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.
Here you go all you Senior citizens who voted Republican. This is the thanks you get and there will be more where this came from!
Quote:
"I just stand here amazed at what just happened in the United States Senate, although I shouldn't be," Brown said. He contrasted Republicans' unwillingness to spend an estimated $13 billion to cover the one-time $250 bonuses for seniors with their insistence on extending Bush-era tax cuts that Brown said will cost $700 billion over ten years.
"Republicans said they didn't want to increase the nation's debt. George Voinovich, the Ohio Republican who is retiring this month, was among those voting no.
Voinovich spokeswoman Garrette Silverman said the senator voted no because the cost was not offset by savings or revenue elsewhere in the federal budget. "
At some point, somebody has to say no to something. We have too much debt.
If it was so important to the democrats, they could have come up with a way to offset the cost, but they ignore the paygo legislation that they passed.
"Republicans said they didn't want to increase the nation's debt. George Voinovich, the Ohio Republican who is retiring this month, was among those voting no.
Voinovich spokeswoman Garrette Silverman said the senator voted no because the cost was not offset by savings or revenue elsewhere in the federal budget. "
At some point, somebody has to say no to something. We have too much debt.
If it was so important to the democrats, they could have come up with a way to offset the cost, but they ignore the paygo legislation that they passed.
How about letting the tax cuts expire for those making over one million per year? Republicans are more concerned about the extremely wealthy than for our senior citizens who must live on fixed incomes. What a way to wish them a Merry Christmas.
How about letting the tax cuts expire for those making over one million per year? Republicans are more concerned about the extremely wealthy than for our senior citizens who must live on fixed incomes. What a way to wish them a Merry Christmas.
That's one option, but history tells us that each dollar of addional revenue is met with $1.17 in new spending, so that probably wouldn't solve the problem. A little restraint, courage, and sense would suggest finding areas to cut in our out of control spending.
That's one option, but history tells us that each dollar of addional revenue is met with $1.17 in new spending, so that probably wouldn't solve the problem. A little restraint, courage, and sense would suggest finding areas to cut in our out of control spending.
This extra $250 was probably budgeted to pay for Christmas for many seniors.
This extra $250 was probably budgeted to pay for Christmas for many seniors.
Spending money before its in your pocket or on a maybe is foolish at best. But then why shouldn't they? Our FED does it all the time.
As for raising taxes on a select group.
I can live with this if we also cut the same amount of spending that the tax hike is projected to generate.
For example: Tax hike will generate 1 billion in revenue. We should also cut an equal amount from our spending.
Tough times require tough choices. I have not seen either party introduce a bill that will lower their benefits or require them to contribute more. Its easy to spend other peoples money and easier still to talk about how others can afford it.
Going after the seniors? Talk about a low blow, looks like "get a job grandma" is coming sooner than later.
More like, "Hows that kitty food, Grandma?"
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.