently, a group called U.S. Uncut has been organizing protests at Bank of America and other corporations for the past month.  The movement began with U.K. Uncut, which was formed by British workers angry at the draconian austerity measures targeted at the middle class.  U.S. Uncut was formed and quickly followed suit.

On March 26, U.S. Uncut joined in an international day of protest “targeting corporate tax cheats connected to cuts in valuable public services.”  The primary target of the group has been local Bank of America branches although there were some protests at other so-called tax dodgers like Verizon and FedEx.

“Bank of America is bankrupting America,” said US Uncut DC organizer and spokesperson Armand Biroonak, “When they don’t pay their fair share, just like the rest of us, then we are forced to cut $1.7 billion in early childhood education (Head Start & Title I). In America, do we want tax cheats or teachers?”

U.S. Uncut has used primarily social networking sites to get their message out.  They have not received much press, but already has over 16,000 fans on their Facebook page.  “Big corporations in our country dodge up to $100 billion every year,” said US Uncut Seattle organizer and self-described populist Laurie Dunivant-Larsen, “If they paid their taxes this year like the rest of us do, we could also stop the $100 billion in cuts to college loans. With all these tropical tax havens, US corporations make profits in America but barely pay any taxes here. That’s cheating – it’s immoral and un-American.”

The protests have also spread to other parts of the world.  Netherlands, Canada, Portugal, France, Ireland, and Australia all have branches of the group.  The U.K. group is still the largest.  On Saturday, during the international day of protests, demonstrators in London brought the city to a halt.  The Guardian estimates that over 250,000 people were at the protests however some activists suggest the number was closer to 500,000.  In the U.S., one of the largest protests was held outside a local Bank of America branch in Washington, D.C.  The demonstrators carried a large banner that read “Tax Dodger,” and screamed, “Pay your Taxes.”  The group handed out fact sheets on how Bank of America does not pay taxes and was successfully able to shut down the branch.  One member of the protests attempted to get into the bank in order to close his account.  Although, he showed his Bank of America card to security, he was denied entry.

“The government say there is no alternative to the cuts,” said Laura Carpenter of UK Uncut, “The government is making a political choice to cut and privatize public services whilst there are clear alternatives, like making the banks pay for the crisis that they caused or clamping down on tax dodging by corporations and rich individuals.”

“Maybe there isn’t a spending problem. Maybe it is a revenue problem,” said Carl Gibson, Co-Founder of US Uncut from Mississippi, “We The People just have to make sure that corporate tax cheats pay up.”

The article U.S.Uncut Organizing Protests at Bank of America appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.