einsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 2047 posts, RR: 6 Posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 1544 times:
Being a Democrat but unable to vote for president, it seems pointless to be following US politics. However, now more than ever, I'm eagerly following what goes on on Capitol Hill since these next two years may prove to be marked with economic difficulties. Nonetheless, I extend congratulations to the GOP and their new Speaker John Boehner and hope they work alongside Democrats for a better US.
Now, one thing I'm curious about. They weren't even sworn in and already they spoke about cuts in federal spending, which is fine. I agree that the US needs to rein in its spending, I just disagree on where to cut. Since they are so eager to make cuts, I think the following is a valid question: will the Pentagon also be put on a diet?
"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
Dreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 7794 posts, RR: 22 Reply 1, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1530 times:
Quoting einsteinboricua (Thread starter): Now, one thing I'm curious about. They weren't even sworn in and already they spoke about cuts in federal spending, which is fine. I agree that the US needs to rein in its spending, I just disagree on where to cut
That's easy. EVERYWHERE. NO sacred cows. The federal budget needs to be cut (from current levels - never mind the stuff coming down the pike like Obamacare) by 20-25%. It is impossible to achieve that without hitting the military budget, welfare, Medicaid, federal pensions and other previously untouchable budgets. The big question is whether the GOP will have the balls to do it. It is already a given that the Democrats never will, and will demonize the GOP's efforts to reign in spending.
This week's program of slashing Congressional budgets is a start, but is only a drop in the proverbial bucket.
Personally I doubt they will manage it, with the Democratic Senate and Obama defending the public sector unions with his veto.
einsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 2047 posts, RR: 6 Reply 2, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1519 times:
Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 1): It is impossible to achieve that without hitting the military budget, welfare, Medicaid, federal pensions and other previously untouchable budgets.
See here's the thing...they have spoken about health care repeal, they have spoken about reducing government spending, but they have not yet said upfront which agencies will have budget cuts and by how much.
Also, and here's where I tend to disagree with the measures: how much is the unemployment rate? And they're talking about reducing government size which try as you might, you cannot mask that budget cuts and reduction of government size involves layoffs. How can you try to create jobs when on the other hand you're trying to cut spending?
"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
Dreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 7794 posts, RR: 22 Reply 3, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1511 times:
Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 2): Also, and here's where I tend to disagree with the measures: how much is the unemployment rate? And they're talking about reducing government size which try as you might, you cannot mask that budget cuts and reduction of government size involves layoffs. How can you try to create jobs when on the other hand you're trying to cut spending?
It might help if you look at government jobs and expenditures as a company's G&A. Sure, you need G&A - keep the books, manage payroll and sweep the floors, but those are not the people and expenditures that actually produce anything.
I'm pretty sure that if the government came to its senses and suddenly balanced the budget, slashed spending by 25%, eliminated a lot of the anti-business regulations and simplified the tax code, private employment would explode. There is a tremendous amount of untapped economic potential. For example, 40 or so years ago, 29% of the US labor market was involved in manufacturing. Now it is down to about 8%, and we buy all our stuff, particularly high-markup electronics, from overseas. Imagine if we started producing just a third of that stuff domestically again - we're back at full employment.
But as long as we have a tax and regulatory system that discourages business, and as long as investors have no confidence in our long term economic policy, that won't happen.
Aaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 7658 posts, RR: 28 Reply 4, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1509 times:
Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 3): But as long as we have a tax and regulatory system that discourages business, and as long as investors have no confidence in our long term economic policy, that won't happen.
Unfortunately I have to agree...but the other problem is that Americans don't even know what they want. Some want our military expansions abroad to continue, some want Social Security to continue forever, but most are just content to tune into Dancing With the Stars and let someone else figure it all out. That cannot continue or we're doomed. The best decisions come not from experts, but from the group.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 19723 posts, RR: 56 Reply 5, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1499 times:
Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 3): For example, 40 or so years ago, 29% of the US labor market was involved in manufacturing. Now it is down to about 8%, and we buy all our stuff, particularly high-markup electronics, from overseas. Imagine if we started producing just a third of that stuff domestically again - we're back at full employment.
The reason that we're buying all that stuff from overseas isn't taxes on business, it's that the production costs are so much lower. I very much doubt that the US worker can compete with the Chinese worker on costs. The days of a large US manufacturing industry are gone - we can still put out some very good stuff, but we can only be competitive when quality is more of an issue than price, which just isn't true anymore when it comes to most consumer goods.
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
To get elected, they told voters they would cut $100 billion. Now, they say they will be lucky if they can cut half that in two years. My guess is they will try to grow and expand the government as fast as they did 2001-2006 but tell everyone it was the left that did it.
Cadet985 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 1408 posts, RR: 5 Reply 7, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 1481 times:
As I see the news footage of Boehner being sworn in as the Speaker, I am forced to remember a memorable quote from Star Wars: Episode III: The Revenge of the Sith." Queen Amidala looks at the people around her as Palpatine assumes control. "So this is how liberty dies...with thunderous applause."
PPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8493 posts, RR: 43 Reply 8, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 1471 times:
Quoting Mir (Reply 5): The reason that we're buying all that stuff from overseas isn't taxes on business, it's that the production costs are so much lower. I very much doubt that the US worker can compete with the Chinese worker on costs.
Yes it's also taxes. It's ludicrous to think business will move to china to save some money on labor while at the same time say they don't want to go overseas to save double-digits in taxes.
But it's not just taxes. It's regulations, which add to the cost and puts you at an even greater disadvantage in this area. Regulations is an area places like China, India, Brazil are deeply disadvantaged compared to the US, and the US needs to play to this strength even more. Taxes is also easy. Labor may be more expensive, but it's not all bad news: it's relatively well educated and plentiful, which means you can train them in just about anything. That's not the case in Brazil, for example.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
DeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 5318 posts, RR: 47 Reply 9, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 1465 times:
I honestly think, if done correctly and with smart thinking on the military leadership's side, the defense budget could get trimmed quite a bit without reducing too much capabilities. I know it's easier said than done, but no more Air Assault school for cadets, no more use it or lose it mentalities (with money, fuel, ammo, etc,) just little stuff here and there.
Dreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 7794 posts, RR: 22 Reply 10, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1460 times:
Quoting Cadet985 (Reply 7): As I see the news footage of Boehner being sworn in as the Speaker, I am forced to remember a memorable quote from Star Wars: Episode III: The Revenge of the Sith." Queen Amidala looks at the people around her as Palpatine assumes control. "So this is how liberty dies...with thunderous applause."
You have one hell of a time delay on your DVR. That was January 20th 2009.
WarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 6496 posts, RR: 8 Reply 11, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1448 times:
Quoting Mir (Reply 5): The reason that we're buying all that stuff from overseas isn't taxes on business, it's that the production costs are so much lower. I very much doubt that the US worker can compete with the Chinese worker on costs
Let us say it the way it should be said, we are not buying, the US Corporations are manufacturing the products overseas. I see HP on the product etc and etc. We now have no choice, let us blame who is blamable. It is the US companies. It is the US consumer, trying to save a buck, it is the US companies trying to turn a buck into a buck and a half by screwing the US worker to maximize profits. Dreadnaught is correct, it is time to return manufacturing here. The Federal poverty line in 2009 for a family of four was 22K. Now in China, that is big money, we are not living in China, Hello! We are living in the land of high taxes, greed, high cost of living, high costs all around, Hello! Those who constantly cite that we cannot compete offer no answers, Hello! Our high cost of living is not going down, our taxes, our heating, utilities are not going down, Hello! We need the jobs which will pay for our high costs. I am sick and tired of listening to the bull about competing with China and how they can produce cheaper than we can. If we listen to this bull much longer, we will be broke, and we can blame the US Corporations, along with our government, along with us. We will still be broke, Hello!
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
Dreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 7794 posts, RR: 22 Reply 12, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1404 times:
Good news and bad news.
First the good news. Harry Reid wrote a letter to House leaders a few days ago pleading for them to abandon any talk of repealing ObamaCare - and the new speaker did an excellent job in answering it. First the appeal:
Quote: The incoming House Republican majority that you lead has made the repeal of the federal health care law one of its chief goals. We urge you to consider the unintended consequences that the law’s repeal would have on a number of popular consumer protections that help middle class Americans
Quote: Senators Reid, Durbin, Schumer, Murray and Stabenow:
Thank you for reminding us – and the American people – of the backroom deal that you struck behind closed doors with ‘Big Pharma,’ resulting in bigger profits for the drug companies, and higher prescription drug costs for 33 million seniors enrolled in Medicare Part D, at a cost to the taxpayers of $42.6 billion.
The House is going to pass legislation to repeal that now. You’re welcome.
Quote: Many people knowledgeable about the federal budget said House Republicans could not keep their campaign promise to cut $100 billion from domestic spending in a single year. Now it appears that Republicans agree.
As they prepare to take power on Wednesday, Republican leaders are scaling back that number by as much as half, aides say, because the current fiscal year, which began Oct. 1, will be nearly half over before spending cuts could become law.
Superfly From Thailand, joined May 2000, 38514 posts, RR: 80 Reply 13, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1393 times:
I find solace in the fact that Henry Waxman loses his Chairmanship post as the head of the House Energy and Commerce.
Henry Waxman is one of the most dangerous men in government.
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 19723 posts, RR: 56 Reply 14, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1390 times:
Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 11): it is time to return manufacturing here.
I'm all ears for suggestions on how to do it. Clearly, tax incentives aren't enough.
Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 11): We need the jobs which will pay for our high costs.
We do. But even if we were to bring back manufacturing to the US, we couldn't do it and provide wages that would cover the costs of living, not it we wanted to be competitive. The jobs you speak of are out there, but they're not in manufacturing. Rather, they're in the services industry.
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
sccutler From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 5093 posts, RR: 28 Reply 16, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1379 times:
lowrider From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 3220 posts, RR: 11 Reply 17, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 1367 times:
Quoting einsteinboricua (Thread starter): Since they are so eager to make cuts, I think the following is a valid question: will the Pentagon also be put on a diet?
We can only hope. Any reduction in spending that does not take the Pentagon to task for waste is not a serious effort. Hopefully no one will take up the, "but that isn't supporting the troops" mantra. You know what undermines the troops? Wasting resources allocated to them.
Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 2): How can you try to create jobs when on the other hand you're trying to cut spending?
It is not the purpose of the government to directly create jobs. Government jobs cost taxes. Taxes are revenue removed from economically productive purposes. Government can only enact or refrain from enacting policies that encourage or discourage economic growth. New private sector jobs are simply a gamble by employers.
Quoting Mir (Reply 14): Clearly, tax incentives aren't enough.
No, because they are only a band aid measure. In order to entice manufacturing, or any sort of business, you need to ask yourself 2 questions. 1. What are the barriers to entry? 2. Which of these barriers are controllable. Once you answer those, you will have a good idea of what is needed and whether or not the industries are worth attracting. Taxes aside, regulatory compliance is a huge cost in the US. If we are serious about attracting companies back onshore, we need to ask ourselves if the current regulatory structure is worth what it is costing us.
Quoting Superfly (Reply 15): I hope this new Congress legislation for more nuclear power plants and eliminate CAFE requirments for auto manufactures.
I agree. I would love to see the barriers to construction of new nuclear plants lowered. If we can eliminate or at least modify CAFE rules, maybe auto manufactures can get ride of dead weight models.
WarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 6496 posts, RR: 8 Reply 18, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 1367 times:
Quoting Mir (Reply 14): I'm all ears for suggestions on how to do it. Clearly, tax incentives aren't enough.
I am also waiting for someone who will advocate such a policy. I think eliminating any tax breaks for corporations to ship jobs, out will be a atart. I do think tax penalties for those that do will be of greater value, and a hell of a lot more sensible. It has been an insane policy, and we all know it.
Quoting Mir (Reply 14): We do. But even if we were to bring back manufacturing to the US, we couldn't do it and provide wages that would cover the costs of living, not it we wanted to be competitive. The jobs you speak of are out there, but they're not in manufacturing. Rather, they're in the services industry.
We agree on that. We have listened to that about how the services industry will be our salvation, I would like to know how? Service jobs are the worst there are, low pay, low, or no benefits. Who can afford healthcare on service industry jobs, college for their children? I ask, how many cooks and bottle washers can we have? We have intentionally destroyed our economy in the quest for higher profit by the corporations. Nationalism is dead, screw the country and its citizens, make money. Once again, where are the college graduates going, to cook, to work at Walmart, to work in retail? Everytime wages fall, we have less tax revenues, less money going into social programs, SS and Medicare etc. We have less to pass on to the service industry people. It was just announced here tonight, more Super Markets closing, isn't that wonderful? We are destroying what was to be passed on to our children, and grandchildren. Prosperity.
It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 19723 posts, RR: 56 Reply 19, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1346 times:
Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 12): First the good news. Harry Reid wrote a letter to House leaders a few days ago pleading for them to abandon any talk of repealing ObamaCare - and the new speaker did an excellent job in answering it.
Voting to repeal the health care bill is a ridiculous waste of time, and mere political grandstanding when they should be focused on cutting the deficit (and they've already figured out they can't meet their promises on that - not that that's really surprising, but it does mean they really need to get to work on it). They know it's not going anywhere in the Senate, they know Obama will veto it even if it did - why are they bothering? In principle, I'm not opposed to a repeal of the health care plan, but I want to see a concrete bill to replace it before they do anything, so that I can actually decide whether I'd rather have that over the current bill. Without that, they have absolutely zero credibility, and are trying to equate anger at Obama's plan with support for theirs, when the two are not by any means equivalent.
I like that they'll be putting bills up on the internet before voting on them (if they stick to that promise - we've seen that sort of thing before from both parties), I'm okay with the idea of cut-as-you-go so long as they don't get carried away with it, but the fact that one guy is in charge of the entire budget really bothers me, as does the fact that they took away the voting rights of the delegates from DC and the territories - one would have thought from all the Tea Party influence that the GOP would be all about hearing the voices of the people, but I guess it's okay to exclude some.
Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 18): Service jobs are the worst there are, low pay, low, or no benefits.
I'm not talking about cooks or dishwashers. When I say service industry, I mean research and development, consulting, etc. Basically, the mental half of manufacturing (the physical half being done elsewhere). And there's a lot of money to be made in that - if you design a product that a lot of people want, you're golden. And it doesn't even have to be a physical product - it could be a piece of software or an internet service (Facebook being the obvious extreme example, or Apple - their stuff is all made in China, but it's designed in the US, and I can guarantee that the people who worked on the development of the iPhone/iPod/iPad are making at least a decent living).
But in order to do that, you need to have a high level of education and a national commitment to supporting research and development, and I don't think we're doing enough in that area.
Quoting lowrider (Reply 17): If we can eliminate or at least modify CAFE rules, maybe auto manufactures can get ride of dead weight models.
If you really want to convince people to buy more fuel-efficient cars, scrap CAFE and implement a tax on gas to fund alternative energy R&D.
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
lowrider From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 3220 posts, RR: 11 Reply 20, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1343 times:
Quoting Mir (Reply 19): implement a tax on gas to fund alternative energy R&D.
both of these already exist. What we lack is efficient usage of the first, and a realistic implementation of the second.
Aaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 7658 posts, RR: 28 Reply 21, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1338 times:
Quoting lowrider (Reply 17): 1. What are the barriers to entry? 2. Which of these barriers are controllable. Once you answer those, you will have a good idea of what is needed and whether or not the industries are worth attracting. Taxes aside, regulatory compliance is a huge cost in the US.
Macroecon 101.
Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 18): Once again, where are the college graduates going, to cook, to work at Walmart, to work in retail? Everytime wages fall, we have less tax revenues, less money going into social programs, SS and Medicare etc. We have less to pass on to the service industry people. It was just announced here tonight, more Super Markets closing, isn't that wonderful? We are destroying what was to be passed on to our children, and grandchildren. Prosperity.
Well jeez, if we're going to talk about things in that vein, might as well throw in the towel already
Quoting Mir (Reply 19): But in order to do that, you need to have a high level of education and a national commitment to supporting research and development, and I don't think we're doing enough in that area.
Absolutely true. Obviously these issues require a multi-pronged approach. One of the first ways to make headway is to acknowledge that not all schoolchildren are destined for college and develop a two-track system that devotes proper resources to those who are college bound and those who are not.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
flanker From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 1609 posts, RR: 2 Reply 22, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1318 times:
Quoting Mir (Reply 14): I'm all ears for suggestions on how to do it. Clearly, tax incentives aren't enough.
Less taxes, less laws that make it impossible to do what you want to do. You think an American company would prefer building a plant in China and ship things here and going through all that trouble if they had the choice? hell no.
Quoting lowrider (Reply 17): No, because they are only a band aid measure. In order to entice manufacturing, or any sort of business, you need to ask yourself 2 questions. 1. What are the barriers to entry? 2. Which of these barriers are controllable. Once you answer those, you will have a good idea of what is needed and whether or not the industries are worth attracting. Taxes aside, regulatory compliance is a huge cost in the US. If we are serious about attracting companies back onshore, we need to ask ourselves if the current regulatory structure is worth what it is costing us.
Quoting PPVRA (Reply 8): Yes it's also taxes. It's ludicrous to think business will move to china to save some money on labor while at the same time say they don't want to go overseas to save double-digits in taxes.
But it's not just taxes. It's regulations, which add to the cost and puts you at an even greater disadvantage in this area. Regulations is an area places like China, India, Brazil are deeply disadvantaged compared to the US, and the US needs to play to this strength even more. Taxes is also easy. Labor may be more expensive, but it's not all bad news: it's relatively well educated and plentiful, which means you can train them in just about anything. That's not the case in Brazil, for example.
Quoting Superfly (Reply 15): I hope this new Congress legislation for more nuclear power plants and eliminate CAFE requirments for auto manufactures.
Completely agree with you there.
Calling an illegal alien an 'undocumented immigrant' is like calling a drug dealer an unlicensed pharmacist
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 19723 posts, RR: 56 Reply 23, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1314 times:
Quoting flanker (Reply 22): You think an American company would prefer building a plant in China and ship things here and going through all that trouble if they had the choice? hell no.
All things being equal, you're right. But there's no way that the cost of labor in the US could ever come down to the point where it would be cheaper and less complicated to have the factories in the US. Unless, of course, we wanted to have labor and environmental rules like China. Which I don't think we do.
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
einsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 2047 posts, RR: 6 Reply 24, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1296 times:
Quoting lowrider (Reply 17): Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 2):
How can you try to create jobs when on the other hand you're trying to cut spending?
It is not the purpose of the government to directly create jobs. Government jobs cost taxes. Taxes are revenue removed from economically productive purposes. Government can only enact or refrain from enacting policies that encourage or discourage economic growth. New private sector jobs are simply a gamble by employers.
Still, it's sorta contradictory. Because on one hand you're trying to get companies to hire your unemployed citizens, but on the other hand, austerity measures will surely mean government layoffs. The success will depend on the ratio of people being laid off to those being hired. If you can guarantee that all laid off employees(if any) will get a job in the private sector as well as those currently searching for one, then citizens should have nothing to worry about, which here in PR was a BIG mistake made by the governor (which, unsurprisingly is affiliated with the Republicans).
Also, they must make sure that any austerity measures do not affect economic growth. Measures taken here in PR, claiming to eventually boost the economy, propelled the unemployment rate over 16% and have only managed a fifth year of recession.
"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
25 lowrider: There are no such guarantees in life. If increased regulation and taxation resulted in economic contraction that leads to private sector citizens bei
26 seb146: They are now trying to read the Constitution. I hope they keep those words stuck in their minds when they vote on things like Patriot Act (unreasonabl
27 AGM100: Promote does not mean..mandate and control. We can not afford universal health care ... so does the general welfare consideration cover national bank
28 CargoLex: On that day, however, nobody lost their political rights. Today, Americans living in U.S. Territories lost all representation in our legislature as t
29 Aaron747: We can't afford the current system either, and millions of uninsured continue sapping the system. What's your proposal then? Turn them away at the do
30 AGM100: You get the government out of it and everyone will be able to afford it... If people know they will be turned away at the door they will make sure th
31 FlyPNS1: This is a total lie and you know it. If this was true, everyone could afford to buy a home, but the reality is that the market does not (and should n
32 Aaron747: Utter nonsense. Nobody is going to cover a 12 year-old inner city kid with diabetes, knowing his future heart disease and 15 years of BP medication w
33 windy95: Agree Agree. It is amazing that more people vote for these stupid shows than for President. We deserve what we get. This line was already worn out wh
34 windy95: Final Tab for Pelosi’s Speakership: $5.34 Trillion in New Debt—Or $3.66 Billion Per Day http://cnsnews.com/news/article/fina...tab-pelosi-s-speake
35 Aaron747: The people want a reduction in spending - there is no proof repeal would accomplish that based on the CBO and GAO estimates of the bill's impact. In
36 windy95: And also many ran on repealing healtcare. They are doing what the people who voted them in want them to do. Many a Dem lost because of their healthca
37 CargoLex: Right. And pigs will grow wings and fly. Government programs like Medicare and Medicaid came about in our country because when the system was entirel
38 Aaron747: Well obviously the CBO and GAO read it. And I highly recommend a perusal of: http://factcheck.org/articles/
39 CargoLex: I think you're wasting your breath their. Both CBO and GAO predict that the Healthcare Reform Act will lower the national debt over the next ten years
40 Mir: Okay. So why are the Republicans doing the same thing that got the Democrats voted out of office? -Mir
41 CargoLex: ..And just in time, CBO released a letter today to John Boehner about HR2 (the repeal resolution) stating that repealing the Affordable Care Act will
42 WarRI1: Economies tend to follow a developmental progression that takes them from a heavy reliance on agriculture and mining, toward the development of manuf
43 Mir: A claim the GOP has decided to reject. Interestingly, due to the CBO report, their new rules wouldn't allow them to repeal the health care bill (or w
44 propilot83: Mr. John Boehner, I hope I spelled his last name right. The new Speaker of the House, well lets see if he's got the balls to bring this country out of
45 DocLightning: Name one liberty that Obama has removed from you. ONE. I dare you. ONE.
46 Superfly: John Boner and his Republicans haven't finished off their bottles of whiskey and already they are starting to back pedal on their campaign promises. h
47 Dreadnought: The freedom to not have to pay for levels of health insurance I don't need or want. Freedom to keep what I earn/invest without having it stolen and g
48 seb146: Let's not forget how Medicare Part D came into being. That would be the right taking away our rights and giving more rights to the pharmacutical comp
49 Dreadnought: Just because they were Republicans does not mean they were conservatives. Irrelevant attempt of justifying bad behavior by pointing to other bad beha
50 CargoLex: Many of them are still there right now. Including the new Speaker of the House. If you endorse them now, you implicitly endorse them then. They are t
51 Dreadnought: They claim to have "found religion", to use the cliche. Whether or not they have remains to be seen - I'm not very encouraged so far. But people who
52 Aaron747: So you want litigators to make even more money then, with the limbo situation that would inevitably put individuals and organizations in??
53 CargoLex: I honestly do not understand how you can make such a claim. Especially while endorsing a party that routinely spends beyond it's means but simultaneo
54 Mir: If the law is not properly written, then I agree that it should be up to the legislature to rewrite it, but abandoning the principle of judicial prec
55 DocLightning: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! You mean, the freedom to steal services from physicians and hospitals? Sorry, you don't get that freedom. Theft is not a freed
Sponsor Message: 
From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 2047 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 7794 posts, 
From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 7658 posts, 
From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8493 posts, 
From Thailand, joined May 2000, 38514 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
