Obama to GOP: I’m done negotiating with myself

Catawba · Dec 7, 2012

Grant said:
LBJ created the programs which encouraged Americans to become dependent on government, a habit that will continue until the dollar collapses.

Yeah, yeah, our forefathers were socialists, FDR being the biggest one. The man considered one of greatest presidents today, and so beloved in his time he won 4 elections..

Grant · Dec 7, 2012

Catawba said:
Yeah, yeah, our forefathers were socialists, FDR being the biggest one. The man considered one of greatest presidents today, and so beloved in his time he won 4 elections..

I never mentioned FDR but his programs certainly are around today and almost impossible to eliminate. There is little doubt that FDR and LBJ thought they were doing the right thing but, as we can see, it has led to dependency on the government, unimagined debt and crony capitalism.

Catawba · Dec 7, 2012

Grant said:
I never mentioned FDR but his programs certainly are around today and almost impossible to eliminate. There is little doubt that FDR and LBJ thought they were doing the right thing but, as we can see, it has led to dependency on the government, unimagined debt and crony capitalism.

Lack of jobs that pay a living wage is the cause, which was brought about by 30 years of Reaganomics. During Reagan's policy of cutting taxes for the wealthy and increasing military/industrial complex spending is when our debt to GDP first skyrocketed. Reagan racked up more debt than all the presidents before him.

Glad to see the president not backing down from the rich.

Grant · Dec 7, 2012

Catawba said:
Lack of jobs that pay a living wage is the cause, which was brought about by 30 years of Reaganomics. During Reagan's policy of cutting taxes for the wealthy and increasing military/industrial complex spending is when our debt to GDP first skyrocketed. Reagan racked up more debt than all the presidents before him.

Glad to see the president not backing down from the rich.

Why should Obama back down from the rich? That's who his friends are.

The rich will continue to be rich. They will simply find more loopholes, hide their money, refuse to invest, or even leave the country.

It's an Obama political tactic designed for boobs.

Catawba · Dec 7, 2012

Grant said:
Why should Obama back down from the rich? That's who his friends are.

You wouldn't know it listening to them whine about slightly higher tax rates on income and capital gains. Glad to know they are behind it!

Grant · Dec 7, 2012

Catawba said:
You wouldn't know it listening to them whine about slightly higher tax rates on income and capital gains. Glad to know they are behind it!

The rich are whining?

It seems obvious the whines are coming from everywhere, including Barry Obama himself.

"The rich" don't have enough money to carry the country even if all their wealth is confiscated, even if all the assets of Fortune 500 companies were seized. It is still not enough.

But believe what you want. It really doesn't matter.

iliveonramen · Dec 7, 2012

Grant said:
The rich are whining?

It seems obvious the whines are coming from everywhere, including Barry Obama himself.

"The rich" don't have enough money to carry the country even if all their wealth is confiscated, even if all the assets of Fortune 500 companies were seized. It is still not enough.

But believe what you want. It really doesn't matter.

Whose talking about confiscating all their wealth?

They also aren't depended on to fund the whole government just help close the gap between revenue and expenses.

Grant · Dec 7, 2012

iliveonramen said:
Whose talking about confiscating all their wealth?

They also aren't depended on to fund the whole government just help close the gap between revenue and expenses.

Please read the post properly before you respond.

I said "even if". There was a point being made, though you seem to have missed it.

Taxing 'the rich' woukld not significantly close any gap between revenue and expenses. The difference would be miniscule.

Obama is making this argument to deflect from his over the top spending.

Follow the money. Obama has borrowed and spent over $6,000,000,000,000 over and above what the many other sources of revenue are sending to Washington.

Where has all that money gone? What do you have to show for it?

Now he wants to increase the debt ceiling through executive order with no idea of how that money will be spent either. But it's likely it will go to another "stimulus" where billions of dollars simply disappear. You are in favor of this?

iliveonramen · Dec 7, 2012

Grant said:
Please read the post properly before you respond.

I said "even if". There was a point being made, though you seem to have missed it.

I know what you wrote and understood it but I'm confused why something that is not being asked to do something it's not suppose to do is a reason for not raising the top marginal tax rates by less than 5%.

Taxing 'the rich' woukld not significantly close any gap between revenue and expenses. The difference would be miniscule.

There's going to be a lot of minscule cuts and increases to close the deficit. There's no silver bullet.

Obama is making this argument to deflect from his over the top spending.

That must be it...because revenue as a % of GDP aren't at a historic low not seen since the 1920's.

Follow the money. Obama has borrowed and spent over $6,000,000,000,000 over and above what the many other sources of revenue are bring to Washington.

Incorrect figure and completely ignoring that anybody that walked into the white house would of been dealing with 1 trillion a year deficits...unless they were willing to slash spending in the middle of a recession.

Now he wants to increase the debt ceiling through executive order with no idea of how that money will be spent either. But it's likely it will go to another "stimulus" where billions of dollars simply disappear. You are in favor of this?

The money is spent by congress.....the debt ceiling is just some loopy idea that Congress has to condone sending out checks to pay what they've already spent. There's not reason for it. If it gave the President a blank check to spend what he wanted I would be against it.

Grant · Dec 7, 2012

iliveonramen said:
I know what you wrote and understood it but I'm confused why something that is not being asked to do something it's not suppose to do is a reason for not raising the top marginal tax rates by less than 5%.

How can you possibly be confused? Taxing the rich will have no real effect on government spending or balancing a budget or lowering the debt. And "even if" the government was to seize all the monies of the rich it would still not solve the problem. What's confusing about that?

There's going to be a lot of minscule cuts and increases to close the deficit. There's no silver bullet.

What "miniscule cuts are those? The government is spending well over $1,000,000,000,000 each year than they are bringing in. How can this be resolved with "miniscule cuts"?

That must be it...because revenue as a % of GDP aren't at a historic low not seen since the 1920's.

But at that time Americans were willing to work and not become dependent on Government. I often here that excuse but the Americans of yesterday are significantly different from the Americans of today. keep in mind that the American government is also over $70,000,000,000,000 in debt for the programs promised to seniors, etc. Where will that money be coming from?

Incorrect figure and completely ignoring that anybody that walked into the white house would of been dealing with 1 trillion a year deficits...unless they were willing to slash spending in the middle of a recession.

You had better become accustomed to living in a permanent recession. It cannot improve unless sacrifices are made and Americans have demonstrated that they don't have the stomach for that.

The money is spent by congress.....the debt ceiling is just some loopy idea that Congress has to condone sending out checks to pay what they've already spent. There's not reason for it. If it gave the President a blank check to spend what he wanted I would be against it.

Barrack Obama has had budgets suggested to him and he has refused. he has submitted budgets and they were unanimously rejected by both parties and independents. As i understand this not coming up with a budget is also unconstitutional. Just when Americans required leadership they choose BHO to continue to do his thing, whatever that is. I do have a great deal of sympathy for those honest hardworking Americans but they are becoming the minority in this ongoing gender warfare, class warfare, State warfare and the race warfare of this new America.

Catawba · Dec 7, 2012

Grant said:
The rich are whining?

It seems obvious the whines are coming from everywhere, including Barry Obama himself.

"The rich" don't have enough money to carry the country even if all their wealth is confiscated, even if all the assets of Fortune 500 companies were seized. It is still not enough.

But believe what you want. It really doesn't matter.

Going back to a 4% higher tax rate is hardly confiscating all the wealth, but your description of it in that way does to serve as an example of the very whining I was talking about. Thanks for the illustration!

Grant · Dec 7, 2012

Catawba said:
Going back to a 4% higher tax rate is hardly confiscating all the wealth, but your description of it in that way does to serve as an example of the very whining I was talking about. Thanks for the illustration!

What is it with with the illiteracy of the leftists? Are you a product of the Detroit education system with Otis Mathis in charge?

I said ""The rich" don't have enough money to carry the country even if all their wealth is confiscated, even if all the assets of Fortune 500 companies were seized. It is still not enough".

So if that is the case what difference does 4% make? None at all! Correct?

It is spending that is the problem. Nobody can pay for all the spending. No one. Not "the rich", not anyone. Do you understand that?

Catawba · Dec 7, 2012

Grant said:
What is it with with the illiteracy of the leftists? Are you a product of the Detroit education system with Otis Mathis in charge?

I said ""The rich" don't have enough money to carry the country even if all their wealth is confiscated, even if all the assets of Fortune 500 companies were seized. It is still not enough".

So if that is the case what difference does 4% make? None at all! Correct?

It is spending that is the problem. Nobody can pay for all the spending. No one. Not "the rich", not anyone. Do you understand that?

Thank you for clarifying your strawman! No one, let me repeat, no one has said the deficit can be fixed by only letting the tax cuts for the wealthy expire.

However, letting the tax cuts for the wealthy expire will result in $11.6 million dollars an hour more entering the treasury so that it won't be necessary to cut back on benefits to our seniors.

It can help repay the funds from SS that were taken to fight the unnecessary GOP war in Iraq.

Grant · Dec 7, 2012

Catawba said:
Thank you for clarifying your strawman! No one, let me repeat, no one has said the deficit can be fixed by only letting the tax cuts for the wealthy expire.

However, letting the tax cuts for the wealthy expire will result in $11.6 million dollars an hour more entering the treasury so that it won't be necessary to cut back on benefits to our seniors.

It can help repay the funds from SS that were taken to fight the unnecessary GOP war in Iraq.

Oh so it's all about the war in Iraq, huh?

Catawba · Dec 7, 2012

Grant said:
Oh so it's all about the war in Iraq, huh?

No, its all about paying SS back the money taken from it while the rich continued to enjoy their tax cuts.

Grant · Dec 7, 2012

Catawba said:
No, its all about paying SS back the money taken from it while the rich continued to enjoy their tax cuts.

Are you sure it isn't the 47% who have the tax cuts? In fact my understanding is that they pay no taxes at all, that they are net takers.

Catawba · Dec 7, 2012

Grant said:
Are you sure it isn't the 47% who have the tax cuts? In fact my understanding is that they pay no taxes at all, that they are net takers.

You can't tax something that isn't there.

Grant · Dec 7, 2012

Catawba said:
You can't tax something that isn't there.

The 47% aren't there?

Catawba · Dec 7, 2012

Grant said:
The 47% aren't there?

The income isn't there. Most of them are seniors and servicemen. Is that who you want to go after to protect your rich pal's from paying 4% more?

Grant · Dec 7, 2012

Catawba said:
The income isn't there. Most of them are seniors and servicemen. Is that who you want to go after to protect your rich pal's from paying 4% more?

Most of them are seniors and servicemen? Do you have a link for that?

It is the old leftist story that unless the US continues to spend in excess of $1,000,000,000,000 every year of money it doesn't have then seniors and servicemen and women will be turned out on the streets.

Instead of just printing money or shuffling money from one government department to another, why not raise the annual deficit to $3,000,000,000,000 or more? You know it's never going to be paid back anyway. Why not just go as far as you can and see what happens? You can call it the ongoing stimulus plan.

Catawba · Dec 7, 2012

Grant said:
Most of them are seniors and servicemen? Do you have a link for that?

It is the old leftist story that unless the US continues to spend in excess of $1,000,000,000,000 every year of money it doesn't have then seniors and servicemen and women will be turned out on the streets.

Instead of just printing money or shuffling money from one government department to another, why not raise the annual deficit to $3,000,000,000,000 or more? You know it's never going to be paid back anyway. Why not just go as far as you can and see what happens? You can call it the ongoing stimulus plan.

It's A Myth That 47% Of Americans Pay No Taxes, In Truth 86% Pay Taxes

I don't know what you are talking about above. What I know is by letting the tax cuts for the wealthy expire will mean there will be enough revenue to repay the money that was borrowed from SS.

Grant · Dec 7, 2012

Catawba said:
It's A Myth That 47% Of Americans Pay No Taxes, In Truth 86% Pay Taxes

I don't know what you are talking about above. What I know is by letting the tax cuts for the wealthy expire will mean there will be enough revenue to repay the money that was borrowed from SS.

They are confusing federal taxes with other taxes and claim 2009 was an anomaly because of the unusual amount of unemployment..

They also claim that "Barack Obama signed the largest tax cut in US history", despite the Big Owe and his followers referring to them, as "The Bush tax cuts".

It's quite a comical read if you take the time.

Catawba · Dec 7, 2012

Grant said:
They are confusing federal taxes with other taxes and claim 2009 was an anomaly because of the unusual amount of unemployment..

They also claim that "Barack Obama signed the largest tax cut in US history", despite the Big Owe and his followers referring to them, as "The Bush tax cuts".

It's quite a comical read if you take the time.

FICA Taxes are federal taxes. They in fact make up as large a share as FIT.

Apparently the majority of the country did not find it as humorous as you did.

Grant · Dec 7, 2012

Catawba said:
FICA Taxes are federal income. They in fact make up as large a share as FIT.

Apparently the majority of the country did not find it as humorous as you did.

The majority of the country read that article?

Catawba · Dec 7, 2012

Grant said:
The majority of the country read that article?

The majority of the country didn't need to read that article to know that most of country's wealth is concentrated at the top.

Obama to GOP: I’m done negotiating with myself

Catawba

Disappointed Evolutionist

Grant

Catawba

Disappointed Evolutionist

Grant

Catawba

Disappointed Evolutionist

Grant

iliveonramen

Pontificator

Grant

iliveonramen

Pontificator

Grant

Catawba

Disappointed Evolutionist

Grant

Catawba

Disappointed Evolutionist

Grant

Catawba

Disappointed Evolutionist

Grant

Catawba

Disappointed Evolutionist

Grant

Catawba

Disappointed Evolutionist

Grant

Catawba

Disappointed Evolutionist

Grant

Catawba

Disappointed Evolutionist

Grant

Catawba

Disappointed Evolutionist