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.
Err, he did embrace the idea of it and like many, wanted to pursue developing specifics. Short memory I guess.
Bob, study the news of the last few days a little more closely, and read the transcripts of his press conferences again. He "embraced" it warmly to get Boehner back to the table, but that was evidently a trick: the "corporate jet owners" and "the rich" featured prominently in his remarks after the Boehner walked. Gang-of-Six and Simpson-Bowles were NOT about higher marginal income tax rates, or corporate jet owners.
As for the specifics he wanted to pursue, in the phrase "reduce top tax rates" he specifically wanted to substitute the word "Increase" to replace "reduce."
I know you are a thoughtful person, but I am afraid you have fallen for the spin as Obama intended. His "embrace" of Gang of Six principles was a fig leaf to cover his rejection of the centrist position.
Err, he did embrace the idea of it and like many, wanted to pursue developing specifics. Short memory I guess.
Bob, you will have a clearer mind about things if you realize that Obama lies. He is only interested in getting reelected. Since he can't do it on his record, he needs to convince people he is doing what is best for them. Unfortunately, the country has become so fractured, their beliefs on what is best varies so he is all over the place. That is why his lies are being discovered.
One group that he feels safe on throwing under the bus are millionaires and billionaires. Even that is deception as his definition of a millionaire is a couple that makes more than $250,000 annually. I am sure you feel that anyone that makes more than you should pay for everything but the fact is, he isn't even straight with American's on who he is going after.
It has been shown many times that over-taxing this group (even to the point of a 100% tax on income over $250,000) doesn't come close to our deficit spending, he will then have to lower the bar.
Bob, study the news of the last few days a little more closely, and read the transcripts of his press conferences again. He "embraced" it warmly to get Boehner back to the table, but that was evidently a trick: the "corporate jet owners" and "the rich" featured prominently in his remarks after the Boehner walked. Gang-of-Six and Simpson-Bowles were NOT about higher marginal income tax rates, or corporate jet owners.
As for the specifics he wanted to pursue, in the phrase "reduce top tax rates" he specifically wanted to substitute the word "Increase" to replace "reduce."
I know you are a thoughtful person, but I am afraid you have fallen for the spin as Obama intended. His "embrace" of Gang of Six principles was a fig leaf to cover his rejection of the centrist position.
Well Nancy Pelosi will lose her Corporate JET credit for all those flights back home ...she is shedding more tears than Boenher pealing onions.
Err, he did embrace the idea of it and like many, wanted to pursue developing specifics. Short memory I guess.
You must have a short memory because Obama did not REALLY embrace it... he said so but behind the scenes, he demanded an ADDITION that killed the deal and would NOT budge on it... everyone else was okay with the plan but NOT Obama even though he "said" publicly he was... the plan went nowhere BECAUSE of Obama...
I love all these headlines before ANY deal is sealed, before ANY details and specifics are out.
The Left loves doing this so that when things go wrong, they can point to deals that never were and "winning" headlines to proclaim it is all the GOP's fault.
Apparently obama nixed a bipartisan, short term debt deal....for politics.
Wow are you guys all wealthy retirees! I am glad you're happy. Unfortunately in the short term, there will probably be more unemployment and deflation (I was wrong about inflation, I now believe) in the US. Sadly, even with lower prices, the "average American" still won't be able to afford the goods.
Entities who have variable rates of credit (credit cards, lines of credit) or who rely on credit to make large purchases will have to do without the items such as cars, electronics and houses. Those guys may also have to pay higher interest rates. Interest rates can get as high as 50% or higher. It has happened in other countries, if I am not mistaken.
While people without unique skills, connections or even advanced education may have been able to make very high salaries in the US in the past couple of decades, that's probably a phenomenon of the past. I predict the US will start to resemble modern day Mexico: Large lower class vs small extremely wealthy upper class...high unemployment...scarcity of goods.
I guess an extremely wealthy and powerful upper class may seem nice...but those guys seem to produce offspring like Paris Hilton and the heiress who married Tila Tequila LOL. Also, the Republicans spent a lot of our money themselves to get us into massive debt... Nevertheless, the ones who do not want to raise taxes on "job creators" may have won...
I'm not sure how this will play out in the rest of the world...China, for instance has a lot of consumers, and with low prices, they may buy more and make their region more prosperous...Perhaps India may suffer as US companies move their "IT" work to less expensive locations (not because they HAVE to, but to squeeze another penny of profit out)...but for people who live and work in America...average people...who have been able to get jobs and buy things...up til now...It's not looking so great.
Sadly, while I am in a better financial position than a lot of people, I'm not independently wealthy...so I can't really rejoice.
Big question is, do they know, or are they intent go be memorialized in History by the "Great Republican Depression" of 2011? Or, maybe "The Huge Norquist Boehner of 2011".
First of all, why would this be attached to republicans, do we no longer have a president? Are presidents. or at least this one, so inconsequential now, that the economy is no longer influenced by them?
You guys whine that 0bama inherited the economy from Bush, and yet the democrats controlled both houses of congress for the last two years under Bush!!! Why isn't this 0bama's economy, just because the republicans hold one house for seven months? Is 0bama that insignificant, is Reid that inept, are both men that inconsequential???
The dems can **** and whine all they want, they ran the complete show in Washington for two years; with plenty of clowns, geeks and bearded women. The dems had two years and never passed a budget, never bothered to tackle the inevitable debt crisis; and even now Reid has not passed a budget. So here we are at the nth hour..... and still no plan in writing from the democrats, that can be scored by the CBO, or passed by the house.
The republican congress sent two bills to the democratic controlled senate, and they refused to event debate, amend, pass, or offer any plan, in writing, related to the debt or budget.
Edit: You want bipartisanship!! The cap, cut and balance bill that the congress just sent to the senate was bipartisan, so how about Reid debate it in open session.
We will witness the 0bama depression, he is the president after all. Or is this another new historic event we can hand 0bama, where the president no longer leads the nation, and is no longer the steward of the economy?
The Republicans have not yet won. They are, however, trying to destroy Obama, at the risk of destroying America.
It will not happen.
Why would the Republicans want to raise the debt ceiling twice; once now and then again before the 2012 elections? Why would the Republicans want to go through this fight twice rather than come to an agreement on a long term, BALANCED bill? Why? Why?
Because they are more concerned about destroying President Obama than they are concerned with rebuilding and saving America.
_____ all republicans. And ____ to hell all teabaggers.
Obama talks about the rich and how we have to tax them.
Then you see plans described to the press and there's no tax on corporate jets..instead it's reduced tax deductions for the middle class and reduction in SS/medicare payments.
To boot, corporations are dealing with Schumer and Hagan to get their corporate taxes reduced.
What he says and what's produced in plans have a total disconnect.
But more will remember what he said because many don't bother reading these days.
The Republicans have not yet won. They are, however, trying to destroy Obama, at the risk of destroying America.
It will not happen.
Let me ask you, which political party has been running the nation for the past two years? Which party ran both houses of congress for the past four years?? The answer - DEMOCRATS!
We have not had a federal budget since 0bama took office!! This is why we have a debt crisis!!!
If the dems would have bothered to pass a budget when they were in control, and addressed the debt limit, we would have been able to avoid this current crisis. That is why we have budgets; to 'budget" the money coming in, with the spending that is going out. But the dems NEVER passed a budget, they just kept spending until our credit limit ran out. How reckless and irresponsible is that?
Do you think that is they way it supposed to be? That the previous congress spends so much money, that a few months into the next congressional term, our nation runs out of money??
If the democrats in congress would have written a budget plan the past two years, they would have seen that "Ooops our spending will exceed our debt limit in mid 2011". So why didn't they pass a budget to avert this, when they had super majorities?? It's not as if they were not aware that they were spending, printing and borrowing trillions of taxpayer dollars.
The democrats were the ones in control of writing the nations budget for the past FOUR years. But the dems did NOTHING, which is why we are in a crisis today. So stop trying to blame the republicans. If the dems would have passed a budget, our nation would be operating within a budget, and not running around like chickens with our heads cut off.
This is a debt crisis created by democrats!! And wankers like you are complaining that... after four years of democratic party control... the republicans have not gotten us out of it, and saved us from the democrats, in a mere seven months. Keep in mind, there is a bipartisan bill in the senate, sent there by the congress. Reid will not bring it to the floor, will not go thru the amendment and reconciliation process... which is his job. Why? Why?
Don't you think it odd, that the democratic congress did not worry about the looming debt ceiling until the republicans took control? Did this whole "we are gonna hit the debt ceiling" realization escape the democrats while they were in complete and utter control for two years????
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecovlke
Why would the Republicans want to raise the debt ceiling twice; once now and then again before the 2012 elections? Why would the Republicans want to go through this fight twice rather than come to an agreement on a long term, BALANCED bill? Why? Why?
The republicans already sent two budget bills to the senate, the last one was a bipartisan budget bill. Harry Reid can amend the snot out of that bill, strip out whatever he does not like, and send it to the congress, and they can both agree to hammer out a bill. But Harry refuses to do so, he refuses to. Why? Why?
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.
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.
I am glad you're happy. Unfortunately in the short term, there will probably be more unemployment and deflation (I was wrong about inflation, I now believe) in the US. Sadly, even with lower prices, the "average American" still won't be able to afford the goods. 
So stop trying to blame the republicans. If the dems would have passed a budget, our nation would be operating within a budget, and not running around like chickens with our heads cut off.
Keep in mind, there is a bipartisan bill in the senate, sent there by the congress. Reid will not bring it to the floor, will not go thru the amendment and reconciliation process... which is his job. Why? Why?
