Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 09-15-2009, 04:40 PM
 
Location: Here
11,574 posts, read 13,896,824 times
Reputation: 6978

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boompa View Post
Why bother, they are nothing even if they had 100,000 there were more people at Ohio State or Michigans Football Games. Let them whine
It sure seems to matter to you as you've made this same argument about 4 times now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-15-2009, 04:41 PM
 
Location: Over There
5,094 posts, read 5,423,546 times
Reputation: 1208
Quote:
Originally Posted by compJockey View Post
You railed against the bush tax cuts?
No not all of them. Some yes.

Quote:
And his stimulus packages?
YES Hated it !!!

Quote:
And his war with Iraq?
Yes did not think the time was right although and being completely honest not in the beginning it took me about 6 months to realize ti was a dumb thing to do.

Quote:
And his medicare modernization act?
Can not comment becaue I am not fully versed on it.

Quote:
Did you complain about Reagan's tax increase (not imaginary, and the largest in history)?
And against Reagan's massive spending?
Well to be honest I was to young to rail against anything. The first President I ever voted for was Clinton during his first run.

Quote:
Fine, then perhaps you are not as much of a hypocrite as these uninformed tea party protesters you try to defend.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2009, 04:47 PM
 
2,661 posts, read 2,894,957 times
Reputation: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcadca View Post
Ok hold up you just added the last part.

Obama 2010 budget:

Bush 2008 Budget:

Now one MAJOR factor in Obama increase seemingly being on the small side is because in 2010 Bush's tax cuts will expire. It is NOT because Obama has done anything to limit spending.
See, the problem is you comment on things you don't fully understand.

Obama's budget includes the TARP money (enacted before he was in office).
Obama's budget includes the cost of the wars (Bush had it in emergency spending - it did not count toward the deficit)
Obama's budget banned several accounting tricks that the previous administration used to make the deficit appear smaller.

If you are really interested in learning about the budget, you can look at the last two budgets and at what has changed.

Last bush budget
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy...get/tables.pdf

Obama's first
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy...et/summary.pdf
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2009, 05:50 PM
 
Location: Over There
5,094 posts, read 5,423,546 times
Reputation: 1208
Quote:
Originally Posted by compJockey View Post
See, the problem is you comment on things you don't fully understand.

Obama's budget includes the TARP money (enacted before he was in office).
Obama's budget includes the cost of the wars (Bush had it in emergency spending - it did not count toward the deficit)
Obama's budget banned several accounting tricks that the previous administration used to make the deficit appear smaller.

If you are really interested in learning about the budget, you can look at the last two budgets and at what has changed.

Last bush budget
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy...get/tables.pdf

Obama's first
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy...et/summary.pdf

No I do understand. One of the biggest problems is that in the links you posted Bush's Budget is COMPLETE so there are things added in that could not be foreseen. Example Natural disasters. Also Bush's budget shown here has ACTUAL spending which is almost always higher then proposed spending so since Obama's PROPOSED budget has not actually happen you can not compare the two. Once 2010 is complete and we see what is ACTUALLY spent then you can compare but until then it is like comparing apples to oranges.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2009, 06:06 PM
 
2,661 posts, read 2,894,957 times
Reputation: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcadca View Post
No I do understand. One of the biggest problems is that in the links you posted Bush's Budget is COMPLETE so there are things added in that could not be foreseen. Example Natural disasters.
Also Bush's budget shown here has ACTUAL spending which is almost always higher then proposed spending so since Obama's PROPOSED budget has not actually happen you can not compare the two. Once 2010 is complete and we see what is ACTUALLY spent then you can compare but until then it is like comparing apples to oranges.
You do not understand - its not even close to understanding either.

That Bush budget is his projected costs - just as the Obama budget is.
It is not a year-end summary for Bush, it is the budget produced at the beginning of the year.

Here, first.
Fiscal year - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Make certain you understand that.

How exactly is Bush's budget COMPLETE by leaving off natural disaster relief?
That IS included in Obama's budget.

Maybe we'll come in under budget for once if that disaster relief isn't used?
Oh, wait.
We already have actually, when that 250 billion our current administration set aside for additional tarp funds didn't get used.

TARP is included in Obama's budget - not Bush's, despite bush signing it into law (see Fiscal year).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2009, 06:48 PM
 
1,340 posts, read 2,795,275 times
Reputation: 768
The SE + SW areas of the US have been considered the most benighted areas of the developed world,worldwide, for well over a century.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2009, 07:43 PM
 
Location: Way on the outskirts of LA LA land.
3,051 posts, read 11,562,965 times
Reputation: 1967
Quote:
Originally Posted by compJockey View Post
Its based on lies.
He suggests an exchange, with private insurance companies.
And some mechanism of keeping insurance companies honest (so they discontinue ripping off americans), of which the option is one possible solution. Outlawing pre-existing conditions as well.
The "Obama" plan has been short on details. What has been seen is the proposal by the House. The details looked pretty scary to me, and, if passed, would eventually put everyone under the government health plan umbrella. The notion that we could keep our existing coverage would only go so far as the employers would be willing to take it. With taxpayers subsidizing the government plan, the "private" plans would not be able to compete, and we would quickly lose that coverage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by compJockey View Post
I've addressed your tax comment.
If you are employed, you are being taxed less.
This is a fact.
All you pointed out was a reduction in withholding. That is not the same thing as a tax cut. I can change my withholding any time I want by filing a new W-4 with my employer. The rubber doesn't meet the road until I file my taxes and see the end result.

Quote:
Originally Posted by compJockey View Post
What liberties have you lost?
What freedoms have you lost?
What proposals? Can you name 2 or 3?
Proposals and other Obama supported legislation: GM/Chrysler Bailout, Bank Bailout, Stimulus 2, Cap and Trade, Nationalized Health care, and the 2009 Omnibus Public Land Management Act for starters. All of these add to the tax burden that must be shared by all Americans, limiting the freedom we have to use our own money as we see fit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2009, 07:49 PM
 
Location: Way on the outskirts of LA LA land.
3,051 posts, read 11,562,965 times
Reputation: 1967
Quote:
Originally Posted by Donna7 View Post
Can you imagine that? The neo-cons and right-wingers will kill themselves before they allow that to happen and they'll take us all with them because we all know that it's their way or the highway. If we didn't know it before, we surely know it now. God forbid that they actually respect the democratic process in this country and the voice of the people which spoke loud and clear when Obama was elected by the MAJORITY of this country. That means zilcho squat to them. They've been major pains in the b*tt since Obama was elected last Fall and they haven't let up yet. To top if all off, the Queen Bee, Sarah Palin, has come out to mix with her peeps and rile them up even more.
First of all, Obama was not elected by a majority of this country. He was elected by a slim majority of those who voted. There is a difference. Close to half of those that voted also spoke loudly, saying "No." It was nowhere near a landslide.

Speaking of p.i.t.b.s, there were plenty of them around for the prior eight years, too. They also did not let up. What's the point?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2009, 07:54 PM
 
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ
17,531 posts, read 24,607,807 times
Reputation: 9975
Quote:
Originally Posted by 01Snake View Post
It sure seems to matter to you as you've made this same argument about 4 times now.
Excuuuuse Me,I'm sorry no one showed up and it fizzled
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-15-2009, 08:42 PM
 
2,661 posts, read 2,894,957 times
Reputation: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdavid93225 View Post
The "Obama" plan has been short on details. What has been seen is the proposal by the House. The details looked pretty scary to me, and, if passed, would eventually put everyone under the government health plan umbrella.
I'm sure you have an example of these scary details?
End of life counseling perhaps?

Quote:
Proposals and other Obama supported legislation: GM/Chrysler Bailout, Bank Bailout, Stimulus 2, Cap and Trade, Nationalized Health care, and the 2009 Omnibus Public Land Management Act for starters. All of these add to the tax burden that must be shared by all Americans, limiting the freedom we have to use our own money as we see fit.
1. We were supporting the auto companies long before Obama was elected. Last summer, for example. Bush signed the auto bailout in December. I'm glad he did
2. Bank bailout was also signed into law by Bush. Obama did set aside $250 billion in case it was needed - but it was not. The deficit is $250 billion less than what was initially projected (using Obama's budget)
3. Stimulus is half the cost of the bush tax cuts
4. Health care is expected to cost less than the medicare modernization act
5. The omnibus bill was leftover from the previous year.

Your list has one legitimate element - the stimulus.
CBO expects GDP to increase by close to 10% over 3 years as a result of the stimulus, providing millions of jobs.

And potentially one other - healthcare reform, which will not add to the deficit, but will keep down costs and help prevent health care related bankruptcies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top