• 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!

Senate passes $631B defense policy bill 98-0

"88.5 Billion" for the war in Afghanistan.

Maybe one of you rabid Obama lovers can explain that?

Bring those guys home and put them on the U.S./Mexican border.

Cripe, if we bring them home and have them play Tiddlywinks, we will still save money!

None of them will lose their lives, either.
 
I was joking. Congress likes to redefine things when their definition looks bad. As in the misery index.

Whooss right over my head. But you got that right.
 
We used to use bunker oil (used to be used in ships as well) to generate electricity, about 20% IIRC, back in the Carter days, but he started a movement to reduce that. Now probably around 1% of our electricity comes from burning oil...
So making more electricity using wind and solar really does very little toward saving oil....

Except that oil can be made synthetically
 
It worked for well for centuries until we fell hopelessly in love with fossil fuels. Fossil fuels, however, were but a fleeting affair. We know, one day, they will walk out and leave us high and dry. Maybe its time to go back to our sure and steady love, if it will have us back.

View attachment 67139005

No only that, the ole' lady is a thing of timeless beauty.

....and we left her for this fat porpoise?

View attachment 67139006

Yeah boy
 
Despite a bit of partisan back-biting, this is as close to everyone agreeing as I've ever seen on DP. I bet there is some fascinating pork and tax exemptions in there and one thing both sides are united on is screwing the rest of us.

NO doubt there always is pork. And part of the pork is the subsidies we give to big energy.
 
The extended tax cuts would have cost just 250bil.

So why not extend those instead of giving 600+ bil dollars to a part of government that doesn't ask for it.

Congressmen are the dumbest animals on the planet.
 
Tell me how much defense spending should they cut?

The GAO has said for the last 40 years that the DOD (not necessarily military) could get a 30% cut with no effect on troops or logistics or effectiveness.

Of course you will probably disagree because the GAO is a liberal rag or something.
 
The extended tax cuts would have cost just 250bil.

So why not extend those instead of giving 600+ bil dollars to a part of government that doesn't ask for it.

Congressmen are the dumbest animals on the planet.

Taxes are already cut, and are not spending. Outlays will not change whether the tax rates go up or stay down. This defense bill is additional outlays.

You might also say NOT raising taxes by 1 trillion COSTS 1 trillion. But thats misleading as well. Lowering taxes doesnt cost the treasury. Spending costs the treasury.
 
Taxes are already cut, and are not spending. Outlays will not change whether the tax rates go up or stay down. This defense bill is additional outlays.

No, taxes are not spending. They are what permit spending to happen without dumping the country into debt. Ofc, the country is put into debt regardless. Anyway.

The defense bill proves what the OP said and what I said; congressmen are retarded.

Also, the tax cuts have not been extended.
 
Except perhaps the people who elect them.

If you have to elect between 2 turds, then you have no choice but to elect the shiniest of them.

The other option is to run yourself and that requires balls of steel, which sadly, not many men have today. Most just have regular balls. And that doesn't help when trying to change things.
 
If you have to elect between 2 turds, then you have no choice but to elect the shiniest of them.

The other option is to run yourself and that requires balls of steel, which sadly, not many men have today. Most just have regular balls. And that doesn't help when trying to change things.

That is your call to get involved, no?
 
What law says the President can assassinate American citizens?

There isn't a law, but rather Obama has established legal precednent with the assassination of Anwar al-Awlaki. He was, legally speaking, a US citizen at the time of his death (Was Anwar al-Awlaki still a U.S. citizen? | FP Passport) (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/09/w...e-to-kill-a-citizen.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&). The Patriot Act allows the President to deem almost anyone a terrorist as the definition is extremely vague and this assassination of Anwar al-Awlaki establishes a legal precedent in which the President can label someone a terrorist, assassinate them, and then not give any information under the guise of 'national security.'
 
Ha ha. Yes, taxes are much loved. This is state sales tax and probably will be helpful to the states. After many tax free years from Amazon, I suppose I'll finally have to pony up my 8.2% sales tax. This will be near fatal to some online sellers since often the local price is the same but the sales tax savings spurs me to buy online. Poor Amazon is going to take quite a hit methinks.

The 98-0 vote is just more proof that we really have a one party system. Anything to increase power and pork. But they'll fight to the death over any increase on the highest earners...pathetic, really, 100 Senators and not one pair of balls in the lot.


Tax exemptions? No, but there is a shiney new online sales tax buried in it. Now we know why the Dems jumped all over it; they never saw a tax they didn't like.

Online sales tax to be added to defense authorization bill | The Daily Caller
 
Ha ha. Yes, taxes are much loved. This is state sales tax and probably will be helpful to the states. After many tax free years from Amazon, I suppose I'll finally have to pony up my 8.2% sales tax. This will be near fatal to some online sellers since often the local price is the same but the sales tax savings spurs me to buy online. Poor Amazon is going to take quite a hit methinks.

The 98-0 vote is just more proof that we really have a one party system. Anything to increase power and pork. But they'll fight to the death over any increase on the highest earners...pathetic, really, 100 Senators and not one pair of balls in the lot.

State sales taxes attached to a Federal spending bill? How does that work exactly?? :rofl

Poor Amazon is going to take quite a hit methinks.

Um, no, Amazon's customers will be picking up that tab. Screw the private sector, though...huh?
 
Yes, that is correct. The states have been Federally precluded from collecting sales by a congressional order/decision/legislation that forbid the states from collecting for a salke in another state. Even today, if you go to CA and buy a robot for $500 and have it shipped to NV, you will not have to pay CA sales tax but you are obligated to pay NV their sales tax but of course, nobody does.

So, yes, this is Federal legislation that allows the states to collect their tax. I'm 99% sure I'm right for once.

Yes, I will pick up the tab but what I was trying to communicate is that I might stop buying from Amazon since I won;t have the savings anymore. That will be good for my local businesses and bad for Amazon. Example are Greenies Pill Pockets for Cats. They re $5.95 on Amazon and $5.95 at Petsmart local. So, I saved almost 50¢ by buying them from Amazon. No shipping because I'm a Prime member for $80 a year. Now, I won't buy te Prime membership anymore and I'll buy the stuff from the local mega-corp. So, yes, Amazon will lose out big-time.

The money will still be in the private sector. Just that online guys ill lose business and brick and mortar will get a boost.




State sales taxes attached to a Federal spending bill? How does that work exactly?? :rofl



Um, no, Amazon's customers will be picking up that tab. Screw the private sector, though...huh?
 
Yes, that is correct. The states have been Federally precluded from collecting sales by a congressional order/decision/legislation that forbid the states from collecting for a salke in another state. Even today, if you go to CA and buy a robot for $500 and have it shipped to NV, you will not have to pay CA sales tax but you are obligated to pay NV their sales tax but of course, nobody does.

So, yes, this is Federal legislation that allows the states to collect their tax. I'm 99% sure I'm right for once.

Yes, I will pick up the tab but what I was trying to communicate is that I might stop buying from Amazon since I won;t have the savings anymore. That will be good for my local businesses and bad for Amazon. Example are Greenies Pill Pockets for Cats. They re $5.95 on Amazon and $5.95 at Petsmart local. So, I saved almost 50¢ by buying them from Amazon. No shipping because I'm a Prime member for $80 a year. Now, I won't buy te Prime membership anymore and I'll buy the stuff from the local mega-corp. So, yes, Amazon will lose out big-time.

The money will still be in the private sector. Just that online guys ill lose business and brick and mortar will get a boost.

Unless the local business doesn't stock the goods being sought, then no one benefits. Awesome plan!!
 
How does one "get involved"? Your thoughts appreciated.

Participate in the local party meetings, check out the ones who are ambitious enough to run, and if one looks promising then offer support and encouragement. Or if you can't find anyone better than yourself, offer yourself as a candidate. If you are not willing to contribute to the selection process, you have no right to complain about the quality of the candidates.
 
What % of the electricity used in the US comes from oil-fired plants?

On the east coast, and quite a bit far inland from the coast too, millions of homes are heated by oil burning furnaces.
 
Back
Top Bottom