• 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!

House blocks funding for health care law

i really do believe that claire mccaskill is gonna kill the mandate

only she knows, of course

watch her
 
Sgt Meowenstein said:
You are sadly mistaken if you believe that Obama isn't going to veto a bill that defunds his signature legislation. You don't seriously believe that do you? I don't know what you're smoking, but I'd sure like some of it.
Click to expand...

If it's a choice between vetoing the funding bill and shutting the government down, or signing it and taking his chances in retrying healthcare... which do you think he'll choose?
 
Kal'Stang said:
Notice that each of those news sites are liberal news sites....
Click to expand...

Typical conservative deflection. When you see poll results that you don't like, attack the source. Never mind that those supposedly "liberal" sites didn't actually conduct the polls, but simply reported the results of the professionally conducted polls.
 
Whovian said:
If it's a choice between vetoing the funding bill and shutting the government down, or signing it and taking his chances in retrying healthcare... which do you think he'll choose?
Click to expand...

He sure as hell won't choose to have another fight over health care. You can bet on that.
 
Whovian said:
If it's a choice between vetoing the funding bill and shutting the government down, or signing it and taking his chances in retrying healthcare... which do you think he'll choose?
Click to expand...

Obama will probably veto the bill if it gets to him.
Healthcare is Obama presidential legacy.. he must make it work!
 
so many plastic parliamentarians are preposterous

obama is not gonna shut down the govt

he will sign the appropriations approved by congress and fight for his funding in august, when the resolution expires

the man who caved on TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH is hardly gonna go against both houses of congress and lock the doors to the dmv
 
The Prof said:
so many plastic parliamentarians are preposterous

obama is not gonna shut down the govt

he will sign the appropriations approved by congress and fight for his funding in august, when the resolution expires

the man who caved on TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH is hardly gonna go against both houses of congress and lock the doors to the dmv
Click to expand...

:prof Um..... The DMV is controlled by the states, not the Federal Government.
 
The Prof said:
so many plastic parliamentarians are preposterous

obama is not gonna shut down the govt

he will sign the appropriations approved by congress and fight for his funding in august, when the resolution expires

the man who caved on TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH is hardly gonna go against both houses of congress and lock the doors to the dmv
Click to expand...

Dems still control one house of Congress. It will have to make it through the Senate first. And if it makes it through the Senate in its present form, Obama will veto it. He compromised on the tax cuts issue because he got a lot in return. The GOP is offering nothing in return on health care. If the GOP would say "OK, let's sit down and work something out", then that would be a different story. They refuse to negotiate it. They want it all.
 
Sgt Meowenstein said:
Typical conservative deflection. When you see poll results that you don't like, attack the source. Never mind that those supposedly "liberal" sites didn't actually conduct the polls, but simply reported the results of the professionally conducted polls.
Click to expand...

*psst* I'm not a Conservative...look under my name under "lean".
 
Kal'Stang said:
*psst* I'm not a Conservative...look under my name under "lean".
Click to expand...

Ok, then a typical tactic used when a person hears what they don't want to hear. Data is data no matter who reports on it.
 
if obama wants to shut down the govt over the continuing resolution that emerges from house-senate reconciliation, let him

but he won't---the mere suggestion is laughable

party on, plastic parliamentarians
 
danarhea said:
Maybe some of those people don't remember, but Barry Goldwater was quite the environmentalist.
Click to expand...

It would great to infuse some of that environmentalism back into the GOP, I appreciate your efforts in that regard! :sun
 
Kal'Stang said:
Notice that each of those news sites are liberal news sites....
Click to expand...

What is your fault with the CBS poll? Please post your polls that say otherwise.
 
reefedjib said:
This is the age old battle between the patricians and the plebians. In a full throated democracy, rule by the masses, the plebians will still everything from the patricians and call it "fair". It will drive away investment and hurt our private economy.
Click to expand...

If that were true, why didn't it happen during the 50 year period when we had a progressive tax system? Instead we had the most prosperous time for the middle class in history.
We don't need to solve the problem of uncontrolled spending by raising taxes; we need to stop uncontrolled spending.
Click to expand...

Its not possible given the wars, military spending, and tax cuts the rich want to cut spending enough to reduce our National debt. That's why it keeps growing. One of these days we'll understand that hopefully.
 
Had Social Security been left undisturbed and had Medicare and Medicaid never been enacted, we wouldn't be in this mess. The entitlements are either going to have to be revised or fail.
 
Catawba said:
If that were true, why didn't it happen during the 50 year period when we had a progressive tax system? Instead we had the most prosperous time for the middle class in history.
Click to expand...

You had extremely high tax rates during a time of manufacturing explosion and technological innovation. The high rates DID affect investment, but the economy was booming none the less. It would have boomed more with lower rates. Plus, investment was not realized as income. Those days are over. You do not raise taxes on investors when the economy is so sluggish. Exactly the wrong thing to do.


Its not possible given the wars, military spending, and tax cuts the rich want to cut spending enough to reduce our National debt. That's why it keeps growing. One of these days we'll understand that hopefully.
Click to expand...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/economics/90108-truth-can-afford-pay-taxes-14.html#post1059297117
 
reefedjib said:
You had extremely high tax rates during a time of manufacturing explosion and technological innovation. The high rates DID affect investment, but the economy was booming none the less. It would have boomed more with lower rates. Plus, investment was not realized as income. Those days are over. You do not raise taxes on investors when the economy is so sluggish. Exactly the wrong thing to do.




http://www.debatepolitics.com/economics/90108-truth-can-afford-pay-taxes-14.html#post1059297117
Click to expand...

No one is proposing to raise taxes on investors; they are proposing to raise tax on high-salaried workers. Investors are taxed on capital gains. The current low highest tax bracket actually encourages people to take money out of their business, not re-invest it. There is a very good, investor-friendly argument, that suggests highest tax bracket should be much higher...just keep the capital gains tax low.

The result of the high tax rate on earned income that the previous poster referred to was to encourage re-investment in the business. It was better to keep capital in the business for expansion than to take it out in salary and 50-60% to the government.

Now its better to take it out (particularly if you don't trust the tax rates long-term, and few do) and put it in your bank now, than leave it in the business and perhaps have it taxed at a higher rate tomorrow.......
 
Last edited:
The Prof said:
if obama wants to shut down the govt over the continuing resolution that emerges from house-senate reconciliation, let him

but he won't---the mere suggestion is laughable

party on, plastic parliamentarians
Click to expand...

It is a game of hot-potato, but historically, when the government gets shut down, Congress gets blamed.
 
upsideguy said:
No one is proposing to raise taxes on investors; they are proposing to raise tax on high-salaried workers. Investors are taxed on capital gains. The current low highest tax bracket actually encourages people to take money out of their business, not re-invest it. There is a very good, investor-friendly argument, that suggests highest tax bracket should be much higher...just keep the capital gains tax low.

The result of the high tax rate on earned income that the previous poster referred to was to encourage re-investment in the business. It was better to keep capital in the business for expansion than to take it out in salary and 50-60% to the government.

Now its better to take it out (particularly if you don't trust the tax rates long-term, and few do) and put it in your bank now, than leave it in the business and perhaps have it taxed at a higher rate tomorrow.......
Click to expand...

Ok, I see your point and its a good one.

Still, I think a progressive tax system in inherently unfair. We should have a flat tax system, with a 0% tax bracket below the poverty line. Capital gains tax should be low for investors.

We can argue this round and round, but I have said my piece on it and will stop now.

What I would really like to know is what you think about this post of minehttp://www.debatepolitics.com/economics/90108-truth-can-afford-pay-taxes-14.html#post1059297117:
 
reefedjib said:
You had extremely high tax rates during a time of manufacturing explosion and technological innovation. The high rates DID affect investment, but the economy was booming none the less. It would have boomed more with lower rates. Plus, investment was not realized as income. Those days are over.
Click to expand...

I was expecting proof to back up your claim, oh well. Thanks for your opinion.
 
LookingGlass said:
Had Social Security been left undisturbed and had Medicare and Medicaid never been enacted, we wouldn't be in this mess. The entitlements are either going to have to be revised or fail.
Click to expand...

Certainly, and the first revision should be to raise the $106,000 cap for the wealthy.
 
Catawba said:
I was expecting proof to back up your claim, oh well. Thanks for your opinion.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you had inappropriate expectations. Thanks for your thanks.
 
Catawba said:
Certainly, and the first revision should be to raise the $106,000 cap for the wealthy.
Click to expand...

We can have everything we want if we just pass laws making others pay for it. That should work for a while.
 
Grant said:
We can have everything we want if we just pass laws making others pay for it. That should work for a while.
Click to expand...

Not at all, only their fair share.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom