• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Democrats threaten violence on Michigan House floor

No I dont the biggest drivers of the debt were the Bush tav cuts. We had a surplus before boy wonder got into office and just like Republicans do when in power they charge up the credit card. See Reagan, Bush 1, and Bush 2. Obama had to clean up the mess left by the Republican congress and President.


Your reply shows you are not serious about this countries debt problem.

I love it when people cherry pick around Congress. The Congress that gave us the surplus before Bush was a GOP congress, and all during Reagan/Bush years it was a democratic congress, but you seem to totally reverse that in your analysis as it suits you.
 
Your jealousy is unbecoming. If the line worker is upset at what he or she makes as opposed to the CEO of a multi national company, then maybe instead of drinking booze, and smoking pot on their breaks, and all through out High School, they should have excelled in business in collage, and got the job....Don't be silly.

Really so now everyone that works a line is a drunk, potsmoking, undereducated loser. Well how typically Republican of you no wonder Republicans lost big in the last election. The facts are this country has the highest income gap in the world or very close to it.
 
I love it when people cherry pick around Congress. The Congress that gave us the surplus before Bush was a GOP congress, and all during Reagan/Bush years it was a democratic congress, but you seem to totally reverse that in your analysis as it suits you.

No it was a democrate as a President and a gop congress that cared about the country. Under Reagan and Bush it was a mix of both quit trying to rewrite history big fail there.
 
No I dont the biggest drivers of the debt were the Bush tav cuts.


Wrong. People keeping more of their own money is not a debt driver. Spending is. Like social welfare entitlements.

We had a surplus before boy wonder got into office

No you didn't....Sizzle nuts Clinton used smoke and mirror gimmicks to make it seem so but it evaporated as soon as the tech bubble burst.

Republicans do when in power they charge up the credit card. See Reagan, Bush 1, and Bush 2.

Obama's Chinese AmEx makes all three of theirs look like peanuts.

Obama had to clean up the mess left by the Republican congress and President.

I know this is the talking point, but just because you keep repeating it, doesn't make it a total fact...Obama has outspent every President before him, and left unchecked he will continue to spend over a Trillion a year for as far as the eye can see.

Your reply shows you are not serious about this countries debt problem.

Textbook projection.
 
No it was a democrate as a President and a gop congress that cared about the country. Under Reagan and Bush it was a mix of both quit trying to rewrite history big fail there.

LOL Big Fail? Facts are facts about who controlled the House and when and during the Reagan Bush years you lament it was the democrats as it was during must of our years of deficit spending

Control_of_the_U.S._House_of_Representatives.jpg
 
They do not threaten violence, they predict violence which is something completely different from threatening violence.

yeah, lol, it's like a bad imitation of goodfellas...."uh, hey....I ain't tellin' yuz what's commin'....but it could look a whole lot like violence....If yuz know what I mean"....

hahaha....
 
Reagan out spent every President before him and so did Bush 2 so what is your point. Obama inherited a mess created by a Republican congress and a President as well. Most of that debt can fall back on Bush 2. Sorry facts do not lie. There was no concern when Bush 2 was running up the debt at all same with Reagan.


Economic Downturn and Bush Policies Continue to Drive Large Projected Deficits — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities


There ya go doubt you will read it but your delusions are funny eitherway
 
That unsustainable contract is what the management agreed to. If it was not sustainable, and it's easy to see why it isn't, then that is not the fault of the union, nor the workers who hired them to negotiate for them. No one forced management to agree to unreasonable demands.
Someone did a poor job of negotiation.

As for the "American" brands, if there really is any such thing any more, I totally disagree that the added costs are the reasons they haven't been selling as briskly as some of the other brands. Look at the prices of similar models of Honda, Toyota, and Chevrolet, for example, and you'll see that the prices are quite similar. Chevy is most likely going to be the least expensive, as a matter of fact. Look at Consumer Reports, however, and talk to people who have owned these brands before, and you'll get the same story: Hondas and Toyotas are much more reliable and better designed. That's why the big three automakers are in trouble. It's called "competition", and without it, Chrysler, Ford and GM would still be selling us tail fins.


What a bologna answer ditto...You said the union didn't negotiate unreasonable demands, now you agree that they are unreasonable, but it's managements fault....Anything to cover for unions eh?

Oh, and as for the quality comparison, maybe they should cut out the dope smokin on lunch break in the park and focus on the job for that kind of money, ya think?
 
LOL Big Fail? Facts are facts about who controlled the House and when and during the Reagan Bush years you lament it was the democrats as it was during must of our years of deficit spending

View attachment 67139413

Dems controled the House from 1981 through 1987 the debt would have been much worse had taxes not been raised 11 times. Republicans had the Senate. Bush 1 didnt do that bad because he had to raise taxes again after the free wheeling of Reagan. Only one year of Reagans presidency did Dems control everything.
 
No I dont the biggest drivers of the debt were the Bush tav cuts. We had a surplus before boy wonder got into office and just like Republicans do when in power they charge up the credit card. See Reagan, Bush 1, and Bush 2. Obama had to clean up the mess left by the Republican congress and President.


Your reply shows you are not serious about this countries debt problem.

Please show me the U.S. Treasury Data that says we had a surplus under Clinton? Interesting that with that so called surplus the debt went up every year under Clinton from 4.4 trillion to 5.8 trillion. The Treasury shows no such surplus and the Treasury is the bank account of the United States.

further do you honestly believe that you keeping more of what you earn is an expense to the Federal Govt. thus causes debt? In addition please explain how under the Bush tax cuts we had record Tax revenue in 2007?

Your reply shows how little you know about your govt's budget and the revenue it collects.
 
Reagan out spent every President before him and so did Bush 2 so what is your point. Obama inherited a mess created by a Republican congress and a President as well. Most of that debt can fall back on Bush 2. Sorry facts do not lie. There was no concern when Bush 2 was running up the debt at all same with Reagan.


Economic Downturn and Bush Policies Continue to Drive Large Projected Deficits — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities


There ya go doubt you will read it but your delusions are funny eitherway


Ah, the Soros funded CBPP...

While the CBPP claims to be non-partisan, journalists usually characterize it as "liberal" or left of center.[4][5][6][7][8][9

Center on Budget and Policy Priorities - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Soros funded CBPP to the tune of 3.7million...


got anything objective to back you up, or are you just a caricature of liberal colloquiums?
 
Please show me the U.S. Treasury Data that says we had a surplus under Clinton? Interesting that with that so called surplus the debt went up every year under Clinton from 4.4 trillion to 5.8 trillion. The Treasury shows no such surplus and the Treasury is the bank account of the United States.

further do you honestly believe that you keeping more of what you earn is an expense to the Federal Govt. thus causes debt? In addition please explain how under the Bush tax cuts we had record Tax revenue in 2007?

Your reply shows how little you know about your govt's budget and the revenue it collects.

The US treasury sure seems to think there was surplus:

President Clinton and Vice President Gore, working with the Congress, set the
nation on a new course of fiscal responsibility. This program has reversed the
pattern of deficit spending. In fiscal year 1999, a surplus of $99 billion, or
1.1 percent of GDP is expected. This would be the largest surplus relative to
GDP since 1951. We have ended 28 consecutive years of deficit spending and
recorded the first back-to-back surpluses since 1956-57.
http://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Documents/debt.pdf
Why do you continue with same lies Conservative?
 
Last edited:
The US treasury sure seems to think there was surplus:

President Clinton and Vice President Gore, working with the Congress, set the
nation on a new course of fiscal responsibility. This program has reversed the
pattern of deficit spending. In fiscal year 1999, a surplus of $99 billion, or
1.1 percent of GDP is expected. This would be the largest surplus relative to
GDP since 1951. We have ended 28 consecutive years of deficit spending and
recorded the first back-to-back surpluses since 1956-57.

Why do you continue with same lies Conservative?

Please show me the surplus on the Treasury website. Thanks

Government - Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)

You and others cannot seem to comprehend the fact that the debt is made up of deficits coming from the Public Debt and intergovt. holdings. It is easy to show a surplus in public debt when you take from intergovt. holdings. Long term obligation debt isn't a surplus.
 
Please show me the surplus on the Treasury website. Thanks

Government - Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)

You and others cannot seem to comprehend the fact that the debt is made up of deficits coming from the Public Debt and intergovt. holdings. It is easy to show a surplus in public debt when you take from intergovt. holdings. Long term obligation debt isn't a surplus.

Yay a link:roll:

Now do you have anything of substance to counter Th US Treasury data I posted?
 
Yay a link:roll:

Now do you have anything of substance to counter Th US Treasury data I posted?

Easy, there was a public debt surplus but an intergovt. holding deficit so the net was a deficit.
 
The US treasury sure seems to think there was surplus:

President Clinton and Vice President Gore, working with the Congress, set the
nation on a new course of fiscal responsibility. This program has reversed the
pattern of deficit spending. In fiscal year 1999, a surplus of $99 billion, or
1.1 percent of GDP is expected. This would be the largest surplus relative to
GDP since 1951. We have ended 28 consecutive years of deficit spending and
recorded the first back-to-back surpluses since 1956-57.

Why do you continue with same lies Conservative?

It is a matter of semantics. Clinton with the GOP House had a budgeted surplus but not an actual "We took in more than we spent" surplus. We took in more than we expected, which was still off an actual deficit. The Ryan plan in the House actually has a balanced budget, but that is just on a 40 year projection, not on a cash in-cash out today way. The democrats, well they seem to have no long-term plan apparently.
 
I totally agree with you here and not just for the rich. All the tax cuts need to expire 40% cut in military and stop all of the corporate welfare and then we can think about adjusting Medicare and Medicade . Oh and end that big pharma give way that Bush did as well

The only adjusting to medicare that is needed is lowering the the age of quantification for it to about five, then we can ditch Obama care like conservatives want.
 
I love it when people cherry pick around Congress. The Congress that gave us the surplus before Bush was a GOP congress, and all during Reagan/Bush years it was a democratic congress, but you seem to totally reverse that in your analysis as it suits you.

What was the congressional makeup the year Bill Clinton raised taxes on those with incomes over $140,000 a year and individuals over $115?You remember that dontca?That was when Newt said that tax increase will take us into a recession for sure.
 
What a bologna answer ditto...You said the union didn't negotiate unreasonable demands, now you agree that they are unreasonable, but it's managements fault....Anything to cover for unions eh?

Oh, and as for the quality comparison, maybe they should cut out the dope smokin on lunch break in the park and focus on the job for that kind of money, ya think?

and you accuse me of making a bologna answer?
Firstly, union's negotiation position is not a demand. Go back and see what I really posted.
And secondly, the problem with poorly designed cars is not the assembly line workers smoking pot on the job. It is that the cars were poorly designed.
 
What was the congressional makeup the year Bill Clinton raised taxes on those with incomes over $140,000 a year and individuals over $115?You remember that dontca?That was when Newt said that tax increase will take us into a recession for sure.

Very Selective Memory you have as you ignore the elections of 1994 as well as the Tax reduction act of 1997. How convenient!! Democrats controlled the Congress when the Clinton tax increases were signed into law and that led to the "bloodbath" of 1994 and the economic turnaround.
 
Dems controled the House from 1981 through 1987 the debt would have been much worse had taxes not been raised 11 times. Republicans had the Senate. Bush 1 didnt do that bad because he had to raise taxes again after the free wheeling of Reagan. Only one year of Reagans presidency did Dems control everything.

Being "very liberal" is a right that you have in this country but that doesn't give you the right to make up your own "facts." You have a very selective memory and see what you want to see which are hardly the facts. Obama has spent more money than any other President in history yet you want to focus on Reagan and Bush. That partisan hackery is typical of the problem we have today. Your ideology trumps reality and actual facts. Republicans only controlled the Congress from January 2003 to January 2007 and I challenge you to look at the economic results during that period of time. Further I have asked in the past but never gotten an answer, how does raising taxes on the top 2% put 22.7 million Americans back to work and reduce the deficit?
 
Being "very liberal" is a right that you have in this country but that doesn't give you the right to make up your own "facts." You have a very selective memory and see what you want to see which are hardly the facts. Obama has spent more money than any other President in history yet you want to focus on Reagan and Bush. That partisan hackery is typical of the problem we have today. Your ideology trumps reality and actual facts. Republicans only controlled the Congress from January 2003 to January 2007 and I challenge you to look at the economic results during that period of time. Further I have asked in the past but never gotten an answer, how does raising taxes on the top 2% put 22.7 million Americans back to work and reduce the deficit?

Did Reagan and Bush2 spend more money than any other President during there term Yes one triples the debt the other doubled it. That is not making up facts. That is a fact. Secondly Demes did not have total control of the house during Reagans Presidency. The Seneate controlled by Republicans could have shot down that massive deficits. Three we all saw what happens when Republicans had total control of both house. The took thecredit card and went on a shopping spree. While the so called conservatives were whining about socialism and crying how all Muslims were sick and evil and going to kill everyone. The only one ignoring facts is you.
 
and you accuse me of making a bologna answer?
Firstly, union's negotiation position is not a demand. Go back and see what I really posted.
And secondly, the problem with poorly designed cars is not the assembly line workers smoking pot on the job. It is that the cars were poorly designed.


It is Ditto....Look, as a person I like ya, we have known each other for a long time on these boards, and You alone with others have always provided debate instead of bomb throwing, regurgitations of talking point blather...You're a smart guy. So you tell me am I reading this wrong....In one post you say....

Ditto said:
Workers aren't going to vote to strike over unreasonable wage demands.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...e-michigan-house-floor-54.html#post1061255157

Then just a couple of postings later you say...

Ditto said:
I didn't say that they don't ask, now did I?
I said that the union membership wouldn't vote to strike over it.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...e-michigan-house-floor-55.html#post1061255243

So at the very least you hedged your original statement....


Although I too am, as a worker myself for anything that would help boost my own take home pay, I also have an eye toward the longevity of the business that provides the job I do. It's like conservation. Is it that labor in Michigan on a auto assembly line is worth $28 per hour, while the same assembly on a line in South Carolina is only worth $17 per hour? While the factors that compile these disparities in pay for the "same" job exist on a host of factors such as cost of living in different areas, it is not all that. And the fact that cost of labor past, and present drive the over pricing of American made autos to the point that they can not be competitive in a world market without outsourcing. That is a problem in the long term vision of the labor force in their negotiation tactic, and push.

If labor unions are going to be relevant in the future they have to change the face they are now showing to the public. Over bloated institutions, heavily political, with a weighted agenda toward more Marxist ideology, and a sense of entitlement that boasts their greatest achievements that came a century ago, and after such great changes they helped usher in, they have settled for a frame of heavy handed, corrupt, and ugly tactics, fostered in associations with nefarious characters, and one sided political ideologies.

Their popularity has waned from nearly 40% in the 70s and 80s to just 7% now, and what face do they show? Trumpka, Hoffa, etc., all doing their part to divide instead of looking at how to make the Union a viable alternative again...They want to do it by force, instead of winning the argument, and that is their down fall.
 
Did Reagan and Bush2 spend more money than any other President during there term Yes one triples the debt the other doubled it. That is not making up facts. That is a fact. Secondly Demes did not have total control of the house during Reagans Presidency. The Seneate controlled by Republicans could have shot down that massive deficits. Three we all saw what happens when Republicans had total control of both house. The took thecredit card and went on a shopping spree. While the so called conservatives were whining about socialism and crying how all Muslims were sick and evil and going to kill everyone. The only one ignoring facts is you.

Yes, Reagan and Bush spent more money than any Previous President but Obama put that spending on steroids. And yes, Democrats controlled the House during the Reagan term announcing all Reagan Budgets Dead on Arrival. Reagan deficits 1.7 trillion, Bush deficits 4.9 trillion both in 8 years, Obama 5.6 trillion in 4 years.

Democrats controlled the Congress from January 2007 to January 2011. Basic civics would tell you who appropriates the money.
 
Back
Top Bottom