Weekdays at 12noon on 770 AM: The Truth
 Michael Medved

Agree on Goals, Guys

December 3, 2012 @ 11:35 am

The biggest obstacle to a bi-partisan deal for avoiding the fiscal cliff involves an inability to agree on specific, common goals. The underlying aim for Democrats is to close gaps between rich and poor by raising taxes on the wealthy; the deepest goal for Republicans is to slow the growth of government by cutting spending.

Both sides, however, already recognize the urgent need to boost revenues while simultaneously reducing expenditures. This year, government spending reached one-quarter of GDP—close to a seventy-year high—while receipts amounted to only 15.8%, close to a postwar low. Over the next decade, spending must decline to its Bush-era average of 20%, while revenue returns to its Clinton-era average, 19%. If the two parties could agree on these or similar numbers, they could begin to work together to fill in the details.

More Michael Medved

MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (43)


  • Add A Comment

  • Forrest wrote...
    "The deepest goal for Republicans is to slow the growth of government by cutting spending".
    December 3, 2012 12:15 pm
    That is an outright lie. Since Ike no Republican president has balanced the budget.

    iki.answers.com/Q/Which_republican_president_balanced_a_budget

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • FormerMarineSgt wrote...
    Michael - I can't believe it....
    December 3, 2012 12:59 pm
    I nearly agree with you 100%!!! Who are you and what have you done with the real Medved? This is a very even handed, facts based column and it's quite refreshing! The only part of your comment that I disgree with (and I'll do so quite respectfully because of your even handed writing) is "the deepest goal for Republicans is to slow the growth of government by cutting spending" - while it is true that they say this, reality is that they have been right up there with the biggest spenders more often than not. They spend like drunken sailors just like dems - maybe one different government programs than dems, but they do spend like them. Let's see if they actually carry through with what they say the want - as history clearly shows that we should not blindly believe them on thier own spending habits.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • fartforce1 wrote...
    Mikey, get real dude! The underlying aim is not what you said at all.
    December 3, 2012 5:52 pm
    The underlying aim is to make the rich pay close to the same as they did the moment Clinton left office and W took over, before the tax breaks that drank up the surplus. Democrats are also tired of the dog and pony show.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • SeattleD wrote...
    While the Republitards in congress are adamant taxes on millionaires never get raised
    December 3, 2012 5:59 pm
    they are more than happy to jack up the payroll tax on the middle-class.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • roomtemp wrote...
    "Over the next decade, spending must decline to its Bush-era average of 20%"
    December 3, 2012 7:51 pm
    Bwaahahaha! Yeah, that will fix it...

    -Reality check-

    "All I Want For Christmas Is The Truth"

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-12-03/guest-post-all-i-want-christmas-truth

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Forrest wrote...
    What this all boils down to is,
    December 3, 2012 8:37 pm
    Republicans want to cut Medicare and Social Security so they can maintain a tax cut for billionaires.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    Sorry but Obama has ALREADY gutted Medicare $715B for 'affordable' health care.
    December 4, 2012 2:56 am
    And Social Security was SUPPOSED to have been secure before everyone from Bush I used it as a cash cow and for the past 4 years the payroll tax was cut in half.

    Hey, here's an Idea House Democrats once had before Harry Reid shot them down: ... Instead of $250,000, why not start the higher taxes at $1M? ... Compromise. ... But go after some entitlements now as well.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Forrest wrote...
    715 Billion over 10 years hardly gutted Medicare
    December 4, 2012 5:17 am
    From what I can read and comprehend was that no patient benefits were reduced. Money was saved by cutting unwarranted subsidies to providers and insurance companies. Besides the cuts are still use used for healthcare for citizens through Obamacare. The point in my statement is that that the republicans basically want to reduce benefits to seniors to fund lower tax rates for the 1%. That cannot be denied. Look at their proposal.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    Forrest - that's MY Medicare money being SHIFTED to other people.
    December 4, 2012 5:33 am
    Sorry you bought into that 'unwarranted subsidies' cover. (And IF the GOP had said that, the left would have called it an attack on the elderly). ... And I hardly think that health benefits for someone on their 20s is the same because THEY are citizens, too. ... And its also very much s bste and switch - but, of course, no one read that health bill ahead of time.

    But MY point is that we CAN compromise on who gets what for tax cuts. Either way - $250,000 or $1M, your not getting THAT MUCH extra revenue. ..... This whole 'tax cuts for the wealthy' thing has devolved into nothing more that political points that ultimately make little difference to the budget.

    I think Boehner COULD probable compromise for $1M IF Obama would do the same. ... And THEN all could wait on entitlements a couple of months. .. But work the tax thing NOW>

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Forrest wrote...
    ron prevost wrote... Forrest - that's MY Medicare money being SHIFTED to other people.
    December 4, 2012 7:23 am
    I don't think your medicare was Ron as Plan A Medicare wasn't cut (the medicare with the trust fund).
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    OK, Forrest, enlighten me.
    December 4, 2012 7:35 am
    Was that whole $715,000,000,000 just loose change going to no earthly purpose?

    Unless otherwise, that's $715B taken away from those of us currently covered by Medicare. Regardless of Plan A, or Plan B, or Plan D (which I do not use, but would If I didn't have insurance).

    .

    But this is still getting off the idea that both sides need to compromise. ... That's MY ideology. We really don't need to choose up sides to help people.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • It's me! Ha ha! wrote...
    Left wing Parrots, other than what they are told by MSNBC,
    December 4, 2012 5:47 am
    do not ever hear of what it actually happening. Other than their Dear Leader was re immaculated and the rich are EVIL!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Forrest wrote...
    What would my morning be like without the
    December 4, 2012 6:05 am
    "Immaculate Parrot" squawking and crapping on the morning paper.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Forrest wrote...
    Here's the truth about the deficit and Republican offer
    December 4, 2012 7:14 am
    http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/04/three-card-budget-monte/
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    since when is Krugman truth?
    December 4, 2012 7:19 am
    About as unbiased as Sarah Palin.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • logical open mind wrote...
    Krugman??? Non partison economist do NOT take Krugman seriously
    December 4, 2012 8:53 am
    Krugman???
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • William Lawn wrote...
    Ask AJ
    December 5, 2012 6:49 am
    He thinks his opinions should be respected.

    Too funny

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Forrest wrote...
    Do you realize that if America had universal healthcare...
    December 4, 2012 7:30 am
    like every civilized country in the world except Turkey, we wouldn't be having this discussion about Medicare.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Forrest wrote...
    I spend over $10,000 per year on health insurance
    December 4, 2012 8:37 am
    for my wife and I (Thankfully neither my wife or I have see a doctor much. When I am sick I have to wait two weeks before an appointment is available. I'll either be well or dead by then.). A lot of the extra insurance costs go to pay for low income people using the emergency room. I'm subsidizing Walmart because they are too cheap to pay their workers a living wage with healthcare benefits. How is that better than paying a tax so that all Americans have healthcare?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • logical open mind wrote...
    Forest-What? 2 weeks to see a DR? What crappy DR office do u go to.
    December 4, 2012 8:56 am
    Also, if you are healthy take a high deductable on health insurance. I dont pay near that much for a family of four!! Wise up and shop for a better plan!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    Kind of expensive.
    December 4, 2012 8:56 am
    Ours is only $7200 per year through my wife's retirement. With no waiting for emergence and other appointments depending only on what others have scheduled. Near full emergency room and hospital coverage.

    Of course, that's with Medicare as primary. So, I guess, if you are still too young for Medicare, you pay more and get less. ... BUT her insurance cost the same before she retired and we had no Medicare yet.

    Actually, even if we HAD universal health care, there would still be a market for private insurance plans. As a supplement.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • logical open mind wrote...
    What $7200per year? Come on and get this re-quoted.
    December 4, 2012 6:08 pm
    Get a businessman to negotiate for you cause u are getting hosed!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }