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.
Yes, America is deeply divided between net tax payers and net recipients.
Not really, because majority of voters in both parties pay into the system. Your view where democrats don't pay tax, and where republicans don't' receive welfare is pretty naïve.
Reid didn't even want to put it up for a vote on the basis that there was another bill that he felt would create more jobs. McConnell wanted to put it up for a vote, but Reid knew it wouldn't pass because some Democrats were against it. Some Democrats didn't like it because of the tax cuts. Republicans and Democrats alike found good parts in the bill, and bad parts in the bill. It was either Reid or Obama who said they would break the bill down. When the bill was broken down into different proposed legislation, the Democrats didn't have enough votes to pass it.
It was a big bill. It's easier to get pieces of big bills voted on.
Hint: Just because Obama says Republicans were the reason it didn't pass, you can be assured there is more to it.
It was just more about shoveling money to unions which give the money to Democrats. Why can't Obama deregulate, cut taxes, cut spending, cut the number of federal employees. That would boost job growth.
Basically instituting the American jobs act would have put several million Americans back to work fixing things like roads and bridges along with giving more work security to a wide range of professionals.
This of course would not only have helped many but it also would have made Obama look good, something righties are bound and determined not to let happen under any circumstance even if their obstructionism is bad for the country. The GOP have become a one trick pony under their tea party leadership,their only trick is to hate Obama and anything he tries to accomplish America be damned, its now all about satiating the addiction to the emotion of hate .
The normal spending at local, state and federal levels is more than adequate to fund roads, bridges etc...but unions and inept corrupt government officials suck up most of the money. Remember Obama's stimulus was sold as "shovel ready jobs" and most of the money went to government workers and few if any jobs were created.
At the end of the day, big government spending does little if anything to stimulate the economy.
Dems only hold power in the Senate not in the House to get things down one party needs to control both the house and the Senate This is another reason why Republicans are not helping Obama
The dems have 2 out of 3. Seriously, is democratic politics that weak that it needs all three to accomplish anything? That's some lame politics if you ask me.
Our system is built on checks and balances. If that stops the dems from doing what they want then it sucks for them.
Dems only hold power in the Senate not in the House to get things down one party needs to control both the house and the Senate This is another reason why Republicans are not helping Obama
In 2010, Democrats lost the House in a landslide defeat.
Now you would like the Republicans to forget who sent them to Washington because 1 in 5 Americans think Obama should be President?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Votre_Chef
Well, according to that logic, even less a percentage of Americans want the GOP in power. So pretty much you're arguing that nobody can do anything, ever unless more Americans get out and vote.
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
Yes, America is deeply divided between net tax payers and net recipients.
As a net payer, I would prefer that the party representing the net recipients be permitted to do nothing if it means spending more money we don't have and passing the bill along to our kids.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Votre_Chef
That doesn't really address my point. When I pointed out that using votes as a percentage of the total population makes the GOP even less popular than the Democrats, you've seem to have responded by simply adopting a completely different standard.
If you were going to do that, why bring up what percentage of the total population (are you counting children too?) votes for the Democrats?
Well, since "your point" started off with, "Well, according to that logic..." and "So pretty much you're arguing..." my point seems to have been shown the road even before you started typing.
Now you're bitching about your point not being addressed?
Can't say I don't find the irony fascinating.
I didn't respond to your point because there was no point.
I stated three facts and then asked a simple question to which you responded...
"Well, according to that logic, even less a percentage of Americans want the GOP in power."
While this may be factually correct, it has nothing to do with the fact that Obama's election is no more significant than that of House Republicans who control a co-equal branch of the federal government.
That's the point I was making.
You would have known that if you bothered to follow the thread.
The poster I was responding to was making the point that Republicans were not helping Obama.
Well who said they were supposed to Help Obama?
What Democrats call obstructionism is also Republicans doing what they were sent to DC to do by the people who elected them.
In that sense, it is Democrats obstructing Republicans which only shows how well misplaced the term obstructionism is when used to describe the actions of elected representatives in opposing other elected representatives.
Well, since "your point" started off with, "Well, according to that logic..." and "So pretty much you're arguing..." my point seems to have been shown the road even before you started typing.
Now you're bitching about your point not being addressed?
Can't say I don't find the irony fascinating.
I didn't respond to your point because there was no point.
I stated three facts and then asked a simple question to which you responded...
"Well, according to that logic, even less a percentage of Americans want the GOP in power."
While this may be factually correct, it has nothing to do with the fact that Obama's election is no more significant than that of House Republicans who control a co-equal branch of the federal government.
That's the point I was making.
You would have known that if you bothered to follow the thread.
The poster I was responding to was making the point that Republicans were not helping Obama.
Well who said they were supposed to Help Obama?
What Democrats call obstructionism is also Republicans doing what they were sent to DC to do by the people who elected them.
In that sense, it is Democrats obstructing Republicans which only shows how well misplaced the term obstructionism is when used to describe the actions of elected representatives in opposing other elected representatives.
1. Your threshold for what constitutes "bitching" is ridiculously low.
2. I don't think he said they were supposed help Obama, he was simply complaining that they were obstructing his agenda.
3. The term obstructionism is not misplaced here.
4. While there's no doubt that the Republicans are doing what they were sent to DC to do (at least a portion of them, thank you Captain Obvious for making a point that nobody was arguing against), the fact remains that their "landslide" victory was won with an even less significant amount of popular support than Obama (58.7% turnout in 2012 vs. 41.7% turnout in 2010).
Understandable, I also agree with what you were saying about infrastructure, till this day I believe we need to invest in infrastructure especially while we still can. Maybe we need an infrastructure and tax-reform bill, I want to corporations to repatriate their over-seas taxes to the US but in a way that gives them an incentive to while also investing in projects across the US to build the infrastructure we need.
You cannot take taxes that companies owe other countries. That's not our money. It belongs to those countries. Profits are already brought back here just as foreign companies that build here do which is why it's better to buy from an American company than one owned by foreigners. The money ends up where the ownership is. Hence buying a Ford vehicle made in Japan can be better for the US economy than buying a Japanese vehicle made in the USA. You have to look at where the profits go in addition to content and assembly point.
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.
This is another reason why Republicans are not helping Obama 
