ChrisWWW :
Obama’s got a tough road ahead of him. After years of the Federal government running large deficits during times of economic expansion, there is no government rainy day fund, which is what the Republicans and Clinton tried to create in the 1990s through their budget.
We had better hope the economy is recovered by the time these major government cuts are set to come in, otherwise it could deepen our economic woes and make the future budgets look even more bleak or debt ridden.

that would be nice – if it were true Cris

I love his closing sentence. No worries about confiscating money from the most productive members of society because:
“The rich, after all, already have most of what they want.”

“Hmm, let me think. Why would the new administration try to “cut that amount sharply” before / around 2013? Hmm. I’m sure there’s something going to happen at the end of 2012. What’s that again? O yeah, now I remember: presidential elections! That’s funny. Probably a coincidence I guess.”

Would you expect him to set a goal for 2016? If he did, you’d be criticizing him for presuming he’d be re-elected. He’s made no secret that the goal is to cut the deficit by the end of his first (and maybe only) term. If you’re implying he’s being secretive about his motives, I think you’re just fishing for reasons to criticize Obama. In any case, since most of the deficit reduction will be in the form of tax increases, I’ve never heard anyone argue that tax increases before an election are a good idea, so I don’t see your point. It’s perfectly reasonable for a president to set out goals in 4 year periods, considering the time they serve is broken up in those terms.

We had better hope the economy is recovered by the time these major government cuts are set to come in, otherwise it could deepen our economic woes and make the future budgets look even more bleak or debt ridden.

I’ll be among those who will lose a portion of deductions for charitable contributions and home mortgage. We always give a good bit more to charity than the maximum we can deduct anyway, but with times getting tougher there’s no doubt that some people will have to cut back at giving money that doesn’t help reduce one’s tax liability.

I think it’s less likely that this will affect housing because I doubt most people make decisions on buying homes based on the size of their deduction, but nonprofits are already bracing for severe downturns in their revenue (plus, many have already had to deal with losses in their investments) and this will hurt.