Jun 24, 2012

Republicans Don't Want To Cut Social Security To Balance The Budget -- Actually, They're Not Interested In Doing Anything To Balance The Budget

     From a YouGov poll taken in late April and early May:
     Note that only 13.5% of Republicans are willing to accept major cuts in Social Security to reduce the budget deficit. Twice as many Republicans are willing to accept increases in taxes on higher-income Americans. Note also that 53.3% of Republicans are unwilling to accept either tax increases or major cuts in spending in order to balance the budget.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Come on, the Democrats didn't balance the budget for three years..

Anonymous said...

Or even do a budget for three years for that matter.

Anonymous said...

Correction--the Democrats have never balanced a budget. The balanced budgets at the end of the Clinton Adm came from a Republican Congress.

Anonymous said...

Oh, and "independents" have never balanced a budget, either.

Anonymous said...

The obstructionist House Tea Party Republicans had everything to do with Congress' inability to pass a budget these past three years. They do not reflect the past Republican Congresses that got things done with Clinton.

Nobbins said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Nobbins said...

Good point that the Clinton surpluss was the result of an obstructionist congress blocking a lot of spending... and hurting a lot of poor people. It wasn't a plan of Clinton's, or really a victory, just something that happened.

The whole "Clinton benefitted from previous Republican administration policies" is quite a fallacy, though. He started office in the midst of a mild recession. Even IF Reagon/Bush policies benefitted Clinton so much, why aren't Bush43 policies helping Obama? The whole thing is absurd, but that's for another topic.

Anyway, I think Charles is missing the fact that according to this poll, the Republican participants probably felt they were given a false choice. Had there been an option that said "reduce taxes on job/wealth creators," you'd get like 80%.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 10:12 said...
The obstructionist House Tea Party Republicans had everything to do with Congress' inability to pass a budget these past three years. They do not reflect the past Republican Congresses that got things done with Clinton.

The House Tea Party has only been in power for one year. The Democrats had the House and Senate for the first two years so their inability to pass a budget can only be blamed on the Deomcrat party.. Duh..

Anonymous said...

The Republican House has consistently passed budgets. The Democrat Senate has failed/refused to pass a budget since before Obama was elected.
Clinton's administration started on the upswing from a recession that had ended just as Bush 41 was defeated. His administration ended at the beginning of a recession that Bush 43 ended up inheriting.

Anonymous said...

Boehner, Cantor and company have orchestrated an obstructionist policy since before Obama even got into office. The Republican House majority only cemented that policy. This is no different than the argument against Obama's so-called failures on immigration reform. The Republicans refuse to compromise or even entertain the idea of meeting in the middle, then blame Obama for not getting anything done. I am seriously grateful that the Democratic Congress passed what it could (Obamacare chief among that) when they had that blissful window without Republicans grinding the nation to a halt.