“The House has been frittering away precious time on ideological games, forcing Congress to miss its Friday deadline for an agreement on raising the debt ceiling,” according to an editorial in the New York Times. “Fortunately, there are signs of adulthood in Washington’s sandbox, and it remains possible that a deal could be reached to prevent the loss of America’s credit standing.
“The Friday target was originally imposed by the White House to allow time to pass a bill before default begins just 11 days later on Aug. 2. With economic calamity clearly in sight, markets beginning to rattle and even cynical economists getting scared, the desperate search for a plan to raise the debt limit is a 24-hour operation at the Capitol. (The right thing for Congress to do, of course, was to pass a clean raise to the limit, but the Republicans would not let that happen.)
“For all its flaws, the Gang of Six plan — unlike the ideas floating in the House — is at least a framework for further discussion. It is much more promising than the ‘Plan B’ being cobbled together by Senate leaders to raise the debt ceiling in three increments while cutting at least $1 trillion in spending with no revenue increases.
“It is hard to see how the extremist Republican caucus in the House could accept the Gang of Six plan. At the moment, at least 80 members have signed a letter objecting even to the ‘Plan B’ proposal. But perhaps the growing prospect of a financial crash will focus a few minds. With a bit of extra time, and a good deal of extra sense, there is still a chance to avert disaster.”
The rest of the article is here.
Filed under: Uncategorized
I guarentee that the ultra right morons will mess this up too with some kind of stupidity
You can’t fix stupid. Especially Grover Norquist politically calculated stupidity. They are, with malice aforethought, the tea-liban are, on purpose, intentionally bringing down the United States Government. They are like an abusive boyfriend–if they can’t have “her”, they make sure they beat her half to death for the “next guy”…that’s Norquists
m.o. This isn’t about the debt ceiling…its about who is legitimately the leader of the United States of America…which IS NOT them. Kate
Kate,
You must give Chris Matthews his talking points on Mr. Norquist!
Allow me to address “moron” and “stupid” since those are considered strong language in most circles. The Republicans in Congress have asked for three things that seem pretty reasonable to me. Please let me know how you think any of these would bring down the government of the United States:
1) They asked for $112 billion in the reduction of spending increases for next year, which is part of the promise they made to the voters to reduce spending by $100 billion, of which they have only done about $352 million to date: Is it bad to keep promises in politics?
2) They have asked that federal spending be capped at about 20% of GDP. Do you think the federal government needs more that a fifth of our economic output?
3) They have asked that a balanced budget amendment be sent to the states: Are you against having the people decide state by state if having a balanced budget is a good idea?
And as a bonus question: Isn’t having a balanced budget a good idea?
John
John:
You asked Kate if she is against having people decide state-by-state that having a balanced budget (amendment) is a good idea. I assume that that’s a rhetorical question.
Do you also, then, think it’s a good idea to have HJR 47 adopted so that the Equal Rights Amendment can be ratified when the next three states support it? Or do you think the ERA should go back to square one and start the process all over again?
Off-point to this thread, perhaps, but maybe not that far off.
Steve,
It is not as far off topic as we often wonder in these discussions!
I have no problem with various amendments going to the states and even leaving credit for ones that have already approved the ERA, as long as there is an option to remove such approval if they are so inclined.
I use to have this debate when I was with Gun Owners when I would point out that if folks really don’t like what the 2nd Amendment says, they can always use the amendment process to change it!
The Constitution is not set in stone, but the founders wisely made it very difficult to amend.
John
Not negotiating with economic hostage takers is a better idea…and defending the 98% of us that need defending from them. Kate
Actually, I think Boehner was busy counting blonde tea party heads in the House to see if any of them flew to Norway…Oslo, Oklahoma City, rw extremism– horrible. Kate
Grover’s concepts belong in the groover….as in river rafting groovers.
Jeff,
The real compromise is going to be Plan B: NO ONE in Washington is serious about making the hard choices that need to be made: I think Gary North nails it in this piece: http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north1007.html
As he rightly says, all of the debt talk is theater so in the end the limit will be raised and the talk of “cuts” will be phony.
John
I’m not following you into the Norquist/teanut weeds Stoos. The fact is–they see the president of the United States as illegitimate–although duly voted into office-and will do anything, including committing an “honor killing” of our country to see him out of office. On behalf of the wealthiest lobbyists and citizens on the planet. Mitch McConnell said as much. It’s very clear and the Grover lines are drawn. Screw em. Kate
Kate,
So stay out of the weeds and just answer the questions that is asked. IF this is not an acceptable compromise then present both your objections and the alternatives. Remember, the Tea Party folks just so don’t raise the debt limit PERIOD and I can certainly agree with that position, but it ain’t going to happen so we should be talking compromise.
John
You cannot negotiate in good faith with Norquist wealth lobbyists or tea party zealots. Their motivations are what I have described above. It really is that basic and debased, John. Katep
Kate,
Then what you are saying is that we don’t raise the debt ceiling because last time I checked they will have to get that through the US Congress, so that is OK by me.
You could still humor me and answer the questions strictly from a policy standpoint.
John
So what you’re saying John, is that we need to not let any type of program go thru, even if we default on the current prorgams, as it will do us all “good”….
Am I correct on your assesment of the situation?
Brad,
I you are talking about not raising the debt limit, that would put us on a pay as you go basis which would be a BIG improvement over what we are doing right now.
Tough medicine in the short-term but huge benefits in the long term: Sort of like chemo.
John
Wow – that’s one of the most asinine, misguided statements I’ve seen in quite a while, even from you Stoos (I quit reading the local angry dinosaurs a while back, but maybe you should go there to find your level).
Default, or even more perceived instability, would crush whats left of US credit on a global scale – which ironically is the mantel upon which the globalists (Clinton & the Bushies) place their gilded merits; and we have not even fully realized the debt burden incurred by unfunded wars, trickle down ‘stimuli’, and the era(s) of greed.
And besides, as proven, we’re way too far down the road to adopt PAYGO as viable economic policy.
J Cutter,
I did not say it was the preferred path: It was Kate who refused to negotiate so I was just making the point that this could be where it ends and just as leaving things alone in 2008 is now seen as the better course of action, so will this in a few years, and perhaps even months.
John
“…and just as leaving things alone in 2008 is now seen as the better course of action, so will this in a few years, and perhaps even months.”
Sez who?
And I contend that, based upon my sources and research, by ‘leaving it alone’ in 2008 we would have book rate unemployment level of >13% by this point (effectively 25% real world adjusted for underemployment, etc.), among other catastrophic consequences of runaway failed ‘leadership’.
Again, the arrogance of your assertions is appalling.
There would certainly have been pain, as there is at the middle and lower levels today: The BIG difference is that the big boys & girls would have suffered as well and maybe even more.
John
Stoos, that sounds about as bright as cutting off your arms to prevent them from making a debit card transaction. Rich wingnut fanatics, I tell ya…Kate
Kate,
It is more like the struggling family who finally decides that should NOT get that next credit card even though it is offering to make the payments on the other ones at a reduced rate for six months.
Again, means making some tough decisions in the short term but leaving them much better off in the long term.
Or to use your analogy, if that ATM arm does have cancer you are suggesting that we take some aspirin so we can continue to use it.
John
The “patient” is fine, it is the teaparty “doc” that is all f&%#ed up on Xanax or somethin Stoos. Physician, heal thy own half-baked a@#…Kate
I heard some interesting analysis today. Unfortunately there is a lot of misinformation out there and it is hard to nail this down as well as a tough pill to swallow. What I was told is that the USA is now running up debt at about 1.4 trillion per year and that the 4 trillion worst case reduction scenario over ten years would only cut that back about 30%. In other words, there’s nothing to stop the USA from running up the debt until no one will buy the T-Bills so interest rates will rise and rise until it all fall apart. .If that’s true and if John says that sooner is better, he may be right because the collapse won’t be as deep if it comes sooner than later.
I’d definitely like to see the source of this info.
I believe it – as I do that bankruptcy is a viable option for individuals, or even companies that have been compromised by forces beyond their control. It’s a clean slate kind of reset. But I have trouble wrapping my brain around the viability of such a move on a global scale. I simply believe that the economies are too inter-dependent and that we are in the midst of a global correction due to the failed monetary policies of many a wealthy country who dictate the terms of policies on the world stage as ‘market movers’. It is true that our ‘default’ would be softened by the poor state elsewhere, but we are we still ready for the fallout, or can we fantasize our way toward a new bubble?
http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2011/04/19/what-america%E2%80%99s-debt-problem-means-for-the-global-economy/
I seems to me that the wingers spreading the GDP/Spending ratio mantra are tired in their analysis, as we moved beyond such production-based markers when we went all free-trade and globalized our markets – much as we once moved beyond the ‘gold standard’ as asset-backed security of our monies.
The credit tied to debt crisis has been simmering for a long time, but the politics is just apparent at the eleventh hour.There will be a deal, it’s just that the vocal minority of has-been, failed policy makers is still struggling for control, and given that privilege by the current administration at our expense.
Greg,
The basic numbers this year are revenues with be about $2.2 trillion and spending will total $3.6 and that is the best case scenario.
The debate is over how dangerous this is: I say it is as serious as you would think it was for a family that was making $44,000 and spending $72,000. Dr. Krugman and the other economists would argue that the deficit is not large enough because it is that spending that is keeping our economy going.
That did NOT work in the 1930′s or 1940′s and it is not working well today.
John
Government spending certainly did work in the 1930s and 1940s. The US — thanks to government spending — was emerging from the worst of the Great Depression by 1936-1937, when FDR made the mistake of capitulating to conservative demands to “balance the budget” (a goal FDR himself espoused in his first campaign for president but wisely abandoned in actual governance). So, in 1937 the economy slid back into depression (as a result of that lapse in judgement) until the effective (but not most efficient) government spending program in the form of WWII brought us out of that depression. This is all well supported by data.
Government spending isn’t working well today because it hasn’t been effectively tried yet, and obviously won’t be tried so long as there’s a bipartisan consensus in Washington that our biggest problem is the budget deficit, rather than a jobs crisis.
We have had this debate here before, so I will ask for the data: I know what happened after the largest DECREASE in government spending after WWII.
It was basically the same as what happened in 1921, the last time that the government largely stayed out of economic policy.
So where is the data to show that government intervention brings economic recovery?
John
And yet, the US continues to be able to borrow at low interest rates, as does Japan, which is running a debt/GDP of ratio over 200%.
Why is that?
Of course, that could all change in a moment (possibly the moment of debt default).
You are absolutely right and that is the problem with living in a house of cards: Any bit of wind creates BIG problems.
I was glad to see in this morning’s Bee that even Dr. Krugman does not understand what happened with the “agreement” on Greece this week!
John
I think think the Churchill quote that the United States is the worst country in the world except for all the others explains it aptly. It’s all relative.
OK, I’m going to predict that if the Republicans continue obstructing and playing brinkmanship through the weekend Obama is going to raise the debt ceiling in spite of them and it will be a move the majority approve of.
Sunday night will begin a new chapter.
What isn’t in dispute is whose failed leadership and absolute lust for power and greed caused this Wall Street debacle. We’ve paid. While bankers and oil companies and Saudi sheiks and military contractors made record profits. We paid. When mortgage speculators and hedgefund managers took middle and working class money and homes. We paid. When these same “job creators” threw everyone under the bus BUT high paid administrators and executives and lobbyists and paid them even MORE money we paid. We are bloodily, righteously, candidly sick to f&%&ing death of paying. So, top 2% of all wealthiest humans/Americans on all the planet? (Especially Grover Norquist and his father, Karl Rove)… It’s all urine’s peepee…Kate
I can’t help but think of that stupid man with his child at Vernal Falls the other day, where he held her upside down over the precipice, looking down to the bottom. Luckily, ever so luckily, they weren’t part of the three who took their final plunge.
The situation ever so reminds me of the 80 Repubbys and the debt ceiling.
Douglas,
Allow me to gently say that this was a poor comparison to draw.
John
How many unfunded Obamacare babies will die as the USA credit rating crashes, and the American dollar gets far less for the average American citizen?
The freshmen congressfolks are serving raw room temp hamburger at their barbeque, and will soon be cluelessly wondering why their voters are so sick.
Let me “draw” a not so gentle comparison this morning…radical, right-wing, xenophobic, fundamentalist christian, anti-islam, foaming tea party rhetoric begets Timothy McVeigh at the Murrah Building, which, one more time, begets, neo-nazi rw whacko terrorist, aryan freak in Norway who murders cornered children. Because he doesn’t like their parents politics–no cauldron of Hell could have done a better job creating these pigs. Which makes fundamentalist Christians no better than the jihadists you spew about. But, you may have given the U.S.A. a wake up call–so, teahadists–”we’re not afraid, neither is the Norwegian government or most of the civilized word and “No Coup For You”…you get nothing for your hatred. Kate
Kate,
I certainly feel the same outrage that you do when observing what happened yesterday in Norway, where by the way my sister raised her five children.
However, I would caution you to withhold judgment until a few more facts are known about the madman’s motives: As with the shooter in Arizona who was initially deemed a right-wing nutcase, it is just as likely that this man will also be a product of the Zeigeist model of evolutionary humanism where they argue that we should still be worshiping the sun god.
Remember, the Christian faith teaches that man is made in the image of God and as part of living as one made in God’s image and respecting others as well, murder is forbidden, harassment, rampaging, and the violent that J Cutter outlined below are all considered wrong and opposed. Are there Christians who do such things? Absolutely because we are all sinners, but the difference is that other Christians have the basis to come along and say those actions were very wrong: The end does not justify the means under Biblical justice.
On the other hand, what does a humanist do when a fellow human does wicked things: He or she has no real basis for saying it is wicked, just that they think it is very wrong. When you buy the propaganda about how we all evolved from the rocks, the ONLY truth is that the end justifies the means, or as they taught us in high school, the survival of the fittest is how we all got here.
The bottom line is that what this man has done is horrific and I pray that justice is carried out in a swift and sure manner.
John
John
Only a madman hands a psychotic a loaded ideology and then is surprised at how wrong things can go. Very wrong, wickedly wrong, a slur on the Wikkan religion to use the latter term. Not unlike how some Wahhabi talk about Christians.
You still haven’t discussed how many children and babies will die at the hands of the 80 Congressmen who want to cut how much in services? and not to raise any taxes?
TAXES THAT MIGHT SAVE BABIES LIVES???
Keep your priorities right in front of you. ALL of them, not just taxes on the wealthy.
Which is worth more? A stupid “pledge,” coupled with saving the very rich a few dollars, or SAVING BABIES!?!?
Or does your stand on abortion go by the wayside if having money to care for the BABIES afterwards has to come from taxes on the rich?
Put up or shut up.
What are your priorities on these issues?
Douglas,
If you really want to talk about children, I would be happy to do so. I have two major priorities:
1) We must stop the slaughter of the unborn in our nation where we have made the womb the most dangerous place to be in childhood.
2) We must return the responsibility for raising and caring for those we allow to be born to the parents, extended families, churches and other charitable groups that have always done so in the past: I have lived in what some of you refer to as a Ghetto for the past 28 years and know first hand the damage that has been done by Washington DC nanny government.
John
John, what about the deaths mainly in Africa now where the capacity to support life is surpassed? Would you support abortions there in the death camps?
I’m against abortions but I am more against those “saved” babies being condemned to a life of horror.
It strikes me wrong to force the end of abortions while standing idly by to watch the consequences of over population or exhausting the planet they will live on in a life of suffering. In that light pro-life sounds sadistic. If you truly care about abortions you will truly care about the world that tomorrow will bring.
Why not focus on prevention?????? There are ways to have sex that don’t cause diseases and births. You must know an ounce of prevention would cure a pound of abortions.
I think you are clinging to personal principles at the expense of the greater good. I don’t believe Jesus would approve of your position either, given the greater reality and his admonition to not judge and to love your enemies.
Greg,
First your basic premise is wrong: How can you say, “this child is going to suffer therefore it is better to kill it?” Even if you try to say it is not yet real human life, but just potential life, then you have opened the doors to many of the atrocities we saw in the 20th Century that were done in the name of the “greater good.”
Turning to Africa where they do have some REAL problems, are they caused by over-population or governments and cultures? If I have done the math right Africa is about five times the size of the continental US and has only three times the population: One billion people v. three-hundred and fifty million. I don’t think it is a stretch to argue that they have greater natural resources, but they are at least roughly the same.
So I would argue that I am following the admonition of Jesus to love our enemies by striving to help them see children as a blessing from God and to follow His principles so ALL can have a better life. He is also the one that told us to be fruitful and multiple until we fill the earth: i don’t know what that number will be, but the last time I flew across the United States it was pretty clear that we still have a ways to go.
john
110,000 children in foster care await forever homes that never come. Now funding for those homes themselves is in danger, and the children will be out on the streets. Are those homes what you call Nanny State interference? What about children with no extended families to do anything for them?
Douglas,
Here is one story among many successes they have had in Detroit dealing with the most difficult cases. Sadly it is often the old ‘war on poverty’ bureaucrats that end up opposing or slowing such efforts down. They like BIG case loads because that means more staff [and before someone goes on the attack, I am not referring to the case workers who are doing the hard work!].
http://library.adoption.com/articles/homes-for-black-children-recruits-through-courtesy-and-community-connections.html
John
Bernie Sanders and a handful of progressive democrats are the only representatives standing up for the people in the US Senate. The republican party has become something I can’t describe outside of one term “Corporatist”. They only represent the interests of the extremely wealthy and huge corporations.
Well stated Ben. I’m one to say not all corporations are guilty but these mega welfare corps (we need your tax dollars to bail us out so we can dish out $10M bonuses to executives who don’t deserve them) disgust me to no end. Abraham Lincoln would be turning in his grave if he knew how the great party he created has turned into a cesspool.
Michelle,
Actually President Lincoln fought to have greater federal power, so he carries a great deal of the responsibility in my mind.
John
Ben,
This was a brilliant speech and I even found much to agree with: Pretty scary, but then he and Congressman Paul have worked together on military funding and some other issues.
Perhaps you would care to tackle the questions that I asked Kate above, that thus far no one on the list has been willing to take on:
The Republicans in Congress have asked for three things that seem pretty reasonable to me. Please let me know how you think any of these would bring down the government of the United States:
1) They asked for $112 billion in the reduction of spending increases for next year, which is part of the promise they made to the voters to reduce spending by $100 billion, of which they have only done about $352 million to date: Is it bad to keep promises in politics?
2) They have asked that federal spending be capped at about 20% of GDP. Do you think the federal government needs more that a fifth of our economic output?
3) They have asked that a balanced budget amendment be sent to the states: Are you against having the people decide state by state if having a balanced budget is a good idea?
And as a bonus question: Isn’t having a balanced budget a good idea?
John
YEAH!!!
Let’s roll this biatch back to the thirties!!! (along with civil & reproductive rights, etc.)
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_20th_century_chart.html
(and just search “Big Government Myth’ for more)
More effing nonsense – clearly some of our intellect, comprehension and retained knowledge eclipses your mindless regurgitation of winger talking points Stoos. All these ‘questions’ have been addressed, just not to fit your batsh*t crazy speak.
It’s a new, scary world of your idol’s making, and you and yours have no clue as to how to put the toothpaste back into the tube – just ramble on about the good-old-days and attempt to rinse, lather & repeat.
Again, I guess this fool stirs your pot for debate Jeff, but I guarantee it’ll drive as many away.
J Cutter,
And what is to fear from good debate?
My questions seem simple enough and yet there are no attempts to answer them, even for the benefit of others who may be watching.
I did enjoy your link: We have gone from the government spending 6% of GDP in 1906 to almost 40% in 2010. I think that pretty much make my case don’t you think?
I would defy ANYONE to read the stories on Greece today and explain what they are doing to solve their problems: They are a few years down the road in their fiscal mess, but we will not be far behind if we don’t actually address what is going on.
John
I don’t agree, J Cutter. If we are ever going to dig out of this mess, those with alternate viewpoints must feel welcome to this site, knowing they will be heard, and then scratch their heads to a response that is respectful and persuasive.
I believe Stoos is a sincere person and we better make the best of it or enjoy preaching to the choir while the boat sinks.There is no other way to solve the problems of today than by showing respect and listening to what others have to say, even if we don’t agree with them.
Stoos makes some good points sometimes and is respectful. He sets a good example that many on this site would do well to follow.
ah… ok dad.
You calling Stoos respectful is what I have a problem with Zaller (you clearly don’t know the man that perpetrated many an insult/assault over the years).
That being said, yes, he does play the simple game of perpetrating his affronts with the grin and slap atta-boys that obviously keep those like you assuaged.
Bottom line – nothing ‘real’ comes from Stoos. All distortions and propaganda, but softened by the affable eye gleam of the born again. It’s beyond me how you could consider anything he has written since I’ve been around here as worthy of debate.
I just simply disagree with honoring such game; and am not sorry if I throw off your delicate sense of decorum with calling it as I see it – as from what I’ve seen, for a group so intent on ‘investigating’ and debating issues, there is little true dissection going on here. No one apparently vetted Pruett (and AtPac for that matter) prior to my most basic research, yet pages of uninformed discussion had been dedicated. I doubt anyone here really knows Stoos’ history. ‘Positive Tickets’ were the extent of solutions proffered by participants to the GV crime discussions. And discovery of the distasteful Territorial Dispatch/Logue money link debacle was due to my looking at it from that same skeptical eye.
Maybe I’m not a fit amongst you more ‘enlightened’ stalwarts of the local righteous – I’ll accept that. And at the same time respect all that I assume you have contributed to our community in other ways.
Hell, none of my posting since the ‘unrested’ days has helped me at all – just gotten me ‘outted’ to friends and colleagues by those same pricks you had all been so ineffectually hand wringing over long prior to my contributions.
At least my personal examination (seen as ‘attacks’) have been of truly hypocritical public figures worthy of a good reaming – and I’m alright with that.
Hey JC, I think you bring a lot to these discussions with some very interesting insights and background. So does Stoos. I’ve seen people make points with him and I’ve seen him make valid points as well.
I often get the urge to insult others here and sometimes I do but I always feel bad about it. That’s because I am convinced that the way out of this mess humans have made of the planet and their lives will only begin when they start to listen to each other respectfully and that that is important.
Zaller –
As said, I respect your right to handle Stoos or any other person/issue in whatever manner you chose.
Maybe I have misjudged your respected man.
Buy maybe my perspective is different.
Or maybe I just hold a grudge.
Maybe a woman I love was harassed at a Sacramento Women’s Clinic by zealots; some of whom later went on a rampage, attacking clinics and ultimately killing a doctor.
Maybe I was beaten to a pulp while counter protesting a white supremacist rally where the speaker was the ‘pastor’ of a reformist ‘church’.
Maybe my brother the law enforcement officer was gunned down by psychopaths recruited by right wing extremists preaching ‘secession’ from our communal union as cover for their inability to assimilate.
Or just maybe is it that I have empathy for those that have experienced such tragedy and injustice?
I will allow that my tolerance has been compromised by witnessing the smug presence in our midst of those that have perpetrated, co-signed, and/or still tacitly excuse such actions.
But I surely have been face-to-face with true scum. Men whose offenses are unconscionable. And at a point, I realized that though absolutely despicable and deplorable, those that knew no better or even worse, owned up to their responsibilities, were actually more worthy of my pity and/or forgiveness than the manipulative type that knowingly commit maybe even lesser offenses, yet attempt to conceal their actions and agenda (particularly within the cloak of religion, etc). When faced with that true disclosure, I would test your theory of ‘respectful listening’.
My experiences are such that I believe progress must be made to the peril of some such sensitivities – as that is where those commonly ‘left’ traits fail us in the political arena; the more aggressive ‘right’ proceed with fewer qualms.
/rant (and end Stoos as topic for me)
JC- For me this was never about Stoos and all about building communications rather than tearing it down. I’ll say it again: You have a lot to contribute and it would be far more effective if you did it as a teacher (dad) than as an antagonist.
None of us on the overall scale of things are any better than the others and we are all in this together and doing the best we can given our blindnesses. Forming into insular groups where the dissenters are driven off will never achieve anything but more isolation and animosity.
I recall these quotes (paraphrased)
If everyone followed an “eye for and eye” the whole world would be blind.
and
If we can’t work together as brothers we will hang together as fools
Bernie Sanders made news yesterday on Thom Hartmann’s radio program by saying that he thinks a primary challenge to Obama “would be a good thing.” This is a radical change in his thinking.
He pointed out that what has allowed Obama to move so far to the right is the absence of any effective opposition within his own party.
Time’s they are changin’ …
John, I’ve already looked into the blonde haired, blue eyed, RIGHT WING, Xenophobic, EXTREMIST…there are screenshots and documentation of his right-wing rantings and extreme, conservative views. He is LINKED to U.S. extra conservative anti-Muslim websites like Pamela Gellmans and another called Gates of Vienna by his postings there. He stated on his Facebook page that he is a conservative “christian.” His writings are much less volatile and angry than most Tea Party, Hot Air or Free Republic nutjob rantings. He cornered 80 children and killed them because they were the children of liberals. Don’t think, Mr. Stoos, that this freak or others like him get a teabagger “pass”…they are no different than any terrorist on this planet. They deserve our derision and disgust…and it appears to me that they are about to reap what they’ve sown spiritually and politically…Kate
Sorry, that’s Pamela Geller website and a site called Atlas Shrugged that this moonbat, rw freakozoid frequented. There’s a extremist rw political party over there he calls the “true party” or some such rabid twaddle…run by a guy named Wilding…busy looking for U.S.tea party xlink-upsx and mutual kissy faced slavish fawning…and of course, there is some…Kate
For Ben or anyone:
We keep debating tax rates when it appears that tax collection might be the better discussion: Can anyone explain in English how any company can make billions and yet pay no taxes?
http://beta.news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/g-e-paid-no-taxes-5-1-billion-20110325-082417-878.html
john
and how so many are in a cash only economy and pay no taxes?
The answer to your question is lobbyists and foolish representatives.
Here’s a question for you, John.
If you were a “:job creator” earning over $250K a year and your taxes went up on anything over that, would you start looking for write offs? Could it be that you might actually create some more jobs because you figured it better to write off the money developing your business than pocketing it?
Greg,
You will always have a cash only economy [or black market] and the size of it is almost always directly proportional to the size and scope of government regulations and taxes. I don’t remember any stories about cigarette smugglers back when my dad bought his Larks for three bucks a cartoon.
The same is actually true about those job creators: The tax code does impact this as the GE example certainly shows. I think we should be a whole lot more focused on tax simplification rather than tax rates, something that even President Clinton has suggested.
The other reality that must be faced is that EVERY dollar the government takes out of circulation is a dollar that cannot be invested in any of the job creating adventures. There are certainly things that government must do for a healthy economy, like infrastructure and safety, but when it goes beyond that it enter very dangerous ground, as we are now learning the hard way.
john
Actually, John, I think your approach to legislating against abortions is so wrong that it actually contributes to them. It is a fact that education is the most efficient and effective way to stop abortions. Using legal penalties and fear tactics against abortion also tends to distract us from realizing its significance. What would Jesus do? He certainly wouldn’t use the government to force his beliefs on others as I think you propose. What about that?
I am definitely pro-life but I distinguish myself from the pro-lifers who don’t care what people think or feel and focus on fear and penalties to prevent abortion.
When the clearly effective approach to abortions is education and prevention and the pro-lifers instead choose ineffective fear and penalties they look a lot like a counterpart of the Taliban or “wolves” in Christian rather than Muslim clothing. They prefer violence over peace and excuse themselves with Christian myths;.
Greg,
Two quick thoughts:
1) When did we have more abortions: Before 1973 when all of our states had the right to regulate them or after 1973 when we had education and prevention?
2) Are you really willing to NOT have government enforce any of the beliefs that Jesus said we were to hold?
John
Cantor: Screw Your Coup and the tealiban too!
Kate
Hey Grover, let’s give the Tea Party exactly what they want–lets let em gamble on default. They have the collective financial acumen of 4 year olds. Oh, and Grover: Remember the plaedge! Remember the plaedge! The top 2% need their gold plated bidet money, their private jeeats, you wanted to toss granny under the bus on Colbert, remember? Wendi Deng needs a new pink suit and bright red nail lacquer! Priorities, priorities….Kate
I’m alright with you too Cutter. You produce some damn fine critical skills. Your name suits you…and you call it…:) Kate
“So where is the data to show that government intervention brings economic recovery?”
From http://www.shmoop.com/great-depression/statistics.html
“Growth of Government During the Great Depression
Roosevelt’s New Deal
in 1933: $8.7 billion
in 1934: $10.5
in 1935: $10.9
in 1936: $13.1
in 1937: $12.8
in 1938: $13.8
in 1939: $14.8
Average government spending as percentage of GDP, 1933-39: 15.4%
Mobilization for WWII
in 1940: $15.0 billion
in 1941: $26.5
in 1942: $62.7
in 1943: $94.8
in 1944: $105.3
in 1945: $93
Average government spending as percentage of GDP, 1940-45: 35.3%
Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal greatly increased the size and scope of government during the 1930s, then World War II increased government spending even more dramatically in the early 1940s, skyrocketing to consume nearly half the US economy during World War II.
Unemployment During the Great Depression
Average rate of unemployment
in 1929: 3.2%
in 1930: 8.9%
in 1931: 16.3%
in 1932: 24.1%
in 1933: 24.9%
in 1934: 21.7%
in 1935: 20.1%
in 1936: 16.9%
in 1937: 14.3%
in 1938: 19.0%
in 1939: 17.2%3
“Full and healthy employment in 1929 at 3.2% abruptly shifted with the crash on Wall Street and ensuing global depression. Rising unemployment reached double-digits in late 1930, and the situation continued to deteriorate through the bleak winter of 1932-33, when well over a quarter of all workers were unable to find jobs. The New Deal helped to reduce unemployment from 1933 through 1937, when another economic recession briefly caused a resurgence in joblessness. Full employment did not return until the war years of the early 1940s.
“To put Great Depression unemployment in context, consider that the highest annual unemployment rate ever recorded after 1940 was 9.7% in 1982. The average rate between 1998-2008 (including the 2002 recession) was 5%, and as of December 2008 (during a time of serious economic turmoil) unemployment stood at 7.2% nationally.”
Oh, and Mr. Boehner, who can’t find his way around a negotiation without a snipe hunt stick and a burlap bag and 52 booze soaked lobbyists–nobody gives one soggy tea bag about what debt deal you want–or what time your chinese wall street butt boys want it. You left…walked…like a scared cat, capish? And, no matter what you believe in your Orange tinted noggin…you or Grover baby are not THE MAN. Thank God and not ever…Kate
Oh, and tell your do nothing Congress to start with their own whopping, ridiculous salaries and benefits before you touch what people have worked for all their damn lives. Cut your own health benefits. See how you like “sharing the pain” for awhile. Kate