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.
It would be naive to say we can cut spending without affecting anyone at all but the reality is that increased taxes won't help at all; it will simply further hurt the economy. Thus, you must look to spending.
Interesting. I imagine a similar logic is at work in Portland, OR where they are systematically destroying one of the finest, most highly regarded mass transit systems in the country. At issue is a 15M shortfall. Unfunded pension liabilities are also troubling to planners. Drivers have been given early retirement, fares are rising and the free rail zone eliminated. Entire bus routes have been eliminated and service on existing routes has been cut in half on many routes. Down to one bus an hour on weekdays on others. One can argue all day about the need for cuts but cuts to whom? The CEO of Trimet and the rest of the executive staff will not experience ANY disruption in the timely emplacement of their paychecks in their Direct Deposit accounts. The fact that they negotiated a planned expansion of the system and paid 12 Million dollars to a contractor who bailed on them will not be investigated. The fact that they bought 5 Million dollars worth of faulty light rail equipment will also go uninvestigated. In an "explanation" of the New World Order according to Trimet it is acknowledged that "many riders will simply be unable to afford mass transit after the new fare structure is in place... ..." Oh welll... I mean... really?? When even mass transit becomes unaffordable... ... time to shoot yourself in the head before things get any worse.
Increased taxes won't help at all? Are you ******** me? They surely will! Tax them. Tax them because they, not the average working stiff, are the ones that are responsible for the present state of things! That's why they are rioting in Europe. The rioters had nothing to do with the EU debt crisis but they are being asked to bend over and take one for the team and its a long one... they will be going hungry for the rest of their miserable lives as their governments try to save every dollar possible. And those savings will go straight into rich peoples offshore accounts. Tax them because it is the only sane option. America has the civilized worlds weakest social safety net. The vast majority of the casualties of the Great Recession are surviving because their parents are keeping them fed and watered. Waste is one thing, the cutting of services is quite another. The planned spending cuts do not address inefficiency and/or waste, but are simply cuts for cuts sake and if anything, spending should be increasing at this time!!
For 13 years I worked in a large agency that had thousands of employee's. There were numerous pregnancies and resulting absences of female workers. Maternity leave was two weeks paid and the rest, two months maximum unpaid. The women would usually get a shower organized and paid for by the other women. The gifts would come from the other women. Management did nothing. When one of the female managers got in the family way her shower was organized and paid for by the rank and file office women, her gifts were paid for by the pooled savings of the rank and file office staff. Her maternity leave was unlimited with options for job sharing with women of equivalent rank. The inequity of it galled me then and galls me now. Those who have the most to get them through a rough patch aren't asked to do anything to help out, and those who have the least to share are asked, no, not asked, simply told, to assume the entire burden of getting the country back on its feet. Is that sane?? I mean, forget about fair, I'm not a five year old. Is it sane?? I'm asking everyone, but especially you. You went there.
How odd that all you managed to remember is the relatively trivial stuff, most of which (like Obamacare and regulations) have nothing to do with the fiscal cliff, and managed to leave out sequestration.
It almost as if you are deliberately trying to misrepresent what is actually happening here.
Obama and the dems want sequestration to happen. Sequestration looks to be the only way to force this president to actually cut federal spending.
In 2010, Obama could have simply made the Bush tax rates permanent, the repubs would have gone along with that. Then Obama could propose a tax increase on "the rich" at a later date. Instead he only extended them, so he could create another crisis two years down the road, to give him an opportunity to jump on his soap box and claim to be our hero, and save us from himself.
Even the current tax policy proposal by Obama is only "an extension" of parts of the Bush tax rates. The guy simply refuses to add a modicum of stability in the nation's tax liability. He once again wants to create another ticking time bomb, for whenever this new tax policy expires, so he can once again jump on his soap box and tell the nation how he is going to save us from his own dumb ass polices.
What is the worst that would happen, if the Bush tax rates expire? We'd go back to Clinton tax rates, and you guys loved them.
Obama and the dems want sequestration to happen. Sequestration looks to be the only way to force this president to actually cut federal spending.
In 2010, Obama could have simply made the Bush tax rates permanent, the repubs would have gone along with that. Then Obama could propose a tax increase on "the rich" at a later date. Instead he only extended them, so he could create another crisis two years down the road, to give him an opportunity to jump on his soap box and claim to be our hero, and save us from himself.
Even the current tax policy proposal by Obama is only "an extension" of parts of the Bush tax rates. The guy simply refuses to add a modicum of stability in the nation's tax liability. He once again wants to create another ticking time bomb, for whenever this new tax policy expires, so he can once again jump on his soap box and tell the nation how he is going to save us from his own dumb ass polices.
What is the worst that would happen, if the Bush tax rates expire? We'd go back to Clinton tax rates, and you guys loved them.
So, republicans don't mind slashing defense to protect the elite. Thanks for clarifying where the GOPs bread is buttered.
Correct, because Obama agreed to keep it for two more years, instead of letting it expire. But since he agreed as a compromise, you blame him for keeping it?
I blame him for giving them a drop dead date in Jan 2013, with a lame duck congress and a potentially lame duck president, scrambling over the holidays to try and come to an agreement, in other words, to avoid exactly what we have today. If Obama cared so much about the lower and middle income Americans, he should have made them permanent, and then used his awesome leadership skills to push thru a tax increase on "the rich."
I blame him for giving them a drop dead date in Jan 2013, with a lame duck congress and a potentially lame duck president, scrambling over the holidays to try and come to an agreement, in other words, to avoid exactly what we have today. If Obama cared so much about the lower and middle income Americans, he should have made them permanent, and then used his awesome leadership skills to push thru a tax increase on "the rich."
Hey, you would blame him ANYWAY. So, people like you, obligated to do so, should be least of anybody's concerns.
Obama wants lower and middle income Americans to get the tax breaks (and so will people earning more than that, up to that cap). But since he must fight with your great people in congress who would jeopardize welfare of lower income groups, to protect that for the top earners, he doesn't care about the lower income people.
Now THAT is a GREAT example of "conservative" operating procedure.
I blame him for giving them a drop dead date in Jan 2013, with a lame duck congress and a potentially lame duck president, scrambling over the holidays to try and come to an agreement, in other words, to avoid exactly what we have today.
It does not appear that you have figured out the difference yet between the legislative and executive branches. Start here:
If Obama cared so much about the lower and middle income Americans, he should have made them permanent, and then used his awesome leadership skills to push thru a tax increase on "the rich."
Obama and the dems want sequestration to happen. Sequestration looks to be the only way to force this president to actually cut federal spending.
In 2010, Obama could have simply made the Bush tax rates permanent, the repubs would have gone along with that. Then Obama could propose a tax increase on "the rich" at a later date. Instead he only extended them, so he could create another crisis two years down the road, to give him an opportunity to jump on his soap box and claim to be our hero, and save us from himself.
Even the current tax policy proposal by Obama is only "an extension" of parts of the Bush tax rates. The guy simply refuses to add a modicum of stability in the nation's tax liability. He once again wants to create another ticking time bomb, for whenever this new tax policy expires, so he can once again jump on his soap box and tell the nation how he is going to save us from his own dumb ass polices.
What is the worst that would happen, if the Bush tax rates expire? We'd go back to Clinton tax rates, and you guys loved them.
Obama tried to make it permanent in 2010, the GOP filibustered it.
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.
