- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 1, 2012 at 12:27 am #753190
JanSParticipantcutting taxes more for a certain faction of the people in this country ain’t gonna fix it either…
April 1, 2012 at 1:29 am #753191
kootchmanMemberAgreed. But we don’t know where the Senate could or would cut. They won’t show us. Ryan did. I happen to like it, but it’s not in stone. Simpson Bowles gave everyone cover. Too bad we didn’t take it. Where are you going to make the cuts? I will stand 100% behind the republicans… if there are no spending cuts.. no more taxes. Not cuts like… we won’t spend as much as we planned… and counting it as a deficit reduction. If I was Obama… I would be looking to deal. .. because it is the right thing to do. Real cuts to real programs. Republicans want a balanced budget… but they know it won’t happen until they get spending concessions. They want a balanced budget more than they oppose some marginal tax increases.
April 1, 2012 at 6:02 am #753192
JoBParticipantkootchman..
Ryan showed us all right
what he showed us is that he is a political player
he huffed. he puffed. he got news coverage…
he never intended to blow the house down
if he had,
he might have been held responsible for his mess
April 1, 2012 at 6:05 am #753193
JoBParticipantKootch
have you got the brain god gave a Newt?
Hehehehehe
no i have not been drinking
but i just couldn’t resist
there are so many similarities
and i spent the evening with Monty Python fans
April 1, 2012 at 6:23 am #753194
kootchmanMemberAll well and good. But. the question remains. Why has the democrat Senate not submitted a budget? I would guess they are ready to hand that over to the Republican too… so we can get a budget on the table. eh? Let;s see what Harry has to show.
April 1, 2012 at 4:06 pm #753195
JoBParticipantkootch…
what?
sports tv let you down?
politics as a sport
doens’t accomplish much
and maybe that is the take home point of this conversation
April 1, 2012 at 10:07 pm #753196
kootchmanMemberWell the democrats are playing “keep away”… and have been for three years. Even when they HAD control of the Senate AND the House… the Senate would not go on record with a proposed budget, hell they wounld’t even pass the presidential budget. Nothing. Like I said soo many posts ago…. in the heartland of American, there is a gathering, very angry populace. that Democrats in the liberal enclaves are so estranged from…You ignored the singing canaries. Now we start counting…. as you posted… the loud and obnoxious in a bar tend to get in fights? Just a little compromise was a “War on Women”… now you complain you are in a no quarter asked or given brawl.
April 1, 2012 at 10:11 pm #753197
kootchmanMemberSmitty… that high tech boom came from investors with capital to invest … private capital funded that hight tech boom. Capital, Obama thinks belongs in the hands of the Treasury and IRS… Amn oh man… what economic miracles can happen when investors have a reason to invest.
April 2, 2012 at 1:10 pm #753198
redblackParticipantkootch: the senate budget committee passed a FY 2011 budget resolution to the senate in april of 2010. republicans wouldn’t allow it to pass.
http://budget.senate.gov/democratic/index.cfm/markup-of-fy-2011-senate-budget-resolution
so you can stop with the 1100 days nonsense.
and after republicans insist that you cut cut cut, then you cut cut cut, then they kill it anyway, why bother marking up a budget resolution?
and it drives you guys nuts, doesn’t it?
therefore, i say, “rock on, kent conrad.”
April 2, 2012 at 3:18 pm #753199
JoBParticipantkootch…
“Capital, Obama thinks belongs in the hands of the Treasury and IRS.”
Isn’t it ironic…
Obama is asking for less from big business than Reagan did..
but he is THE ONE gutting our economy by demanding that businesses pay their lawful share of taxes
and gutting our economy by demanding that the Bush tax CUTS to the wealthy end
even though those tax cuts have not provided the financial stimulus that was promised…
is there nothing you think that Obama can’t do?
It seems to me that an all powerful Obama
who can move mountains and single-handedly change our financial future
might not be the image you want to project here…
that is if you expect whatever survives the Republican blood-fest to actually compete in the upcoming election :(
April 3, 2012 at 3:03 am #753200
jamminjMember“Obama is asking for less from big business than Reagan did..”
under Obama, the wealthiest pay less than Reagan, Nixon, or Eisenhower.
Top rates under Reagan, 50%. Obama wants to roll them back from 35% to 39.6%. As an aside, very few pays the maximum rate, the US effective corporate tax rate is one of the lowest in the world.
April 3, 2012 at 3:19 am #753201
jamminjMemberObama Budget
Dept Agriculture: 4.8 percent increase
Dept Commerce: 15.6 percent increase
Dept Defense: 4 percent DECREASE
Dept Education: 52 percent DECREASE
Dept Energy: 41 percent increase
EPA: 2.1 percent DECREASE
Health Services: 3.7 percent increase
Homeland Security: 5.4 percent DECREASE
HUD: 21.3 percent decrease
Dept Interior: 2.1 percent DECREASE
DOJ: 15.3 percent DECREASE
DOL: 35.7 percent DECREASE
NASA: 0.3 percent DECREASE
State Dept: 13.8 percent increase
DOT: 39.4 percent DECREASE
Dept Treasury: 0.8 percent DECREASE
VA: 10.6 percent increase
-88.9 percent budget.
detractors, slash away on what you think is better.
April 3, 2012 at 3:26 am #753202
jamminjMember“Bush tax CUTS to the wealthy”
Extending the (Obama) Bush tax cuts from 2013 through 2022 would cost $5.4 trillion.
April 3, 2012 at 3:31 am #753203
jamminjMemberInteresting article from the Christian Science Monitor, you know, the same Christians that want to be involved in my wife’s uterus.
“Extending tax cuts for the rich is highly inefficient. Tax cuts for the wealthy are costly, and simply not an effective way to grow the economy.”
April 4, 2012 at 9:21 pm #753204
CaduceusMemberI’ll just leave this here.
Paul Ryan’s response.
From my albeit ignorant take the largest problem I see is that no one is talking about what else is in the budget. If it’s reducing things to “pre-Obama” as Paul Ryan says..; what about Discretionary spending? All people are talking about is how much the GOP hates old people (obviously this isn’t the case). And I want to also know what would happen to gov jobs, employment projects, defense budget etc
Edit; Just got some googling done and discovered that Ryan is presumably a laissez faire capitalist. Which makes me a little less obligated to take a stab at “fairness” or being too modest with doubt…
April 5, 2012 at 7:00 pm #753205
kootchmanMemberDo you actually read the proposals? Ryan says nothing will change for those 55 years or older.
Here it is folks in a nutshell.
You can’t balance the budget unless you make reform to entitlements. I am sorry all these federal programs got so bloated and out of control. Raising the marginal tax rates of the top 10% per cent isn’t going to do the job. There isn’t enough money there. Tax rates at 16% of GDP and spending at 24% of GDP isn’t sustainable. Ands hell NO we are not going to raise taxes to 25% of GDP either.
So what is the “progressive” plan to balance the budget, eliminate the deficit? You can’t ignore it forever or we will have to make Medicaire cuts and SS cuts that will affect current seniors .. and cap Medicare spending at flu shots and nothing near the service levels we have know. When are you going to let the younger generations off the debt hook so they can prosper?
April 6, 2012 at 1:06 pm #753206
redblackParticipantRyan says nothing will change for those 55 years or older.
but i’m under 55, and i’ve been paying into medicare for 25 years. i guess i don’t count, huh? i have to do with less than my parents, huh? my country is doing less for its citizens now, thanks to republican austerity.
yeah. thanks, but no thanks.
leave medicare alone, and make paul ryan give up his lifetime of free taxpayer-funded health care and pension benefits.
Ands hell NO we are not going to raise taxes to 25% of GDP either.
by hook or by crook, we will.
they’re going to pay back what they stole.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.