Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Budget Battle: Will Gov Shut Down?  
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8296 posts, RR: 8
Posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 3351 times:

There was an interesting video on WaPo today covering the potential of the Government shutting down over the Budget Battles in DC.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...olitics/the-fast-fix/?hpid=artslot

So we have 3 weeks before we see how the Republicans & Tea Folks in the House end up, how the Senate responds and how the President responds.

In my situation I would find it "interesting" to see how the country AND the politicians handle a shut down. Last time wasn't very positive for the conservatives, but it did allow Clinton to have a second term.

If the battle really heats up it can turn out to be the most interesting political news for 2011, or at least the first half of hte year.

So now everyone has the opportunity of putting down their opinions on IF there will be a shut down, opinions on who wold be to "blame" politically and if you would be impacted. Overseas posters would, hopefully, bring in how such a shutdown would be seen where they live.

76 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinegatorfan From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 331 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 3352 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Thread starter):
Budget Battle: Will Gov Shut Down?

We can only hope!


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19789 posts, RR: 59
Reply 2, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 3324 times:

Quoting gatorfan (Reply 1):

We can only hope!

I think that we will see how important the government is really quickly.


User currently offlineB727 From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 521 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 3300 times:

I kind hope the goverment does. We still give billions to oil companies even though the are at record high profit levels. We the people need to shut the county down and let it be known that were done with getting ass raped at the pump.



B727
Glenn


User currently offlinegatorfan From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 331 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3269 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 2):
I think that we will see how important the government is really quickly.

The last time the government shut down (when Clinton was in office), it had zero effect on me. In fact, vital gov't departments will remain open. The FAA will be staffed, the army will be on patrol, the Coast Guard will protect our coast. Perhaps a shut down will show us how little we need such a big government.


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19789 posts, RR: 59
Reply 5, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 3249 times:

Quoting gatorfan (Reply 4):

The last time the government shut down (when Clinton was in office), it had zero effect on me. In fact, vital gov't departments will remain open. The FAA will be staffed, the army will be on patrol, the Coast Guard will protect our coast. Perhaps a shut down will show us how little we need such a big government.

Oh, yes. Because the FAA, DoD, etc. are all such tiny parts of the government.


User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8296 posts, RR: 8
Reply 6, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 3224 times:

Quoting gatorfan (Reply 4):
Perhaps a shut down will show us how little we need such a big government.

If we have to tell military personnel in a war zone that we can't pay them, or send their pay to their families waiting back home.

At least various monthly checks, like Social Security and VA will have been paid before the Republicans pull the plug.


User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11677 posts, RR: 15
Reply 7, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3145 times:

At the base of all this is the right-wing screaming and shouting that Obama ran up a huge deficit. But, in reality, it was the right and their policies that did it. Obama simply put the "off budget" spending by the right on budget. The right did not like what they saw. They have no one to blame but themselves. Government in general is a problem, but, when the blame game starts anew, let's put blame where blame belongs. I know it will not happen, but I would like to make that statement.


Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlinedxing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 3068 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 5):
Oh, yes. Because the FAA, DoD, etc. are all such tiny parts of the government.

Compared to entitlement spending that would be a yes.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 6):
If we have to tell military personnel in a war zone that we can't pay them, or send their pay to their families waiting back home.

Essential services will remain intact to include the forces deployed overseas and their families at home.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 7):
But, in reality, it was the right and their policies that did it. Obama simply put the "off budget" spending by the right on budget

He did? Where and when? No budget was passed last year, just one continuing resolution after another. Please elaborate, I'm fascinated by statements with no logical support. On top of that the democrats were in power in Congress, you know, that's where "budgets" come from, from 2006 to 2010, so what were they hiding?

Shame the President can't take his own advice which was to rise above politics as usual and solve this. A good first step would be to embrace the nonpartisan debt reduction panels ideas to heart. You know, the panel he created to find a way to cut the deficit and reduce the debt? Yet his budget contains none of their substantive recommendations. Guess that's just a little to much "hope and change" to ask for?


User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8296 posts, RR: 8
Reply 9, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3024 times:

Quoting dxing (Reply 8):
Compared to entitlement spending that would be a yes.

And how much money has the Social Security Trust loaned the Treasury? And how much interest (compound interest) has the Treasury added to those loans?

How does that compared to, say, loans made by China? Or the total debt?

Quoting dxing (Reply 8):
Essential services will remain intact to include the forces deployed overseas and their families at home.

And who is going to pay those funds? The Tooth Fairy or Mother Goose?

Quoting dxing (Reply 8):
On top of that the democrats were in power in Congress, you know, that's where "budgets" come from, from 2006 to 2010, so what were they hiding?

And Republicans were right there in the Senate with their Secret Holds and Filibusters. Remember? That's why we didn't finish last year with a budget being passed.

So now we'll see if the Republicans can perform with their power in the House.

Quoting dxing (Reply 8):
A good first step would be to embrace the nonpartisan debt reduction panels ideas to heart.

Well, the Republicans could have picked that up when they took the oath this year. What happened?

There should be no reason why they couldn't pick the commission report up as a guide.


Quoting dxing (Reply 8):
You know, the panel he created to find a way to cut the deficit and reduce the debt?

And there were Republicans on the Commission - including one of my Senators - so why don't the Republicans start using the Report?


User currently offlinedxing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2989 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 9):
How does that compared to, say, loans made by China? Or the total debt?

Again, if you loan money from your wallet to your pocket, and then spend that money, you can't wonder why there is no money in your pocket to pay back to your wallet. By allowing a unified budget to exist for 40+ years the money that should be in the bank for the tidal wave of individuals that are about to swamp SS and medicare has been spent. In order to recoup it at the current worker to retiree ratio current workers, and their children, would have to pay almost 50% in FICA taxes alone. The system is just now experiencing its first "in the red" year and by all accounts, it will only get worse every year for the next 15 years. When you borrow money from an outsider and youself, the outsider gets paid back first.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 9):
And who is going to pay those funds? The Tooth Fairy or Mother Goose?
http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/12/17/what-shuts-down-exactly

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 9):

And Republicans were right there in the Senate with their Secret Holds and Filibusters. Remember? That's why we didn't finish last year with a budget being passed.

Again, the democratic party held a large majority in the House and and no filibuster was in play in the Senate since no budget was up for a vote.

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/104635-dems-wont-pass-budget

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0410/35647.html

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 9):
Well, the Republicans could have picked that up when they took the oath this year. What happened?

In fact they are going farther on some things while not going far enough on others. As of this morning the House passed it's first resolution which cut 50 billion from the budget. That's a start but not enough has entitlement spending has yet to be tackled.

[Edited 2011-02-19 06:04:22]

User currently offlineJBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4491 posts, RR: 21
Reply 11, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2968 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 5):

The point was to show how we can survive easily without the myriad smaller wasteful government programs. No one is making the argument that we don't need government....we can just get by with a good bit less than we have.



I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8296 posts, RR: 8
Reply 12, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2958 times:

Quoting dxing (Reply 10):
Again, if you loan money from your wallet to your pocket, and then spend that money, you can't wonder why there is no money in your pocket to pay back to your wallet.

The Social Security Trust is still a legal entity that loaned money to the US Treasury.

Defaulting on either the principle or the interest will be exactly the same as defaulting on any other legal loan.

You can't hide that reality with a pocket & wallet argument. It doesn't matter that you generation is enjoying the infrastructure those loans paid for, it appears that your generation is too self centered to stand behind the nation's financial obligations.

Quoting dxing (Reply 10):
As of this morning the House passed it's first resolution which cut 50 billion from the budget.

$61 Billion cut in the House Bill this morning. Now it goes to the Senate where Senators will do their job. In the end we'll see what goes to the President for signing, but I believe that the government will shut down before the House will work with the Senate.


User currently offlinesccutler From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 5531 posts, RR: 28
Reply 13, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2950 times:

Quoting seb146 (Reply 7):
At the base of all this is the right-wing screaming and shouting that Obama ran up a huge deficit.

No, it is not.

Rational observers (of whom one minds members in both parties) note that persistent overspending by the federal government, coupled with excessive federal requirements heaped upon states, has caused our problems.

Note well: President Bush (43) could have wielded his veto pen and sent congress a compelling message about spending- but did not. Bad deal.

President Obama could have done the same, and has not. The rate at which Congress increased spending during President Obama's first two years is staggering, and utterly without precedent - more a drunken frenzy than anything else - but it's not as if they invented deficit spending. For the first time, however, it seems more likely than not that the true intent is to gut the value of the dollar, and this is criminal.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 12):
In the end we'll see what goes to the President for signing, but I believe that the government will shut down before the House will work with the Senate.

In the end we'll see what goes to the President for signing, but you believe that the government will shut down before the houses of congress will work together. for the better.



...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
User currently offlineNorthstarBoy From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1838 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (3 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2917 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Sigh. I get so tired of the republicans and their rush to bow and scrape to the almighty tea party and their mega rich backers who make no bones that they want to pay as little as possible in taxes.

IMO the tea party movement should have been killed in its infancy by the mainstream GOP growing a pair and demanding that these nut jobs form their own political party rather than attaching themselves to the GOP like a parasite.

I can only hope that if there is a shutdown, blame will be placed where it belongs: squarely on the shoulders of the tea party. Hopefully, the american public will finally see these people for what they are: a sham invented to do nothing more than protect the wealth of the top 1 percent from an overly greedy government (in their opinion) that would like nothing better than to bring socialism upon america (in their opinion). Finally, I hope that the end result is the removal from office of every one of those tea party candidates and the restoration of sanity and bi partisanship back into the government.

IMO none of this talk of a government shutdown would be happen if the GOP weren't so scared shitless of the tea party and their backers. Time to show the tea party the door.....for good.....and get back to bi partisan government and cooler heads prevailing.



Why are people so against low yields?! If lower yields means more people can travel abroad, i'm all for it
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19789 posts, RR: 59
Reply 15, posted (3 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2908 times:

Quoting dxing (Reply 8):

Compared to entitlement spending that would be a yes.

Tell me, do you know what portion of the national budget goes to the DoD?

About 1/5.

Do you honestly believe that we need to be spending that much on the military? Hell by doing away with "cost-plus" contracts, we could cut the military budget probably by a third without affecting anything tangible just by no longer forcing units and contractors to use all available funds.


User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8296 posts, RR: 8
Reply 16, posted (3 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2892 times:

Quoting sccutler (Reply 13):
note that persistent overspending by the federal government, coupled with excessive federal requirements heaped upon states, has caused our problems.

We had a massive tax cut, followed by a very expensive war. There was no effort made in the Bush/Cheney Years to spread the burden of the war. No tax increases and existing military personnel were forced to shoulder the burden of the war, with Stop Loss forced retention after completion of enlistment and abnormal levels of deployment with insufficient time at home for recovery & retraining.

No efforts were made to ease spending, or to increase taxes to cover the excessive spending. Regulation and oversight of industries related to the housing market were tossed aside, leading to a housing crisis that continues today.

Addressing those problems alone will require increasing taxes as well as sending cuts. Then we can address other spending. But worrying about Public Broadcasting because your nose is out of joint isn't going to get this country very far.

Quoting sccutler (Reply 13):
President Obama could have done the same, and has not.

In all fairness, Obama took the oath of office as the nation was falling pretty fast on the economic side. Reasonable economists have called it the Great Recession and more than a few were legitimately worried about a true depression.

It is not unexpected that some heavy jolts were needed to the economy and some industries.

But what have we seen since? Business has rebounded and is delivering profits (and repaying government loans), but business has not started re-hiring. All their profits and cash mean nothing to the economy if they will not invest in growth, and without growth we will loose one important method of reducing the national debt.

Quoting sccutler (Reply 13):
but you believe that the government will shut down before the houses of congress will work together.

I believe that the Tea Party is taking themselves so seriously that they will push for the country to shut down. starting March 4th. There will be Social Security payments made on the 3rd of March, with the next round due on the 10th. Basically that gives the Tea Party until the 9th to gloat, flutter around and then compromise before causing some major crisis with a lot of elderly in the 25% of SS recipients who do not get the benefit.

Quoting NorthstarBoy (Reply 14):
I get so tired of the republicans and their rush to bow and scrape to the almighty tea party and their mega rich backers who make no bones that they want to pay as little as possible in taxes.

For this election cycle the GOP has to let the Tea Party have its way to a degree significantly higher than a typical GOP Freshman. But the Tea Party is based in some part on the concept that they are not going to accept a tax increase or other compromise. That is their down fall over time. Cutting alone will simply generate more unemployment and slower growth of the economy, adding to the national debt instead of bringing it down.

So let them wrap themselves in the flag and sing ballads about Paul Revere. I simply believe it is a short term rise in odd judgement that cannot deliver anything but more wealth to the wealthiest 10% in the country.


User currently offlinegatorfan From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 331 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (3 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2889 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 6):
If we have to tell military personnel in a war zone that we can't pay them, or send their pay to their families waiting back home.

What part of the following didn't you understand?

Quoting gatorfan (Reply 4):
In fact, vital gov't departments will remain open. The FAA will be staffed, the army will be on patrol, the Coast Guard will protect our coast.


User currently offlinedxing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (3 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2877 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 12):
The Social Security Trust is still a legal entity that loaned money to the US Treasury.

The Social Security Trust is a part of the U.S. government, same as the Treasury. One department of the government loaned money to another, from your wallet to your pocket.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 12):
You can't hide that reality with a pocket & wallet argument. It doesn't matter that you generation is enjoying the infrastructure those loans paid for, it appears that your generation is too self centered to stand behind the nation's financial obligations.

It does matter that your generation spent your retirement funds with absolutely no thought on how to repay them. As has been shown to you, very little of that money went to infrastructure over the 40+ years of the unified budget. It's too bad that your generation was so self centered as to push that debt on to your children. If you wanted those things so badly you should have been willing to pay for them up front.

Quoting sccutler (Reply 13):
Note well: President Bush (43) could have wielded his veto pen and sent congress a compelling message about spending- but did not. Bad deal.

Absolutely correct. Bush 43 was not a true fiscal conservative. He was for lower taxes which is a good thing, but failed, as did all his predecessors and the current occupant, to tackle the elephant that is entitlement spending.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 12):
$61 Billion cut in the House Bill this morning

By the time it leaves conference and heads to the President it will be 50 billion.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 15):
Tell me, do you know what portion of the national budget goes to the DoD?

About 1/5.

And do you know how much goes to SS, medicare, interest on the growing debt (and only getting bigger), welfare and other mandatory entitlement spending? How about half. I emphasize mandatory because unlike those others, spending on defense, even though it is specifically mentioned in the Constitution as one of the things the federal government is actually responsible for, is completely discretionary.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 15):
Do you honestly believe that we need to be spending that much on the military?

No and I have been on record for years as saying that when we look at cuts, defense will have to be included.


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19789 posts, RR: 59
Reply 19, posted (3 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2868 times:

Quoting dxing (Reply 18):

And do you know how much goes to SS, medicare, interest on the growing debt (and only getting bigger), welfare and other mandatory entitlement spending?

Yes. It's mandatory. And Medicare needs to be fixed.


User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8296 posts, RR: 8
Reply 20, posted (3 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2851 times:

Quoting dxing (Reply 18):
The Social Security Trust is a part of the U.S. government, same as the Treasury. One department of the government loaned money to another, from your wallet to your pocket.

That's simply a pathetic excuse to try to default on government loans. Gotta love that "Die Fast Old People" approach by the Me Me Generation.

Quoting dxing (Reply 18):
It does matter that your generation spent your retirement funds with absolutely no thought on how to repay them.

We pay into the program while we are working, just like our fathers and grandfathers. It's the generations after us that try so hard to weasel out of their responsibilities.

We built the roads you drive on and the airports you fly through and all your generation does is try to wimp out of paying your part.

Quoting dxing (Reply 18):
By the time it leaves conference and heads to the President it will be 50 billion.

And after all the dust has settled we'll see what part of the deficit will be paid for by "cuts" and what part by increasing taxes.

Quoting gatorfan (Reply 17):
What part of the following didn't you understand?

So members of the military will continue to obey orders. That's not a big deal - the same as when I served.

What you did not explain is where the funds for military families will come from. If we are past out debt limit we don't have legal funds to pay them with.


User currently offlinesccutler From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 5531 posts, RR: 28
Reply 21, posted (3 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2821 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 16):


No efforts were made to ease spending, or to increase taxes to cover the excessive spending.

I believe I was pointing that out...

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 16):
Regulation and oversight of industries related to the housing market were tossed aside, leading to a housing crisis that continues today.

Principal cause of the housing crisis was excessive lending to unqualified borrowers... a bad call by any measure, but if you wish to lay the blame on Republicans (alone), you're disregarding reality.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 16):

In all fairness, Obama took the oath of office as the nation was falling pretty fast on the economic side.

And this excuses an orgy of spending how?

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 16):
Business has rebounded and is delivering profits

This is certainly not the case in smaller businesses...

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 20):

We pay into the program while we are working, just like our fathers and grandfathers. It's the generations after us that try so hard to weasel out of their responsibilities.

We built the roads you drive on and the airports you fly through and all your generation does is try to wimp out of paying your part.

That may be one of the most ludicrous sets of comments I've seen here. The proportion of the productive economy gobbled-up by federal spending, and by spending by states mandated by federal regulation, is ever-increasing. It is in every possible way unsustainable, and increasing taxation simply won't help now. There was a time when American taxpayers were taxed substantially less than their counterparts in other developed countries - this is simply no longer the case, and we will consign ourselves to third-world status, and soon, if the ship is not righted.

---

Suggestion: If your comments here require that you lay blame on one party or another, you're probably not ready to contribute in a meaningful way to the discussion (and this is not offered in response to any particular user's posts).

We're fiddling, and Rome is burning.



...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
User currently offlinedxing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (3 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2799 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 19):
Yes. It's mandatory. And Medicare needs to be fixed.

It's only mandatory because of the law behind the programs, the Constitution does not specify that the federal government is responsible to the citizens to ensure that they have anything like SS, medicare, or an "affordable health care act". It does however specify, in clear and certain terms, that the federal government is responsible for the common defense of the States.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 20):
That's simply a pathetic excuse to try to default on government loans.

That is just completely igonoring the plain fact that the Social Security administration is an independent arm of the federal government just as the Treasury is a part of the federal government. You can call it any insulting name you wish but it does not change the fact that the government loaned itself money for 40+ years at the citizens expense.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 20):
We pay into the program while we are working, just like our fathers and grandfathers. It's the generations after us that try so hard to weasel out of their responsibilities.

You paid into the program and it, by a vote of the legislators you voted in, voted that money right back out with absolutely no plan in place to pay it back other that to kick the can down the road. Now you expect the younger generations to pay of the loan that you in essence made to yourselves, even though those younger generations had no say in the matter. If you should run short of cash in your retirement do you plan to raid your childrens bank accounts using the logic that they are only repaying what you spent on them when they were younger? The logic is the same.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 20):
We built the roads you drive on and the airports you fly through and all your generation does is try to wimp out of paying your part.

You built the roads and airports but you did not pay for them. If you had they would be paid for and your SS money would all be there waiting for you. You spent the money, enjoyed the roads and airports, and now expect the younger generation to pick up the tab that you accrued.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 20):
And after all the dust has settled we'll see what part of the deficit will be paid for by "cuts" and what part by increasing taxes.

There will be tax increases, no way around that. But hopefully this time they will at least be matched by identical amounts being cut from the federal budget.


User currently offlinewindy95 From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 2738 posts, RR: 8
Reply 23, posted (3 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2777 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Thread starter):
Budget Battle: Will Gov Shut Down?

Please...

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 2):
I think that we will see how important the government is really quickly

To the recipients yes we will see how important wealth distrubution is.. To the donors we can only hope.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 5):
Oh, yes. Because the FAA, DoD, etc. are all such tiny parts of the government

Essential personel do not stop working. The last time around we continued to our job in the military. Nothing stopped.

Quoting seb146 (Reply 7):
At the base of all this is the right-wing screaming and shouting that Obama ran up a huge deficit. But, in reality, it was the right and their policies that did it.

You really have no clue on this do you. You continue to shout the same theme over and over ignoring the fact that the Pelosi lead congress spent more money than any other in history. More debt from Obama and Pelosi and Reid continue to be ignored. Bush and the Republicans have their share but stop ignoring the lions share that can be attributed to the Pelosi and Reid congress.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 9):
And how much money has the Social Security Trust loaned the Treasury? And how much interest (compound interest) has the Treasury added to those loans?

It has made no interest. Loaning money to yourself does not make you any money. Stop perpetuating this lie.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 15):
Do you honestly believe that we need to be spending that much on the military?

Seeing how it is one of the few enumerated powers, yes. Savings from fraud , waste and abuse are still needed but seeing how this id one of the few things the Feds are authroized to do under our constitution we need to continue Defense spending.

Quoting dxing (Reply 22):
It's only mandatory because of the law behind the programs, the Constitution does not specify that the federal government is responsible to the citizens to ensure that they have anything like SS, medicare, or an "affordable health care act". It does however specify, in clear and certain terms, that the federal government is responsible for the common defense of the States.

     



OMG-Obama Must Go
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8296 posts, RR: 8
Reply 24, posted (3 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2734 times:

Quoting sccutler (Reply 21):
Principal cause of the housing crisis was excessive lending to unqualified borrowers..

Unqualified buyers slipped into houses via Liar Loans. The people making the Liar Loans had major financial benefits from selling houses to those they knew could not afford them. Even if there was only one mortgage payment made before foreclosure on these Liar Loans everyone still made money. Everyone simply relied on home inflation to cover their asses.

And so they resold the homes with more Liar Loans.

Quoting sccutler (Reply 21):
And this excuses an orgy of spending how?

Your preference was that Obama's Administration take no action at all with the economy spiraling down?

The Great Recession was only a myth?

We would have been fine with most major banks crashing, along with companies like AIG?

Let 'em all fail?

Are you assuming that we would have al rebounded by now?

Have lower unemployment?

Quoting sccutler (Reply 21):
The proportion of the productive economy gobbled-up by federal spending, and by spending by states mandated by federal regulation, is ever-increasing.

And one reason is that we have had a contraction in the private sector. Companies are now becoming profitable, have the cash available, but are not investing in growth. And growth of the economy is one of the critical approaches to reducing the national debt.

Quoting sccutler (Reply 21):
There was a time when American taxpayers were taxed substantially less than their counterparts in other developed countries - this is simply no longer the case, and we will consign ourselves to third-world status, and soon, if the ship is not righted.

There was a time when the top tax rate was 90% and the company was better managed that we have now. That's because moderate Republicans were professional in their management of the economy - just like Democrats. Neither party paid homage to groups like the Tea Party.

Quoting sccutler (Reply 21):
If your comments here require that you lay blame on one party or another, you're probably not ready to contribute in a meaningful way to the discussion (and this is not offered in response to any particular user's posts).

I've popped both parties over my years, moved from a conservative to a moderate and have been (recently) called a acid head socialist because I'm not a fanatic right wing.

These days the hard right is so obsessive that a middle class moderate veteran is called an acid head socialist?

Do I faithfully follow the Democrats? Nope. I even voted for Bush II, but only the first time. Got burned big time.

I also go back to previous experiences, be they from serving in the Navy or living in Australia.

Of course any time I bring up options that relate to medical environments that are successful, but not Born In America, I become a socialist. I think I was also a communist a time or two also.

What I would hate to see is this board to be locked into a hard rights only position.

Quoting dxing (Reply 22):
That is just completely igonoring the plain fact that the Social Security administration is an independent arm of the federal government just as the Treasury is a part of the federal government.

You're still working hard to avoid the issue that the Social Security Trust is a legal entity that has accepted retirement money from Americans and has loaned that money to a legal entity to allow the SURPLUS to grow. That helped America to grow, but you sure work hard discrediting all the benefits you are receiving.

Quoting dxing (Reply 22):
You can call it any insulting name you wish but it does not change the fact that the government loaned itself money for 40+ years at the citizens expense.

We've borrowed money from the SS Trust and others for major infrastructure expenses and for military costs. A carrier might be paid for over a shout period of time, but provides service over a far longer period. Same with USAF planes, Army tanks, roads, bridges, airports, etc. Long term investments that you want to stop even interest payments on? If your generation can make some minimal efforts at maintenance then they will be there for you and your children. I have little hope, however, for your generation making any efforts for your grandkids.

But then, hey, I'm just the acid head socialist on the board - what do I know about long term investments?

Quoting dxing (Reply 22):
You spent the money, enjoyed the roads and airports, and now expect the younger generation to pick up the tab that you accrued.

And you don't benefit from the Interstate System, or the airports and related investments?

Get real, your income appears to be related to working in the airlines. How much government money goes into IAH?

And how much federal money has gone into the freeway system there? I can remember generations ago when the Southwest Freeway was built. Now there are private freeways (and, yes, I have a sticker on my windshield) andprople are paying to use them. But out SS Trust dollars on loan built a lot of roads in Houston.


25 windy95 : Way to cover for the people who refuse to take personal responsibility. Your still working hard to say that taking a loan from yourself and paying in
26 Ken777 : Like those selling homes to people who would never be able to afford them? They made a lot of money. Or the banks that went "wink, wink,nudge, nudge,
27 dxing : Not at all. The problem is that the loans were made with absolutely no legitimate plan to pay them back. They are backed with paper, with no actual c
28 windy95 : Once again you wash away personal responsibility. Who cares what the realtor's, bank's or insurance companies offered. The people still had to say ye
29 Post contains links and images Mir : Isn't it? Tax rates in the US are still quite a bit lower than in most other developed countries, and last year the Bush tax cuts got extended. Feder
30 ltbewr : I do believe that a partial shutown of the Federal government will occur, much like as in the 1990's and it could last longer than that one. Clearly w
31 Post contains images dxing : Agreed. It's in real trouble now. As to you getting your money, we all know that you live way to wild and active lifestyle to ever make it to retirem
32 windy95 : They are lower because they are figuring in the people who pay nothing. What is the % for all the people who actually pay most of the taxes. 30 to 60
33 Post contains images Ken777 : Exactly like any other Treasury loan, like the loans from China? So let's first start with bringing in some user taxes directly applied to the infras
34 seb146 : The party of "no" is still up to their same old song and dance. Any compromise coming from the Democrats is automatically rejected. Will the governme
35 windy95 : I cannot understand how you can stand up for irresponsible citizens who take out loans with out reading them or understanding them. Or how they walk
36 Post contains images Ken777 : You must be in the investment, insurance or real estate business. Is the infrastructure still there? Yep. From roads to tanks & carriers in a war
37 windy95 : No I am a citizen who makes a informed decision when buying my property, vehicles and investments. I understood what I was getting myself into along
38 Post contains images Ken777 : As were a lot of others. People who thought they had a "professional real estate agent" who showed them how they could get a short term low interest
39 Post contains images Mir : Yeah, I suppose I'm on track to be bruised and battered in a box by age 50.... Let's say you want to buy an airplane. There's a new manufacturer who
40 windy95 : Did they brake the law? Sorry but that is allowing me to keep the money I earned. How is my keeping more of my money a free handout to someone who pa
41 windy95 : This is a ridiculous comparison . Are you comparing interest rates for a mortgage/adjustable mortgage for a home to performance specs on airplanes? I
42 Post contains links dxing : Go to any bankruptcy court in the nation and explain that the first creditor that should be paid is yourself as you loaned yourself money with unsecu
43 Mir : One investment to another. When the bank loans someone money, they're making an investment in that person in hopes of future returns (otherwise there
44 Post contains links dxing : Looks like both sides are about to blink....... http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/26/us/politics/26budget.html WASHINGTON — The prospect of an imminent
45 seb146 : Since the right is fond of analogies, here's one: A CEO, tea partier and union member are all sitting at a table with a plate of 12 cookies in front o
46 Post contains links Ken777 : Interesting article in the WaPo today, indicating that the GOP Plan would cost 700,000 jobs between now and the 2012 election. Would cut growth in the
47 dxing : If they are government jobs then I'm all for it. And yet the interior department is still enforcing a moritorium on offshore drilling that a court of
48 windy95 : If we could only get back to the good old days of the Bush/Cheney deficits 140 billion instead of 1.4 trillion. And they are complaining about this $
49 Ken777 : 700,000 increase in the unemployed, with all the follow-on impacts. Less income tax revenues, increased payouts for unemployment, food stamps, Medica
50 windy95 : Yes. As long as it reduces the governmetn and balances the budget. Way to avoid the difference between $140 Billion and Obamas $ 1.4 trillion. When f
51 SCCutler : Utterly meaningless. First of all, "income taxes" also include the 15.3% for FICA/Medicare, and this is a tax that hits everyone from dollar one. Add
52 Ken777 : Only a conservatives laughs at that. And only a conservative would consider loss of JOBS, which INCREASES unemployment will be a good th9=ing. Like T
53 SCCutler : Until one grasps the essential reality that government creates nothing, they will forever try to justify the creation of government jobs. Bitter irony
54 seb146 : Keep in mind Bush kept all the war spending off budget AND signed the first stimulus into law. All that spending by the evil Democ... oops... guess n
55 sccutler : No one in their right mind would accuse President Bush of being fiscally responsible; he could not find any ink for his veto pen. But, as far as enab
56 Ken777 : Unless you are over the cap, and then you get to forget the SS Withholding. The more you make the further you get ahead of those who are not so fortu
57 Post contains links and images dxing : All 700 thousand jobs are not going to be lost at one time in one fell swoop so your scenerio is rather jaded. As with private industry a lot of the
58 FlyPNS1 : Of course not, because the jobs were simply outsourced to private contractors. If the government had really eliminated almost 400K jobs, you would ha
59 sccutler : Eye on the ball, young 'un. Re-read what's above - was pointing out that the cited listing of "income taxes" allowed the implication that the tax bur
60 Ken777 : The folks making a fortune from Medicare fraud sure notice the lack of auditors and/or investigators. They probably contributed big dollars to the Te
61 Post contains links dxing : No you wouldn't. SS, medicare, and other entitlement programs, which have made up the bulk of government spending for well over 2 decades eat up the
62 sccutler : Absolutely, 100% correct. One of the most basic and rational comments I've seen on the board. Now, hold it, son. Boeing and EADS wanted the tanker co
63 Post contains images Ken777 : Honest medical professionals actually show concern for following the regulations. If you want to find Medicare fraud you have to go after the crooks.
64 Post contains links dxing : Perhaps they should just start in house. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Tax/1...e-irs-back-taxes/story?id=10125860 Working for Uncle Sam comes with s
65 Post contains links FlyPNS1 : As you said, to really have a chance at cutting the deficit, big cuts to SS and Medicare are needed. These cuts will require people to pay more out o
66 Post contains images Baroque : Not the best of examples perhaps? It does stretch the meaning of the word "accident " in as much as about four sequential errors were made, each of w
67 Post contains images Ken777 : I have no problems with that. No big deal - just use a bit of intelligence and sort out the legitimate disputes as you and I fall under the same disp
68 dxing : That is going to have to happen regardless of which party makes the initial move, Failure to do so will ultimately mean a complete collapse of both p
69 Baroque : It was not a small "i" that was missed it was a bloody great big BOP.
70 dxing : i guess the question remains....do you think the spill was willful? Its easy now to say they missed something important. You can say that about any l
71 Arrow : That's the wrong question. Of course it wasn't wilful; no company sets out to create that kind of havoc. The question is, was it negligent. And the e
72 Post contains images Baroque : Just so. Unless of course the folk in question had a particular wish for the afterlife. Even negligence in this case is pretty difficult to understan
73 dxing : Again, almost every major industrial accident can be pegged to some sort or negligence or oversight. Then you have to decide if it was wilfull or not
74 Baroque : Sigh. Do you understand that for most folk, intending to commit suicide is not something they get up to on your average day? I thought my comment on
75 Arrow : I don't disagree with most of what you are saying, and well-intentioned people can disagree on what constitutes reasonable regulation. But when there
76 Post contains images dxing : Your answer reads like a lawyers brief. So the short answer is no, you don't think it was wilfull. See how easy that is. Agreed. But when you then mi
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Help! Computer Will Not Shut Down posted Fri Sep 5 2003 21:01:33 by Dragon-wings
LHR Shut Down For Top Gear BBC? posted Tue Dec 21 2010 19:04:55 by Goblin211
Lieberman Wants To Shut Down The Internet posted Sat Jun 19 2010 16:12:18 by maxter
Widgeteads Shut Down posted Wed Apr 28 2010 21:42:13 by web500sjc
Large Hadron Collider To Shut Down Safety Concerns posted Wed Mar 10 2010 02:46:25 by MadameConcorde
Lord Monckton: Shut Down The UN, Arrest Al Gore posted Mon Jan 25 2010 05:25:06 by Baroque
Obama Budget Deficit Will Be Larger Than Projected posted Sat May 9 2009 00:24:03 by FreequentFlier
Venezuela Consulate In Houston Shut Down posted Sat Nov 8 2008 01:07:00 by UAXDXer
Remote Shut Down posted Tue Nov 27 2007 00:07:14 by CXfirst
Has The Viidoo Site Shut Down? posted Fri Dec 1 2006 02:37:02 by Silverfox