Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty Digest™ News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty Digest™ 

The Battle Lines Have Been Drawn

November 16, 2012 by  

The Battle Lines Have Been Drawn
PHOTOS.COM

The fiscal cliff draweth nigh. A lame-duck Congress and a triumphant President have six weeks to effect a deal that will keep the country from plunging over it. And right now, while both sides pay lip service to the idea of compromise, it looks like they’ll play chicken right up to the edge.

Earlier this week, President Barack Obama met with a bunch of left-wing labor leaders and social activists — all of whom were happy to take credit for his election victory. Afterward, the President doubled his demands for higher taxes. Instead of the $800 billion in additional tax increases that were on the table before the election, Obama now says he wants $1.6 trillion in additional revenue over the next decade.

Anyone who hoped we’d see a milder, more moderate occupant of the White House this time around just got a very loud wake-up message: It’s going to be war on the haves on behalf of the have-nots — and the bureaucrats who get to distribute the spoils, of course.

In case you’re just waking up from a Rip Van Winkle-type nap, the fiscal cliff is what will happen when the George W. Bush tax cuts expire at the end of the year (they’ve been extended once already) and automatic spending cuts kick in. The spending cuts, known as “sequestration,” were part of the last agreement to raise the Federal debt ceiling. If they aren’t undone, the military budget will face $500 billion in cuts, starting in January.

It should come as no surprise that the Congressional Budget Office says that the combination could be devastating to our economy. The supposedly nonpartisan CBO says that economic growth in this country, which is already dreadfully anemic, will drop 0.5 percent. At same time, unemployment will climb from 7.9 percent to some 9.1 percent, the CBO predicts. Of course, the “official” unemployment figures are a cruel distortion of what has actually taken place; when the underemployed and long-term unemployed are counted, the actual number is more than 20 percent.

So, yes, we’re facing some pretty serious problems. Meanwhile, although Obama likes to say that he’s willing to compromise and that “all ideas are on the table,” there are a couple that he says absolutely won’t be considered. One is making significant cuts in spending on his favorite programs. The other is giving any sort of tax break to “millionaires and billionaires.”

Meanwhile, a majority of members of the House of Representatives have made a promise to their constituents not to vote for any tax increase. Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform, which created the no-tax pledge, reminds us that it has been signed by 271 members of the current Congress and 258 members of the one that will take office in January. The pledge promises that signers will “oppose any and all efforts to increase the marginal income tax rates for individuals and/or businesses.”

And don’t look at closing deductions as a way to raise revenue, either. Signers have also pledged to “oppose any net reduction or elimination of deductions and credits, unless matched dollar for dollar by further reducing tax rates.”

House Speaker John Boehner hinted at the possibility of compromise when he said: “For the purposes of forging a bipartisan agreement that begins to solve the problem, we’re willing to accept new revenue, under the right conditions.”

Boehner didn’t explain what those “right conditions” might be. But so far I haven’t heard any proposal that will satisfy the tax-and-spenders on the left and the no-tax crowd on the right. From what I’ve heard, compromise looks a long way off.

Oh, and did I mention that we are also approaching the ceiling for the Federal debt? The Treasury can do a little check kiting for a while. But sooner or later, we will reach a point where we won’t be able to add to the national debt. That’s going to be a heck of a problem, since that borrowing provides the funds for about 30 percent of Federal spending.

So what should our fearless leaders do? Let’s look at a few hard facts.

First, the Obama tax increases on the super-rich won’t solve our deficit problems. In fact, they won’t come anywhere close. The most generous estimates are that they will raise an additional $60 billion to $80 billion a year in revenue.

But the deficit has topped $1 trillion a year for every year that Obama has been in office. Washington will need to raise 15 to 20 times that much revenue if our leaders are serious about balancing the budget.

Here’s another example that should help bring some perspective to this discussion. It’s been estimated that repairing all the damage caused by Hurricane Sandy will come to something like $50 billion. That’s a staggering amount of money, isn’t it?  The devastation we’ve seen on our TV screens (and many people have witnessed in person) has been incredible.

But consider this: Obama’s deficits have amounted to 20 such hurricanes every year for the past four years.

That brings me to the second fact that the politicos in Washington — on both sides of the aisle — will have to face. This country doesn’t have a revenue problem; it has a spending problem. When you add together taxes collected by all levels of government, the combined bite from Federal, State and local taxes comes to more than half of the money the more successful people among us earn. What sort of incentives will successful people have to try even harder and do even better if the government grab goes even higher?

The answer can be found somewhere between “very little” and “none.”

But there’s even more bad news waiting for us around the corner. What happens when the badly misnamed Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare, becomes fully operational over the next two years?

Well, for one, an awful lot of us will be paying more in taxes, thanks to various fees and add-ons the bill includes. That’s bad enough. But even worse, a lot of full-time jobs in this country will vanish, as more and more companies replace them with part-time workers. Employers will not be required to provide health insurance for anyone working 30 hours a week or less. A lot of companies will prefer to hire four part-time workers to three full-time ones. Can you blame them?

A lot of these problems could be solved by a vibrant, growing economy that saw millions of new jobs being created — which also would mean billions more tax dollars being collected. It’s happened several times in the past, under both Republicans (see Ronald Reagan) and Democrats (see Bill Clinton’s second term).

What are the chances that an even more liberal Senate and a President who no longer has to worry about being re-elected will do the things necessary to get the economy growing again? I fear they are very, very small.

If I were a conservative legislator in Washington today, what would I do? I’d stick to the promises I made that got me there. I’d insist that our government needs to spend less and tax less, and I’d vote only for legislation that helps move the country in that direction.

More freedom, not more government, will produce the prosperity we once enjoyed — and can enjoy again. But that’s not what we’re going to get from Washington anytime soon.

Better batten down the hatches, folks. I’m afraid we’re in for a very rough ride.

Until next time, keep some powder dry.

–Chip Wood

Chip Wood

is the geopolitical editor of PersonalLiberty.com. He is the founder of Soundview Publications, in Atlanta, where he was also the host of an award-winning radio talk show for many years. He was the publisher of several bestselling books, including Crisis Investing by Doug Casey, None Dare Call It Conspiracy by Gary Allen and Larry Abraham and The War on Gold by Anthony Sutton. Chip is well known on the investment conference circuit where he has served as Master of Ceremonies for FreedomFest, The New Orleans Investment Conference, Sovereign Society, and The Atlanta Investment Conference.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “The Battle Lines Have Been Drawn”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • Rod Ems

    Don’t worry Chip, Boehner will cave in the end. And a fiscal cliff will be averted, and we’ll all live peacefully for ever more.

    • George E

      And the economy will go to hell in a hand basket, and the Democrats will still find some way of convincing the American people that it’s the Republican’s fault. Amazing.

  • macgyver1948

    There is a lot of discussion about if the very wealthy and the big corporations are taxed more they will lose their incentives to invest in their companies, as in creating jobs or in other ways. There is a lot of truth in that so I wont dispute it. But we should all know when there are higher taxes, or not, on the mega wealthy they have the clout and the tax/finance advisers to work the loop holes where we, the UN-wealthy, cannot. The taxes have to come from some place, like the middle class, if needed government programs are to continue. This too I will not dispute. Sad for the middle and lower classes since we can less afford it than the wealthy can.

    There is a point Chip Wood makes in this article I believe is a bit one sided and perhaps slanted, well, at least one. He says “If I were a conservative legislator in Washington today, what would I do? I’d stick to the promises I made that got me there. I’d insist that our government needs to spend less and tax less, and I’d vote only for legislation that helps move the country in that direction”.

    I say one sided for this because of one of the little realities in politics. Yes, GOP elected officials were elected because of the campaign promises they made and for their alignment with their party policies.

    Here is the dilemma, or one sided thinking. The same is true for the Democrats who received the most votes for them to be elected. That is why we have the fighting between the sides of the aisle on any policy. Well, at least we know what Chip Wood would do if he were elected as “a conservative legislator in Washington today”. I’d also “stick to the promises I made that got me there”. As a voter I would hope the guys I voted for would do that or why would I vote for them again? That seems to be another issue for many. Why would we vote for the same guys again if they didn’t at least fight for the reasons they received our votes, even if blocked in their attempts, in the first place? See, Chip Wood’s “what I would do if” statements should apply to all elected in all parties.

    If I were elected I too would work as Chip Wood suggests he would with “I’d insist that our government needs to spend less and tax less, and I’d vote only for legislation that helps move the country in that direction”. But when it comes to never raising taxes under any circumstances, that would be nice, I would hope we would allow reality and prudence guide us. If we never raise taxes, and that includes adjusting tax bases back to their pre-“temporary” levels, eventually there will be no money to support necessary and helpful programs.

    There are times when taxes need to be raised, and I hope that is rare, and it could be destructive to adhere to a “under-no-circumstance” pledge which could contradict reality and what is needed under the circumstances at “the” time. Let’s also remember the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy were billed as “temporary”. I wonder if the “temporary” Bush tax cuts for the wealthy would have passed at that time if they weren’t billed as “temporary”.

    Thanks Chip, interesting article.

    • macgyver1948

      By the way, the battle lines are always drawn in politics. Unfortunately it is generally at our expense…

      • kkflash

        You have stated the point that is central to all political arguments: The cost of government is ALWAYS at the people’s expense. When those expenses benefit ALL the citizens, the expense is for the “general welfare” and MAY, after careful consideration, be part of the proper function of government. National defense and interstate highways are examples on the federal level. Whenever government expenses are for the welfare of only a particular fraction of the citizens, e.g. food stamps, unemployment compensation, agricultural price supports, etc., government should refrain from involvement. Wealth redistribution is in no way the proper constitutional function of government, and is the cause of all our economic problems.

      • macgyver1948

        kkflash…. Let’s see…. Ok, Here is how I see it. Wealth distribution, as many see it, I am for only if the burden on those who cannot afford to pay more is just. I do not want redistribution just for the sake of taking it and to appear those in office are doing their jobs because they are doing something.

        Government expenses are never exclusively for “Whenever government expenses are for the welfare of only a particular fraction of the citizens, e.g. food stamps, unemployment compensation, agricultural price supports, etc., government should refrain from involvement” but if these expenses are justified in their application they are good moral spendings. What I mean is if you do not deserve (showing need) and if you do not qualify then you should not get. At the same time if you need it and do qualify they Government should be compassionate enough to help. We cannot just let these people starve or die of exposure.

        I agree that wealth distribution is not the “proper” constitutional function of government but we cannot have a apathetic government either. If we do then why or how can we be loyal? Why would any of us want o join the military or care to vote when we are in need and the government ignores our needs? How different would we be than the governments we talk about being not as good as ours for their people? I have heard that apathy is the opposite of caring and love and not hate. It can be worse than hate too.

        I have to say this to help explain my last paragraph. We as individuals, are ultimately responsible for ourselves. We need to go as far in school as we can, we need to learn how to save and do for ourselves as best we can> I, for one, do not want hand outs or welfare but if I was not capable, whether temporarily or permanently, I would hope I lived in a caring nation until I could get back on my feet. I do not want to hear that it the is fault of the unemployed for being employed, that comes from a party of the selfish and apathetic. So many of the unemployed were made that way by their employers (it very much was not the idea of those unemployed) because of downsizing or just plain “we will do more with less“ greed. So, many of them deserve help with unemployment compensation until they can get back on their feet.

        If all we do is return the tax levels to what they were before Bush gave his tax gifts to his wealthy buddies, especially since he billed those gifts as “temporary”, I do not see this as redistribution of wealth but rather a return to proper and perhaps needed levels. And, after all, the wealthy can afford many tax loop holes and great tax and finance advice that we cannot. It seems to be an attempt at a fairing of the playing field, especially in this economic climate, although the UN-wealthy will still budget so much more and harder than the wealthy just to make ends meet. Otherwise it can be like their telling us to tighten our belts while the wealthy go out and buy larger belts.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Well said, macgyver!

        You show many signs of right brain thinking in your comments, and that is something that is in rather short supply at times on this site.

  • alpha-lemming

    Perhaps it’s time to get serious about a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution again. Not enough money in the coffers is no longer a deterent, whereas $1.40 is currently being spent for every $1 recieved. Why stop there… spend $1.66..$2… whatever it takes to buy more votes. Borrow, raise the debt ceiling… they’re all gimmicks in play now….. the old “lower taxes to starve the Government” game plan will no longer work because they’ll just create the money out of thin air…. Government refuses to be starved. Constitutionally binding the Government to live within their means (I know… I have to) and leave a $0.00 balance at the end of the year to end deficit spending is a good start. Of course it does nothing for the 16 trillion national debt but…. “stop taking on water…. we’ll start bailing when we stop sinking”!!!

    • Warrior

      Bravo!

    • Right Brain Thinker

      We don’t need a balanced budget amendment when we have Grover’s pledge, do we? Of course, an amendment would (or should) include provisions for both raising taxes if absolutely necessary as well as cutting spending. So, Grover won’t like it and will go after any legislator who supports such an amendment. Remember, this is the USGR, not the USA (that’s the United States of Grover and the Rich).

      The quick and easy answer is to work to balance revenues and spending right now, over the next few months and years. Reform the tax code to eliminate so many tax dodges and raise the rates on those who can afford it. Cut some spending. Make adjustments to Social Security and Medicare. Lots of good ideas have been put forth over time but they have all run aground on the rocks of the Party of No and Grover’s pledge.

      President O’Bama now has a mandate—it will be a very interesting few weeks as we watch him exercise that mandate

  • Walt14

    The important thing is to protect the middle class from the problems created by the fiscal cliff, hence the need to let the Bush tax cuts expire for the 2% wealthiest, and extend the tax cuts for the middle class–what Obama has been working for and what America voted for just a little over a week ago. Cutting loopholes won’t generate anywhere near the money we need to deal with the deficit. Many middle-income Americans would be hurt if they could not make the deductions they currently use for their mortgages, church donations and other causes. That is a key reason Romney lost. The results of this election showed that the current breed of Republicans are not in touch with reality with regard to dealing with the deficit–12 years of tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans did not create jobs here in the U.S.–it only promoted offshoring of earnings.

    The Booth School of Business surveyed 40 leading economists of both parties back in July, and the survey results confirmed that a mixture of taxation of the wealthiest Americans combined with spending cuts must be done in tandem (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-23/the-u-s-economic-policy-debate-is-a-sham.html). It also confirmed that Obama’s stimulus saved the U.S. from the type of Depression that Republican President Hoover’s policies only made worse. In dealing with the current U.S. economic situation, spending cuts alone would just turn us into Europe, which is being torn apart right now by austerity-related joblessness and protests. It all goes to show that there should never have been any Bush tax cuts in the first place–we should have just continued the economic prosperity program of Clinton. And, if the Republicans are so fiscally minded, why didn’t they pay the trillions of dollars that the Iraq and Afghanistan wars cost AS THEY WERE HAPPENING rather than leaving payment for our children and grandchildren? So, if we do go over the fiscal cliff after Dec 31st, the anger against the Republicans will be so great that in 2016 many won’t be re-elected. These Republicans need to remember that although Ronald Reagan decreased taxes once, he subsequently had to increase them in 1982, 1984, 1985, 1986, and 1987, which helped American get back on its feet again (http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2012/jun/25/gerry-connolly). We need to follow the Reagan taxation example now with Obama at the helm. Only in this way can we save middle America.

    • Right Brain Thinker

      Well said, Walt. You Do see the irony behind the fact that Grover would have worked to unseat Reagan after he so wisely raised taxes?. (to say nothing of the fact that “Saint Ronald” would fail the “tests” that have given us the present day Republican Party?

      • macgyver1948

        Right Brain Thinker … I so agree with you when you say Norquist would have tried to unseat the tax and spend Republican Reagan if the PLEDGE was around at the time. I believe a precursor to the Conflict-of-interest Norquist Pledge helped considerably to bring down the Sr. Bush’s second run for the office for raising taxes soon after he took office and after his “READ MY LIPS, NO NEW TAXES” campaign promise. It is so clear that keeping taxes low, or eliminated (and that goes for letting “temporary” tax cuts to expire because that is like “raising them”), is so much more important to the TP/Norquist-like/GOP than to do what is necessary/helpful and prudent for the county at any given time. I listened to Norquist say he wanted the FED budget and tax base to go back to that of the turn of the century (one that would fit in a “bathtub”, as he put it) and he was talking about the start of the 20th century, not the current one.

        So many needed programs, such as Social Security, and Medicare to name just a couple, would starve out of existence at those tax and budget levels, which is some of what they want. I believe he meant the 20th century, and not this one, because at the start of this century it was before the little bush tax gifts for his buddies so that wouldn’t work for them. No increase in taxes at any cost is the TPGOP way and the Norquist Pledge (over 270 TPGOP members of Congress have pledged their souls to Norquist in this) holds the signers careers as hostage in the bargain. The get, in return, major support in elections, the chance at power and disgrace if they violate the PLEDGE. With this Pledge in place it is so easy to see why the filibuster is used to defeat Obama in his wants for us and why the TPGOP is so much an obstetrical in his attempts in other ways as well. I can see more hate in his second term as well, unfortunately for us.

        Norquist has the clout and the huge money to back it all up. I think they hated Obama since way before he was first elected because they knew he wouldn’t betray us by signing. Maybe many also hated him because Obama is black but I try not to think in those terms when I can.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Good thoughts macgyver. A small clarification on Grover’s “bathtub” comment. What he said was “Our goal is to shrink government to the size where we can drown it in a bathtub”. Grover wants to DROWN our government, i.e, put it to death.

        George H.W. Bush had something to say about Grover and the pledge. He said:
        “The rigidity of those pledges is something I don’t like,” Bush said. “The circumstances change and you can’t be wedded to some formula by Grover Norquist. It’s — who the hell is Grover Norquist, anyway?”

        I will answer the former REPUBLICAN President’s question as I did when someone asked it earlier on this thread. Grover is a stooge for the plutocracy, a thug in a suit, and should be prosecuted for treason for actively working to destroy our government. He has taken away the right to representation of every citizen who is represented by a legislator who has signed the pledge. They are beholden to Grover now.

      • macgyver1948

        Right Brain Thinker … Thanks for the George Sr, quote. I am not sure what Grover is other than a treader to Americanism, as is all his signers. The Founders, I believe, would have wanted us to shut Grover and his kind down permanently. This Pledge is clearly a threat to all who aren’t of his ilk, so UN-American or libertarian, the real kind. I agree he should be prosecuted for treason, as should his signers.

        You say, and I totally agree “He has taken away the right to representation of every citizen who is represented by a legislator who has signed the pledge. They are beholden to Grover now”.

        I have been saying this for a long time since I first learned about the anti-American Immoral PLEDGE and I have been writing, and publishing, about it. Those who have signed are obligated by extortion to obey Norquist and that dooms the rest of us. How can those who signed still be seated in Congress? How can they not be arrested for treason? This kind of pledge is one of the biggest threats to Americanism and our liberty and freedoms. Apathy and greed is running wild in these kinds of pledges.

        The decision to raise taxes should always be avoided unless necessity and prudence declare so at the time. No one wants his/her taxes raised so it has to be determined by necessity/prudence and not by the wants of the super wealthy and greedy for their sole benefit. George Bush Sr. saw the necessity to raise taxes, which is why he did, and he was buried by the greedy and the apathy because of it. That is why the signers of the criminal Norquist PLEDGE are afraid to NOT comply with Norquist – whatever he wants. We lose if the the 270 plus TPGOP signers do comply with the tyrant Norquist.

  • Steve E

    I say let’s run head on into the fiscal cliff and get it over with and stop kicking the can down the road.

    • George E

      Steve,

      If the fiscal cliff just meant shutting down some government services, I wouldn’t care too much. However, as I understand it in this case, the fiscal cliff means raising taxes across the board, and that would hurt the economy pretty badly which I don’t like. The one thing we need to do is get this economy on its feet again. Aside from that, I don’t care too much because the “pain” incurred may serve to clear folks minds a bit and help to expedite a solution.

  • factnotrhetoric

    Until Bernanke’s speech in February 2012, the FISCAL CLIFF meant America going bankrupt and falling over a fiscal cliff. Picture a bunch of tiny people dragging a sleeping giant up to the edge of a bankruptcy cliff.

    The 2013 Bernanke Fiscal Cliff is a Federal Reserve Bank fallacy. The only real fiscal cliff is America going bankrupt.

    Think about it. Bernanke says that if we return out taxes to a normal level, and decrease government spending by 5% were going to crash the economy. That’s Bernanke’s Federal Reserve Bank lies. If you don’t realize it, Bernanke and the Federal Reserve Bank are owned and operated by foreign enemies of the US. They want you to believe China will cough up another $1 Trillion real dollars when in fact it’s all fake, imaginary dollars created out of thin air by the foreign owned Federal Reserve Bank, China, Russia and Saudi Arabia. It’s a joke on you for believing there is such a thing as a 2013 Bernanke Fiscal Cliff.

    To put the Bernanke 2013 cliff in perspective. Obama has increased the deficit by 100% every year he’s been in office over Bush’s largest deficit on record. But according to Bernanke, a 5% decrease in government spending, and returning taxes to normal, is going to throw us over a fake fiscal cliff.

    Facts: The highest Bush deficit was in 2008 and was only $0.64 Trillion Dollars. The lowest Obama deficit was in 2010 and was $1.37 Trillion dollars. That’s well over 100% increase in the trillion dollar deficit every year Obama has been in office. Bernanke’s fiscal cliff is all CIA style spin by the Foreign Owned Federal Reserve Bank. The real fiscal cliff is American Bankruptcy.

  • Dianne Lee

    The Republicans agreed that if there was no budget deal by January, the budget would be cut, with half of the money coming out of defense and the other half out of unspecified domestic programs, with the White House in charge of which programs those would be. I figured they must know something I didn’t know, because this was such a blatantly stupid move on their part, I couldn’t believe that they would do it. I’m still waiting for them to come up with some evidence that they aren’t idiots.

    At this point, unless the Republicans cave to whatever the Democrats want, on January 2, every pay check in America is going to be cut– on average about $2000 a year ( assuming a $50k salary), when the Bush tax cuts and payroll tax cuts expire. Now that Washington totally has everyone’s attention, they will notice that everyone in congress agrees that money should be restored to their paychecks. However, the Republicans will only agree to that if families making over $250,000 a year also keep their tax cuts.

    Since their defense of the 1% is causing the voters to, by about a 30 point margin, blame the Republicans for that hole in their paycheck and believe that the Democrats are trying to fix it, what incentive do the Democrats have not to drag this out as long as they can? They don’t want to solve the problem before that hole actually appears in the checks and DC suddenly has the undivided attention of everyone, even people who couldn’t tell you who won the presidential election.

    . Maybe electing a bunch of rookie Republicans in 2010 was a mistake, because they totally got played.

    • Right Brain Thinker

      Yes, Diane, somebody surely did get “played” by electing Tea Party extremists. That’s what happens when you unleash the junk yard dogs—-you never know who they’re going to bite.

      When we go over the cliff, there will be such screaming from the public that the middle class cuts will be quickly restored. But the higher rates on the 2% will remain because the Repugs will have NO leverage at all to “demand” that they be cut too. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

      • Nadzieja Batki

        You sure don’t seem to have been bitten so in effect you are making up lies about the Tea Party people.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Right Brain Thinker says:

        No, NBatki, I have not been bitten. I am too smart to get close enough to let the JY Dogs bite me. Anyone with good right brain thinking skills knows exactly how long their chains are and stays just far enough away that they break their necks trying to get at us..

        I’m not sure what “lie” I have told about the Tea Party people. They ARE extremists almost by definition, so it can’t be that. The 2010 election that put so many of them in power WAS unfortunate for the Repugs and does constitute a “foot shooting”, so that can’t be it. The overall point Diane and I were trending towards is that the Repugs are now backed into a corner and O’Bama is going to kick their butts is true, so that can’t be it.

        Hmmmm. I’ll keep pondering what my lies might be. Maybe it will come to me.

      • George E

        Right,

        Is it extreme to want the federal government to manage its budget without raising taxes? If that’s your definition of extreme, I’ll have to say you and I have two different definitions of extreme.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Yes, George. It IS extreme when a splinter group takes the whole country and the legislative process hostage as they blindly DEMAND that they get their way and their “way” is based on ideology rather than reality.. It IS extreme when they blindly refuse to recognize that there are TWO sides to look at when you talk about balancing a budget—revenue and expenditures. I think what we probably differ on more is our definition of “rationality”.

      • Joe H

        RBT,
        you mean like with Bambam care????

    • kkflash

      OK, let’s cut the BHO BS about the 1%, and start dealing with the truth. The Dem’s proposed tax increase for the top tax brackets will affect at least 5% of the households, not 1%, and that’s more than 6 million households. Those 6 million households, the top 5%, earned 25.9% of all the income in 2009, but they paid 39.6% of all the Federal Tax Liabilities. (per the Congressional Budget Office) Meanwhile 47% of tax-filers paid $0 income tax that same year. BHO’s favorite phrase, the “middle-class”, is not paying a proportionate share either, contrary to his repeated lies. Households in the 3 middle income quintiles earned 45.6% of the income, but paid only 31.5% of the Federal taxes. (For the mathematically challenged, that “middle-class” group excludes the bottom 20% and the top 20% of earners, leaving 60% or about 70.6 million households. ) So, how do you justify asking the top earning people to pay a still larger share of the Federal government’s bloated spending?

  • LC

    I would raise the minimum wage to 10 dollars an hour before I would raise taxes. At least this would add to taxes being paid in and encourage consumer spending to aide the economy at the same time. Health care should stay at the state level. Cut spending for foriegn countries. How come it’s ok to take billions from our education programs yet continue to send billions to foreign countries? I for one am sick of government accomplishing nothing and getting paid the whole time. Put them on a results driven pay structure. NO work! NO pay! As for entitlement, just like any other paycheck, if you can’t pass the fed enforced drug test you don’t get a check,food, benes,etc…. Enough of the free loading on all levels. End the rich tax breaks, stop supporting drug addicts with tax dollars, no tax break for corps or migrant workers, stop spending overseas, stop spending on endless,unproductive war, stop paying a gov’t that doesn’t work. There’s alot to be done and gov’t needs to get off their ass and start doing the work required to restore this nation.

    • DaveH

      When minimum wages go up, employment goes down. If an employer is faced with paying an employee $10 an hour, and the employee is expected to produce only $9 an hour, what employer in his right mind would be expected to hire that guy who will lose him money?
      Business owners aren’t in business to lose money.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        And workers are not “in business” to be treated like slaves.

      • http://www.boblivingstonletter.com/ Bob Livingston

        Dear Right Brain Thinker,

        You write: “And workers are not “in business” to be treated like slaves.” As there is no overseer to hunt them down and flog them (or worse) if they choose to leave for greener pastures, they are not slaves and aren’t treated as such. I don’t recall reading or hearing of any employers standing over their employees while holding whips or guns.

        Best wishes,
        Bob

      • cawmun cents

        Even if you sock them in the gourd with knowledge,these persons will not learn.
        The fiscal cliff is just the tip of the iceberg,yet ou cannot get them to steer their Titannic away from danger.They will never know what happened until they are floating in the icy drink.They will stagger about like drunkards on the deck of their doom,until it comes to greet them.
        You cannot educate those who do not wish to be educated,unless some marxist professor claims it as truth.We have a looming water shortage crisis,energy shortage crisis,food shortage crisis,clean air shortage crisis,resource shortage crisis,war crisis,and in order to keep from total war(which would inevitably likely mean the deaths of 1/3 of the earths populace,or at least therebouts,our industrious leaders are willing to break down what we have grown accustomed to,i.e.,a higher standard of living,to accomodate sharing the resources with the growing population of the planet,thereby avoiding,or so they think,a huge war which threatens the existence of mankind itself.)
        Technology is said to be able to bail us out of this current world FU,but that remains to be seen,as the scientific community has coopted a darkmatter approach to the origins of the universe.The darkmatter does exist,but only in their feeble understanding of what amounts to nothing at all.
        The worlds leaders are looking for solutions in the marxist manifesto,the nations leaders are throwing their hands up and going along to get along to stall for time so total war doesnt break out,because to have war here on our soil would be bad for their political livelihoods.
        The growing unrest here at home doesnt seem so bad because there are all these other considerations jumping to attention at once,so they choose to lie to you so that you will bury your heads in the sand(not really understanding that you can still get your ass kicked)and they can go on planning what lies to whisper into your ear to make you feel better about the stinking conditions which you find yourselves in.
        And meanwhile you argue left and right,right and wrong,back and forth,froward and leeward,not realizing that you have run clean out of solutions to the fecalstorm coming into your Doppelor Radar,and the forecast gets grimmer with each growing moment.
        So bicker if you will,but I suggest you take the time to prepare for disater,because if a worst case scenario develops in a neighborhood near you,and your pants are still around you ankles,you may not have a safe second to bend over to pull them up.
        But what do I know?
        Apparently very little…..
        Cheers,
        -CC.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Good afternoon, Bob.

        NIce to see you talking to me again. I’m glad you took my advice and let the other exchange drop—a smart and right-brained thing to do.

        I have contributed many longer and more detailed comments on this topic today. I wonder why you haven’t responded to any of my arguments there rather than to this quick “one-liner ” I popped into the thread in passing (mostly because virtually everything DaveH says needs correcting). Perhaps that would have been dangerous for you to do because my arguments in those comments were irrefutable? This one is also if you THINK about it rather than just let it push a button.

        Are you saying that we must actually go back to before 1865 when there were in fact overseers to flog “them” and hunt “them” down before we can speak metaphorically of workers being “slaves”?

        Ask any Wal-mart employee if metaphorical guns and whips are being held over them. Do not low wages, poor or no health benefits, poor working conditions, and retaliation against any who speak out constitute a form of “slavery” and “guns and whips”?

        Especially since there are NO “greener pastures” to go to in the present economy. Go to any Wal-mart on Black Friday and you will perhaps see the the “slaves” demonstrating against their “slavery”. Come to my Local W-M and you may find me on the line with them. I will get you a sign to hold if you do show up.

        And you “don’t recall reading or hearing”? That’s also a wee bit “snarky” thing to say. DaveH would approve, though—he loves snarkiness over substance.

        Best wishes,
        RBT

      • http://www.boblivingstonletter.com/ Bob Livingston

        Dear Right Brain Thinker,

        You write: “NIce to see you talking to me again.” I didn’t realize I had stopped.

        You write: “Perhaps that would have been dangerous for you to do because my arguments in those comments were irrefutable?” Yes. I cower in fear at your superior intellect. In truth, I’m usually doing many things during the day. Sometimes I don’t have time to read any comments. Some days I have a lot of time. Sometimes I pop in and see a comment that interests me and I respond.

        You write: “Ask any Wal-mart employee if metaphorical guns and whips are being held over them. Do not low wages, poor or no health benefits, poor working conditions, and retaliation against any who speak out constitute a form of “slavery” and “guns and whips”?” No, low wages, poor or no health benefits, poor working conditions and retaliation do not form a kind of slavery. They are free to seek greener pastures. That’s what rational people do if they find working conditions unbearable.

        You write: ” Go to any Wal-mart on Black Friday and you will perhaps see the the “slaves” demonstrating against their “slavery”. Come to my Local W-M and you may find me on the line with them. I will get you a sign to hold if you do show up.” I make a point not to shop at Walmart. I prefer to purchase quality merchandise.

        Best wishes,
        Bob

      • Nadzieja Batki

        RightBrainThinker, I will go along with Bob L., if you don’t like the job or the wages the employer offers you don’t work for him. It is as simple as that. Better yet, form your own business and work for yourself.
        You and other Leftists being control freaks, you attempt to gather followers by offering yourself as a messiah if they give you control of their lives. Sympathy and caring for the gripers and malcontents is how Leftists gather followers. It is the same thing O is doing.

      • macgyver1948

        Nadzieja Batki… “if you don’t like the job or the wages the employer offers you don’t work for him. It is as simple as that”…

        Realistically speaking what does “It is as simple as that” mean? When we know that so many companies pay “competitively” which generally means “we pay as poorly as our competitors for similar jobs”. And so many low payed people are treated the same ways in different companies where could they go even if the different companies do have openings? If there are openings. They would ‘meet the new boss’ who is ‘the same as the old boss’ from the dissatisfying company they just left.

        I do agree the best thing for us to do is to create our own company if we can. That has always been the best way to feel like you own your job and money and you can make your own decisions. Working for another company will never mean you own the job, the job belongs to the company, which is why they can dump you if they want to or if the accountants say so.

        As for the rest of your comment. Wow you do not see anything positive or with light, do you? You are only seeing the dark. You really do not have any realistic concept of the Left. That’s fine, you can continue to fool yourself about us because you have the right to your wrong opinion just as we do. I would even fight for your right to your wrong opinion. The First Amendment is a beautiful thing.

      • Karolyn

        Bob – Not many people can just go find another job. We are not all itellectually or even physically capable of doing anything other than working for whoever is hiring. Where I live, there is no work period. WalMart and a few plants are all there is, other than small mom-and-pops. Too many people are wont to say “Anybody can find a job.” That is BS, and they are not living in the real world. Yes, people like me who are resourceful find other ways to bring in some income; however, the majority is not like that.

      • http://www.boblivingstonletter.com/ Bob Livingston

        Dear Karolyn,

        You write: “Not many people can just go find another job. We are not all itellectually or even physically capable of doing anything other than working for whoever is hiring.” I have worked many jobs in my lifetime. Some I hated and equated with eating crap. That is life. It is not always a bed of roses. If one is not “intellectually” capable of doing certain things, one has the option of working to improve his intellectual capabilities and thereby improve his condition. You are correct in that some mental and physical disabilities limit work choices.

        You write: “however, the majority is not like that.” I disagree that it is a majority that is incapable of being resourceful if they choose.

        Best wishes,
        Bob

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Dear Bob,

        You say “I didn’t realize I had stopped (talking to you)”. Yes you did stop, Bob—on another thread, but you terminated our discussion after I suggested you do so. Glad to see you’re not mad at me and have come back for more discussion.

        And just as I said in that prior exchange, I will again say “nice tap dancing” as you again evade any real discussion of anything substantial.. You try some “snarkiness” (love that word) and talk about how you “cower in fear at my superior intellect”. Looks like a little bit of self-awareness may have crept in there if you admit that to yourself. And you’re BUSY “doing many things”? LOL I can see you down in the vaults doing a Scrooge McDuck and rolling in your money.:

        And you say “No, low wages, poor or no health benefits, poor working conditions and retaliation do not form a kind of slavery. They are free to seek greener pastures. That’s what rational people do if they find working conditions unbearable”. Isn’t that basically what you said before? Don’t you subscribe to that endlessly repeated and misapplied wing nut quote of Einstein’s about insanity? To paraphrase a bit—”Saying the same thing over and over and expecting it to mean something different is insane”. It is irrational of you to say that those at the bottom of the pile are able to find “greener pastures”. Karolyn understands even if you don’t—back to Karolyn later.

        And the kicker. You say “I make a point not to shop at Walmart. I prefer to purchase QUALITY merchandise”. You asked somewhere in one of your comments “Who have I insulted?”. With that comment you have insulted me for one, and a lot of other folks too—certainly those who shop at W-Mart because they have to watch EVERY penny. I am a bit ashamed to admit that I shop at W-Mart for certain things to save a buck, being a 70+ year old “moocher” on social security and pensions. (I feel less bad when I run into my doctor, dentist, and lawyer also shopping there). Ashamed because that helps W-Mart to continue to hold its workers in “slavery”. But I DO enjoy buying that non-quality merchandise like Campbell’s soups, Cheerios, Kraft’s cheese and thousands of other good AMERICAN things that are also found in the “up-scale” stores while saving a buck along the way. If W-Mart raised its prices AND used that $$$ to do better by its “slaves”, my moral dilemma might be ameliorated.

        In closing, Bob, reading your comments here could give one the idea that you are an elitist, a member of the greedy 1%, and someone who would say “let them eat cake” about the less fortunate.

        Your rather arrogant dismissal of Karolyn just works to cement that impression. You told her “If one is not ‘intellectually’ capable of doing certain things, one has the option of working to improve his intellectual capabilities and thereby improve his condition. You are correct in that some mental and physical disabilities limit work choices”

        Really? Sounds like you are talking out of both sides of your mouth here, Bob. Please explain how you can say one has “the option of improving his intellectual capabilities” if they are not up to “doing certain things” and “thereby improve his condition” while saying in the very next sentence that it is “correct that some mental disabilities limit work choices”? Maybe I’m pre-senile, but I see some serious contradictions there. And what “choices” do people with serious intellectual or physical handicaps really have anyway?

        Karolyn, I will apologize to you on Bob’s behalf. I am embarrassed for him.

        Best wishes, Bob
        RBT

      • http://www.boblivingstonletter.com/ Bob Livingston

        Dear Right Brain Thinker,

        You write: “Yes you did stop, Bob—on another thread, but you terminated our discussion after I suggested you do so.” You are living in fantasy world. This never happened.

        You write: “LOL I can see you down in the vaults doing a Scrooge McDuck and rolling in your money.:” Gold and silver coins only.

        You write: “And you say “No, low wages, poor or no health benefits, poor working conditions and retaliation do not form a kind of slavery. They are free to seek greener pastures. That’s what rational people do if they find working conditions unbearable”. Isn’t that basically what you said before? Don’t you subscribe to that endlessly repeated and misapplied wing nut quote of Einstein’s about insanity? To paraphrase a bit—”Saying the same thing over and over and expecting it to mean something different is insane”. It is irrational of you to say that those at the bottom of the pile are able to find “greener pastures”. Karolyn understands even if you don’t—back to Karolyn later.” This works both ways.

        You write: “In closing, Bob, reading your comments here could give one the idea that you are an elitist, a member of the greedy 1%, and someone who would say “let them eat cake” about the less fortunate.” What I do for others I do with my own money and without fanfare.

        You write: “Really? Sounds like you are talking out of both sides of your mouth here, Bob. Please explain how you can say one has “the option of improving his intellectual capabilities” if they are not up to “doing certain things” and “thereby improve his condition…” Are you familiar with education and training? Or are those words foreign to you?
        You write: “And what “choices” do people with serious intellectual or physical handicaps really have anyway?” There are a number of non-profits that train and place those with intellectual and/or physical handicaps in jobs they are capable of performing. You really must get out more.

        You write: “Karolyn, I will apologize to you on Bob’s behalf. I am embarrassed for him.” You are not authorized to speak for me.

        Best wishes,
        Bob

      • richard brooks

        You write: “And you say “No, low wages, poor or no health benefits, poor working conditions and retaliation do not form a kind of slavery. They are free to seek greener pastures. That’s what rational people do if they find working conditions unbearable”. Isn’t that basically what you said before? Don’t you subscribe to that endlessly repeated and misapplied wing nut quote of Einstein’s about insanity? To paraphrase a bit—”Saying the same thing over and over and expecting it to mean something different is insane”. It is irrational of you to say that those at the bottom of the pile are able to find “greener pastures”. Karolyn understands even if you don’t—back to Karolyn later.” This works both ways. <<

        i know a fair number of people who used to say if you did not like your job, regardless of the reason, you could just go find a better one. many of those same people no longer have jobs. they are unemployed. replaced by cheaper labor.

        the manipulation of the labor pool by cheap immigrant labor is designed to keep wages low, eliminate benefits and force workers to accept poor working conditions.

        another problem with such a simple solution.

      • DaveH

        Brain (Right), you contribute nothing to the conversation but name-calling, ridicule, conjecture, and the other typical boring adolescent manipulative comments that we read daily on PL from Liberal Progressives. If you truly had a brain, you would be laying out thoughtful, factual, and logical comments. You do none of those.

      • DaveH

        Karolyn says — “Bob – Not many people can just go find another job. We are not all itellectually or even physically capable of doing anything other than working for whoever is hiring”.
        Then you should thank those people who make the sacrifices to create those jobs for you, Karolyn, instead of voting to steal their money, throw up numerous regulatory hoops for them to negotiate, and otherwise denigrate them.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        DaveH,

        Maybe you didn’t see this when I posted it earlier so I’m going to repeat it. Your latest “contribution” (which is really a “detraction”) only reinforces my decision.

        Right Brain Thinker says:
        November 16, 2012 at 10:10 pm

        That’s it Dave. I have tried to counsel you and help you “see some light” on several occasions. You refuse to pay attention and have again made a “snarky” response that says nothing of importance. Someone asked me if I thought some people on the site were “stupid”. You are perhaps the best example of that on the whole site, and I say that after watching you in action across many threads. I’m too old to waste time on stupid so I will not respond to your comments or “come back” to another one of your replies. Go play with those who will tolerate you but don’t be surprised if fewer and fewer enter into exchanges with you. If you haven’t noticed, that seems to be happening already.

      • Joe H

        DaveH,
        I must disagree with you on rbt. If he TRULY had a brain, from what I’ve seen here he would take it out and play with it. Or have to return it to it’s rightful owner!!

      • DaveH

        And there you have it, Folks. Read Brain’s comments carefully because this is typical of the kind of Liberal Progressives who want to run your life. If you think the ones who have actually gravitated to the top are any more “compassionate” than Brain is, think again. If they truly were, they would fund their compassion with their own hard-earned money instead of your hard earned money, and they wouldn’t dream of Forcing their way on you through Big Government.

      • macgyver1948

        DaveH… You are generalizing again and again etc. and as usual you are wrong in those generalizations, as you are with your Right thinking, with your “And there you have it, Folks. Read Brain’s comments carefully because this is typical of the kind of Liberal Progressives who want to run your life”.

        Not typical at all actually. Most “Liberal Progressives”, as you refer to us, do not want to control anyone. But you can continue to convince only those who chose to believe the c*r*a*p that comes out of the TP/Right about us and continue to be wrong in your denial about us. Honestly, I do not know any “Liberal Progressives”, or Left moderates for that matter, who have a need or desire to control anyone outside themselves and I know plenty around the country. This is part of the TP/Right delusions and you want to be of them in that. Good for you, and they, but you are not convincing any who know better about us.

        I am not saying you are a member of the Tea Party but your thinking is Tea-like for sure – no acceptance of differing beliefs and views and telling others what their feelings and beliefs are. No Liberty for others in those thought processes, is there? Where is the an Americanism in that? :-) … Please do not think or assume, and especially your irrational generalizations, for anyone but yourself because you really do not have the ability.

        Have a great day and enjoy your TP-like programming… :-) .

      • Right Brain Thinker

        JoeH and DaveH must be related. Or perhaps DaveH has changed his handle in the hopes that we will not notice that JoeH sounds exactly like DaveH. How clever! My message applies to both “H’s”. Stupidity and immaturity do not deserve anyone’s attention.

      • DaveH

        MacGyver says — “Most “Liberal Progressives”, as you refer to us, do not want to control anyone”.
        Proof by bald assertion? Then why, pray tell, do you Liberal Progressives vote for Politicians who take other peoples’ money and dictate other peoples’ life choices?

      • richard brooks

        MacGyver says — “Most “Liberal Progressives”, as you refer to us, do not want to control anyone”.
        Proof by bald assertion? Then why, pray tell, do you Liberal Progressives vote for Politicians who take other peoples’ money and dictate other peoples’ life choices? <<

        interesting declaration. just whom do you vote for that does not take other people's money and will not dictate life choices for others?

      • macgyver1948

        richard brooks… I have answered this question of yours several times in great detail on here and recently too for others. Politicians on both sides of the aisle take our money and spend as well as make decisions in our name. That is it in short…. Also in brief, I see the GOP as being in business mainly, maybe exclusively, for the benefit and protection of the corporations and the Dems much less so but they do that too to some extent. Just depends on your perspective.

      • richard brooks

        richard brooks… I have answered this question of yours several times in great detail on here and recently too for others. Politicians on both sides of the aisle take our money and spend as well as make decisions in our name. That is it in short…. Also in brief, I see the GOP as being in business mainly, maybe exclusively, for the benefit and protection of the corporations and the Dems much less so but they do that too to some extent. Just depends on your perspective. <<

        the perspective is rather simple. all politicians are crooks. we simply try to choose the crook(s) who do the least amount of harm. the problem is the selection of the crooks we get to vote for. and the lack of term limits.

      • macgyver1948

        richard brooks… LOL. yep. That is the brutal truth. We choose our version of the least of the evils in elections so they can forget who they really represent and we reward them by giving them a career with great benefits, better than the ones we get. The sad question is who are the real dummies, we or them?

        Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But then I repeat myself.
        – Mark Twain

        There is no distinctly Native American criminal class…save Congress.
        – Mark Twain

        I don’t make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts.
        – Will Rogers

      • richard brooks

        The sad question is who are the real dummies, we or them? <<

        if you want to find who is to blame for the state of the country. simply look in the mirror. i do every day,

      • macgyver1948

        richard brooks… Yeah, I agree and that was my point too. I read when some get into politics they might have honorable intentions for us at firsdt but soon they see to stay in politics they have to go along with what their party wants of them. Then there are some who get in for the power and glory. One of the questions I ask myself is “what is the point in voting?” but I always do anyway..

      • richard brooks

        I read when some get into politics they might have honorable intentions for us at first<<

        honorable. that is a personal definition. as differing as those who use it. much like the gop definition of the terms freedom, liberty, justice or equality.

      • macgyver1948

        Richard… Yeah, Honorable. It is one of those subjective words that is defined by the user. When I feel slighted and then insulted by someone on the right because I do not agree with them I know they are “honorable”…

      • richard brooks

        Richard… Yeah, Honorable. It is one of those subjective words that is defined by the user. When I feel slighted and then insulted by someone on the right because I do not agree with them I know they are “honorable”…<<

        lol. seems to epidemic for the gop. they always assure me they have my best interests at heart.

      • macgyver1948

        Richard… Whose best interest? How can they say that when all they cater to is the wealthy and the big corporations? I suppose they can say it and expect you to believe it…

      • richard brooks

        Richard… Whose best interest? How can they say that when all they cater to is the wealthy and the big corporations? I suppose they can say it and expect you to believe it<<

        well, they believe increasing the net wealth of the wealthy and the corporations at my expense, the country's expense, is really in my best interest. they never seem to consider or care what i think is my best interest.

      • macgyver1948

        Richard… You have that right. If you aren’t in control of enough money or a huge tax payer your interests would not be a concern. I often laugh when I read or hear welfaring the wealthy and big corporations, deregulation where regulations are needed, etc will benefit the country and each of us.

        While I was a business analyst for Walmart, in their home office, I learned more where and how the benefits are generated and for whom. Walmart is typical and they treat their associates as government treats the non-wealthy citizens, and with the same BS lip service. It is funny what you can learn when you take meetings with the execs and see why they love the GOP. As I said, not exclusive to Walmart.

      • richard brooks

        Richard… You have that right. If you aren’t in control of enough money or a huge tax payer your interests would not be a concern. I often laugh when I read or hear welfaring the wealthy and big corporations, deregulation where regulations are needed, etc will benefit the country and each of us.

        While I was a business analyst for Walmart, in their home office, I learned more where and how the benefits are generated and for whom. Walmart is typical and they treat their associates as government treats the non-wealthy citizens, and with the same BS lip service. It is funny what you can learn when you take meetings with the execs and see why they love the GOP. As I said, not exclusive to Walmart. <<

        i received my education from several large international corporations. and you are absolutely correct.

      • macgyver1948

        Richard… I worked for other corporations before Walmart and I was learning in those years too but Walmart gave me my best education in this.

      • macgyver1948

        DaveH… I say what I said about most  “Liberal Progressives” that I know and it could be the majority of us but you get very specific by singling out a small group of politicians. We could get very specific about politicians on both sides of the aisle who we feel are passing laws which are or could control us. I am saying I and so many I know do not want to but you guys on the Right seem to want to change our reality and you do not have the ability to do that. Speak for your self and stop taking the talking points of those you allow to control your thinking. Stop being so general about those who have the audacity to disagree with you politically. We do have the right to feel differently than you whether you want to accept that or not but when you generalize as you do you can be so wrong.

        We “Liberal Progressives” can see the politicians we vote for as doing more to help the country than the ones you vote for. I see the GOP as a party who is more so in business for the benefit and protection of the very wealthy and the big corporations than they are there to help the non-wealthy. So much of what the GOP does is to protect the corporations at our expense. For example, deregulation blindly without regard for what is needed, is a blatant attempt to protect the corporations and we lose with those concepts. Regulations should be there to protect all of us and the ones that over do it should be reevaluated. But the GOP will do what the Corporations want and need and we are only in the way. Corporations want to do all they can with less expense to them so naturally they want deregulation and if the GOP wants their continued support the GOP better protect the corporations. It’s a matter of perspective.

        Regulations can be considered a form of controlling if you factor out the human element and only consider what is important to your bottom line. We see this in mining where the safety of the minors are less important than the saving of expenses to the execs. Without regulations the minors would be paid much less and their would be so much more safety hazards, as there were before regulations. It’s a matter of perspective.

        I suppose you are referring to ObamaCare and how it forces people to have what they should be deciding for themselves. Well, let’s remember President Reagan suggested a national health policy and let’s remember the GOP put together its own package in the early 1990s and it failed in Congress. Let’s also remember What’s his name, oh yeah, Governor Romney of Massachusetts put together RomneyCare for those of that state. Let’s remember there is so much from the GOP and the RomneyCare versions in ObamaCare. Let’s remember nasty things in ObamaCare, such as “if you cannot afford health insurance we will fine you through the IRS until your get it anyway” comes from the GOP/ROMNEYCARE versions which was insisted on, as with other GOP items, into ObamaCare by the GOP. Isn’t that controlling? So politicians do that so-called, as you say, “dictate other peoples’ life choices” from both sides of the aisle. It’s a matter of perspective.

        Also if you are talking about raising the wealthy’s taxes to help pay for the extreme costs of running government that too is a matter of perspective. Who could more afford to help the country with that tax raising, the very wealthy or the shrinking middle class, many of whom live from payday to payday? That is if they still have jobs and weren’t canned or downsized or “BAINed”.

        “pray tell”, did I answer any of your questions or do you have a different perspective?

      • DaveH

        Nice try, Brain (Right), but the only people who might fall for your obfuscation and manipulation aren’t smart enough to understand my message anyway.
        Do all you Liberal Progressives use the same bankrupt adolescent manipulative tactics, or are you yet another incarnation of Flashman, Brain?

    • Nadzieja Batki

      You are wrong that minimum wage should be raised to $10. What employer would be willing to pay such an amount for work that did not require much physical or mental effort. Minimum wage jobs were starter job for the young entering the work force and for the under educated who needed a footing to establish themselves.
      Minimum wage jobs were not meant to have people live on them forever contrary to what the government meddlers decreed.

      • macgyver1948

        Nadzieja Batki… You said “Minimum wage jobs were starter job for the young entering the work force and for the under educated who needed a footing to establish themselves”.

        In theory you could be right but realistically in these times there are so many people in their 30′s through their 60′s who are forced to accept these unrealistic wages and many are not under educated. People cannot live on minimum wage jobs unless they are also living off of mommy and/or daddy. It is just to hard to get jobs for many so the many are stuck taking what is available. They were starter jobs initially and they still can be for the student and the just out of high school but when you have to pay rent and utilities and other things each month, for your self or for your family, minimum wage jobs are starvation and homeless jobs for many. They are for the time being until many can get a real paying job, if the many can with how Execs are not creating them in the needed numbers and with salaries that can meet needs.

        Notice I said “meet needs” and not pay $100/hr for a Walmart cashier. By the way, many corporations are doing well enough to create more jobs, it is just cheaper and more cost effective not to. Do more with less just so the execs do not have to make up the slack. It may sound like a joke but I think the real corporate exec motto could be “We pay our people less so we can live better”.

        I do not know what the happy medium is for minimum wage but as it is now and less, if many corporations get their way, minimum wage means minimum living, and that can mean from the streets or under a bridge. If you think I am exaggerating please think again. I have always been lucky but I see and read about it all to often.

        “Minimum wage jobs were not meant to have people live on them forever contrary to what the government meddlers decreed”. Unfortunately for so many who are no longer living off of mommy and daddy minimum wage can seem like their new “forever”. “Government meddlers”? If it isn’t for the attempts by concerned government meddlers the homeless rate would be so much higher. The undertakers would be busier too.

      • DaveH

        MacGyver says — “People cannot live on minimum wage jobs unless they are also living off of mommy and/or daddy. It is just to hard to get jobs for many so the many are stuck taking what is available”.
        So you prefer no jobs at all, MacGyver, for those people? If a company can’t afford to hire people at minimum wage, those people then have no choice but to go jobless. You know MacGyver — Choice, that quality that you Liberal Progressives give lip service to, but take away from other people with the Force of Government. No company is in business to lose money. Unlike Government, they can’t tap the bottomless pockets of the American Taxpayer, so they just don’t hire as many employees when the Government raises the minimum wage.
        I don’t know if you’re a propagandist or just genuinely ignorant about economics, MacGyver, but if it’s the latter you can cure that condition by reading the section titled “How Government Creates Unemployment with Minimum Wage Laws” (page 58) in Chapter 8:
        http://mises.org/books/capitalism_kelly.pdf

      • macgyver1948

        DaveH… You say to me “So you prefer no jobs at all, MacGyver, for those people? If a company can’t afford to hire people at minimum wage, those people then have no choice but to go jobless. You know MacGyver — Choice, that quality that you Liberal Progressives give lip service to, but take away from other people with the Force of Government”. 

        Choice huh? It seems you are taking my choice away in how you are answering your question for me. Why bother asking if you are going to answer for the person you ask? Why have you decided, for me, that I “prefer no jobs at all, MacGyver, for those people”? I do not prefer that at all. I would prefer for jobs to pay enough for people to live on and care for themselves and their families if they have one. I prefer a fair wage, one that will not over burden the company but will make it worth while for the worker to go to work each day.

        I joke about the Walmart Motto “Pay less, live better” because it is corporately a joke in its real meaning to the Execs and it is common in essence for so many corporations, not only Walmart. The Joke I offer is “We pay our people less so we (execs) can live better”. Payroll is an expense and it is the easiest expense for any company to control. Keeping expenses down is one of the biggest efforts for any company or household and it should be. But when we bundle that effort with greed and the concept of keeping as much money at the top as possible then it becomes a no win situation for the employee or associate, as Walmart chooses to call the workers.

        Many corporations, especially the huge ones but not really exclusive to them, see the employee/associate as a tool or piece of equipment and as very expendable. This is especially true in hard high unemployment times when the Execs can be their cost saving selves and say “if you do not like the low pay and bad treatment leave, there are always more of you out there to take your place”. Where can they go with good jobs being scarce and the same exec attitude awaiting them most likely where ever they go?

        I just want fairness for all sides and not only have greed and apathy control the lives of the “expendable”. We need business for the country to prosper and businesses need people to do the work the execs do not want to do themselves. People need to feel the job is taking care of their needs at home and employers should have the decency to pay a fair wage and still not feel their bottom lines are being overly burdened with this major expense called payroll. So employment should be considered a business arrangement, one that works for both sides. Both sides need each other but many execs do not want the employee to know that so they can treat the employee in not so respectful ways. Employers want to be respected by those on their payroll but many do not offer that respect in return. If it is not a two way street respect is fake in both directions.

        I did not major in economics so I took only the required coursed in grad school. I do know something about it but I am no expert. You, in your attempt to insult me (LOL) seems to be saying, with your suggestion of ““How Government Creates Unemployment with Minimum Wage Laws” (page 58) in Chapter 8: http://mises.org/books/capitalism_kelly.pdf , thank you, I will read it later.

        The way I see it is, in my ignorant ways, if we eliminate minimum wage there will be so many workers who wouldn’t be able to (afford) get to work, with the cost of gas or perhaps public transportation, let alone pay rent or buy food. So what would be the point to being an employee to any one but the execs? Again, in case you missed my point above, one of the execs main goals, in any corporation, is keeping expenses down and also to keep as much money at the top as possible so the expense of payroll will be one of their necessary easy approaches to limit. Lowering minimum wage, or eliminating it, is a win-win only for the exes. Again the employee will lose.

        The elimination of minimum wage, as the title of your suggestion to read seems to imply, is to support what is wanted by the corporations. It might also suggest the government has a need for high unemployment but I hope not. I also say that because no in party wants to explain high unemployment while under their watch. It is harder to win election that way.

        Do you still want to imply or tell me what I mean when I write?

  • DaveH

    Chip says — “If I were a conservative legislator in Washington today, what would I do? I’d stick to the promises I made that got me there. I’d insist that our government needs to spend less and tax less, and I’d vote only for legislation that helps move the country in that direction”.
    But what if you were a Neoconservative legislator (most of them) who got there with funding from their favorite Crony Capitalists?

  • http://wildeyguns.com The Christian American

    No, it’s a congress working agains the America it swore to protect and a president working against the America he swore to protect. In the middle there’s a huge bowl of vanilla pudding watching and waiting to be eaten by them. They all, except for a few Americans in their midst, should be tarred and feathered and run out of the country. When wolves come around, sheep circle. The one’s in the middle feel safe as the wolves eat the one’s on the outer perimeter, to stupid to realize they’ll be next.

    I know the magicians have us looking at celebrities, what they wear or drive or eat but it looks like Armaggedon is starting in the mid east people. The Zionist are pulling out all strings to get us involved in a war with Iran, and now. Are these bomb shelters they’re building in the district of criminals to protect us? Take a look at RT.com if you want some world news. Not even Drudge is reporting this.

    • DaveH

      Of course. Leaders have always looked out for themselves first. As this article states — “To say governments were formed to protect the rights of men would be historically incorrect. Almost all governments were formed by ruthless men exerting their will over others through the use of force”.
      http://mises.org/daily/3427

      • http://wildeyguns.com The Christian American

        America was the exception. Now it’s just another wave rushing to the beach. 2Corinthinians 3:17 Now the Lord is that Spirit; and hwere the Spirit of the Lord is, there is Liberty. No Lord. No liberty, and no America.

      • DaveH

        Even with America, Christian, there were those wishing to thwart the concept of Freedom and Force the Gang on the rest of their citizens. People such as the deceptive Alexander Hamilton who was smart enough to bide his time and achieve his power gradually as people over time forgot how dangerous Big Government was to their Freedom and Prosperity. Read this to learn who the real Alexander Hamilton was:
        http://www.amazon.com/Hamiltons-Curse-Jeffersons-Revolution-Americans/dp/0307382850

  • richard brooks

    how many business’ can remain solvent with out a customer. as we continue to pay less, and increase the number of unemployed, business’ fight over the few remaining customers. the inevitable result is fewer business’.
    a study of the most prosperous economy’s reveal that wages were the highest during those times. that created more customers which increased the number of company’s and their profits.
    unless you are willing to accept less income, how can you demand that someone else take less?

  • jopa

    Some more gloom and doom being predicted here again I see.When you take this 1.3 trillion and divide that by ten which is a decade that doesn’t sound like a whole lot in todays world.Most writers put the ten year number out to impress their readers with these huge sums.Why not say 2.6 trillion over two decades and really be scary.Also there is no such thing as a fiscal cliff we are going to plunge over on a specific date.If it’s a little late it would merely be a little bump in the road but that’s not as impressive or scary enough for the public to start trembling.Or should I say the readers that are here in this bubble.

  • Polski

    It would be nice if our President, our Senators, and our Representatives actually REPRESENTED us, like they are supposed to. Our President is going to turn over the United States of America to the ILLEGAL ALIENS OF MEXICO AND THE REST OF THE LATINS. Here in Washington state, our 2 Senators, Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell, are ILLEGAL ALIENS. Well, according to NUMBERS, USA they are both rated F-. They have NEVER VOTED FOR US, THE UNITED STATES CITIZENS. They have ALWAYS VOTED FOR THE ILLEGAL ALIENS. So with 20 MILLION ILLEGAL ALIENS taking the jobs that are meant for US CITIZENS, why do you think we have high unemployment? Why do you think we have an economic crisis? Why do you think the MIDDLE CLASS HAS DISAPPEARED?

  • Jim B

    Money is being pulled out of the markets by the billions daily, and government barrows by the billions daily. This simply cannot continue for long, and frankly I’m surprised it has continue for so long without devastating affects…. Yet! America is slowly losing its way, you can see it, feel it as expressed within these pages. Have we become so dumb and blind that we cannot see what government has become, and what they have taken from us piece by piece. America is asleep, and it can be no more evident, for if we saw with our own eyes what is happening to us we surely would fight back. Surfdumb has taken over, government is in charge of us now and our free nation is disappearing… quickly.

  • Marc

    ” Never have so many suffered so much
    For so few to be so happy”

    • walter agard

      You best cling on to what you have right now, OBAMA , along with us also yourself is working to try to make living better for all of us-that is if you want to join in-,and it cant happen overnight,this economy is badly damaged.So if you are in a hurry,I would say, take what you get and wait for what you want.

  • http://www.chandostransportsolutions.com GraemeB

    Who the he!! is this Grover Norquist?. Not even an elected representative. And he has all these twits sign a pledge to not raise taxes?? Are they nuts. It’s no wonder Romney was soundly beaten. Tell your representative to get a life. You cannot have two wars, lower tax revenues and a failed trickle down fiasco of a welfare tax plan for the wealthiest, and then expect them to create jobs. They don’t have to, they are making too much money as it is now, and in the meantime the balance sheets of corporate America, have $6 tillion in cash sitting there doing nothing.
    Cut the military addiction to crazy spending, raise the taxes on the 2%, and cut earmarks and entitlements. But this craziness that is Norquist, Cantor and Ryan has to change. The rest of the world looks askance at the US and thinks we are nuts. And GOP are nuts. The electorate re-elected Obama to do this very thing. To do otherwise will mean the demise of the GOP in 2014. They elected you to work in the interests of the nation, not the welfare billionaires and banking interests. Cut the tax loopholes that allow a billionaire to deduct $6 million when buying his new executive jet. That is obscene!

    • Right Brain Thinker

      Hear, hear, Graeme and Marc. I have often asked the same about Grover Norquist. He is a shill for the 1% through his Americans for Tax Reform group. He was a close friend of Jack Abramoff back in college, where they both worked to start the Young Republicans group. Jack later went to jail. Grover should also—or maybe be shot for treason because that’s what his activities border on in terms of the damage he has done to the country. The no-tax pledge he and his ilk have coerced so many legislators into signing is a subversion of the system in that it takes away the rights of the citizenry to have true representation. A congressman should be able to vote his conscience and for the best interests of his constituents without worrying that GROVER will get him if he violates the pledge. It is INSANE to say NEVER to a tax increase. Grover is a hostage taker and little more than a thug in a suit.

  • AL CRACKER

    KG is right, to a point. It is time to shut up and allow the fools that continue to vote for the idiots,democrats,liberals to destroy everything America stands for. I for one have shut down my business,terminated all labor(i enjoyed that as they voted for Obama) will be moving to South America and do what they do. One exception, I will live off of what I generated …because I did do it. America is not yours or mine. Our fore fathers left europe because of the same socialist policies, Now it is time for those who understand freedom to move on.

    • Mark Esche

      Adios, Dude! Could you take Rush along with you?

      • Nadzieja Batki

        Al Cracker is as much of a fool as you are, Mark Esche.Al Cracker you will be loved in South America as long as you have money to throw around, once it is gone what will you do? They don’t have enough jobs for their own people and you think they will be tripping over themselves running to give you jobs because you are you.

    • Right Brain Thinker

      Uh, Cracker—do you really think our forefathers left Europe because of the SOCIALIST polices that George III and the other kings and aristocracies were following?. Enjoy SA—maybe you think there is no socialism down there?

    • KG

      Uh… I wouldn’t count on any Navy SEALS to come and rescue you when your neighbors find out that you are a rich American. Remember, there will ALWAYS be more people than bullets.

    • walter agard

      AL Cracker, you are calling the president senseless names that is not true. How much you want the president to do in such short time.Don’t you have patient.Nothing can be done overnight. You have so good here in america that you do not even realize it .Are you sure you want to move to S America? You couldnt make 2 weeks there.There are too much good things here for you That you are accustom to.In south America, the people are accustom to what they have.If they come over here, they can adapt to this system more than you con adapt to theirs faster, because you would have to start all over again and how much time do you have for that?

      • Joe H

        Walter agard,
        Short time?? Let’s not forget that even HE said if he couldn’t fix the economy in four years he DESERVED to be a ONE TERM PRES!!! It would be different if his policies were making a GOOD difference. In August of 2011 there was a ZERO job growth rate and that hasn’t happened since the great depression!!

  • http://gillysrooms.blogspot.com GILLY FROM AUSTRALIA

    Governments have over time become just like the Union Movement or Crime Syndicates made up of politicians who have been given the power to take from the haves to give to the multitude who are poor. A legalised crime gang…nothing more really. Eventually the haves wont bother trying any more and the whole nation becomes poorer….destitute…America and Australia are both heading in that direction.

    I know many people who have decided to stop taking risks or doing anything much really deciding to retire early and selling up or closing down…after all why should they bother fighting all these regulations where even in Australia you cant rent out rooms in a house without a multitude of regulations in case of fire, whilst thousands die on roads every year they dont ban cars.. The result is the homeless sleep in tents because thats legal in a caravan park and freeze to death beause tents dont have locks only zips in case of fire they can get out quick whilst almost frozen to death in winter…. what a load of belone…but thats whats happening in socialist Australia today under our conservative government in the State of Victoria..they are no better than the official socialists running the Federal Government today.

  • http://www.thelonepatriot.blogspot.com OrionRon

    If the Republicrats were smart (and by and large they are not), they would give the President the Tax increases on high income earners that he wants in exchange for FREEZING (not cutting, freezing) all Federal Spending at the 2012 levels for the next 4 YEARS. The freeze would include delay of any further implementation of ObamaCare until 2017.

    The rationale is simple; tax hikes will stall the economy and we cannot risk hammering the taxpayers with another 2500 pages of more taxes, regulation and spending until it recovers from this next shock and until the debt curve starts to at least flatten.

    Citizens will then see first hand whether or not “taxing the rich” really helps or hurts (or neither) and the Republicans could not be accused of making drastic cuts in the middle of a fragile recovery as 2012 spending levels are way above pre-crisis spending.

    Most importantly, they give the President his precious tax increase which he would then own.

    As I said, they are not smart enough to do this as I really believe that they’d rather be political punching bags for another 4 years.

  • Jim

    Both sides of the isle gave away the store. NAFTA has shipped millions of manufacturing jobs overseas and left nothing in their place other than a growing debt and a growing group of marginalized people. The suits in Washington don’t really give a flip about the common man. Obama wants more taxes, he promised to increase the cost of fuel so we could go green, that will happen; He promised to take us out of war by shakes a mean sabre. UN observers at the election polls?! UN gun control?! Remember, the Democrats are also millionaires and billionaires. Wake up! No country has risen out of ecomoniuc disaster without a strong manufacturing base. So-called service jobs are not only demeaning, but they do not bring a real sense of accomplishment to those who work them.

    • Gordon

      Demeaning? Maybe for those with too much pride to actually have to work for a living. I was offered a job at 1/5 of what I was making but had to go 150 miles and stay at my own expense to work it. Netting $2 an hour after taxes and non-deductable expenses. Would you do that?

      • Gordon

        Oh ya, and I was expected to wait 3 weeks to get paid. Another thing, the new unemployment rules say that I made too much money last summer so now I can draw ZERO. wth?

      • Jim

        Worked for a living since I was fourteen. I’m 67 and still working.

  • http://gillysrooms.blogspot.com GILLY FROM AUSTRALIA

    Your tax policies are a mess and i find them impossible to understand, And you have state death duties another rort and not very smart… the states that get rid of it will prosper i can assure you.

    The Chicken game is a very dangerous game your playing with everyones money being put at risk in a rollercoaster ride on the stockmarkets and lifting everybodys STRESS LEVEL, some may even get heart attacks and die just so some politician can get a lift in their egos?

    Fix it fast is my opinion.

    • Right Brain Thinker

      Gilly, it is NOT just something that involves “ego lifts” for politicians. We are engaged in a deadly serious battle for the future of this country and, as you have pointed out, by extension, the world economy. The plutocracy drives this battle, and they have apparently sheltered their assets enough that they don’t care what happens to the 99%.

      • George E

        Gilly,

        I hope you can see socialist talk when you read it. “99%”…………..These guys are going to take care of us if we’ll just give them all of our money and personal liberties……………“We’re from the government and we’re here to help you!” Yeah, sure…………… I’m not buying that line, and I hope others won’t either.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        George,
        You are showing that you allow your buttons to be pushed when you go off like this just because you see “99%”. You prove it by launching into the mindless talking points like

        “give them our money” “personal liberties” “government”

        Which tells us nothing except that you have some deeply held beliefs that you are not really willing to examine in any way. That’s left brained and of little use in dealing with a situation that requires rational analysis of FACTS rather than emotional outbursts based on pure belief.

      • George E

        Right,

        I’ll look at the “facts” when presented to me, and I will consider them as objectively as I can. However, like everyone else, I’m not 100% objective because I have my built-in biases constructed on a foundation of traditional conservative values, Christian teachings, and capitalist economics. What are your foundational values?

      • DaveH

        Right Brain, Left Brain, or just another name-calling manipulative Liberal Progressive?
        Can you tell us who those 1% are, and how we can remedy that?
        Yeah, I know, I will brace myself for more verbal abuse.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        George, you said: “I’m not 100% objective because I have my built-in biases constructed on a foundation of traditional conservative values, Christian teachings, and capitalist economics”. It’s good that you show such self-awareness and are honest enough to say it. You need to read The Republican Brain to understand the implications of all that and become even more self aware..

        You ask “What are your foundational values”? I was probably quite close to you 50 years ago but have moved a bit since then, especially in the past 30 years, and definitely in the last ten. What has happened since O’Bama’s election in 2008 really sealed the deal for me. (And when I look at it, I haven’t moved all that far—it’s just that so many others have gone screaming past me to the right, many of them into the land of the junk yard dogs). I subscribed to traditional conservative values more strongly back when, but those “traditional” values have become so corrupted that I can no longer recognize them.

        I subscribe to Christian TEACHINGS, but not to the teachings of many of our present day Christian churches—their IS a big difference, Since Jesus was and is a liberal, I am too. I think the teachings of Christ about having concern for the poor and his egalitarianism pretty much says it all for me. The golden rule should “rule” us all.

        I support capitalism but not the run-amok “free markets” that have corrupted capitalism by allowing the plutocrats and “greedy rich” to steal from everyone else.

        I subscribe to rationality, open-mindedness, and looking at the facts of a situation before taking a stand—-the right brain type of thinking so characteristic of liberals. (As opposed to the closed-minded left brain thinking style of conservatives, who resist change in spite of clear evidence that it might sometimes be necessary)

      • Joe H

        George E.
        Yup just like Greece. Cradle to grave care & Dam the consequences! Like your countries debt being higher than your GDP! Like having to borrow massive amounts of money from foriegn countries who will now have a say in how you will run your country if you want to continue recieving these funds!!! The price is TOO HIGH!!!

      • George E

        Joe H,

        I think it’s likely our government will default on its promises to the American people before defaulting on its obligations to its bondholders. At least that’s the way it should work out, difficult as it will be for the politicians. I expect the Democrats, after seeing the “handwriting on the wall”, will figure out a way of doing this and blaming it on the Republicans, even though it’s been the Republicans who have been trying to call attention to the fact that our entitlement programs need to be reformed if we don’t want them to go bankrupt.

      • DaveH

        What you “subscribe” to, Brain (Right), is the typical Liberal Progressive manipulative techniques, their conjecture, and their lack of logic. Whether that comes from your right brain, your left brain, your lizard brain or some other has no bearing on your arguments.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        I am now convinced that JoeH and DaveH are the same person. Look at the time stamp on their postings. That means that DaveH, in addition to being stupid and immature, has a split personality and is now TALKING TO HIMSELF I wonder if we will meet any other H’s along the way. LOL

        It’s a shame that George and I can’t have a serious discussion without having Mr. Snarky and Stupid get in the way. And yes, I know I said that I would ignore DaveH (and now also JoeH), but I thought it would be valuable for the group to see this new revelation about Dave—or is it Joe?—or really Dave? Back to ignoring him and all his “others”.

        (And it should not be forgotten that a fart in church does get one’s attention).

      • DaveH

        You just proved my point, “Brain”. Thanks.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        George E,

        It’s a shame some of us can’t have a decent discussion without others getting in the way and cluttering up the thread with what can only be characterized as “turds in the punchbowl”. That they then think they are intelligent and clever for doing so is beyond understanding.

        I do quarrel a bit with your statement that “it’s been the Republicans who have been trying to call attention to the fact that our entitlement programs need to be reformed if we don’t want them to go bankrupt”. In fact, rational people of all political stripes (our president first and foremost) have recognized the need to make some adjustments to entitlement programs, including “entitlements” such as those that allow some corporations to pay no taxes, oil companies to get unwarranted subsidies, and the rich to pay less than their fair share in taxes.

        The real problem is the refusal of the Repugnants to deal with the need for increasing taxes on the 1% or 2% as part of a balanced debt reduction strategy. They won’t do the rational thing because GROVER and the specter of what happens to those who go back on THE PLEDGE governs their thinking, NOT the wishes of those who elected them or the greater good of the nation. GROVER wants to “shrink the government down so that it’s small enough to drown in a bathtub” and the Repugs follow him like sheep—THAT’S
        the problem.

        And be reminded that I have already said that Grover is just a shill for the rich and that’s why he came up with pledge—-so that the rich wouldn’t have to pay their fair share—-and the circle is now closed.

  • hipshotpercusion

    Socialism is a great form of government, until you run out of other peoples money.
    Margret Thatcher

  • Tony

    KG I’m pretty sure you do not pay taxes or you would know how it feels to work and pay taxes for a bunch of lazy able bodies.

    • Joe H

      WELL SAID, TONY!!!!!

  • Adrian

    When I read the point about the federal deficit being $1 trillion a year, I thought – he’s got that wrong, there’s no way it could be that high, that would just be crazy. So I went into Wikipedia and looked it up, sure that I was going to be posting a ‘you’ve got your facts wrong’ comment. But no, it has actually been over $1 trillion for each of the last 4 years. Crazy, If it’s true that this is a third of govt spending, then that means that the govt is essentially borrowing the equivalent of half their income. If I knew someone who was spending the equivalent of half their income on their credit card each year, without paying off a penny, I would tell them that they were crazy and would easily go bankrupt in no time. It seems the govt is that person, and is saying ‘I’ll get a pay rise sooner or later and then I’ll be able to pay it off’. This is delusional. The US would need China-size levels of growth in national income to be able to even stop borrowing and that’s not going to happen to a developed economy. So my advice to this credit card addict would be ‘just stop. spend what you earn, live within your means, and then when your income does grow, you will be able to pay the debt back’.

    • johnC

      You do realize that Congress and the president have no intention of paying off the debt after all when they are out of office it will be someone elses problem. The President blames the Republican house but ignors the democrat controlled senate who have not passed a budget in 4 years…seems the house sends bufgets to the senate and Harry Reid decides to not even allow it to come to a vote.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        You do realize that you’re just parroting the wing nut talking points, don’t you? The reason that the Senate hasn’t passed a budget is that they will not capitulate to the Ryans of the House that keep slipping insane and unacceptable things in there. The Ryans then turn around and go “see?” when the senate does the right thing.

        I am reminded of what some “dirty” football players do. Do something to get an opposing player incensed, go tell the ref to:”Watch that guy, he’s been doing bad stuff”, and hope that the player WILL do something and get penalized for it. In this case the whole country would be penalized if Harry passed a budget. Those of us with any sense see through all that and thank Harry and the Senate for holding the line.

      • DaveH

        You do realize, Thinker (yeah right), that both major Parties are taking us down the Road to Serfdom? It’s interesting that you used a football reference because that is exactly how the Crony Capitalists ply their trade. While the people chant mindlessly for their team, the Leaders and the Crony Capitalists are robbing us blind.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        We can agree on something for once, Dave.

        Yes, BOTH parties have contributed to the mess. Read “Winner Take All Politics” for a good take on that. And it IS the crony capitalists of the !% that drive it all with their greed. And it’s also true that the Repugnants have been far more culpable.

        And it’s not “right” as in “correct” but a metaphor for certain personality traits and thought processes that used to be associated with right and left sides of the brain but are now moving more to amygdala vs frontal cortex as new research is done. You should try to use the “right side” more and get out of the “left side”—it would help you wrap your brain around the problems from a more complete perspective.

      • DaveH

        You should try some actual Thinking and Reading, Thinker.
        Both Parties have been infiltrated by Crony Capitalists. Some of the Cronies play both sides. Read this book and learn something:
        http://www.amazon.com/The-Big-Ripoff-Business-Government/dp/0471789070

      • DaveH

        So, Thinker, how would you address the issue of Crony Capitalists? What policies would you implement if you were King that would benefit the citizens most?

      • Right Brain Thinker

        I DO read, DaveH. A lot. And I DO think, also a lot. And I use the right side way more in my thinking so I can see the big picture, rather than be like you, constantly playing your left side two-note tune for us.

        And why are you so “snarky”? Why can’t you just engage in a debate without “snarks”? Or is it that I and many others have wounded you deeply by having better arguments than you or pointing out the serious shortcomings in your “thinking” (and I use that word with reservations). It’s perhaps OK to be a bit hurt and resentful when you lose, Dave, but adopting that at your permanent “style” is immature.

        Now let’s see if you are even listening. If you aren’t, we can all expect a brief and “snarky” response that says nothing of importance.

      • DaveH

        As usual, all I get from the Liberal Progressive is double-speak and ad hominem attacks.
        Come back when you can give me a coherent response, Brain (Right).

      • Right Brain Thinker

        That’s it Dave. I have tried to counsel you and help you “see some light” on several occasions. You refuse to pay attention and have again made a “snarky” response that says nothing of importance. Someone asked me if I thought some people on the site were “stupid”. You are perhaps the best example of that on the whole site, and I say that after watching you in action across many threads. I’m too old to waste time on stupid so I will not respond to your comments or “come back” to another one of your replies. Go play with those who will tolerate you but don’t be surprised if fewer and fewer enter into exchanges with you. If you haven’t noticed, that seems to be happening already.

        Double-speak, ad hominem, and coherent. Lord love a duck.

        DaveH says:
        November 16, 2012 at 9:45 pm
        As usual, all I get from the Liberal Progressive is double-speak and ad hominem attacks.
        Come back when you can give me a coherent response, Brain (Right).

      • DaveH

        The Liberal Progressives don’t “exchange” with me, Brain, because they have no logical or factual comebacks to my arguments. So like yourself, Brain, they must resort to adolescent manipulative tactics like I might expect from my 12 year old grandchild.

      • Joe H

        Right brain thinker,
        you DO remember that in his first term Bambam locked the repubs out of all talks on Bambam care, don’t you?

      • Right Brain Thinker

        In scanning through the postings, I saw something significant in a post from “He-who-is-ignored by nearly all” and though it needed pointing out.

        Doing a little arithmetic, it appears that H-W-I-I-B-N-A is older than his posts would indicate. In order to have a 12-year-old grandchild as he states, he must be at least 26 himself. I look forward to hearing the news when he announces that he is a great-grandfather in a couple of years.

        Congratulations in advance! May the dynasty of ignorance live and prosper!

      • Right Brain Thinker

        OOOOPS In my attempt to be “Snarky” like “He-who-is-ignored by nearly all”, I got over-eager and made a mistake. (My only excuse is that I’m new to “snarky” and got excited). The math needs to be carried out one more generation. It’s H-W-I-I-B-N-A’s CHILD who is around 26 and H-W-I-I-B-N-A himself is therefore maybe 40. Definitely older than his posts would indicate. Sorry for the error. Never said I was perfect (and I am one of the few on this site that have ever admitted that and/or apologized for an error). My congratulations on impending great-grandfatherhood still stand.

    • Cliffystones

      Won’t it be an interesting day when the Chinese send in their repo guys?

      • DaveH

        China only owns a small percentage of US Debt. The majority is held by the Federal Reserve. China held about $1.15 Trillion of US debt in 2011 (about 8%).
        The Federal Reserve held about $4.7 Trillion of US debt in 2011 (about 47%).

      • DaveH
    • DaveH

      Good for you, Adrian, for investigating. It’s good to know there are still people who are interested in truth.
      I always advised my children that if they couldn’t live within their means and borrowed now, how were they going to be able to live within their means later with the additional debt burden to pay back?

  • KG

    It’s funny (yea….right) when you guys talk about the Debt as a zero sum game. And then, turn around and say that tax cuts will help the economy.

    We are paying less taxes than ever, and yet, have the worse economy ever. Accumulation of wealth never helped a Nation to prosper. Just look at Mexico. Some of the richest people in the world live there – but would you want to live there? There are very rich people who live in Sweden. Would you want to live there?

    When wealth got too concentrated in France, the “rich” were beheaded. That is what happens when you have too many poor people. It’s time for America to become America again. I’m tired of seeing white-washed windows in our old town areas. I’m tired of seeing rusting hulks that used to produce the best steel in the world. I hate seeing our Harbor areas with empty warehouses and rusting cranes that used to unload American ships.

    So, you want to “cut” our way out of recession? That is impossible. it would be like a guy who is bleeding, and instead of fixing the bleeding, we cut off his arm.

    We must start to build our way out of this. And that means taxes. Remember, freedom isn’t free, so stop your whining and pay your taxes!

    • http://personaliberty.com A-New-Hope

      Taxing more is not the answer. The reason we are in such a rut right now is because the people that do the hiring are waiting to hire until they see the ramification of upcoming legislation. You demonize them for wanting profit but it’s that profit that provides for research and development and expansion. Before posting such nonsense I would suggest reading a book sometime.

      • Robert

        GOD gave us the answer to our woes in his Holy Scripture. “If my people will humble themselves and repent and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from Heaven and heal their land”. Until this happens America is under the judgement of GOD.

      • Polski

        They’re not going to use the information for improving anything except the executive salaries and bonuses. The CEO who’s making $23 MILLION a year is trying for $46 MILLION a year and all the executives under him are just following that line.

      • Gordon

        Robert, I agree we need to pray and be a nation of faith in God the creator Jesus Christ…… but your pray doctrine sounds a lot like the “TV prosperity teachers” that say pray and God will send you money. “IF you want a new car, buy it, and trust God to provide the money.” Sorry friend, money does not appear that way, and fiat is not real money.

      • KG

        There was supposed to be billions of dollars just waiting to be invested – that is the biggest crock in the world. I’ve been hearing that ever since the last economic chaos in 1989.

      • Nancy in Nebraska

        This I know is true!!! Whenever government says they want to raise taxes on the rich, they raise taxes on the middle class!!! The middle class gets shafted every time! They lie!!! The rich and the corporations are protected by loopholes and deductions! Why do you think that GE paid NO taxes last year?!? Why do you think that deductions are off the table?!? KG thinks that we are paying less taxes than ever! I don’t know what world he’s living in!!! We’re in the lower half of the middle class and we’re being eaten alive!!! Every dollar we earn is being taxed over and over again!!! Federal income taxes, social security taxes, Medicare taxes, state income taxes, property taxes, automobile taxes, wheel taxes, sales taxes, restaurant taxes, hidden taxes like driver’s license fees, dog and cat licenses, marriage licenses, telephone taxes, cell phone taxes, special taxes on our utilities, it never ends!!! In Omaha, they even tax our taxes!!! If you eat out, they charge you a restaurant tax, then charge sales tax on the tax! NOW the federal government wants a value added tax and a tax on carbon! The UN even wants to tax us on carbon and financial transactions!!! I SAY ENOUGH!!! STOP STEALING OUR MONEY!!! LET the fiscal cliff happen!!! CUT the military budget and END these ILLEGAL wars!!! MAKE them STOP spending OUR money!!! Everyone in our government belongs in PRISON!!! Our economy is going to collapse!!! THEY have already spent more than WE can EVER pay back!!! They keep putting it off because they want to get every last drop of blood that they can get!!! When they own everything and we own nothing, they’ll let it all collapse!!! I DO NOT understand WHY the people just stand back and LET them do this!!! READ THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE!!! We are right back where we started!!! Are we going to let them take it ALL?!?

      • Old Henry

        Absolutely Robert! Absolutely. The United States is ancient Israel.

      • mr Jan Haveman

        Robert,Robert,Robert

        still buying that bull ???

      • Bert Cundle Sr.

        Robert: Christianity is a DREAM WORLD! Reality is NOW! If you can pinch yourself till it hurts… Thats Life!

    • Flashy

      KG…funny how the extremists are crying about the stance taken by the President, and insist the GOP membership stick to a pledge which will send us over the cliff. No compromise seems to remain in their twisted thought processes.

      What they continue to refuse to accept is…the president ran on what he is stating as his position. No surprises, no lies or changing stance. He promised American voters that he would insist on revenue raises by way of increasing the top tax bracket for the wealthy elite who have been receiving welfare for the past decade paid for by the Middle Class. He ran on the promise to cut tax loopholes used by the wealthy. He promised to end the bizarre system where the wealthy who made millions paid less in percent of earnings than the laborer sweating every day allowing them to rake in the profits.

      So, the GOP extremists can say “no” and tell the American electorate ‘screw you” and continue to insist that the wealthy 1% be allowed their welfare program. And what happens? Automatic tax increases for ALL (how’s that pledge doing for ya Grover ?). Then they either have to agree to lower taxes for the Middle class without the welfare for the wealthy…or be branded once again and take the rightful blame for being the party raising taxes.

      The GOP may refuse to deal on the Sequestration deal THEY demanded and voted for. Boom…send the nation back into recession. Try telling the voters you placed politics above nation and that’s why the economy went down. Ouch.

      The extremists have had their day. the screams and rantings and refusal to deal have been seen for what they are..meaningless rantings of petulant children who have no clue what life and reality is about.

      The American people soundly spanked the GOP this past election. Everyone but the blind and the ignorant know it. The GOP has to deal …. and they are grinding their teeth wishing they took the deal this past summer. For what they now have is their worst nightmare…a path to a stronger Middle Class and a dismantling of the welfare programs for the wealthy. no more free ride…pay your way. .

      • Warrior

        Comrade, you’re getting pretty good at cutting and pasting I see. Where do I locate the “drivel” you espouse on a daily basis? All day, every day. Careful, one may actually start to believe this is your job.

      • rabidconservative

        The “American People” soundly kissed the hand that feeds them you mean. The proposed tax increases will be consumed in less than a month at the current skyhigh, out of control spending rates. Employers fled an extremely business unfriendly America. You don’t risk investing where governments are hostile to employers. It’s clear what s happened here: the left joyfully raided the treasury to pay off their supporters and thus stay in power. Liberals realized to their glee that Americans can be bought. O’s election was paid for with deficit spending (borrowed money). When the dollar crashes you’ll discover once again that “there’s no free lunch”.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        EXCELLENT comments, Flashy. Among your best.
        Ignore the ignorant responses and keep telling it like it is.

      • Bob Jeffrey

        You are absolutely correct!!!

      • Nadzieja Batki

        So your new word for the day is “extremists” and you must use in every comment. Big whoop!

      • Nancy in Nebraska

        Flashy, when are you gonna WAKE UP and recognize that it isnt just one side or the other?!? It makes NO difference WHO’S in office!!! You are so wrapped up in having the democraps win that you don’t even care WHAT happens to our country!!! As long as its the democraps who destroy everything, you’re fine with that!!! But of course you can blame the republicraps!!! IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE!!! They are ALL destroying our country!!! YES, bush too! But don’t ignore the truth!!! Come out of your hypnosis and SEE what is really going on!!!

      • DaveH

        Flashman knows darn well what the truth is, Nancy, he just doesn’t want to tell it.

      • kkflash

        Flashy, get something through your thick skull just once. There was NO electoral mandate in the 2012 presidential election. According to Politico.com, he won the popular vote by 3,476,775 votes, a narrow 51/49% margin. Two-thirds of that margin, 2.3 million votes, were in the state of California. Obama also had a 1.65 million vote margin in New York.
        Now, guess which two states have the greatest number of people on government welfare. Good guess! It’s CA and NY leading the pack in government handouts. (And, it’s not just because those states have high populations. CA is #3 in welfare cases per capita, at more than 3%. That’s more than double the rate of the next most populous state – Texas.) So, if you take out the two biggest welfare states, Obama LOST the popular vote in the rest of the country. Obama was elected primarily by freeloaders who don’t understand that freedom isn’t free.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Let me get this straight, KKF

        O’Bama wins BOTH the popular vote AND the electoral vote TWO times by big margins in 2008 and 2012 but there is NO mandate?

        George W Bush LOSES the popular vote and only squeaks by on the electoral vote in 2000 because of the Supremes, and then nearly sinks the country. And you most likely think he was NOT one of the worst presidents we ever had and think he had a mandate to do what HE did? Do I detect bias and motivated reasoning there?.

        Then you make the predicable leap to “O’Bama was elected by freeloaders”. Freedom is certainly not free but stupidity and closed-mindedness must be—we certainly see a lot of it on this site.

      • George E

        Right,

        I notice that a lot of liberals/progressives/socialists spend a lot of time on this site. Do you include them in your last statement or is that just reserved for conservatives and libertarians?

      • Flashy

        KKF..ignore reality. be my guest. The GOP lost Senate seats AND house seats (even as the GOP insulated themselves from losses via gerrymandering House Districts) and the Dems take 26 of 33 Senate elections. The GOP stifled voting access with restrictive voting laws based on made up lies about voter fraud. Obama garners 50% + of the vote in TWO elections (not since FDR has a Dem done that..and only FDR and Obama can lay claim to that. He nails the election with 332 Electoral votes. Ummmm … what makes that not a mandate?

        I guess if it’s not a mandate, the GOP are falling all over themselves like gaffed salmon flopping on the pier because they’ve won a resounding victory eh?

      • kkflash

        Read what I wrote, not what you think. Take out the two biggest welfare states, and Obama LOST the popular vote in the rest of the country. You can take your “mandate” to California or New York and preach the socialist gospel there.

      • kkflash

        RBT, In 1980 Ronald Reagan won the popular vote over Jimmy Carter by 10%, carrying 44 states. Now that is a wide margin and a mandate. Your boy won 26 states and lost 24. That’s a squeaker. His popular vote margin is more than accounted for by only 2 states, those being the one’s with the largest number of welfare recipients. My facts are unerring.

      • Nancy in Nebraska

        Way too much FRAUD in this election!!! Believe what you want!!! And when people critisize obumass, it doesn’t automatically mean that they were FOR bush!!! They’re BOTH lousy criminals!!! Just because bush was terrible doesn’t mean that it’s ok for obumass to be terrible!!! Instead of sticking up for the democraps or republicraps, stick up for America!!! These people(?) are destroying our country!!! And it isn’t ok just because bush did it!!! Grow up!!!

      • Flashy

        KKFlash….y’know, if you took away the votes from the largest populated Red States…guess what? Pres. Obama wins with a greater margin. And…tadaaaa…those two red states have the largest 9as a % of population) of gov’t aid recipients.

        Your facts may be unerring, your analysis and conclusions are grossly erring

      • Right Brain Thinker

        George, I think you overstate when you say “a lot” of progressives/liberals spend time on this site. This site caters to conservatives and they far outnumber the libs/progs. Maybe your mind set is so far right that you view moderates as libs?

        I see little evidence of any socialists it all—that is perhaps a figment of your need to express your deeply rooted (and wrong) beliefs by overstating where people fall on the spectrum.

        I reserve “stupid” for those who demonstrate “stupidity” and am sorry to say that the folks on the FAR right are much more afflicted with it than the more moderate conservatives. I have seen little evidence of it on the left on this site, although that doesn’t mean it can’t ever exist there.

        Closedmindedness is a defining trait for conservative (left brain) thinkers, and again it becomes more extreme the farther right you go. I see much evidence of that on this site, as would be expected. Folks on the FAR left can be closed minded but none of them have appeared here that I have seen. Most of us libs/progs posting here fall in the openminded part of the spectrum, which is a defining trait for libs/progs, (who tend to be right brain thinkers and look at things from many angles and reserve judgment rather than operate from the base of emotion and belief that left brains do).

        If that’s all too hard to follow, the simple answer is No, I don’t include libs/progs ON THIS SITE very much. And Yes, it fits a significant portion of the conservatives ON THIS SITE, perhaps even a majority of them (and that is based on evidence and somewhat offhand analysis—one day I am going to do a real study on it—actually count up and categorize who said what and put some numbers on it).

      • George E

        Right,

        I don’t know how you can tell the difference between libs/progressives and socialists/communists. They all say the same or similar things. I know the technical definition for socialists is that they want government ownership of everything. In my book, there’s not much distance from that definition and wanting control over everything like liberals/progressives seem to strive for.

        From where I sit, it doesn’t look to me like libs/progressives are any more objective than conservatives and libertarians. Everyone has a certain mindset which they use to filter and judge information with. Certainly, you might expect to find more conservatives and libertarians on this site who are spelling and language challenged because there are more conservatives and libertarians here than liberals/progressives. Aside from that, I’m just not positively impressed with the liberal/progressive argument that capitalist business people are greedy rich brain-dead bastards while socialist government bureaucrats are compassionate all-knowing intellectuals. That nonsense doesn’t play well with me, and as long as the libs/progressives continue to argue from a socialist point of view like that, count me out because those arguments are discredited with me from the get go.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        KKF doubles down on his denial and brings up Reagan Carter? 30 years ago? In a world far far away and long long ago—like Star Wars? Your facts about 1980 may be “unerring” but your attempt to make something out of them that is relevant to TODAY is not.

        O’Bama won and he does have a mandate, no matter how much you need to play with the numbers to make yourself feel good. The number of states is irrelevant—what counts is the number of voters—-that results in the awarding of electoral votes and 332 to 206 is not a “squeaker” but pretty much a drubbing. They don’t give votes or to jackrabbits and armadillos or award them on the basis of square miles of territory.

        (And why didn’t you use McGovern as an example? He won only one state. Although that too is irrelevant).

        And don’t you know that referring to the president as “your boy” can be considered offensive for several reasons? Do you intend to be offensive?

      • B rian

        “the president ran on what he is stating as his position. No surprises, no lies or changing stance.”

        Dear god!!!!!!!! Flashy! Are you really that blind and deaf….. This statement is crazy…. Would you like to see it and hear it in his own words, uncut…. Unedited!!!! How can you defend this liar?! I voted for him in the first election….. And he lied about everything! So this last election I made sure everybody around me knew it!

        Promises…… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaQUU2ZL6D8&feature=youtube_gdata_player

        Unpatriotic…. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kuTG19Cu_Q&feature=youtube_gdata_player

        Patriot act….. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gF3MC-TkpRQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player

        Government transparency….. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CU0m6Rxm9vU&feature=youtube_gdata_player

        Civil liberties….. (ndaa specifically)…… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8qWB4Si__Q&feature=youtube_gdata_player

        Obama only lies if he talks…. No other times! Which is interesting…… Considering he hasn’t met with the whitehouse journalist in 8 months….. And when he did….. Right after he got elected….. The press started asking him about all these things he promised to be transparent about…. And Obama got mad and started threatening…… “you got a problem with me!”.

        His own words flashy! Obama….. Him….. He said these things….. But he won’t do them! He is a liar! He divided this country almost 51 to 49 percent…. He did not unite us! “I’m gonna unite america!”. If you consider civil war uniting American on the same battlefield to fight each other uniting…. Ok well he’s almost succeeded! What he meant to say was “untying Americans!”.

        Wait till you see him go after the second amendment! He’s gonna do it! Just wait and see what happens when he actually Signs an executive order to damage the 2nd amendment.

        Oh yeah….. Almost forgot this one….. Executive orders….. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xc0i6N7zVSs&feature=youtube_gdata_player

        So you keep defending this liar! He promised sequestering “would not happen”. Kinda hard to make that promise during the debate when congress makes that decision….. You can’t make a promise that is not your to make!

        Frankly….. We…… The 53%ers have paid by ourselves long enough! I’m willing….. Me….. Am willing to pay 600 more a year…. To see most of the 47% have to pay…. Then they may understand why paying for everyone else [comment has been edited]! Wow! What a concept! Having to struggle to pay taxes over and above daily living!

        Your guy may have won….. But you have lost! So have the rest of us! He said it was unpatriotic for president bush to accumulate 4 trillion in debt in 8 years! He beat that in half the time! So what is that considered?! And his promise was he’d cut the deficit in half…… Lies! Lies! Lies! Lies! Lies! Lies! Lies! Lies! Lies! Lies! Lies! Lies! What else do you call that?! His pants are on fire hanging from a telephone wire!

        Congress… It’s congresses fault! Yes! Precisely…. It’s congresses fault! The people made sure he couldn’t damage this country further by taking away his majority in congress 2 years into his term! And guess what?!…… Nothing has changed! Still has a republican congress! Blame congress! Blame the American people for choosing congress! It was the citizens that put republican congress in place as is to revoke obamas platinum credit card! When are you going to get it?! Checks and balances!

      • DaveH

        I don’t care if you’re using your Right Brain, your Left Brain, or your Lizard Brain, Thinker, your comments are illogical, conjectural, and laced with the typical manipulative techniques (name-calling, ridicule, condescension, etc.) that are the hallmarks of Liberal Progressives.

      • AJ

        Someone up there said Obama stands on no lies? I think it was Flashy something. Are you smoking Crack? You know when Obama is lying? His lips are moving just like Georges. Obama is trying for Liar of the decade neck and neck with Bush. I guess Obama will take it he has four more years to tell us woppers.

      • Doug Rodrigues

        Interesting….the left-wing propagandists are really active on this site.

      • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

        rabidconservative,

        “O’s election was paid for with deficit spending (borrowed money).”

        No, it was paid for by citizens donating money. Their own money.

      • Gary

        Obama is the boss, it is his job to figure it out and get it done. Blaming everybody else is not figuring it out. Wow aren’t we lucky another four years of no leadership and llstening to him blaming every body else because he can’t solve a problem.

    • Rita Paige

      How many “poor” people are actually employers? NONE that I know of. If a business owner is bringing in $1,000,000 a year, pays taxes at a rate of 35%, and he pays his 5 employees $100,000 each, he is able to take home for himself $150,000. Now, due to taxes rising and ObamaCare being implemented, he now pays 50% in taxes, he can no longer pay himself a wage. What fool will do that? He now has to lay people off so he can afford to pay himself, or go get a job from someone else at the same time as running a business, which is a full time job, or close his doors and put 5 people out of a job that will now be competing with him in the job market. Who has benefited from the rise in taxes? Oh, yeah right! No one! A bankrupt anything be it person, business, city or country simply cannot spend it’s way into prosperity. And you can only take OPM before the OP get tired of you taking their money and they quit playing and leave the game.

      • Karolyn

        Actually, Rita, there are poor people who are employers. Though their businesses may be small, they believe in them and keep striving to build that business. As far as the poor rich employers who “have” to cut their workforce or hours because of health insurance, they are a bunch of bloated, greedy, unamerican pigs, who have no regard for their fellow Americans and only regard for enriching their already overflowig coffers. Take Poppa John, for example. He lives in a 40,000 sf castle witha moat and gold course but can’t afford to pay a little more for health insurance, which could even be offset by charging another14 cents per pizza.

      • Warrior

        karolyn, sing along with me……And the wheels on the bus go round and round….round and round…..round and round…and the wheels on the bus go round and round…all through the town. There, don’t we feel better now?

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Sounds like the workings of the “free” market should be able to take care of the problem. He can do all of the things you suggested, even if you did state the extreme case to push your point. How about cutting his own wages and the wages of his employees a bit, or laying off just one employee, or raising his prices? And your business owner may be impacted some by O’BamaCare but O’Bama doesn’t want to raise his taxes if he only makes $150K.

        The obsession we see with “TAKING (or “stealing”) OPM” on this site is a straw-man cum red herring that is beloved by the JYDogs but not really valid . You ask who will benefit from an increase in taxes ON THE RICHEST 2% WHO CAN AFFORD IT AND HAVEN’T BEEN PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE? Simple—the whole country, even the 2%—-because the only answer to deficit and debt reduction needs to be one in which a balance is struck between revenues and spending. Once we get the economy back on high speed, the rising tide will float ALL boats.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Good comment, Rita. Did you hear someone singing a song in the background because he had nothing intelligent to say? Annoying.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        OOPS—-I misspoke. I meant to say “Good comment KAROLYN”. Sorry—I would hate to further confuse the already confused on this site.

      • Jane

        Our recession has nothing to do with high taxes. They have been low for the past 10 years and this has not helped job creation. The only tax that should be lowered is the corporate rate which would bring jobs back from overseas. I am an American and feel sickened and ashamed by the disparity in wealth…….It is obscene that we have allowed this to happen. I couldn’t live without social security and medicare, my grand children are benefiting from lower interest on student loans, we recieved help from FEMA…..if this is socialism then it is the moral choice for a great country to remain great. Right now the 1% can kick in a bit more until we get back to the Clinton surplus.

      • Gordon

        It is almost humorous how some people find that increasing the expenses for consumers is expedient, yet increasing their income, or getting them a job is seemingly ignored. There is an old saying that money isn’t that important, but that only applies to folks who have lots of it.

      • Flashy

        Actually Rita…using your example…his income is $150,000 and would not be subject to any higher tax rates under President Obama’s plans.

      • Flashy

        Rita…every person who buys some article or good is an employer. There wouldn’t need to be a factory if nothing was purchased.

        That’s the con job the GOP , TPers and American Taliban are playing you with…they want you to believe the wealthy are the “makers” and “job creators”. false..the real makers and job creators are the Middle Class and other mass consumers and purchasers …without them, there’d be no factory.

      • shoalsvillagewebmaster

        ummm, Rits, you have a misconception of how this works. Employees are considered part of the cost of doing business and their pay is subtracted from gross receipts, along with other expenses like paper, computers, and amortized items, such as vehicles, before tax is applied. Therefore, using YOUR numbers $1million minus $500k (5 employees at $100k each) leaves the owner with $500k in take home profit, if there is nothing else to deduct, that would then be taxed. At a 35% tax rate (your number) would leave him with $325k.

      • http://gravatar.com/bychoosing Wake The Sleepers(Jay)

        Warrior, too funny! LOL!!!

      • DaveH

        Karolyn says — “As far as the poor rich employers who “have” to cut their workforce or hours because of health insurance, they are a bunch of bloated, greedy, unamerican pigs, who have no regard for their fellow Americans and only regard for enriching their already overflowig coffers”.
        Wow, Ms. Positive comes out of the closet.
        To the contrary, Karolyn, those “Greedy UnAmerican Pigs” are invested their own legally earned money and in the process giving otherwise useless people like yourself, Karolyn, an opportunity to earn a living without working the long hours and taking the personal and financial risks that are inherent in this heavily Socialistic System that we all labor under. And then you Greedy Liberal Progressive Pigs look a gift horse in the mouth and proceed to hire the Big Government Gang to steal their money and inhibit their productivity.

    • Joe H

      KG,
      The problem in europe is not the rich nor the concentration of it. It is their birth to death entitlement program! It is causing further debt and further shortcomings each year and THAT is what you liberals want for US!

    • Wonder

      Well said! They dont wait to increase tax at the same time they dont want to cut expenditure but expect to reduce the debts!

      • johnC

        They Increase taxes so they can increase spending …never worry about the debt ..the next guy will have that problem…lets just spend, spend, spend …some day when the bill comes in your children and grand children can pay it…we are steaing from our future generations and making them slaves to debt

      • Gordon

        John, it has worked for 50 years. Won’t it work forever?

    • http://newstips@personalliberty.com Redfray

      Raising the taxes has never worked in any society where the government is out of control.

    • George E

      KG,

      Everyone should have the same objective. That is, grow the US economy so that we have the resources to be able to afford the things we need/want. The economy grows from investments, not taxes. When the government taxes the economy it takes money that could be reinvested to grow the economy. Obviously, we need a government and the government needs to provide infrastructure, defense, law enforcement, and other critical services to support a stable and growing economy. However, when the government takes more money out of the economy than absolutely necessary (for whatever reason), it drains the economy of investment capital which could help the economy grow. Right now, the economy is struggling, so increasing taxes may cause the economy to go back into recession or even depression. Obviously, that would further decrease tax revenue and increase unemployment. Absolutely not helpful.

      Having said that, if I were a lawmaker, I’d probably be willing to agree to the increased taxes Obama is demanding IF I could get agreement on balancing the federal budget without increasing tax rates further over the next 10-15 years, and had assurances that future Congresses couldn’t alter the agreement without a super majority and Presidential approval. That would mean cutting federal spending many times over tax increases and would set us on a path of fiscal responsibility that would eventually get us out of the current financial mess we’re facing and would support a healthy and growing US economy.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Well said, George. And all that would be true if “investment” meant today what it meant back in the “golden years of the middle class” when everyone’s boat was floating higher on a rising tide of prosperity.

        Unfortunately, “investment” today means bleeding money out of the pockets of the 99% by the greedy 1% and socking it away rather than using it to grow the economy . The money that accumulates is used to just create more money for the 1% and dos not trickle down or create jobs. Look at the income and wealth inequality data—the figures are shocking and getting worse every day. The data shows the USA sinking down with third world countries rather than up with the countries of the developed world where it used to be. .

      • George E

        Right,

        Sounds like you’ve bought into the socialist propaganda. Let’s get back to building wealth and growing the economy instead of trying to equalize income. In a healthy economy there will always be disparity between the rich and poor, but most people’s situation will tend to improve over time, even if not at the same rate or amount.

      • DaveH

        Is that what the Right Brain does for you, Thinker? Lots of Conjecture?

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Well said, George. And all that would be true if “investment” meant today what it meant back in the “golden years of the middle class” when everyone’s boat was floating higher on a rising tide of prosperity.

        Unfortunately, “investment” today means bleeding money out of the pockets of the 99% by the greedy 1% and socking it away rather than using it to grow the economy . The money that accumulates is used to just create more money for the 1% and dos not trickle down or create jobs. Look at the income and wealth inequality data—the figures are shocking and getting worse every day. The data shows the USA sinking down with third world countries rather than up with the countries of the developed world where it used to be. .
        George E says:
        November 16, 2012 at 10:55 am

        Right,

        Sounds like you’ve bought into the socialist propaganda. Let’s get back to building wealth and growing the economy instead of trying to equalize income. In a healthy economy there will always be disparity between the rich and poor, but most people’s situation will tend to improve over time, even if not at the same rate or amount.

        To George,
        PROPAGANDA?…..and SOCIALIST, no less?. No George, I am talking about building wealth for ALL, not just the greedy plutocrats. We are really pretty much on the same page except for that “equalizing income” thing. I never suggested that.we should “equalize income” (that’s communist, and even they didn’t really believe it and couldn’t make it work). I suggested only that we restore a “level playing field of opportunity” and stop the greedy rich from stealing and taking from the the 99%. That we return to the investment philosophies of old where we DID create jobs and build companies and build shared wealth.

        To DaveH,
        And here I thought we were finding common ground. Instead you revert to the mindless Dave of old and get “snarky” like Snarky Bill (and I do love that word “snarky”). What “conjecture” are you talking about anyway? It is not conjecture to talk about the ever-increasing income and wealth inequality in this country. Look at the data—some of the best comes from the CIA’s yearly analysis and reporting on the issue. Look at the GINI numbers—the USA is way down the list. It is not conjecture to say that the plutocracy is privatizing gain and socializing costs and bleeding the 99%. Look at the declining incomes and wealth of the middle class. What Right Brain does for me is allow me to look at things with an open mind and try to understand underlying truths rather than react in left brain knee-jerk fashion as you so often do. You need to move over, at least closer to the middle—it won’t hurt you too much—I promise .

      • George E

        Right,

        You may not be socialist or agree with socialist ideology, but you do use some of the same slogans often used by socialist in promoting their ideology. You certainly see the world in “greedy rich versus oppressed poor” terms……….right out of Marxist teachings. If you’re not preaching socialist ideology, let’s discuss the world in real capitalist terms and solve the problems that exist using capitalist solutions. As a capitalist you would know, and believe, that capitalism is the best economic system the world has ever known, and has raised the standard of living of more people over time than any other economic system.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        OOPS! Sorry—-I often copy comments into the reply box so I can see them easily as I compose my reply. Forgot to delete all of them before I hit “post” this time. All before “To George” should be disregarded.

      • kkflash

        Right Brain, you are simply wrong. You’re NOT “talking about building wealth for all”, nor about a “level playing field of opportunity”. You’re supporting stealing from those who earned their money and giving it to those who didn’t. The 1% aren’t stealing to get their money. They have jobs and businesses that produce money through their own efforts, unlike those who rely on the government to take money by force from those who earned it and redistribute it to those who produce nothing.

        And, your statement that the top earners aren’t paying their fair share is also a fabrication. By any measure, the people at the top pay MORE than their fair share. According to the Congressional Budget Office, in 2009 (latest data I have) the top 1% of households had 13.4% of all the income but paid 22.3% of all federal taxes. Even your “right brain” should be able to do the math on that one and see they are paying a disproportionately high share of the federal bill. Meanwhile 47% of tax-filers had $0 federal income tax liability in 2010. No, it’s not about “fair” for you liberals. It’s about envy.

      • George E

        kkflash,

        I think it’s about getting power and control over everyone, especially the wealthy who have the means to challenge their political power. They don’t want to be challenged.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        KKF enlightens us with the same old broken records—-”stealing from those who earned their money and giving it to those who didn’t”—”take money by force from those who earned it and redistribute it to those who produce nothing”. That’s just not true, anymore than if I said the 1% LITERALLY steal from anyone. Stealing is against the law and the !% are, if anything, law-abiding. They show this by using every legal means possible to maximize their wealth at the expense of the 99%. I only use the “stealing” reference because it seems to be so popular among the singing parrots of the right like you—too bad you don’t really understand what you are saying when YOU use it, never mind when I do.

        Another little “parrot song” titled “….the people at the top pay MORE than their fair share” (do parrots sing?). And “by ANY measure”? BOTH THOSE SONGS ARE WRONG. Too bad you parrots like to cherry pick the data and only look at FEDERAL INCOME TAXES when you say they are paying more than their fair share. To be fair about the question of tax fairness, one must look at ALL taxes paid and compare them to total income to see what the real TAX BURDEN is. Only then can you begin to decide what “fair share” means.

        I’m quite sure I can “do the math” and I will lay out some TRUTH for you. Figures are taken from the Citizens for Tax Justice who got them from the CBO and other government sources. You can find the truth IF you look at primary sources and not at filtered and cherry-picked data from biased websites as you have likely done.

        Compare two cases. (A) makes $4,000,000 a year and may pay on that at the 35% rate if he isn’t a tax avoider like Romney and therefore pays $1,400,000 in federal income tax. (B) makes $40,000 a year and pays $0 in federal income tax. (B) is one of those moochers in the 47% that are getting a free ride according to you. Wow!—how unfair! (A) is out $1.4 mil and (B) is getting a free ride. It’s SO obvious!

        Let’s get back to TOTAL TAX BURDEN as we seek “fairness”. When you factor in federal PAYROLL taxes and all state and local taxes—property, sales, state income, gas, telephone, etc, we find that they fall much more heavily on the 47% than they do on the 1%. The actual figures for TOTAL TAX BURDEN?

        The bottom 20% pay around 17% of their income in combined taxes.

        The top 20% pay around 30% of their income in combined taxes

        …..and GUESS WHAT, the top 1% pay only 29%, slightly LESS than the rest of the top 20%. If anyone should complain about unfairness, it should be the top 19% just under the moochers in the 1%.

        So, (A), even if he pays at the top FEDERAL rate, likely has maybe $2.500,000 left after all taxes. (B), even though he has paid NO federal tax, has $33,200. Now we can talk about “fairness”. If we CUT federal income tax rates, (A) would benefit significantly and (B) would get nothing, since he “doesn’t pay taxes”—-he’s a 47%-er, a moocher that steals etc.. If we raise taxes, the little guys will be hurt more. Every dollar means a lot more to the $40,000 a year guy—the $4,000,000 a year guy probably wouldn’t bend over to pick up a $100 bill. I know which one I’d rather be—I’d gladly pay 50% on $4,000,000 and struggle to survive on the $2,000,000 that’s left.

        So, knock off the idiotic crap about “liberals” and “envy” and look at the TRUTH of the numbers. All the screaming about not raising taxes on “the job creators” and “stealing” is just a smoke screen for the greedy rich to hide behind.. The very top 1/10 of 1% make nearly all of their money by manipulating money anyway, and not by actually producing anything.

        PS I purposely used full numbers, i.e., $4,000,000 rather than $4 million so we can see how big these numbers are. (A) makes 100 times what (B) makes and to me it’s quite striking to see the full numbers laid out.

      • DaveH

        Yes, Rightbrain, Conjecture. Like this statement — “Unfortunately, “investment” today means bleeding money out of the pockets of the 99% by the greedy 1% and socking it away rather than using it to grow the economy”.
        Socking it away? Where? You have proof for that? It’s their money, so what business is it of yours if they burn it even? And if they did, the remaining money would be buy more goods and services, so you should
        rejoice instead of villifying them. Right Brain or Left Brain, the truth is that you have little knowledge about economics.

    • Gordon

      Sure, I’ll be happy to pay taxes. Know of any JOB that I can get that will net me more than $2 per hour after my direct expenses to get to it and work it?

    • DaveH

      More conjecture from KG — “We are paying less taxes than ever, and yet, have the worse economy ever”.
      Less than ever? Here is a chart of US Government revenue since 1900 as a percentage of GDP:
      http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/revenue_history

      And revenue is only part of the picture. The real issue is the Spending.

    • Bill

      You seem to be talking in circles. On one hand, you want prosperity, on the other hand you want to get those rich with higher taxes. You are a good example of America being so dumbed down, that they have no idea how economics work.

      Increasing taxes will not increase revenues. Politicians have tried this for decades and it does not work. The only way to increase tax revenues is for the economy to grow… and higher tax rates do not pave a path to prosperity.

      A vibrant, free market economy is the answer. But until people wake up to reality, we will not see that.

    • robert

      We need to cut the SPENDING…quit sending billions of dollars to foreign countries, Pakistan, Egypt, countries in Africa and Europe.. Then we can take care of the less fortunate here, the ones that have no education or desire to work at any job. If we continue to amass this DEBT, we will not be able to pay it off, we will encumber our grandchildren and they will not be able to help anyone.. STOP Spending. NO NEW TAXES ..

      • Bill

        Good comments, Robert

    • mary beardslee

      Fiscal cliff is a myth, prospects of spending cuts and tax increases is not a fiscal crisis it it a POLITICAL crisis brought on the the GOPs attempt to take the economy hostage. They are manufacturing the crisis to make the Dems extend Bushs tax cuts and accept painful cuts to social security and medicare. Stop the BS the real crisis is Jobs. We have enough of the games from all of you in Wash. Jobs..

      • Ted Crawford

        Thank You Richard Trumka Jr.! GEEZE to quote a lout, maybe ten years seperated from a street thug, surly you can find a better source for your material than that!

      • George E

        Mary,

        If “jobs” is your priority, you’re not likely to get them by 1) increasing taxes and regulations, 2) ignoring small businesses which creates most of the jobs, and 3) doing everything you can to snuff out our fossil fuels industries like the Obama administration is doing, unless of course, you want one of those “good government jobs” that pays a lot, has almost permanent job security, and has fabulous benefits all at the expense of the other poor folks out there who pay for all that.

      • Joe H

        George E.
        yup those “government Funded” jobs like solyndra where BamBam invested half a billion dollars of our tax dollars just to have it go belly up in less than a year! Good job, Bambam!!!

    • Charles A

      KG has a twisted, perverted sense of reality. He reverses all logic to claim that over-burdening us with taxes is the only way out of this situation. The government just isn’t extorting enough. He slices and dices, he uses a pseudo-medical example which has no correlation to the economy. And, as liberals always do, he ignores the fact that our problems were caused by the government, not by the economic system.

    • Warrior

      Luke ”The Drifter” says:

      “We Americans got so tired of being thought of as dumbasses by the rest of the world that we went to the polls this November and removed all doubt.”

      • Joe H

        Warrior,
        Speak for yourself, my friend. Bambam has NEVER gotten a vote from ME!!!

    • Jim Wright

      Lets get something straight, people, including me, do not invest money out of the goodness of their hearts. Employers do not hire out of the goodness of their hearts and they do not normally lay off employees for the heck of it. There is a cost to hire people and the employer must see a reason to take that risk of limited capital. If there is nothing to gain from investing (risking) my money, which is where Mr. Obama desires to take this country, investments will continue to dry up and along with that hiring (employment) will fall even further. People are not being taught how economies work and I have met several both young and older who have no idea how economic systems work. From the policies Mr. Obama espouses, he has a limited understanding of Kensington economics which have been completely refuted in more recent times. This is typical of the left. If you desire this country to get going again and avoid the economic and social problems of the western European socialist countries we must correct our path and not follow their example.

      • Bill

        Good Comments Jim,
        You are so right about people having no knowledge about how economics work. Just listen to some of the comments from the progressives who have invaded these posts. I have never heard any of the progressives discuss GDP numbers, which indicate how our economy is doing. Or how after taking over the Carter recession ( with 10% unemployment, 15% inflation and 21% interest rates) Reagans GDP numbers after three years in office were in the 6 and 7% range.

        Or how Hong Kong, with one tax only of 17% on businesses, has created the most vibrant economy in the world. Hong Kong people think that 4% GDP is recession.

        Yes, the dumbing down of America is alive and well

      • Right Brain Thinker

        “Kensington economics”? Haven’t heard of that “school”—-can you recommend a source so we can study up on it?

      • richard brooks

        to Jim Wright:
        Lets get something straight, people, including me, do not invest money out of the goodness of their hearts. Employers do not hire out of the goodness of their hearts and they do not normally lay off employees for the heck of it.<<

        a business requires customers. will your low wage employees earn enough to be a customer?

        btw- i do invest occasionally simply to help without any expectation of return. you should try it. i also give money that i can not write off. never heard of compassion have you.

    • Public Citizen

      To use your own analogy – it’s like a guy trying to cut off his arm, the solution is to stop cutting ~~and staunch the bleeding~~.
      This country is ~~haemorrhaging~~ jobs and money.
      The only solution offered from the left is to spend more and raise taxes. The only solution coming from the right is to not raise taxes and cut spending.
      We have seen a concentration of wealth in this country since the 1970s that is of historic proportions in the entirety of recorded history. At the same time we have seen entire industries subjected to taxes and restrictions that have driven them out of the country [I'm including the excessive demands of unions in the restrictions column].
      Meanwhile we have allowed a free ride on the “welfare” [ the only ones who have gotten well are the professional welfare workers] train for an ever increasing percentage of the population,a percentage that has now reached the point where the train is being slowed down by the drag on the system. In the background the sound of “Helicopter Ben” ferrying in another load of “free” money gets louder as the ponzi scheme of the Federal Reserve buying Treasury Debt with money magicked into existence out of thin air continues.
      The only way out is for everybody to give something. The left is going to have to give up on the notion that the government as Santa Claus can replace a functioning traditional family and that the corrupt spending deals can continue without consequence. In addition the red tape and regulation have to be cut to a level that will allow industry to once again function in this country. The right is going to have to accept marginal tax rates similar to those we had in the Eisenhower and Kennedy years, the high water mark for the success of the US as providing the most for the greatest number of people.
      The people are going to have to get off their Obamaphones and American Idol Stupor and get to work instead of expecting somebody else to provide them a lifestyle above what the majority of the world is able to obtain with hard work and sweat.
      The consequences of not compromising will be the Weimar Republic 2.0 and all that followed.

      • richard brooks

        Meanwhile we have allowed a free ride on the “welfare” [ the only ones who have gotten well are the professional welfare workers] train for an ever increasing percentage of the population,a percentage that has now reached the point where the train is being slowed down by the drag on the system. In the background the sound of “Helicopter Ben” ferrying in another load of “free” money gets louder as the ponzi scheme of the Federal Reserve buying Treasury Debt with money magicked into existence out of thin air continues.
        The only way out is for everybody to give something. The left is going to have to give up on the notion that the government as Santa Claus can replace a functioning traditional family and that the corrupt spending deals can continue without consequence. In addition the red tape and regulation have to be cut to a level that will allow industry to once again function in this country. The right is going to have to accept marginal tax rates similar to those we had in the Eisenhower and Kennedy years, the high water mark for the success of the US as providing the most for the greatest number of people.
        The people are going to have to get off their Obamaphones and American Idol Stupor and get to work instead of expecting somebody else to provide them a lifestyle above what the majority of the world is able to obtain with hard work and sweat.<<

        the free ride is being given to the professional corporate welfare raider. the farm blocs and the foreign country's.

        end the gop manipulation of the labor pool.

        tax rates will have to be increased on the high end earners.

        the majority of the world is what we are becoming. hard work and sweat labor does not provide a better life style. low wages are the problem. and will continue to be the problem.

    • wandamurline

      So what you are saying is that you are a socialist and believe that the working should take care of the nonproductive…just because the rich actually worked for what they have and this is somehow evil and they need to give it to others. Ridiculous. People gripe about CEO and what they make, but as long as the company is making a profit and not asking for a government bail out, it is the company’s business how and who they pay….that is the true nature of capitalism….a form of business that has helped America prosper for decades and now, suddenly it is bad? More of the problem are the unions, who are sucking the livelihood out of the entire business world as they want more and more….the unions are a bigger problem than the overpaid CEO’s because of demographics…there are more of them and then you have to calculate into the problem, the illegals who cross our borders without any invitation (they call it tresspassing) and then have their hands sticking out for us to provide for them instead of providing for themselves as the legal immigrants have done in the past….look at California….it needs to go back to being part of Mexico. Whether or not you like taxes….you are fixing to get a gut full of them….from the Bush tax cuts expiring, and Obamacare….hope you like what you are going to receive.

    • Bud Tugly

      Taxes are the price of civilization. They pay for military, infrastructure, education and all the other things a society needs to prosper. Of course there are moochers in the welfare system, but the majority of recipients are those incapable of functioning in society (my mother was a welfare worker and most of her “clients” fell into that category. Consider Dickens-era london. There was no welfare. The tiny minority of the rich held all the power and the poor were forced into perpetual petty crime as there was no alternative for survival.”Scrooge said “Are there no prisons? …Are there no work houses?” Is that what we want for America?

      Let those who have benefited most show their real patriotism by chipping in a bit more. Every rational economist debunks the “trickle down” theory – or as it really is the “tinkle down” theory. I will not set foot in a Walmart anymore because of what they have done to many American businesses. The Walton family, who INHERITED the once great American company, has as much wealth as the lower 40% combined yet they reward their employees who earn the money for them by withholding benefits and paying subsistence wages.

      Who is Grover Norquist anyway? Did anyone elect him to anything? He started out as a right wing nut job flunky for Bill Maher – someone to look stupid on the show to make Maher look smart by contrast. Why does the GOP voluntarily give that nerd so much power? Hooray for the real American heroes, Republicans in congress who are walking away from their pledge to that colon and dealing with the pragmatic realities of today’s problems.

      And how about Marco Rubio? – so afraid of Taliban-like fundamentalists that he denies science. If this is the type of rising star the GOP is looking to for leadership we are in deep doo doo as a nation.

      I long for the likes of Dight D. Eisenhower… a great man with the vision to understand the core problems and warned us against them… sadly his warnings are being ignored for the sake of dogma convenient for the rapacious to stay in control.

      • macgyver1948

        Bud Tugly… Excellent example bringing in the Dickens-era London. It happened that way there, then, and it always has in history when an apathetic small percentage of the populous tends to control the major percentage of the wealth. Any who think it cannot happen here are renting their gray matter out to that small percentage of wealth controllers. Give in to self serving conflict-of-interest pledges like the Norquist one, which favors only the wealthy and gives all the control to the corporations/banks, and we have our own Dickens-era economy in the making. Without a strong middle class we, the forgotten middle class, will all be ugly unwanted orphans.

        In Dickens day there was nothing like Social Security, Medicare or any kind of deserved welfare because those who had it all refused to share and help. We have that today with those who wanted to leave the deserving out in the cold. But we do have a lot of welfare for those who need it the least, those with the money. I am not saying take it all from those who have the money but let’s not give those at the top more than we give those in need and deserve.

        You ask ‘who is Grover Norquist?’. Well, he was a bush jr advisor and he holds no elected post now either. He is super wealthy with huge amounts of clout. He controls the lives and careers of over 270 TPGOP in Congress and he controls their votes in Congress with his pledge. He promised the TPGOP loads of financial backing and all the help they need to be elected for the purpose of yielding power. He also says if they betray his pledge, or they do not sign it, “they will become toast”, his words. Sounds like extortion to me. Romney and Ryan are signors and Norquist also said, when Romney is elected President (LOL), “Romney will do as he is told”.

        Maybe that is why they hated Obama since so long before he was elected the first time, Obama wouldn’t sign the Pledge. We should all know what is controlling the TPGOP in Congress by way of this pledge so we can really know who the TPGOP really represents. He says he wants the tax base and the budget to go back to what they were at the start of the 20th century, “small enough to fit in a bath tub”, again his words. This way all the programs which he wants dead, such as Social Security and Welfare, would starve out of existence. Guess who else would starve.

        You mention Eisenhower. Well, the group the TP evolved from, The John Birch Society, labeled Ike as a commie perhaps because Ike wanted fairness and balance and didn’t favor the Corporations exclusively. Meet the new group, same as the old group in that ‘all are commies who do not agree with us’. The JBS also fought vigorously against Civil Rights in the 1960′s and one of the creators and huge financiers of JBS was the father of the Koch brothers who are chips of their old block.

        You also mention Rubio… With them you have to deny science because with science you might have regulation, even the very necessary kind, and you cant have that. Anything for the best benefit and protection of the big corporations and the mega wealthy.

    • http://www.facebook.com/benjamin.fox.98892 Benjamin Fox

      kg; It was a Demo-rat, JFK who first came up with the idea of tax cuts across the board and it worked, Rommey did it and it worked, Bush did it and it worked then the Demo-rat house screwed it all up and want to continue down that path.
      With obozo care you’ll see less Doctors and more elderly, planned to kill of those who draw SS and get Medicare, the dead don’t need to be paid. You libs are like rats on a sinking ship, you’ll be eating each other soon. Higher taxes hurt everyone except those who live off the labor of others and there are way too many of those under this administration.
      Get oil from our enemies when we have more oil then them and who’s fault is that? The Demo-rats and the greens who just love obozo-green. You guys are the problem.

      • Bud Tugly

        Bush did it and it worked? On what planet? Certainly not Earth.

        Norquist and his cronies have successfully deluded you.

      • http://tlgeer.wordpress.com tlgeer

        “With obozo care you’ll see less Doctors and more elderly, planned to kill of those who draw SS and get Medicare”

        This has not happened with SS or Medicare in all these years. What facts lead you to believe that it will happen now?

    • Doug Rodrigues

      How about an extreme (by Liberals standards) cure for the debt?: STOP SPENDING MONEY WE DON’T HAVE !

      • richard brooks

        How about an extreme (by Liberals standards) cure for the debt?: STOP SPENDING MONEY WE DON’T HAVE ! <<

        two wars. drug intervention in 57 country's. foreign aid. corporate welfare. when is the gop going to stop spending money???

blog comments powered by Disqus
Bottom