Politics
- Started
- Last post
- 33,755 Responses
- ukit0
"We'll hurt but we'll pay debt to ss and those, but we may not be able to keep up the ponzi schemes and other social initiatives"
It's funny because you have to admit you have no idea what we would or would not be able to afford if spending was suddenly cut by 40%. Do you really believe 40% is just worthless spending that no one will miss? Discretionary spending is a tiny part of the budget, the vast majority are entitlements and other vital government functions.
"Get the power back to the people and not the rich elite. rebuild a middle class that is forever getting eaten away by the 2 party system."
In what way would disrupting unemployment, Social Security, jobs for millions of people, etc...help the middle class?
You may be opposed to entitlement spending and I guess it's easy to be when you talk in the abstract...but millions of people have built their lives around these institutions. It's unfair to pull the rug out from under them.
- It's also anti-democratic. No one elected Congress so they could crash the economy.ukit
- well people elected them but they did it hap hazardly. and we're a republic or use to be********
- ukit0
It's very naive to think that the middle class would somehow benefit if the government goes into a crisis like that. Look at what's happening in Greece, foreign banks are basically using it as an excuse to impose their terms and buy up the country's assets.
- benefits the elite. not the middle class.akrok
- it wont go into crisis. and theyll benfit in future. has middle class benefitted so far?********
- ********0
I dont know what will happen. I just know nothing will happen accept expand the gap. I can expect more voting of funds based on necessity and such. I know SS should have a reserve. Much like other entitlements. No different than an HOA.
I expect the cut will effect people. I think it wont be abrupt as new orgs say. Everything has a gain and loss. Someone wins someone will lose this just levels the playing field for future generations.
Helping middleclass comes from not not letting rich elite manipulate politicians into helping the poor stay poor. Or the poor through vote keep helping rich get richer by their ineptitude in understanding what it is theyre voting on. I could probably write a book on it and polarity. Im sure others have. AS far as that argument goes this forum isnt the best suitable medium. You will just have to take it as face value and q
- ********0
uestion it at face value in your typical daily routine. I admit i cant give u the evidence needed here.
I know many people have built there live around the entitlement programs. But its not unfair to pull a rug out from under them if they never deserved it in the first place. If political policy gave them that rug then they should blame the philosophy that gave it to them and question wether if they ever deserved it.
and still it wont be abruptly pulled out from under them. the etitlements can be vouched for through reserves and taxes. it simply forces gov to act reposnibly and see what really can be funded with excess funds. and if it cant be afforded likely it needs to be eased out.
- What about all of the entitlement programs for the wealthy elite i.e. (tax breaks, loop holes, and tax cuts)?utopian
- tax refrom will need to happen without extra credit. im all about looking at it. the pros and cons********
- TheBlueOne0
I love the way "theorists" avoid empirical evidence. From the period of time when the US enacted a social spending net until the Republicans started to dismantle it in the 1980's the US enjoyed the highest % of income growth in history. For some reason this doesn't "count" as real, but the whole idea of "cutting taxes on the rich so it trickles down" which hasn't actually worked in the 40 odd years of trying just needs to "be applied one more time, but with more vigor", as stated by the small % of the population that has seen it's income grow during that period.
One sounds like an ideology and one sounds like a practical solution.
We had an unregulated banking system. It drove the globe into worldwide depression. We regulated it and banking became safe and boring with small, respectable profits. Then they deregulated it and surprise! we are on the brink of a global depression.
But more deregulation is apparently the "serious" answer. Again given by the same small % who seem to benefit from it. You know, made by the people who have in the meantime bought all the media outlets and hack politicians phones.
Again, one is an ideology and another is a practical tool of economic governance.
Useful idiots is the perfect term for you sheep.
- TheBlueOne0
Large scale government backed financial speculation, systemically protected inheritable fortunes and rentier methods are not capitalism. Yet this is what the Republicans and most of the Democrats are in the business of protecting and promoting. And I've seen nothing in the Tea Party rhetoric or actions that oppose this either, rather they're like Peasants cheering on their Lord as they get conscripted to go kill the other Lord.
How ironic how much of "liberty" and the role of a democratic government actually plays in protecting liberties is forgotten on this Bastille Day.
These Tea Party peeps all talk a great line about their "rights" but you know your right to walk on the streets, to engage in contracts, etc. is absolutely useless unless their is a powerful enough government to ensure that the streets are actually safe to walk on and that contracts can be impartially enforced. But somehow they think if they can carry a gun they can do this all on their own.
- ********0
WOLF: ‘German Miracle’ Barack Obama doesn’t see
Blinded by big government, the Obama Depression is no accident
http://www.washingtontimes.com/n…“The eye does not see what the mind does not know.” The difference between your patient’s life and death, my professors would warn, is what you see, and you cannot see what you do not know. Barack Obama cannot see a way out of America’s current economic malaise. He should ask the Germans what they know.
- ********0
Libyan rebels looted and beat civilians, rights group says
http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/af…---------------
Obama supports these thugs in Libya!?
- a) Shall I assume you then agree with Human Rights Watch on other issues? Or..TheBlueOne
- ...are you cherry picking because you're a fucking troll; and...TheBlueOne
- b) shall I check off the "Pro-Ghaddafi" checkbox next to your name then?TheBlueOne
- Hypocrisy, and what's with the troll stuff, I can't have a fucking opinion, who made you KING!?********
- I made myself the Anti-King. That's just how I roll.TheBlueOne
- ********0
Obama, Cantor Clash in Heated Deficit Talks
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/…"I've reached my limit. This may bring my presidency down, but I will not yield on this," Obama said, before walking out.
------------------------
You said it, Mr. President.- Maybe he's done being held hostage by his own misconception that conservatives want compromiselocustsloth
- (not holding my breath, by the way)locustsloth
- I agree, like I said, I blame both sides, this is fucking ridiculous, pissing contest. reminds me of********
- Steve Jobs with Flash compatibility on iPhone.********
- locustsloth0
"This may bring my presidency down, but I will not yield on this,"
isn't this the attitude that we're looking for? The acknowledgment that the principles that our elected officials are fighting for (on some or all of our behalf) are more important than their jobs? If this is a genuine sentiment and not just posturing, my opinion of him has gone up a few pegs
- ukit0
Poll: GOP will get blame if debt ceiling not raised
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/…
The president gets a 47 – 46 percent job approval rating, unchanged from the June 9 survey by the independent Quinnipiac University. That tops a 64 – 28 percent disapproval for Democrats in Congress and a 65 – 26 percent disapproval for Republicans. Obama outscores congressional Republicans on several points in the deficit reduction battle:
Voters will blame Republicans over Obama 48 – 34 percent if the debt limit is not raised;
Voters say 67 – 25 percent that an agreement to raise the debt ceiling should include tax hikes for the wealthy and corporations, not just spending cuts;
Voters say 45 – 37 percent that Obama’s proposals to raise revenues are “closing loopholes,” rather than “tax hikes”;
But voters say 57 – 30 percent that Obama’s proposals will impact the middle class, not just the wealthy.“The American people aren’t very happy about their leaders, but President Barack Obama is viewed as the best of the worst, especially when it comes to the economy,” said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling institute.
- McConnell copped to this on Ingraham's showlocustsloth
- it's all going to come down to unemployment rate, the month this goof tries to win again.********
- You ain't gonna have that same youth and minority (first timers) this time and independents are sick of him********
- ukit0
"Voters say 67 – 25 percent that an agreement to raise the debt ceiling should include tax hikes for the wealthy and corporations, not just spending cuts"
Not exactly a Democrat-Republican divide there, seems more like a super majority in favor.
- Maybe Congress should start representing the opinion of the publicukit
- I'll post something on this soon********
- <I'm sure you willfooler
- No one I know even understands what the "debt ceiling" is. They just hear "debt" and say "Oh yeah, against that for sure..."TheBlueOne
- against that for sure" bec they've been conditioned like monkeys since the 80'sTheBlueOne
- ********0
- Get a Governor to declare a day of Muslim prayer and watch the shit flylocustsloth
- such is the makeup of USA********
- ********0
Congressman to Boehner: 'Quit believing the president'
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/…LOL!
- locustsloth0
So then if there's no reason to fear the debt ceiling deadline, there's also no reason to give in to the conservative's entitlement slashing (while keeping those who earn enough to weather an increased burden virtually untouched).
Thanks Gohmert!
- Ramanisky20
Q: why do I want to punch every big Republican square in the face?
A:
- because photogs pick the absolute worse shots of all politicians, always?locustsloth
- Wow, angry today eh?********
- wow. not at allRamanisky2
- ********0
Obama kills space program -- ends America's dominance; kills 10,000 jobs
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2…- omg!!.. I totally believe you.
hey can we be friends nowRamanisky2 - saving $450 million for every would-be launch. In 2008 NASA had a gross deficit of $18 billionlocustsloth
- sorry, i meant net deficit. Made $1 B, cost $19 Blocustsloth
- Please tell me under what administration the Space Shuttle phase out was planned. okthnxbyeTheBlueOne
- TROLLY TROLL IS TROLLINGTheBlueOne
- omg!!.. I totally believe you.
- TheBlueOne0
BUSH ANNOUNCES PLAN TO GO TO MARS!
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2…
Awsome our pres is funding the space program! To the future and beyond.
- Ooops. Oh wait. 2004. Nothing happened.TheBlueOne
- So, will poppfodder pipe in now? Bush killed our space dreams.TheBlueOne
- *taps fingers for trolly troll to trollTheBlueOne
- TheBlueOne0
OK, so what happens when you ignore agitprop like FOX and reads actual original documentation.
*stares at popfodders
Appropriation summary from the COngressional website:
http://appropriations.house.gov/…
"National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) – NASA is funded at $16.8 billion in the bill, which is $1.6 billion below last year’s level and $1.9 billion below the President’s request"
So, it's the Republicans in the House which came in lower than the president's suggested NASA budget.
So popfodders, how many of those "10,000 jobs" is the Republicans 1.9 Billion not covering?
*crickets, waits for picture/story of obscure black person doing something vaguely questionable posted on NYPost website with
- OMG LOL OMG LOLRamanisky2
- Still Crickets ..... Wait ... ....
........,,..,,No still crickets.
Figures!!!!!!Ramanisky2
