Page 14 of 20 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 192

Thread: White House won't accept new tax offer from Republican leader

  1. #131
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: White House won't accept new tax offer from Republican leader

    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    Links are only need to give proper credit to those who generated the information presented. If a quote or information is from a Book/movie/TV broadcast., no link is required, however, Author and Title, as a minimum, should be given. Besides giving proper credit to originators of works, it also allows those who view your post, and desire to, to look up the full context that it was taken from.

    Because, as some have noticed, common knowledge and logic are even more rare than common sense. Also, what I believe to be common knowledge and logic may not be what you understand to be common knowledge and logic. Without knowing what facts are "common knowledge" to you, I cannot compare them to facts that may be considered "common knowledge" to me. No two people have the same total sum of knowledge. And no two people apply "logic" in exactly the same way on political issues.



    Then why didn't you say that? I, for one, obviously, did not get that meaning from what you posted.
    I did say that. In conjunction with j's comment, I added to it. You leap in.

    As for links, you're not telling me something I don't know. But I spelled out fairly clearly what I was speaking about, and it was commonly known and my logic not hard to follow. I keep it simple as I can at times as I'm doing a couple to hinges at once and I'm practicing on an iPad I haven't mastered yet.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  2. #132
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The Republic of Texas.
    Last Seen
    11-15-17 @ 11:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,647

    Re: White House won't accept new tax offer from Republican leader

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    Well, here's the deal - President Obama won reelection with 332 electoral votes over 206 for the opposition and by more than 4,400,000 popular vote margin. No one has won with those margins since Reagan's second term. When Bush barely squeaked by Kerry in 2004, he claimed a mandate. Sorry, GOP, but you can't have it both ways.
    You are leaving out a vital and key difference. In '04, Bush and the Reps were also given a Majority in Both Houses of Congress. Despite the popular vote for President, the Senate only changed by 2 seats and the Reps still have a majority in the House. So, although he won the popular vote and was reelected and his party did increase in both houses, him and his party was not given full control as the Reps were in '04.

    Having said that, I don't believe either Bush or Obama, or anyone in politics for that matter, was given a "mandate". If there was a drastic change in the make up of Congress like what happened in 2010, and that party got the Presidency, I might, that is might, swallow rhetoric about mandates.
    Only a fool measures equality by results and not opportunities.

  3. #133
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: White House won't accept new tax offer from Republican leader

    Quote Originally Posted by TaraAnne View Post
    Yes he did last year in the grand bargin with Republicans. The spending problem did not start with Obama, everyone knows who, when, and where it started. The sad part is there is a minority that is simply delusion enough to deny it.
    Who started it can go on forever and each political party can blame the other but the real question is, what do you do about it now? Do you have any ideas?

  4. #134
    Mod Conspiracy Theorist
    rocket88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    A very blue state
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,140

    Re: White House won't accept new tax offer from Republican leader

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    Well, here's the deal - President Obama won reelection with 332 electoral votes over 206 for the opposition and by more than 4,400,000 popular vote margin. No one has won with those margins since Reagan's second term. When Bush barely squeaked by Kerry in 2004, he claimed a mandate. Sorry, GOP, but you can't have it both ways.
    Yeah, but Romney won those geograpically huge counties in Nevada that have more ghost towns than actual people.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jetboogieman View Post
    This issue has been plowed more times than Paris Hilton.
    Quote Originally Posted by Oborosen View Post
    Too bad we have to observe human rights.

  5. #135
    Mod Conspiracy Theorist
    rocket88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    A very blue state
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,140

    Re: White House won't accept new tax offer from Republican leader

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Nick View Post
    No, this is a perfect example of how the media lies and claims republicans come up with nothing, when they do all the time but Obama just shoots down the proposals.

    Obama's not willing to compromise on anything - it's his way or no way.

    Hell the republicans could probable draw up a plan identical to his own and he would still deny it because it was presented by republicans. What Obama wants is for the democrats to draft proposals and wants republicans to say "yes master."

    Obama is seriously a psychopath. "you don't offer me a cookie - I offer you a cookie" that is pretty much his pathology. He want's to look like a great savior and when his stupid plans fail he goes blaming everyone but his own remedial self.
    Have you ever negotiated anything? You don't walk in and take the first offer on the table. And in anything this public, nobody's going to say in a press conference that they accept the other side's offer with no changes.

    You guys are all in a tizzy because Obama won't do it Boehner's way. I'm glad to see Obama is finally learning how to negotiate instead of walking in with a compromise and letting the GOP move more to the right (see healthcare reform).


    Quote Originally Posted by Jetboogieman View Post
    This issue has been plowed more times than Paris Hilton.
    Quote Originally Posted by Oborosen View Post
    Too bad we have to observe human rights.

  6. #136
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: White House won't accept new tax offer from Republican leader

    Quote Originally Posted by rocket88 View Post
    Have you ever negotiated anything? You don't walk in and take the first offer on the table. And in anything this public, nobody's going to say in a press conference that they accept the other side's offer with no changes.

    You guys are all in a tizzy because Obama won't do it Boehner's way. I'm glad to see Obama is finally learning how to negotiate instead of walking in with a compromise and letting the GOP move more to the right (see healthcare reform).
    Does a "move more to the right" suggest that spending, debt, etc. get under some control?

  7. #137
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The Republic of Texas.
    Last Seen
    11-15-17 @ 11:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,647

    Re: White House won't accept new tax offer from Republican leader

    Quote Originally Posted by TaraAnne View Post
    Yes he did last year in the grand bargin with Republicans. The spending problem did not start with Obama, everyone knows who, when, and where it started. The sad part is there is a minority that is simply delusion enough to deny it.
    I wonder if they really know.

    U.S. Federal Deficits, Presidents, and Congress

    Since 1911, A century ago, Woodrow Wilson, 1913-1921, was the first to have a deficit, However it only appears during war years of WW I. Herbert Clark Hoover, 1929-1933 was the next president to have a deficit, but only one year of his budget alone, the next year did have a deficit also, but was split between Hoover and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, 1933-1945. FDR had a Deficit every year of his Presidency, and only 4 of those were war years. So, deficit spending, other than war years, was started by H.C. Hoover, with Republicans controlling the House and dems controlling the Senate. The next years budget, also a deficit, the budget appears to be split, with Republicans controlling the Presidency and House part of the time and Dems having control in all three for part of that time.

    The first President to use Deficit spending repeatedly during peacetime was FDR and Dems controlled both houses. The highest tax bracket started at 63% and rose to 94% during his Presidency. High Taxes on the rich did not prevent or cure deficit spending.

    Since FDR, this chart only shows 5 years without deficits (Clinton did have a budgetary "surplus" however subtracting one years debt from the next years debt shows there was actually a small deficit.) and never when Dems had full control of the budgetary process.

    Dwight David Eisenhower, 1953-1961, is the only President prior to G.W. Bush to have a deficit while Republicans full controlled the Budget. Of course, that was also the last year until G.W. Bush that Republicans had full control. All of GW Bushes years were war years, whether you agreed with the wars or not, they were war years. So has Obama's, so far.

    Also, notice that under JFK and Dem control, the deficit took a huge jump, an almost 8x increase in a single year. Not even Obama made that significant of a jump.

    Even with the wars, GW Bush had a total of $4,350,543 millions of that, only $1,723,741 was during budgetary years where the Republicans controlled both houses and the Presidency for the budget. In 4 years, Obama has run a total deficit of $5,990,405 millions at total of 1,639,862 above Bush's 8 year total. The first year of Obama and Dem control, they exceed, in a single year, the total deficit run up by Bush and Republicans during 3 years of control. Since the Reps took control of the House, under Obama, their first year in full control of budget reduced the deficit by $427,004 millions vs the last budget with Obama and the Dems in full control. Wow, they reduced Obama/Dems deficit spending by only $1,688.17 billion less than the maximum deficit ever run by Bush.

    During the Bush years, the Debt grew by $3,796,489 millions (I left off 2001, since that budget was partially Bush, Partially Clinton) while Obama has so far increased it by $2,453,508 (not counting 2009 which had split control of budget). Since the Dems took control of Congress (full control starting 2009 and only Senate for part of 2011 and all of 2012), our debt has increased by $5,990,407 millions. Since the Dems first came into the budgetary process in 2007, the Debt has risen from $8.5 Trillion to $16 Trillion.

    Who introduced Deficit spending during peacetime as policy, FDR with Dems controlling both houses.

    Who started the current trend of deficit spending, D.D Eisenhower with the Dems in control of both houses.

    In a Century, only 7 times has a Congress controlled by the Dems not ran up a deficit. While the Reps did it 12 times. Only 12 times have the Dems actually reduced the deficit, 8 times for Republicans (maybe would of been more, the one time the reduced, they eliminated it and it didn't come back for 10 years). For more than half that Century, Dems had control of both Housed for full budgetary process, while the Republicans only had full control for 15 of those 100 years. In those 19 years, they reduced the Deficit 8 times and didn't run a deficit 11 times the didn't even run a deficit (1 year the did run one but it was a also a year that was a reducing year, so it gets in there twice). 1 time (when they had full control) has a Rep run congress increased the deficit. 1 time out of 100.

    Who made the largest significant jump in deficit spending (by multiples of previous deficit, not actual dollars), JFK, with Dems in control of both Houses.

    Who made the largest single monetary jump in deficit spending, Obama with Dems in control of both Houses. (Actually, I skipped the year prior when the budget was mixed and used the last Bush Budget where it was not mixed control, Obama's first full control was actually a reduction from the split control year with the split control year being the largest actual monetary jump).

    While I don't particularly trust the Reps, this short Budgetary history really makes me more supportive of Reps in Control than Dems.
    Only a fool measures equality by results and not opportunities.

  8. #138
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: White House won't accept new tax offer from Republican leader

    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    I wonder if they really know.

    U.S. Federal Deficits, Presidents, and Congress

    Since 1911, A century ago, Woodrow Wilson, 1913-1921, was the first to have a deficit, However it only appears during war years of WW I. Herbert Clark Hoover, 1929-1933 was the next president to have a deficit, but only one year of his budget alone, the next year did have a deficit also, but was split between Hoover and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, 1933-1945. FDR had a Deficit every year of his Presidency, and only 4 of those were war years. So, deficit spending, other than war years, was started by H.C. Hoover, with Republicans controlling the House and dems controlling the Senate. The next years budget, also a deficit, the budget appears to be split, with Republicans controlling the Presidency and House part of the time and Dems having control in all three for part of that time.

    The first President to use Deficit spending repeatedly during peacetime was FDR and Dems controlled both houses. The highest tax bracket started at 63% and rose to 94% during his Presidency. High Taxes on the rich did not prevent or cure deficit spending.

    Since FDR, this chart only shows 5 years without deficits (Clinton did have a budgetary "surplus" however subtracting one years debt from the next years debt shows there was actually a small deficit.) and never when Dems had full control of the budgetary process.

    Dwight David Eisenhower, 1953-1961, is the only President prior to G.W. Bush to have a deficit while Republicans full controlled the Budget. Of course, that was also the last year until G.W. Bush that Republicans had full control. All of GW Bushes years were war years, whether you agreed with the wars or not, they were war years. So has Obama's, so far.

    Also, notice that under JFK and Dem control, the deficit took a huge jump, an almost 8x increase in a single year. Not even Obama made that significant of a jump.

    Even with the wars, GW Bush had a total of $4,350,543 millions of that, only $1,723,741 was during budgetary years where the Republicans controlled both houses and the Presidency for the budget. In 4 years, Obama has run a total deficit of $5,990,405 millions at total of 1,639,862 above Bush's 8 year total. The first year of Obama and Dem control, they exceed, in a single year, the total deficit run up by Bush and Republicans during 3 years of control. Since the Reps took control of the House, under Obama, their first year in full control of budget reduced the deficit by $427,004 millions vs the last budget with Obama and the Dems in full control. Wow, they reduced Obama/Dems deficit spending by only $1,688.17 billion less than the maximum deficit ever run by Bush.

    During the Bush years, the Debt grew by $3,796,489 millions (I left off 2001, since that budget was partially Bush, Partially Clinton) while Obama has so far increased it by $2,453,508 (not counting 2009 which had split control of budget). Since the Dems took control of Congress (full control starting 2009 and only Senate for part of 2011 and all of 2012), our debt has increased by $5,990,407 millions. Since the Dems first came into the budgetary process in 2007, the Debt has risen from $8.5 Trillion to $16 Trillion.

    Who introduced Deficit spending during peacetime as policy, FDR with Dems controlling both houses.

    Who started the current trend of deficit spending, D.D Eisenhower with the Dems in control of both houses.

    In a Century, only 7 times has a Congress controlled by the Dems not ran up a deficit. While the Reps did it 12 times. Only 12 times have the Dems actually reduced the deficit, 8 times for Republicans (maybe would of been more, the one time the reduced, they eliminated it and it didn't come back for 10 years). For more than half that Century, Dems had control of both Housed for full budgetary process, while the Republicans only had full control for 15 of those 100 years. In those 19 years, they reduced the Deficit 8 times and didn't run a deficit 11 times the didn't even run a deficit (1 year the did run one but it was a also a year that was a reducing year, so it gets in there twice). 1 time (when they had full control) has a Rep run congress increased the deficit. 1 time out of 100.

    Who made the largest significant jump in deficit spending (by multiples of previous deficit, not actual dollars), JFK, with Dems in control of both Houses.

    Who made the largest single monetary jump in deficit spending, Obama with Dems in control of both Houses. (Actually, I skipped the year prior when the budget was mixed and used the last Bush Budget where it was not mixed control, Obama's first full control was actually a reduction from the split control year with the split control year being the largest actual monetary jump).

    While I don't particularly trust the Reps, this short Budgetary history really makes me more supportive of Reps in Control than Dems.
    No matter what different administrations have done in the past the important thing now is to get government spending under control. The Republicans have promised to do that, which makes them at least aware that there are serious fiscal problems. while the Democrats have not even passed a budget for the past several years.

    The question really is what to do now regarding the economy and only one party appears to be taking the issue seriously.

  9. #139
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: White House won't accept new tax offer from Republican leader

    Quote Originally Posted by rocket88 View Post
    Have you ever negotiated anything? You don't walk in and take the first offer on the table. And in anything this public, nobody's going to say in a press conference that they accept the other side's offer with no changes.

    You guys are all in a tizzy because Obama won't do it Boehner's way. I'm glad to see Obama is finally learning how to negotiate instead of walking in with a compromise and letting the GOP move more to the right (see healthcare reform).
    What is Boehner's way?

    Tim Geithner wants absolute executive control over the federal debt limit indefinitely into the future. Do you really believe that's a good idea for the country and for the precedent it sets?

    Boehner is already done anyway for the concessions he has already given.

  10. #140
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: White House won't accept new tax offer from Republican leader

    Quote Originally Posted by notquiteright View Post
    And we need another Greenspan, not Dr. Kavorkian to work on this.

    I didn't say ALL social security money into 'private accounts' please don't put words into my type...
    Sorry the reduction on medicare spending, isn't Dr.Kovorkian.

    Quote Originally Posted by notquiteright View Post
    Using the word 'lie' is not helpful when you are misusing my words...

    BushII did want to put social security money into private accounts... that is not a lie.
    Well you've made a complete mischaracterization of what the plan was.
    All of which was voluntary.

    For me, I'd of rather of had the private account for all my SS money.
    Now, it's in there air on whether or not my potential SS benefit will be cut.

    I think it's likely a certainty.


    Quote Originally Posted by notquiteright View Post
    Social Security has not added one thin dime to the national debt, it is funded by payroll taxes and to date is still solvent. you can argue otherwise but of course you are wrong... (see how I didn't say it is a lie?)
    No it's not solvent to date.
    It actually just recently started paying out more than it's collecting.

    Social Security on Pace to be Drained by 2037 - CBS News


    Quote Originally Posted by notquiteright View Post
    Blaming Social Security for inflated government spending do to it being solvent? Really? More like the need to fund the end of the Vietnam War without raising taxes and making public the true cost of that war starting the IOU slips put into social security and after that the Gubmint, both parties, have had no real problem with just printing money- as long as THEIR party benefited from it.

    Too weak for words, the fix isn't a slow death to the social safety net...
    SS surplus funds, has caused excess government spending, yes.
    It's how Clinton created the phony budget surplus.

    The problem here is that you're unable to grasp reality.
    I've given you a direct link to a non partisan article that details the fact that the big 3 elder care programs and the national debt interest will consume out entire national budget.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

Page 14 of 20 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •