kuzi16:ill be busy trying to figure out how a two month tax cut adds any certainty to the fragile jobs market.
Vulchor:Sorry, I know alot didnt want to see it----and I myself may regret brigning it up.....but it is the Holiday season, and in the spirit of the board here, what better way to celebrate that with a political b!tchfest...I mean discussion.Im waiting for the Fox Newsies and right winged dingbats I to start spouting off again how its the Dems (and especially Obama) fault they cant pass this Payroll extension, even though it passed overwhelmingly in the Senate with Republican support. So I am left to assume this is again the same tired diatribe of stading your ground, morals, oil pipelines....what is the reason this time that the left----and only the left-----is to be blamed?Granted my opinion is obviously bias here, but I know may responses, and all of what I hear on cable news, will be skewed the other way.......but I am really trying to put my head around how the Dems are the ones to blame on this one. Unless of course we just have to agree that all forms of compromise are now over.
Vulchor:That you Beat...I expected nothing less, or more;)There is always a side argument. If it doesnt get done, Obamas fault. If it onoy gets done for two month---its just stop gap to look good, Obamas fault. There is no appeasing either side here. The budget itself was a stop gap to avoid govt shut-down (which is a lie cause it really doesnt shut down, but thats neither here nor there) but something was done. Doing nothing is terrible, doing this is too little. But somehow its expected that a congress and president who cant get ANYTHING done, should now be charged with not enough compromise instead of AT LEAST starting somewhere. And yes I know...it is Obamas fault and he is one who ont compromise. A little for the anti-christ Pelosi too Im sureKuz, I dont believe this creates a job at all or does anything to that issue. However why you and I beleive (or at least I assume) jobs arent being created are for different reasons. Mine is not a PhD in economics theory, mine is simple skepticism and common sense. If you used to employ 10 people to do a job, and you HAD to downsize to 8 because of money I totally agree. However, when the money starts rolling back in and you realize you can continue to work those 8 harder that they should have to because youre making a greater profit-------and other businesses are doing the same, so the worker always has the fear of losing their job (which then means insurance, house, feeding the kids, ect)------then you dont create any new jobs do you? Im sure Ill get plenty about US Tax rates and that were are not competitive on a global scale, and while maybe that is true----save paying out workers 2 bucks an hour with no safety standards, I dont think the maufacturing or anything else is coming back any time soon----no matter the tax rate.
jasonusa1: Vulchor:That you Beat...I expected nothing less, or more;)There is always a side argument. If it doesnt get done, Obamas fault. If it onoy gets done for two month---its just stop gap to look good, Obamas fault. There is no appeasing either side here. The budget itself was a stop gap to avoid govt shut-down (which is a lie cause it really doesnt shut down, but thats neither here nor there) but something was done. Doing nothing is terrible, doing this is too little. But somehow its expected that a congress and president who cant get ANYTHING done, should now be charged with not enough compromise instead of AT LEAST starting somewhere. And yes I know...it is Obamas fault and he is one who ont compromise. A little for the anti-christ Pelosi too Im sureKuz, I dont believe this creates a job at all or does anything to that issue. However why you and I beleive (or at least I assume) jobs arent being created are for different reasons. Mine is not a PhD in economics theory, mine is simple skepticism and common sense. If you used to employ 10 people to do a job, and you HAD to downsize to 8 because of money I totally agree. However, when the money starts rolling back in and you realize you can continue to work those 8 harder that they should have to because youre making a greater profit-------and other businesses are doing the same, so the worker always has the fear of losing their job (which then means insurance, house, feeding the kids, ect)------then you dont create any new jobs do you? Im sure Ill get plenty about US Tax rates and that were are not competitive on a global scale, and while maybe that is true----save paying out workers 2 bucks an hour with no safety standards, I dont think the maufacturing or anything else is coming back any time soon----no matter the tax rate. So are you saying that the fault of this etc does not land at Obama's feet?
deejmemixx: jasonusa1: Vulchor:That you Beat...I expected nothing less, or more;)There is always a side argument. If it doesnt get done, Obamas fault. If it onoy gets done for two month---its just stop gap to look good, Obamas fault. There is no appeasing either side here. The budget itself was a stop gap to avoid govt shut-down (which is a lie cause it really doesnt shut down, but thats neither here nor there) but something was done. Doing nothing is terrible, doing this is too little. But somehow its expected that a congress and president who cant get ANYTHING done, should now be charged with not enough compromise instead of AT LEAST starting somewhere. And yes I know...it is Obamas fault and he is one who ont compromise. A little for the anti-christ Pelosi too Im sureKuz, I dont believe this creates a job at all or does anything to that issue. However why you and I beleive (or at least I assume) jobs arent being created are for different reasons. Mine is not a PhD in economics theory, mine is simple skepticism and common sense. If you used to employ 10 people to do a job, and you HAD to downsize to 8 because of money I totally agree. However, when the money starts rolling back in and you realize you can continue to work those 8 harder that they should have to because youre making a greater profit-------and other businesses are doing the same, so the worker always has the fear of losing their job (which then means insurance, house, feeding the kids, ect)------then you dont create any new jobs do you? Im sure Ill get plenty about US Tax rates and that were are not competitive on a global scale, and while maybe that is true----save paying out workers 2 bucks an hour with no safety standards, I dont think the maufacturing or anything else is coming back any time soon----no matter the tax rate. So are you saying that the fault of this etc does not land at Obama's feet?as the president...everything falls at his feet.
jasonusa1: deejmemixx: jasonusa1: Vulchor:That you Beat...I expected nothing less, or more;)There is always a side argument. If it doesnt get done, Obamas fault. If it onoy gets done for two month---its just stop gap to look good, Obamas fault. There is no appeasing either side here. The budget itself was a stop gap to avoid govt shut-down (which is a lie cause it really doesnt shut down, but thats neither here nor there) but something was done. Doing nothing is terrible, doing this is too little. But somehow its expected that a congress and president who cant get ANYTHING done, should now be charged with not enough compromise instead of AT LEAST starting somewhere. And yes I know...it is Obamas fault and he is one who ont compromise. A little for the anti-christ Pelosi too Im sureKuz, I dont believe this creates a job at all or does anything to that issue. However why you and I beleive (or at least I assume) jobs arent being created are for different reasons. Mine is not a PhD in economics theory, mine is simple skepticism and common sense. If you used to employ 10 people to do a job, and you HAD to downsize to 8 because of money I totally agree. However, when the money starts rolling back in and you realize you can continue to work those 8 harder that they should have to because youre making a greater profit-------and other businesses are doing the same, so the worker always has the fear of losing their job (which then means insurance, house, feeding the kids, ect)------then you dont create any new jobs do you? Im sure Ill get plenty about US Tax rates and that were are not competitive on a global scale, and while maybe that is true----save paying out workers 2 bucks an hour with no safety standards, I dont think the maufacturing or anything else is coming back any time soon----no matter the tax rate. So are you saying that the fault of this etc does not land at Obama's feet?as the president...everything falls at his feet. That's a given. Republican, Democrat.. it doesn't matter. Political affiliation aside it is his job to pull each side together and do what is best for the country and its citizens. I'm also not trying to be a ****, but one reason I particulary dislike 'political debates' like this is that they seem to begin, and continue, from an entirely biased position from one side or the other. Rather than discussing what could/should be done to better serve the people, these always seem to be a blame game. Would you be saying the same thing if Bush was in office making the same decisions? Or better yet, I'd be willing to bet you don't care for Lloyd Blankfein or Jaime Dimon either?
Teege:
beatnic:"Defaulting on our obligations is a reckless and irresponsible outcome to this debate. And Republican leaders say that they agree we must avoid default. But the new approach that Speaker Boehner unveiled today, which would temporarily extend the debt ceiling in exchange for spending cuts, would force us to once again face the threat of default just six months from now. In other words, it doesnt solve the problem. Barak Obama July 2011Now, he just wants 2 months? Splain that to me.
wwestern:Doesn't matter really.... this will result as does everything else the government does. Higher debt, your money becomes worth less, you will still not own anything that government can't take, and your "rights" will still be whatever they tell you they are. Best to just sit down and stfu before you're labeled a terrorist and indefinetly detained without a trial.... best case scenario at that point is torture with no rape.
Vulchor:Also, as far as discussing each sides plan Kuz----I think we could discuss that until we are "blue in the face" (Im full of the liners today) and it wouldnt make a difference. People, myself included, know each side's ideas. We know their reasons, their idealogy, their funders, their backers, points, their disagreements----and I, along with many others, just dont give a $h!t anymore. Both sides are afraid to do anything, and for the power and influence (and in turn money) they get for having their positions its a lot easier to do nothing than it is to do something. I am digusted quite a bit lately at the idea of a representative democracy, because to me that means respresenting the majorities opinion---but not at the cost of the minority totally. In short, compromise. A fragrence that no one seems to be wearing these days. Well, the Senate did yesterday for one vote anyway.
beatnic:"Frankly, given where the parties are, there's not a big difference between our positions," House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said a press event this morning. "It all comes down to the paid for, it's the budgetary impact of the extension of this tax holiday." "I saw the president out yesterday doing his Christmas shopping. I saw he brought his dog with him. You know, we're here. He could bring his dog up here. We are pet friendly. You know, again, it will not take a long time," Cantor said. "We could probably resolve the differences within an hour." Today, Speaker Boehner called President Obama to discuss the Speakers desire to provide a full year of tax relief for American families before December 31st. With Senator Reid having declined to call his Members back to Washington this week to join the House in negotiating a full-year extension of the payroll tax cut, the Speaker proposed that the President send members of his economic policy team up to Congress to find a way to accommodate the Presidents full-year request. The Speaker reiterated that if their shared goal is a one-year bill, there is no reason an agreement cannot be reached before years end. The President declined the Speakers offer. just following up. He never wanted a deal. He only wants an image.
wwestern:American politics has become alot like wrestling, sure they like to do lots of yelling and bullshit, but at the end of the day they're behind closed doors high fiving each other and chuckling about how much the rubes ate it up. I say Vince McMahon for president, then we could just turn this *** into pay per view and maybe ease up on some of these over burdening taxes. Maybe Triple H as sec. state.... he could run around doing the little X at the crotch thing he does "SUCK IT AHKMADENAJAD!" Speaker of the house.... no brainer here.... The Rock. Maybe a revenge match between Palin and that lady who got shot.
jj20030: i still dont belive it makes one shiaat who becomes president there is a group of men/people somewhere behind the curtain pulling the strings paying the lobbyist/ special intrest groups to further an agenda a chip at a time till one day everybody will say, " WHAT THE HELL HAPPEN ? "