Obama just got to the core of why we have "deficits" right now.

[Renew Deal]

He said that if progressives want to invest in community colleges, infrastructure, and basic research, then we need to get our "fiscal house in order" so people don't throw their hands up every time one of these things is proposed.

By saying that Obama just acknowledged that Bush's and Norquists goal of getting rid of the surplus was a success. The entire reason for Bush to drive us into a bottomless pit of debt was to break government so money can't be spent on "social programs." Republicans claim they want a balanced budget, but they don't. If the budget is balanced then it can't be rebalanced to provide for some of the demands of the American people. It was Norquists idea to financially bankrupt the government and Bush made it happen. I hope Obama can turn it around.

[Enrique]

1. the wars and the tax cuts?

or federal workers salaries and pensions, and LIHEAP and entitlements?

[JoePhilly]

6. So it is FREE to bring all the troops home and lay them off?

That the idea?

Skip the military readiness aspects, or other goals.

Let's imagine we bring all the troops home.

Do we still PAY THEM, or do we lay them off and add them to the ranks of the unemployed?

Do we just leave their equipment? Do we replace it? Or ignore that?

The Bush tax cuts are a large part of the existing defict, but not so larger in the 2 year extension. Those 2 years are NOT the problem.

Of course Obama could have let all those tax cuts expire, so that DU could scream that he hated the middle class and raised their taxes in the middle of a fragile recovery. Not a smart idea.

The debt is important, but it only becomes an important issue when the GOP is OUT of power. They use it, as the OP indicated, to prevent Democrats from doing ANYTHING for the unemployed, the poor, or the middle class.

That is their goal.

And sadly, lots of Americans buy into this. They think roads are built by magic elves, and that taxes come from Satan.

[Electric Monk]

7. Are you trying to justify all the wars as a big make work project?

Talk about shifting goalposts.

I suppose when the only tool you have is a hammer, though, every problem starts to look like a nail.

[JoePhilly]

8. Not at all ...

I am simply pointing out that the claim that "ending the wars" fixes the deficit issue, is false.

That's just a matter of basic math.

I'm HAPPY we are bring troops out of Iraq, and Afghanistan.

But no one should assume that doing so, some how fixes the deficit issue. It does not.

We have N number of troops, some intend this to be there career, some don't.

And so ... let's imagine that we bring them all home, and that many simply leave the service. Fine.

The unemployment rate JUMPS as a result. That's just a fact.

Do we praise Obama when it happens, or do we scorn him?

My point is that those who think that "ending the wars" fixes the financial problem are not thinking about the realities. That does not mean I want us to stay at war just to keep the troops busy and employed.

I am simply pointing out that ending the wars does not have the immediate impact some seem to assume.

[Larkspur]

2. Does he understand that the Federal Govt is not like a family?

The Federal govt can run a deficit and should if the nation is plunged into an economic crisis, like the one he inherited.
Balanced Budget amendments sound great to most people until they realize that they mean no additional unemployment $ for millions of laid off workers and major cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

Obama can also lessen the deficit if he withdraws our troops out of Afghanistan, Iraq and

[cottonseed]

12. I'm sure he does. That's why he signed the first stimulus.

[amborin]

3. the $13 trillion dollar bailout had something to do with it:

from motherjones.com

[socialist_n_TN]

4. If the budget is balanced in the Republican manner

with nothing, but cuts, then the next thing they'll proclaim (just like W did) is that since the budget is balanced, then taxes are too high. So they'll cut taxes AGAIN and the budget gets OUT of balance AGAIN and they'll want more cuts, ad infinitum. It's a vicious cycle.

[JoePhilly]

5. Correct.

[Zorra]

9. So he shouldn't buy into their game by cutting social programs. The way

to beat them is to tax them all into submission.

[alfredo]

11. He only proposed them because he knew they'd reject any proposal fom him.

They don't want to cut social programs, they want them eliminated. No proposed cuts will ever be enough for them, and Obama knows that.

The Reps want economic collapse because they think that's the only way the social safety net can be eliminated.

[Major Hogwash]

10. Not only did Bush spend $8.4 Trillion dollars in 8 years, he left 2 unfinished wars going on.

Some legacy, huh?