Bipartisan effort... for some.

Bipartisan effort... for some. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

tazzygirl -> Bipartisan effort... for some. (3/15/2011 7:32:09 PM)
The House has passed a stopgap measure to continue funding the federal government until April 8, with over 50 Republicans bucking their leadership to oppose the three-week spending bill. Fifty-four Republicans – more than many observers expected -- voted against the continuing resolution, which GOP critics said demonstrated a lack of seriousness about solving the nation’s long-term budget woes. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/03/15/6274913-54-gopers-buck-leaders-as-short-term-budget-bill-passes-house?GT1=43001

Sanity -> RE: Bipartisan effort... for some. (3/15/2011 7:41:24 PM)
Why is it that to a Dem "bipartisan" always means my way or the highway. These Republicans werent swept into office last fall to continue the historically high Dem spending, they were sent there to seriously trim deficits. This 'continuing resolution' isnt a budget, Congress is supposed to pass budgets, thats part of their job.

tazzygirl -> RE: Bipartisan effort... for some. (3/15/2011 7:45:08 PM)
So, in your world, its supposed to be an immediate solution to a problem that has been around for decades. And, in this attempt, its perfectly ok to shut down the federal government while both sides butt heads. I think the message that was sent in this vote is important Arent enough people out of work without adding more?

Sanity -> RE: Bipartisan effort... for some. (3/15/2011 7:48:37 PM)
Their job is to make tough decisions, not to keep putting them off forever. How long has it been now since Congress passed an actual budget?

tazzygirl -> RE: Bipartisan effort... for some. (3/15/2011 8:03:52 PM)
How long has it been since we actually had a balanced budget? ...... 1957 Now, do you really want to look into the history of stopgag measures for the federal budget?

Sanity -> RE: Bipartisan effort... for some. (3/15/2011 8:15:05 PM)
No, no, no, since Congress passed a budget. You know, the president proposes a budget then Congress hammers one out? Has it been so long youve forgotten what one is? quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl How long has it been since we actually had a balanced budget? ...... 1957 Now, do you really want to look into the history of stopgag measures for the federal budget?

tazzygirl -> RE: Bipartisan effort... for some. (3/15/2011 9:11:29 PM)
No new budget in 2010. A CR was passed. So a budget was in place. Now, why cant Congress seem to pass a budget?

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Bipartisan effort... for some. (3/15/2011 9:12:21 PM)
Harry Reid doesnt want a budget vote because it will bring up Ocare defunding. But the Dems will be blamed if there is a shutdown because of the Senate. Ye olde rock and hard place.

fmfclwu -> RE: Bipartisan effort... for some. (3/15/2011 9:27:10 PM)
http://blogs.ajc.com/mike-luckovich/files/2011/02/mike02162011.jpg I guess there's no images here? Anyways, the real ways to be serious about reducing the deficit are health care and taxes. Health care now eats 1/6 of our GDP without giving us better results than most countries who spend well less than half of what we do. The employer-based model of health insurance in the U.S. is the worst possible setup - we cannot rely on the market to control costs when the consumers are isolated from the costs. We also need to fix all the tax loopholes that have been added over the years. The top 400 wealthiest Americans, who control more wealth than the bottom 60% of Americans COMBINED, payed an effective tax rate of 16.6% (as of 2007) because of all the loopholes set up for the rich. When Bill Gates has a lower tax rate than his secretary, something needs to change.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Bipartisan effort... for some. (3/15/2011 10:00:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: fmfclwu http://blogs.ajc.com/mike-luckovich/files/2011/02/mike02162011.jpg I guess there's no images here? Anyways, the real ways to be serious about reducing the deficit are health care and taxes. Health care now eats 1/6 of our GDP without giving us better results than most countries who spend well less than half of what we do. The employer-based model of health insurance in the U.S. is the worst possible setup - we cannot rely on the market to control costs when the consumers are isolated from the costs. We also need to fix all the tax loopholes that have been added over the years. The top 400 wealthiest Americans, who control more wealth than the bottom 60% of Americans COMBINED, payed an effective tax rate of 16.6% (as of 2007) because of all the loopholes set up for the rich. When Bill Gates has a lower tax rate than his secretary, something needs to change. Paragraph 1 A+ Paragrapy 2 D- The capital gains tax rate is not a "loophole", and is the reason for low effective tax rates among the wealthiest individuals. It is critical to keep them investing. It is the primary reason that Clinton came close to balancing the budget. There are virtually no other "loopholes" for individuals. And dont buy the bullshit you read about them having a lower effective tax rates than their "secretaries". The top 400 have an effective tax rate of around 17.5%. A $50k earner taking only standard deductions has an effective tax rate around 5%. At 75k its around 8%. At 200k with fairly typical itemized deductions its around 15%.

rulemylife -> RE: Bipartisan effort... for some. (3/15/2011 11:01:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: fmfclwu http://blogs.ajc.com/mike-luckovich/files/2011/02/mike02162011.jpg I guess there's no images here? Anyways, the real ways to be serious about reducing the deficit are health care and taxes. Health care now eats 1/6 of our GDP without giving us better results than most countries who spend well less than half of what we do. The employer-based model of health insurance in the U.S. is the worst possible setup - we cannot rely on the market to control costs when the consumers are isolated from the costs. We also need to fix all the tax loopholes that have been added over the years. The top 400 wealthiest Americans, who control more wealth than the bottom 60% of Americans COMBINED, payed an effective tax rate of 16.6% (as of 2007) because of all the loopholes set up for the rich. When Bill Gates has a lower tax rate than his secretary, something needs to change. Paragraph 1 A+ Paragrapy 2 D- The capital gains tax rate is not a "loophole", and is the reason for low effective tax rates among the wealthiest individuals. It is critical to keep them investing. It is the primary reason that Clinton came close to balancing the budget. There are virtually no other "loopholes" for individuals. And dont buy the bullshit you read about them having a lower effective tax rates than their "secretaries". The top 400 have an effective tax rate of around 17.5%. A $50k earner taking only standard deductions has an effective tax rate around 5%. At 75k its around 8%. At 200k with fairly typical itemized deductions its around 15%. Pulling more nonsense out of your ass Willbeur? Document your "effective tax rates" or stfu. Oh, and let's not forget this little gem. But hey, he's only Warren Buffet, and I'm quite sure your financial genius outshines his any day. Buffett blasts system that lets him pay less tax than secretary ... Mr Buffett said that he was taxed at 17.7 per cent on the $46 million he made last year, without trying to avoid paying higher taxes, while his secretary, who earned $60,000, was taxed at 30 per cent. Mr Buffett told his audience, which included John Mack, the chairman of Morgan Stanley, and Alan Patricof, the founder of the US branch of Apax Partners, that US government policy had accentuated a disparity of wealth that hurt the economy by stifling opportunity and motivation. Why Buffett pays less than his secretary - Conor Clarke - Politics ...

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Bipartisan effort... for some. (3/15/2011 11:18:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife Document your "effective tax rates" or stfu. ORLY. Before I do, why dont you tell us which ones you dispute.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Bipartisan effort... for some. (3/15/2011 11:38:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife Document your "effective tax rates" or stfu. ORLY. Before I do, why dont you tell us which ones you dispute. Well, its late and I dont have time to play gotcha with you. Since I said "around 17.5%", and your own link said Buffet paid 17.7% I'll assume youre not disputing that one. If you are theres a cute little graph of the top 400 that will verify that one. Now for his $60,000 secretary.... [image]local://upfiles/265074/2BDD0C29B7D548DABD0F36685C092505.jpg[/image] And thats worst case...no 401(k) withheld, standard deductions, single, no kids. 14.7% Throw in a kid and a 2,000 401(k) deduction and its 10.5%. so where did the 30% come from? Out of Buffets ass apparently.

truckinslave -> RE: Bipartisan effort... for some. (3/16/2011 6:22:04 AM)
I want them to write a balanced budget. I them to pass it. I want them to sign an oath on their lives, fortunes, and honor that they will not vote on anything save an honestly-scored balanced budget until such is signed into law. I want them to adjourn. Let Barry and Harry see if they can do more than dither and defend spending my tax dollars on fucking cowboy poetry. It only takes 218.

MrRodgers -> RE: Bipartisan effort... for some. (3/16/2011 8:32:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl How long has it been since we actually had a balanced budget? ...... 1957 Now, do you really want to look into the history of stopgag measures for the federal budget? Fiscal 2000 and in fact the last of 3 consecutive years...a surplus.

MrRodgers -> RE: Bipartisan effort... for some. (3/16/2011 8:36:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave I want them to write a balanced budget. I them to pass it. I want them to sign an oath on their lives, fortunes, and honor that they will not vote on anything save an honestly-scored balanced budget until such is signed into law. I want them to adjourn. Let Barry and Harry see if they can do more than dither and defend spending my tax dollars on fucking cowboy poetry. It only takes 218. Then we had better get the hell out of 2 wars and bring our military home...or you are dreaming. But then we could have enough to pay debt service on the next wall street welfare we will also have to borrow and then of course, the people could get smart...and become a farmer. Now there's a plan, 150 million farmers...all on the dole.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Bipartisan effort... for some. (3/16/2011 9:12:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl How long has it been since we actually had a balanced budget? ...... 1957 Now, do you really want to look into the history of stopgag measures for the federal budget? Fiscal 2000 and in fact the last of 3 consecutive years...a surplus. Wrong and its been discussed numerous times why thats wrong. Except of course for your novel claim that there were 3 consecutive years, which is a claim not even spinnable into surpluses like 2000 has been.

Bull5o -> RE: Bipartisan effort... for some. (3/16/2011 9:21:30 AM)
The interesting thing is if you look at the last time the united states had a truly balanced budget it was during the esienhower years. Actually a positive year. Just google to verify. The problem is we spend more then we take in. And with all the tax breaks it doesn't help the situtation. To break it down. A 17 percent flat tax on persons would work if they had a different rate for corporations. ( especially ones that do business in america and keep their headquarters. In more tax friendly countries.) I live and work in DC. Based on what I see with the lobbists their really isn't a different between the two parties. Republicans get alot of their money from pro business and the dens from labor. They pass bills that hose the middle incom since we are the biggest taxable group out there to support the people and groups that keep them in power.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Bipartisan effort... for some. (3/16/2011 9:24:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bull5o The interesting thing is if you look at the last time the united states had a truly balanced budget it was during the esienhower years. Actually a positive year. Just google to verify. The problem is we spend more then we take in. And with all the tax breaks it doesn't help the situtation. To break it down. A 17 percent flat tax on persons would work if they had a different rate for corporations. ( especially ones that do business in america and keep their headquarters. In more tax friendly countries.) I live and work in DC. Based on what I see with the lobbists their really isn't a different between the two parties. Republicans get alot of their money from pro business and the dens from labor. They pass bills that hose the middle incom since we are the biggest taxable group out there to support the people and groups that keep them in power. As I recall Obama outraised McCain from labor AND business. The difference was that business contributed to both, while labor barely spent anything on McCain.

Bull5o -> RE: Bipartisan effort... for some. (3/16/2011 9:27:20 AM)
The obama health bill isn't paid for anymore then the bush prescription plan. Its really quite simple the forfathers never wanted to borrow. Add a constitutional amendment that states the budget must be balanced in the same year the census is done. Ie every 10 except in time of war. Second eliminate all tax breaks. Third fully fund social security and medacare and eliminate the heathcare bill. I mean fully fund and don't let the congress touch the money ever again like the did with social security. Finally eliminate the income tax. And have a use tax. You use more you pay more. Period on everything. Inducing charities. That would eliminate mosques churches and all religeons from getting out of paying. Its not popular so it will never happen.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875