Quantcast
U.S. & World

Official: President Obama proposes cuts to Social Security in budget

Comments

Return To Article
  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    April 5, 2013 8:56 a.m.

    Oh my! Cutting S.S? Will the left say their man Obama is pushing old ladies off the cliff and starving women and children? Be careful liberals, your hypocrisy is showing, again!

  • Red Salt Lake City, UT
    April 5, 2013 9:12 a.m.

    So funny that all the liberals love this guy so much!

    We are for sure heading for tougher times. America is going to pay a heavy price for allowing this fox into the henhouse.

  • mohokat Ogden, UT
    April 5, 2013 9:14 a.m.

    While insisting on more taxes! Obama is like a stuck record. Why would we expect anything different. This is more smoke and mirrors. Obama knows that more taxes will not fly so it is easy to present something that sounds like he is trying. Manipulation is his game. How will this work in any other aspect of real life. I will cut my overhead but only if I recieve more money. Another big Ha Ha

  • DN Subscriber 2 SLC, UT
    April 5, 2013 9:20 a.m.

    This is the budget that by law, Obama was required to submit on February 1st, so we can see that he is (a) disobeying the law, and since this is all based on an anonymous official, not the actual written budget, Obama is (b) refusing to even admit what is in his bill.

    We must cut spending drastically. The tiny steps thrown out as a trail balloon may be painful, but like all his sequester cuts, are designed for maximum impact on popular programs while leaving the most wasteful, duplicate and ineffective programs untouched.

    Cutting payments to doctors and for pharmaceuticals does nothing to improve healthcare, but will create shortages and worse outcomes for patients. Obamacare must be repealed entirely if we are to even maintain our current levels of care. But, his goal is to destroy the best system in the world and replace it with socialized medicine.

    The ultimate insult is to propose a massive new pre-school program (even if funded by the dwindling number of smokers) when existing childhood programs are nearly all worthless, except as free babysitting for unwed mothers, or as indoctrination programs for likely Democrat voters.

    Obama cannot be trusted, period!

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    April 5, 2013 9:39 a.m.

    Won't spending more money fix the economy? Why is barack changing his mind?

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    April 5, 2013 9:47 a.m.

    What Obama REALLY wants; communism!

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    April 5, 2013 9:52 a.m.

    Lets see.

    Cutting entitlements which are growing out of control and raising taxes from historically low levels as a fix to our problem.

    That is what most would call a balanced approach. And non-partisans would call it reasonable.

    You guys would complain about Obama regardless of what he does. = No credibility.

    That is why I dont watch people like Hannity or Sharpton. They are too predictable.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    April 5, 2013 10:00 a.m.

    How about cuts to mid-east countries? Sequester them, not us!

    Isn't sequester a hiding place for Obama failures? You know,-blame sequester, and not the commander.

  • Hamath Omaha, NE
    April 5, 2013 10:12 a.m.

    If the budget has significant cuts (like those detailed in the Simpson commission) then I would want the compromise and will the Republicans that I voted for exactly that. If the budget has token cuts only to appear significant on the "headline" level to simply put pressure and win votes in upcoming elections, then it's business as usual in D.C.

  • wer South Jordan, UT
    April 5, 2013 10:57 a.m.

    Who is dumber? The people we elected in DC or we the people who elected them?

  • Joan Watson TWIN FALLS, ID
    April 5, 2013 10:56 a.m.

    My memory may not be correct, but it seems that for two years SS recipients received no cost of living increase - yet congress voted once or twice to give themselves pay raises?

  • xscribe Colorado Springs, CO
    April 5, 2013 10:58 a.m.

    Yeah, communisim is the grand plan, and North Korea is in on it. Question is: Are we going to take over North Korea, or is North Korea going to take us over? And who will be the leader one that happens? Or maybe Obama and Un will be coleaders!

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    April 5, 2013 11:28 a.m.

    Props to BO for daring to mess with SS, but $130B in reductions and $580B in increased taxes is not balanced.

    I wonder if he can get reid and schumer to go along, though.

    Too bad he is still insisting on even more higher taxes, since the repubs ALREADY GAVE him higher taxes.

    But this is probably all grandstanding on his part, because he knows his party will not go along with it.

  • mcdugall Layton, UT
    April 5, 2013 11:29 a.m.

    @Mountanman FYI, if you haven't figured this out yet, Obama is not a liberal. His is Reagan 2.0

  • JimInSLC Salt Lake City, UT
    April 5, 2013 11:34 a.m.

    When talking about the national debt, those in Washington tell us the US does not default on its debt. Considering that roughly $4 trillion of the debt is money that was appropriated from the social security fund, this move looks to me like a default. How can social security be in trouble when it has so much money owed? When Japan and China get a clue, and stop buying US debt we will be in an economic world of hurt then. In the words of BTO, "You ain't seen nothing yet".

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    April 5, 2013 12:05 p.m.

    "Isn't sequester a hiding place for Obama failures?"

    How is that? Care to explain?

    Now, if you had said that the "sequester was a hiding place for Congress's failure" you would probably get unanimous support.

    I still have to chuckle.

    Obama can not spend a dime without the approval of congress.
    Obama can not raise or lower taxes one dime without the approval of congress.

    Yet, Obama gets blamed for tax rates and spending rates.

    Hey, I have not problem with those who disagree and dislike Obama.

    But at least use logic when assigning blame.

    Has anyone seen that the Stock Market has doubled in the last 3 years?

    Why is that? Let me guess. Republican controlled house? Too funny

  • Counter Intelligence Salt Lake City, UT
    April 5, 2013 12:37 p.m.

    "Obama is not a liberal. His is Reagan 2.0"

    wow Thanks for making me spew milk out my nose

  • Rick2009 MESA, AZ
    April 5, 2013 12:53 p.m.

    All of the talk about decreases over the next 10 years is a joke. No one seems to have the guts to do it now. Ten years from now we will probably be at a $30 trillion deficit if not higher....10 years is a joke just like his 5% salary decrease.

    Utah Mormon democrats need to wake up and bail out of the democratic party. However the Republican party stinks also....join the constitution party and follow the constitution like it says in the D&C.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    April 5, 2013 12:54 p.m.

    JoeBlow:
    Why do things need to be explained to you?

    Wake up!

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    April 5, 2013 1:06 p.m.

    Because you know that you cannot explain it.

    I expected an answer like that from you.

    And whats more, every tax change or $$ spent was voted on by the Republican controlled House.

    That is a fact. One that you are either unaware of or choose to ignore.

    It is much easier to simply say "its Obama's fault" than to look at the realities.

  • lket Bluffdale, UT
    April 5, 2013 2:04 p.m.

    everything that hurt the rest of us, made more money for the rich. record profit oil. they get tax money by the way. record profit for food companies. smaller containers price same or more. mass shootings = record profit for amo and weapons sale. nra propaganda paid for from said companies. nataural gas record supplies because of fracking and prices the same and water unfit for drinking. factories closed jobs lost labour sent to slave wage countires americans out of work. price of clothing prices same after getting cheaper labour. 2 wars that gave us record debt the rich richer and the rest poor. the middle clas is getting smaller. pay roll insurace is being cut by companies at a record level more people unable to afford insurance. now they pay a higher rate out of pocket then insured do. elected congress and others socialized medical for life. but you they want to cut your medicare and ssn that you worked and paid into your whole life. and they get retirement for life and ssn. yes move forth captalism for the few. it is not a thing made by a god it is greed.

  • samhill Salt Lake City, UT
    April 5, 2013 2:12 p.m.

    "...Obama would reduce the federal government deficit by $1.8 trillion over 10 years."

    -------------

    HA, Ha, ha, HEE, Hee!!!

    They've **got** to be kidding.

    The best these clowns can come up with is to reduce the **deficit** by a bit more, spread over **ten** years, than has the deficit for **every one** of the last four years!!

    That's like saying, "Stop complaining!! I'm applying the brakes so we'll go over the cliff a few seconds later than if I were not applying the brakes!"

    Or, like tossing a life line to someone that is only a **few** feet shorter than the distance needed.

    But, as I've said so many times before, it is we, the electorate (generally speaking, as I realize that I and many others certainly wouldn't and didn't pick most of them), who picked these people. And, it is only we who are to blame for the consequences.

  • Say No to BO Mapleton, UT
    April 5, 2013 3:01 p.m.

    I have a friend who sported a bumper sticker last fall that read: "Save Medicare - Vote Democratic"
    I can't wait to talk to him about his voting strategy.

  • Wonder Provo, UT
    April 5, 2013 3:17 p.m.

    Tea partiers are hilarious. The stock market goes down and it's Obama's fault. It goes up, crickets. Obama agrees to spending cuts in 2011, but tea partiers swear that he has cut absolutely nothing. Obama says let's do something about entitlements, he's a Socialist. (That makes absolutely no sense. You realize that don't you?) It's just a pure, unadulterated hatred for the man that bears no correlation to common sense. No matter what Obama does, it proves to any tea partier that he's the Anti-Christ. Tea partiers -- so predictable and so absurd.

  • Counter Intelligence Salt Lake City, UT
    April 5, 2013 4:30 p.m.

    You realize that don't you?) It's just a pure, unadulterated tingling for the man that bears no correlation to common sense. No matter what Obama does, it proves to any Obamette that he's the Christ. Obamettes -- so predictable and so absurd.

  • HS Fan Salt Lake City, UT
    April 5, 2013 4:31 p.m.

    A budget proposal that the Tea Party wacko's hate and one that liberals and the AFL-CIO dislike as well. Must be about right?

  • klangton Akiachak, AK
    April 5, 2013 4:38 p.m.

    What Obama wants is compromise. He does not want to cut entitlement programs, but is willing to in order to find middle ground to move us forward. Seems like darned if you do and darned if you don't is the theme from too many comments. Close loopholes? Republican leadership in the House was all for this just two months ago. Let's support getting government out of gridlock and take Obama up on his proposals, for everyone's sake, regardless of party!

  • Riverton Cougar Riverton, UT
    April 5, 2013 4:48 p.m.

    JoeBlow,

    If what you say about assigning blame is true, then why do Democrats blame the poor economy on Bush? They still blame him to this day.

  • SCfan clearfield, UT
    April 5, 2013 5:51 p.m.

    Ok Joe Blow, here goes. One. If I had lots of cash, I'd find some place to put it other than a bank because if the American dollar does crash, the money will be worthless. At least if you buy stock, you own a tangable asset.

    And secondly, let me laugh out loud at your assertion NOW, that only the Congress can spend and not the President. Tell me Bush was not blamed for his 4 trillion increase in the debt by the likes of people who think like you. Obama was one of them. It's laughable today to see him talking about how unpatriotic Bush was for running up 4 trillion dollars "all by his lonesome".

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    April 5, 2013 5:59 p.m.

    "If what you say about assigning blame is true, then why do Democrats blame the poor economy on Bush? They still blame him to this day."

    Here is my thoughts on it. The economy was in freefall before Obama took office. We were losing 700,000 + jobs per month.

    That is not blame, that is fact.

    The economy is like a large train. It will continue moving in its direction for some time period regardless of what you do. Therefore, it would be expected for the economy to continue on a downward path for some time after Obama took over.

    So, I think Dems blame Bush in response to all of the right wing garbage that says counts the number of jobs lost under Obama early in his presidency. The Right wants to pin all the blame on Obama and the left counters.

    Personally? I do not blame Bush for all of the economic ills. Nor do I give Obama credit for the turnaround.

    I am of the belief that the GOP and the Dems govern similarly.

    Placing blame for our ills on both parties gets me branded as a liberal. A true conservative will always blame the dems.

  • m.g. scott clearfield, UT
    April 5, 2013 6:06 p.m.

    The real trouble is, the country, both Republican and Democrat (except for the first 2 years of Obama, which was Democrat only) spent us into a debt that may cause an economic disaster. Now, with 17 trillion and growing, ALL programs need to be cut, and ALL taxes that won't stifle economic growth, need to be collected. And economic growth will be the only way for us to pay off the debt. We can't tax or cut our way out of this mess. I blame Bush for 4 trillion of it, and Obama for 6 trillion (and growing) of it. Bush can't do anything about his mistake now. Obama can. Will he? It's up to his constituents, namely the Democrat Party to make him do it. He won't listen to any advise from any Republican.

  • carman Wasatch Front, UT
    April 5, 2013 6:25 p.m.

    Calling Obama's proposal a "cut to Social Security" is just more double-speak (read lies) being spouted by the left. The President's proposal is anything but a cut. It is changing the formula for the cost-of-living adjustment from being benchmarked against wage inflation to being benchmarked against consumer price inflation. Social security spending will still go up every year by much more that the economy is growing (because America is aging), and payments to individuals will continue to rise with inflation. There will not be $.01 of a cut to ANYONE.

    This is just more politics and spin. Until voters wise up to the games played by the politicians in Washington, voters and taxpayers will be the ones being played.

  • KJB1 Eugene, OR
    April 5, 2013 7:12 p.m.

    Actually, these "cuts" are a new inflation formula that's actually designed not to affect recipients who are very old and/or living below the poverty line. People are screaming for a way to keep Social Security and Medicare sustainable without hurting the people who need it the most, and this is it. As the saying goes, if the extremists at both ends of the spectrum are angry at you, you've probably made a good deal.

    You know, Wonder really has you guys nailed. Nothing President Obama does will ever satisfy you, so why should we take any of your rantings seriously?

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    April 5, 2013 10:42 p.m.

    @JoeBlow:

    You need to be better informed. I bring up things which are common knowledge. Most people know of what we give to the mid-east, and what sequester is. It shouldn't have to be explained.

  • george of the jungle goshen, UT
    April 6, 2013 12:36 a.m.

    What me worry. There isn't a budget. Hasn't been in years.

  • Ricardo Carvalho Provo, UT
    April 6, 2013 8:54 a.m.

    This seems to me to be a step in the rich direction. It probably does not go far enough but at least we are starting to compromise. Thanks for showing some leadership here, President Obama. I hope the folks we elected from the state of Utah will have the courage to explore compromise positions as well.

  • Anti Bush-Obama Washington, DC
    April 6, 2013 10:35 a.m.

    Just an empty threat. We know he will never do this. Cutting welfare spending is an absolute no no

  • DEW Sandy, UT
    April 6, 2013 11:24 a.m.

    Blame Obama for his big defcit that he created. Oh yeah, when will he and his family start paying all expense vacations?

  • m.g. scott clearfield, UT
    April 6, 2013 5:13 p.m.

    Re: Joe Blow

    You may be a liberal, but a true Democrat will always blame the Republicans. Especially when they are in power and have 2/3rds the responsibllity. And by the way, Obama is now well into his 2nd term. If he is as ineffective in making the economy better as he was in his first term, it will have been a wasted 8 years.