Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: So now what?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: So now what? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: So now what? - 1/20/2010 9:02:43 PM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline
Ask Scott Brown.

I believe he prefers to cut spending, so thats probably the way we're going to go from here. I really doubt he'll let them raise the debt ceiling either...  but we'll see. They might peel off another Republican if things get really ugly, which I think things will.


quote:

ORIGINAL: thornhappy

When do all y'all think we'll finally raise taxes?







< Message edited by Sanity -- 1/20/2010 9:03:49 PM >

_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to thornhappy)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: So now what? - 1/21/2010 6:20:31 AM   
DomImus


Posts: 2004
Joined: 3/17/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thornhappy
When do all y'all think we'll finally raise taxes?


As soon as the Bush tax cuts sunset courtesy of President Obama we'll have an increase.

It just occurred to me this morning on my way home that I haven't seen an Obama bumper sticker on a car in months. There were quite a lot of folks sporting them about a year ago. Surely some folks bought new cars during the Cash for Clunkers scam but I can't remember the last time I saw an Obama bumper sticker and I drive the same roads with seemingly many of the same locals. I still see Bush/Cheney and W bumper stickers and some McCain/Palin ones.


_____________________________

"Regret for the things we did can be tempered by time; it is regret for the things we did not do that is inconsolable." Sidney J. harris

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: So now what? - 1/21/2010 6:47:48 AM   
Louve00


Posts: 1674
Joined: 2/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thornhappy

When do all y'all think we'll finally raise taxes?


hehe I've wondered the same thing myself.  I'm not saying anything negative here, but you know thats what Democrats do, right?

_____________________________

For the great majority of mankind are satisfied with appearance, as though they were realities and are often more influenced by the things that seem than by those that are. - Niccolo Machiavelli

(in reply to thornhappy)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: So now what? - 1/21/2010 7:56:38 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		So....

First we cut taxes, even though expenditures skyrocket.

Then we go back to paying for things as we already had been....and that's a "tax increase."



As for Congress trying it out---Congress already has a nice health plan. They like it. Let's expand it to include the rest of the nation.

Can you imagine the outcry from the right?

I'm sorry, folks. This is stalemate. And "back to the drawing board to do it right" is code for "delay it 'til it's dead."

And as for "making this about Republicans," I already noted in the OP that Democrats aren't likely to do anything now. Absolutely part of the problem.

But so are the clichés and sound bites repeated in this thread in various places. None of those help address any problem. They just perpetuate the status quo, a status quo that grows ever worse while we wrap ourselves in our pride and pretend that's all that's needed.

It's not.

(in reply to Louve00)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: So now what? - 1/21/2010 9:18:33 AM   
Thadius


Posts: 5091
Joined: 10/11/2005
Status: offline 		Tim,

Isn't that why the Senate was laid out the way it is? To allow hot topics to go and cool off with the "rational" debate and supposedly cooler heads that reside there. Unfortunately, that house has turned into a circle jerk, with everybody standing in a circle and pointing body parts at everybody else. Perhaps the only way to change the status quo, is to start organizing at the local level, electing common sense everyday folk, and thumbing our noses at the 2 major parties (unless they provide a candidate that is actually worth voting for).

I remember the messages I received during the last election cycle, about how I was wasting my vote by not voting for a D or an R. It seems the pendulum is finally swinging and folks are realizing that both parties represent the exact same thing, gaining more power and influence (not to mention money) for their financial backers and themselves; we the people be damned. We will get to see a very good example of how they tighten their grip after the census this year, the districts will get reorganized to maximize the number of registered partisan voters to favor whichever party is in power in a given state.

The government no longer fears the people, so now what? Sit back and complain about the status quo, or stand and make the powers that be in Washington understand that they work for us (not the other way around).

I honestly wonder how many folks actually believe that all 3 branches are still equal. It has been changing for many years, this is not something new, although some of the methods to grab power, or Congress just allowing it to slip away have gotten quite interesting under Bush and Obama.

In short I wouldn't be offended if there were 435 new Congressional Reps elected in Nov.

As always,
Thadius

_____________________________

When the character of a man is not clear to you, look at his friends." ~ Japanese Proverb

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: So now what? - 1/21/2010 10:01:00 AM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline 		FR

The debt limit increase is a knotty problem. If it isnt increased then there is probably no way to avoid defaulting on some portion of the debt, which is obviously not a tenable option on public debt. The expedient way to avoid defaulting on the public debt would be to defer obligations on intergovernmental holdings, ie renegotiating the loans from SS and Medicare. But that hastens their bankruptices unless repaid quickly. Its an option that very few would want to vote for if they face reelection this year.

So its virtually certain that the debt limit will be increased. The question is what kind of compromises will be reached on the way to passage. This is the time to demand mandatory across the board cuts in non-defense discretionary spending over the next 3 years. It is also time to repeal the 400 billion or so in TARP money that hasnt been distributed.

The conservatives have a real opporunity to reign in spending, unfortuately they will probably blow it.

(in reply to Thadius)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: So now what? - 1/21/2010 10:03:39 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		This is the time to reign in on and make dramatic cuts in defense spending as well.

And yah, dont matter what party, its gonna be blown.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: So now what? - 1/21/2010 10:57:14 AM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline 		A good start would be to admit mistakes, miscalculations, and being wrong. You can pick any number of issues. Funding the 2nd Bush Stimulus, closing Gitmo - "Today!", Czar appointments, the mess that is the TSA once again illustrating that whoever the Administration is using for vetting their nominations should be fired.

Yet - in the face of the first public referendum on this policies, the Senate election in Massachusetts, Obama still sees it as the ongoing frustration over the past 8 years. It can't be Obama - even blaming himself - he still can't let the buck stop there. The 'blame Bush' game-plan is still in play. It doesn't appear, after one year and the results to date, that Obama's narcissism has waned one bit.

quote:

So....

First we cut taxes, even though expenditures skyrocket.

Then we go back to paying for things as we already had been....and that's a "tax increase."


CUT - CUT - CUT Not taxes but expenditures. Take charity and entitlement out of the hands of taxpayers and put it back in the hands of charities as much as possible.

Start with the public employee staffing; freeze hiring and require each and every department to cut payroll by 20%. It will be their choice on how to accomplish that result. The department heads can either eliminate employees or negotiate the new salary levels with them, and/or their unions. It is occurring every day in the majority of private sector offices and businesses - it should also be happening in the public sector. Providing a fine example - all Senators and Congress members should take a 25% cut. I'm sure their PAC contributers would make up the difference anyway - but it would be nice gesture.

Announce loudly and publicly there will be no more bail outs. The US Government has neither the business savvy or ability to manage a business; let along turn around a failing business or industry. Every time they try they end up getting conned by the executive laughing all the way to their off shore banks to deposit their bonuses funded and guaranteed by tax dollars. Their stockholders were too smart to invest in them - the government was too dumb not to.

Let the dying die, the failures fail, without encumbering the living. Someone shouldn't be punished for their success by being taxed and incurring fees serving to keep the dying alive. Any intrinsic value in the dying entity would end up being transplanted to the survivors anyway.

Unlike any prior occurrence of economic meltdown there is no clear exit strategy. We can't go to war any more than we are. I know it won't happen, but I'm still inclined to immediate withdraw from both the Iraq and Afghanistan theaters and let the locals, and the EU deal with the results. Besides, I think it's China's turn in Afghanistan. It's already caused the failure of the USSR. The US is on the same path, if we don't get out. Let the budding China global presence deal with it.

This Administration has a big problem. One of the key weapons used by Reagan and Bush which had an immediate impact isn't available - interest rate cuts. Today the Fed Funds Rate is 0.25%. It's been that way for a year. Under normal circumstances every business should be borrowing and expanding. However, the bailouts used up all the money and eliminated too much liquidity from the purchasing consumers. There is no personal home equity to tap. There is no source of private funds strong enough to risk massive loan investment. If there were one - the current property values make it pragmatically impossible to do so.

You can track prior economic turn arounds by this one number. Taking office in 1981 the Fed Rate was 19.08%; by December the rate was 12.37%; come the November 1984 re-election it was 9.43%. The economy was 'turned' - Regan was the 'hero'. Through the 90's anytime Bush I, and Clinton wanted to pump up the economy, the rate continued to go down. It got really bad in 2001. After 9/11 it was used meaningfully for the last time. The Fed Rate was 3.65 in August 2001; by year end - it was 1.82 and falling. Link to Fed Fund Rate Tables

This is a big problem facing the Administration and the US. It's a huge handicap. You're the President; you can't go to war, you can't lower the cost of funds, you have 10%+ unemployment, you ran on a campaign of increasing entitlements - Have fun!

The only thing you can do is cut. You can get health care off the table and declare victory very easily; eliminate the prior condition exclusion, eliminate caps, eliminate State borders for acquiring customers. QED! The only people pissed would be the PACs and those who belief free health coverage is a right of citizenship.

Now what? None of that will happen. Business as usual, and I'll continue to live well and happy in 'Merc-Land'!

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: So now what? - 1/21/2010 11:33:05 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		If we're to cut, it's long past time to face reality and cut military spending. It's our greatest expenditure, several times what other nations spend (ALL other nations!), and ever growing.

When I hear people seriously approaching this, I'll start looking at them seriously.

Until then, it's all more talk, picking away at overall minor cents while ignoring major dollars.

Further--cutting alone ignores the considerable structural problems. As any long-term successful business or individual can relate, cost-cutting only goes so far. As an initial few steps--fine. As a long term solution? Not the case.

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: So now what? - 1/21/2010 11:37:42 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

You can track prior economic turn arounds by this one number. Taking office in 1981 the Fed Rate was 19.08%; by December the rate was 12.37%; come the November 1984 re-election it was 9.43%. The economy was 'turned' - Regan was the 'hero'. Through the 90's anytime Bush I, and Clinton wanted to pump up the economy, the rate continued to go down. It got really bad in 2001. After 9/11 it was used meaningfully for the last time. The Fed Rate was 3.65 in August 2001; by year end - it was 1.82 and falling.


This is a different issue, and deserves its own thread.

You've omitted some important points--the market crash in 1987, the ballooning deficit through the 80s, the high unemployment during the Bush I years--hardly a "turn."

What your figures do show is how we've repeatedly spent our way out of recessions with monetary policy. We did it twice again during Bush II. Now, rates are so low that there's nowhere to go, and we had to turn to fiscal policy.

But on the original issue--it's another example of short-term band-aids applied to long-term structural problems.

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: So now what? - 1/21/2010 12:16:09 PM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

What your figures do show is how we've repeatedly spent our way out of recessions with monetary policy. We did it twice again during Bush II. Now, rates are so low that there's nowhere to go, and we had to turn to fiscal policy.
These aren't my figures they are the Fed Rates for the times. I thought we were talking about now what. I provided the numbers to show why the current Administration can't use the same methods employed by EVERY President since the Reagan Administration came up with the idea. You want to make this about the 'Bad Republicans' go ahead. But "NOW" requires focus on now.

I see the current Fed Fund rate encumbering this Administration's potential moves. Similar to using the SS funds to pay bills. Who did it first, or why, isn't material to answering the question "now what?". However cutting rates, the "now what" answer used by every Administration since Reagan to stimulate the economy, can't be used.

Yes we have to turn to "fiscal policy". With no funds, existing revenue sources stretched to the maximum, and sources of new revenue limited; cuts in the only possible answer to "now what?".

quote:

Further--cutting alone ignores the considerable structural problems. As any long-term successful business or individual can relate, cost-cutting only goes so far. As an initial few steps--fine. As a long term solution? Not the case.

The status quo is a long term solution?

Your question was "now what" not "long term solution". Successful businesses initiate spending cuts all the time. They manage to have the ability to expand spending too. The long term solution businesses use, and have been using, is to manage the business under both scenarios.

The difference between business successes and the government is that the government never cuts. If a bureaucracy is in place - it, and their employees, never gets cut or dies; on the contrary they are expanded and become 'necessary'.

What "structural problems" would occur by intimating cuts that either doesn't exist now or would be created if there was a 20% across the board mandate? Why are government programs and public employees untouchable? Why can't they do, under this economy, the exact things being done by every company operating in this economy today?

It won't work long term - it's not meant to. However it is the only action that would have an impact 'now'. What happens tomorrow? Well, I just got off the phone discussing a $50 Million LOC. When we discussed one of the 'worst case' scenario covenants we both agreed that if it comes to that - we'll be fighting over water, not repayment of a loan. Right now - cut; when the positive impact is realized hopefully we'll have people in place that will direct spending a bit more pragmatically and not so influenced by PACs, 'good intent', and special interests. If there is no positive impact - well, we'll all be fighting over water.

We do have common ground. Eliminating the expenditure for Afghanistan and Iraq would be my first move. Considering the past - that point of agreement shouldn't be lost. We have a second point of agreement. I've not heard one voice of advocating for cuts or reviewing our military expenditures.

< Message edited by Mercnbeth -- 1/21/2010 12:47:45 PM >

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: So now what? - 1/21/2010 12:25:39 PM   
Marc2b


Posts: 6660
Joined: 8/7/2006
Status: offline 		Here's a radical idea: the Federal government should stop interfering in health care all together. It's not their problem. Let the States handle it the way they want to.

_____________________________

Do you know what the most awesome thing about being an Atheist is? You're not required to hate anybody!

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: So now what? - 1/21/2010 12:35:20 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		Marc,

That's the status quo that's unsustainable.

Except in Massachusetts.

(in reply to Marc2b)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: So now what? - 1/21/2010 12:57:12 PM   
Marc2b


Posts: 6660
Joined: 8/7/2006
Status: offline
quote:

Marc,

That's the status quo that's unsustainable.

Except in Massachusetts.


It is not the status quo. It hasn't even been tried. Everybody thinks our problems have to be solved at the national level so the States don't even bother anymore. People would have an easier time getting the type of health care system they want if they only had to work at the State level.

You live in New York. You have a certain idea in mind of what kind of health care system we should have. Wouldn't it be eaiser to convince a majority of your fellow New Yorkers, rather than a majority of your fellow Americans? Why should anyone in Texas have any say over health care in New York? Or vice-versa?

_____________________________

Do you know what the most awesome thing about being an Atheist is? You're not required to hate anybody!

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: So now what? - 1/21/2010 1:13:30 PM   
Silence8


Posts: 833
Joined: 11/2/2009
Status: offline 		I think the American people have seen, for the first time in a while, the true face of Democrats relative to Republicans. The question remains how make public opinion reflect itself in public policy. Two primary options: 1) support new third parties 2) support independents within the Democratic party.


(in reply to Marc2b)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: So now what? - 1/21/2010 8:53:24 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

So the bill is dead. Now what?



Maybe I've seen too many Jason Vorhees and Michael Myers movies.  I'm not buying booze for the wake just yet, Muse.  Even if this bill goes down, it might have an evil twin lurking in a shadowy corner.

Now what?  Maybe bipartisanship.  It also might present a golden opportunity for one of those social conservative/fiscal liberal Huckabee-type Republicans to really step up and shine.  The Dems have done a piss-poor job of selling healthcare reform to the people who are happy with what they have.  Sold differently, maybe by someone with business experience instead of handout experience, some actual reform could be achieved.



_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.


(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: So now what? - 1/22/2010 9:10:46 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		I dunno, Rich.

You've got a group on the right who gleefully announced from the beginning their mission was to kill it as a way to bring down Obama. Not a promising start.

Add to that "health care reform" proposals that amount to circumventing state insurance regulation.

Then look at no attempts to change and amend otherwise, but to delay delay delay.

Back to the drawing board is just more delay. They've opposed it for years, and all that's changed is the soundbite from day to day.

I agree the Dems handled the sales job poorly. The right also spread tons of misinformation...again, not exactly the sign of a good faith effort.

And now the Dems will cower, leery of November. It's over. When will we even have a Congress again willing to pick up the issue?

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: So now what? - 1/22/2010 3:59:25 PM   
subtee


Posts: 5133
Joined: 7/26/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

And now the Dems will cower, leery of November. It's over. When will we even have a Congress again willing to pick up the issue?
[snip]

And for this, I think they should scrap it. The ramifications of this "compromise" will damage much more than health care, in my opinion.



_____________________________

Don't believe everything you think...

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: So now what? - 1/22/2010 4:03:50 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		The problem though, subtee, is that the current situation is unsustainable, and we'll simply go on pretending it doesn't exist.

(in reply to subtee)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: So now what? - 1/22/2010 4:10:28 PM   
subtee


Posts: 5133
Joined: 7/26/2007
Status: offline 		It will have to be unsustainable. People will suffer. And when it's his Grandmother and her aged Father, it will again become imperative. Until then, there is no way to salvage an idea of meaningful change and without that, all Obama and the dems show is that they can't make anything happen. It seems to me there is too much left that must happen. This horse is dead and no one has won but propagandists. I wonder that they don't worry what history will say about their obstruction, but I can't get my head around anything they say, much less what they (don't) do.

_____________________________

Don't believe everything you think...

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: So now what? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.098