We are already over the Fiscal Cliff

[Tom]

The fiscal cliff looms and Obama shows his total disrespect for us all by refusing to offer even token cost cutting measures. He moronically insists that the only thing needed to do is to soak the wealthy, give him a blank check by assigning him the power to decide the debt limit, and by ignoring the deep hole we are in.

Suppose we just give in and raise taxes on the rich.
That would raise about 70 billion. He is already asking for 60 billion for Sandy relief. So we net 10 billion. Against a debt of 16 trillion.

Oh, and that 60 billion is loaded with pork, having nothing to do with relief for victims of Sandy.

Business as usual in the wacked out world of libs.

[fast4522]

When you really think about it monetarily, he was the fellow who was able to deliver reparations backdoor style. Systematically handing over to the Bilderburg Group control of our economy and in doing so enabling these bastards to get even more when the next financial meltdown occurs.

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by Tom

The fiscal cliff looms and Obama shows his total disrespect for us all by refusing to offer even token cost cutting measures. He moronically insists that the only thing needed to do is to soak the wealthy, give him a blank check by assigning him the power to decide the debt limit, and by ignoring the deep hole we are in.

Suppose we just give in and raise taxes on the rich.
That would raise about 70 billion. He is already asking for 60 billion for Sandy relief. So we net 10 billion. Against a debt of 16 trillion.

Oh, and that 60 billion is loaded with pork, having nothing to do with relief for victims of Sandy.

Business as usual in the wacked out world of libs.

The original Obama proposals offered $930B in spending cuts. They called for $1.3T in additional revenues. He has since proposed changing the CPI formula for Social Security and raising the threshold at which higher tax rates would kick in. Both of these are concessions to Republican.

John Boehner, on the other hand, refuses to agree to any higher taxes on the wealthy and continues to insist on spending cuts which would harm those with the least ability to deal with that harm.

So, in essence, your claim that Obama refuses to offer even token spending cuts is just dumb.

Also just dumb is the idea presented by many cons here that raising taxes on the rich only results in X dollars of revenue. Since X dollars of revenue only impacts the deficit in a small way, we should not bother to raise their taxes.

The dumb thing about this is idea is that it compares the effect of one year of raised taxes to a debt which has been accumulating for 200+ years. It also ignores the fact that if tax rates had been kept at a reasonable rate for the last thirty years, we would not have been in the situation we are in now.

I am going to have to look into what the Sandy relief bill actually contains. I have the strong feeling that what you consider pork is something quite different.

[Valuist]

Originally Posted by mostpost

The original Obama proposals offered $930B in spending cuts. They called for $1.3T in additional revenues. He has since proposed changing the CPI formula for Social Security and raising the threshold at which higher tax rates would kick in. Both of these are concessions to Republican.

John Boehner, on the other hand, refuses to agree to any higher taxes on the wealthy and continues to insist on spending cuts which would harm those with the least ability to deal with that harm.

So, in essence, your claim that Obama refuses to offer even token spending cuts is just dumb.

Also just dumb is the idea presented by many cons here that raising taxes on the rich only results in X dollars of revenue. Since X dollars of revenue only impacts the deficit in a small way, we should not bother to raise their taxes.

The dumb thing about this is idea is that it compares the effect of one year of raised taxes to a debt which has been accumulating for 200+ years. It also ignores the fact that if tax rates had been kept at a reasonable rate for the last thirty years, we would not have been in the situation we are in now.

I am going to have to look into what the Sandy relief bill actually contains. I have the strong feeling that what you consider pork is something quite different.

Really? What about Boehner's plan to raise taxes on those making over $1 million a year? Or did you miss that?

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics...,4358721.story

[Tom]

So, in essence, your claim that Obama refuses to offer even token spending cuts is just dumb.

No, it just true.
Nothing of substance being offered at negotiations.
Pay attention.

And the repubs have now upped their offer to raise taxes on anyone making over a million a year, same as Reid and Pelosi had previously wanted to do. But Odumbo now says no, not enough, and has the balls to now say the repubs are conceding that we have raise taxes on the rich. He a BS artist.
I have told you all along that it is his goal to have us go over the cliff - he wants as many people as possible to be totally dependent on the government. Economic recovery is the last this he wants.

btw, When you check out the Sandy money, be sure to look for Amtrak bailout, Alaskan fisheries, Homeland security vehicles NOT damaged in the flood....and see if you can find out why only 36% of the money is going to used now, when it is needed. Oh, and if you finish early, see if you track down those FEMA trailers - some folks in NY would love to have a home for Christmas.

[lamboguy]

to quote Gerald Celente, " the republicans are inept and the democrats are incompetent".

I have to agree with one thing, the country is probably better off with the guy they elected than the guy that wanted to be elected. only because the republican proved he had no clue what was going on around him in this country while Obama knew how to win the election, whether you like him or not.

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by Valuist

Really? What about Boehner's plan to raise taxes on those making over $1 million a year? Or did you miss that?

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics...,4358721.story

I did not miss it, but I really wasn't thinking about it when I was responding to Tom. The President's concessions on COLA for Social Security are far more significant than Boehner's tax plan which he knows will never pass the Senate.

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by Tom

No, it just true.
Nothing of substance being offered at negotiations.
Pay attention.

And the repubs have now upped their offer to raise taxes on anyone making over a million a year, same as Reid and Pelosi had previously wanted to do. But Odumbo now says no, not enough, and has the balls to now say the repubs are conceding that we have raise taxes on the rich. He a BS artist.
I have told you all along that it is his goal to have us go over the cliff - he wants as many people as possible to be totally dependent on the government. Economic recovery is the last this he wants.

btw, When you check out the Sandy money, be sure to look for Amtrak bailout, Alaskan fisheries, Homeland security vehicles NOT damaged in the flood....and see if you can find out why only 36% of the money is going to used now, when it is needed. Oh, and if you finish early, see if you track down those FEMA trailers - some folks in NY would love to have a home for Christmas.

What is your source for the above paragraph? Too often you make statements and provide nothing to back them up. Do you have a link to the bill in Congress? Do you have a link to a story about the bill? I do not intend to waste any more of my time trying to find what you are babbling about only to discover that it aint like you said it was.

[mostpost]

Let me clarify the difference between what Obama is doing and what Boehner is doing. Obama is proposing measures that would be acceptable to Republicans. A reduction in spending on Social Security is a favorite of Republicans. Republicans would favor increasing the threshold on higher taxes to $400,000. That $400,000 threshold is higher than many Democrats would like.

Republicans would vote for adjusting the COLA and they would vote for $400,000 as opposed to $250,000 although they probably would not like any increase.

Boehner, on the other hand, is proposing a change which Democrats would not tolerate. And he is proposing a change which he would not vote for himself if it looked like the measure would pass. The only reason for this proposal is to make the Democrats vote against it so the Repubs can accuse them of taking us over the fiscal cliff.

Turtleman pulled a similar stunt in the Senate, then had to filibuster his own bill when Democrats called his bluff.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Originally Posted by mostpost

What is your source for the above paragraph? Too often you make statements and provide nothing to back them up. Do you have a link to the bill in Congress? Do you have a link to a story about the bill? I do not intend to waste any more of my time trying to find what you are babbling about only to discover that it aint like you said it was.

As the king of babble, it shouldn't be difficult for you.

[Tom]

What is your source for the above paragraph? Too often you make statements and provide nothing to back them up. Do you have a link to the bill in Congress? Do you have a link to a story about the bill? I do not intend to waste any more of my time trying to find what you are babbling about only to discover that it aint like you said it was.

No one invited you to participate in this thread, union boy. This a right to post thread. No one does the work for you in here. You question my post, than prove me wrong. I started the thread - I GOT SENIORITY!

[Tom]

http://online.wsj.com/article/APd996...4a867442c.html

They say some measures in the bill — including money for salmon fisheries in Alaska, new government cars and an Amtrak expansion project — smack more of congressional pork than disaster aid.

The bill includes $188 million for an Amtrak project to curb rail bottlenecks in the Northeast. The project was on the table long before Sandy hit in late October, according to an analysis of the bill by the group Taxpayers for Common Sense.

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by Tom

http://online.wsj.com/article/APd996...4a867442c.html

First you post how you are not going to do anything to help me, then in the very next post you provide the link above. Apparently, somebody remembered that Santa is coming in six days.

According to the wsj article the legislation for aid to victims of Sandy also includes other appropriations. Pretty much what you said. That does not mean that those other requests are pork. Money is being requested to repair damaged Alaskan fisheries. Those fisheries were not damaged by Sandy, but they were damaged by a natural disaster as recognized by the government. As such they are eligible for aid. Why not include all such requests in one bill.

Money for Sandy and the Alaska fisheries, or for the Army Corps of Engineers, as well as the Department of Agriculture's program to restore watersheds damaged by fire or drought are all legitimate requests for this bill. I don't think $50M to subsidize tree planting in private nurseries is. It is unclear what the money for Amtrak is for. If it is to repair or replace assets damaged by Sandy, then I support it. If for other purposes, no.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Originally Posted by mostpost

...

That does not mean that those other requests are pork. Money is being requested to repair damaged Alaskan fisheries. Those fisheries were not damaged by Sandy, but they were damaged by a natural disaster as recognized by the government. As such they are eligible for aid. Why not include all such requests in one bill. (ahem, question mark) ...

[YT="Kick Save And a Beauty!"]d6InAjPcFH8[/YT]

[rastajenk]

Originally Posted by Tom

I GOT SENIORITY!

I'd say you've got tenure.