i want to put specifics for these are just broad strokes about your plan, reduce the tkeuf set 3.7 trillion over ten years, reduce the cost of medicare and medicaid over ten years. increase revenue by a trillion dollars over that same decade. again that is just a broad outline. why are people running toward this idea all of this sudden? i think because they know that we have got to address the debt threat. we are borrowing 40 cents of every dollar as we spend as a country. our gross debt it a hundred percent of our gross domestic product. most say when you reach a debt of that level you reach the danger zone that puts at risk your future effect growth. and this is a bi-partisan plan, three democrats, three republicans. it builds on the plan of a fiscal commission. so it s the only bi-partisan plan that has come from
commission has concluded that in the short term, some additional lift spending on infrastructure for example which i would strongly favor and then pivot in dealing with the debt threat. well, this is a big frustration of mine to get into later in the show, but people look at the jobs and the deficit adds somehow being alien to one another, and somehow intentioned, when it seems to me that it is very easy to imagine a deal where the fact that you have a sort of certain amount of economic lift in the beginning and as you say a large infrastructure package to help you get larger concessions on the long-term deficit from liberals and if the jump spending works you would have a much easier time dealing with the deficit problem later, and it seems like it should be a win-win and yet not only can you not seem to get anybody to consider it in washington, but it hasn t been something that the democrats have made core to the negotiations and you have not heard them say, look, if you want a big
aren t they worried that the republicans will pocket the spending cuts and hold the line or taxes again and so that the ultimate deal is not three to one spending cuts that the obama administration wanted, but something much, much more tilted towards the deeper spending cuts? well, that could be the case and it is not attractive at all, but my own view is to have a debt crisis and not to do anything significant about the debt, and $1.5 trillion sounds like a lot of money, but you and i know, ezra, it does not change the trajectory we are on. we are headed for a debt that is 250% of the gross domestic product of the country if we fail to take substantial action to deal with the debt threat. and it does not take any action to lift a weak economy. we are going through a recovery, but it is a weak recovery. one of the things that s needed almost every bipartisan
trial but not competent to represent themselves. and therefore, a court appoints a lawyer. that s what should have been done and that has nothing to do with his right to see the evidence. have to leave it there, guys. interesting debate. that would be like letting a crack dealer see the evidence because he s accused of selling crack is not a good idea. e-mail us, let us know what you think about this. friends at foxnews.com. thanks so much. have a great weekend coming up. coming up on the show, be careful which car you buy. more auto workers busted drinking on the way to work. can the unions save their jobs? what do you mean the checks aren t in the mail? americans on social security not buying the president s new debt threat and they re ready to fight back about it and first, happy birthday to taboo. of black eyed peas.
a democratic source telling it differently, saying the president challenged mr. cantor for what the source called talk out of both sides of his mouth . they ll be back at the table tomorrow. the stakes could not be higher. moody s today put america s credit rating on review hinting at a possible rating drop. ben bernanke says defaulting on the debt would be catastrophic. jessica yellin is at the white house with what her sources are telling her. what have you heard from these differing accounts? reporter: democratic sources say that bottom line is that the president was schooling the crowd in the room when eric cantor changed his position. all along eric cantor as you have said, the house majority leader, had endorsed doing a deal that did reduce the deficit and that had some of these various components we talked about. but when he supported the short-term deal which as you ve pointed out the president has made clear he opposes, the president sort of told the entire group