quote:

Originally posted by EddieZilker Semantic hashing about Republicans keeping a Bush Tax Cut in place doesn't negate the facts. Time and time again, the Zedroga Bill has been stalled and it's the Republicans with their hands in the cookie jar. I am actually now surprised that you're defending this. I've read you typing some pretty insensitive shit, but, above most of it, this takes the cake.

Who... whose hands are in the cookie jar!? Surely not all those Democrats who use taxpayer money to fund every entitlement and social engineering project under the sun, i.e. buying votes. Or the Democrats who requested pork barrel spending/earmarks at a rate of over 50-1 compared to Republicans in the new budget:

quote:

In the 2011 House budget, the groups found that House Democrats requested 18,189 earmarks, which would cost the taxpayers a total of $51.7 billion, while House Republicans requested just 241 earmarks, for a total of $1 billion. Where did those GOP earmark requests come from? Just four Republican lawmakers: South Carolina Rep. Henry Brown, who did not run for re-election this year; Louisiana Rep. Joseph Cao, who lost his bid for re-election; maverick Texas Rep. Ron Paul; and spending king Rep. Don Young of Alaska. The other Republican members of the House -- 174 of them -- requested a total of zero earmarks.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/polit...p-goes-straight



What's insensitive... that I said Republicans agreed to support the bill once the Dems produced figures as to how they came up with a $7.4 billion number? Yeah- I have a black heart dude. lol grow up man.

quote:

Originally posted by EddieZilker Then where has the Republican initiative on this been? If they're not heartless, how come this bill hasn't been passed? Where is their blue-ribbon panel to determine the expenses so that these people are taken care of? You keep coming up with reasons it hasn't been done, but in the light of scrutiny, your reasons absolutely do not stand up to the light of day.

Hey man, I don't know all the fucking details... all I know is that it is perfectly reasonable to request a cost breakdown from the people who are introducing the bill before agreeing to pass it. What the fuck man, are you 12? Budgets are important.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss Stop framing it the incorrect way. THERE WAS NO TAX CUT FOR THE WEALTHY (or any income group) in the bill. TAX RATES that have been in place for over 7 years now are simply remaining. Show me the tax cut the "rich" you speak of are now getting. Hmmm... looks to me like the 35% Federal Income Tax rate since 2003 for the highest earners is now at a whopping.... 35% after this bill passed!

You know perfectly well that the bush tax cuts due to the wonderfully unique way they were put in place were not designed to be permanent but to go back to the clinton levels.
"But whats the problem with extending the tax cuts" one dimwitted republican might say, "isnt that a good thing?" Then an economist walks into the room, smacks their stupid face and shows them the 800 billion hole in the budget that the tax cuts will create. "Hows that for your fiscal responsibility?" the economists asks "feel great about china, saudi arabia and fucking iran owning your national debt yet?" to which the dimwitted republican with a red handprint on his face and a sad look in his eyes replies "But the billionaires, wont someone think of the billionaires, the poor Walton family NEEDS a 30 billion dollar tax cut or their kids might starve!"

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Moongoose You know perfectly well that the bush tax cuts due to the wonderfully unique way they were put in place were not designed to be permanent but to go back to the clinton levels. "But whats the problem with extending the tax cuts" one dimwitted republican might say, "isnt that a good thing?" Then an economist walks into the room, smacks their stupid face and shows them the 800 billion hole in the budget that the tax cuts will create. "Hows that for your fiscal responsibility?" the economists asks "feel great about china, saudi arabia and fucking iran owning your national debt yet?" to which the dimwitted republican with a red handprint on his face and a sad look in his eyes replies "But the billionaires, wont someone think of the billionaires, the poor Walton family NEEDS a 30 billion dollar tax cut or their kids might starve!"

Why don't you just say we could raise taxes 10% across the board, but Republicans would oppose that... therefore Republicans are costing us $5 trillion per year!

Your stupid logic doesn't work. By your rationale, all money belongs to government until they decide how much the people get to keep; perfect Statist ideology. In reality, what you're saying is the extra $800 billion that will end up in the citizens' pockets is costing Government. Costing Government what, exactly?? They have grown a massive 30% since Obama took office, and each yearly budget is growing too.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss Hey man, I don't know all the fucking details... all I know is that it is perfectly reasonable to request a cost breakdown from the people who are introducing the bill before agreeing to pass it. What the fuck man, are you 12? Budgets are important.

9 fucking years. Not even Pat Buchanan could defend Stewart's questions regarding this and trying to pawn it off on the fact that an amortized quarterly projection hasn't been worked out on numbers which are likely to rise, from day to day, as complications from lack of medical attention fester, utterly fails to excuse the Republicans holding out on this.

Trust me. It's not that I'm incapable of understanding the enormity of financial complexity requisite for such an undertaking.




One doesn't use large words like subrogate without having some fundamental understanding of what in the fuck they pertain to.

___________________

Now with extra singles!
my old stuff, not quite up to snuff - but I still dig it - UPDATED 9/23/2012

quote:

Originally posted by EddieZilker 9 fucking years. Not even Pat Buchanan could defend Stewart's questions regarding this and trying to pawn it off on the fact that an amortized quarterly projection hasn't been worked out on numbers which are likely to rise, from day to day, as complications from lack of medical attention fester, utterly fails to excuse the Republicans holding out on this. Trust me. It's not that I'm incapable of understanding the enormity of financial complexity requisite for such an undertaking. One doesn't use large words like subrogate without having some fundamental understanding of what in the fuck they pertain to.

Well bravo, Dr. Thesaurus. I'm impressed with your scope of knowledge. Is it fair to say that if you're outraged at the GOP holding out on this bill after 9 years, you should be equally outraged that it took 9 years for Democrats to introduce this bill?

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss Well bravo, Dr. Thesaurus. I'm impressed with your scope of knowledge. Is it fair to say that if you're outraged at the GOP holding out on this bill after 9 years, you should be equally outraged that it took 9 years for Democrats to introduce this bill?

Actually it was introduced, February 4th, 2009.

___________________

Now with extra singles!
my old stuff, not quite up to snuff - but I still dig it - UPDATED 9/23/2012

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss Why don't you just say we could raise taxes 10% across the board, but Republicans would oppose that... therefore Republicans are costing us $5 trillion per year! Your stupid logic doesn't work. By your rationale, all money belongs to government until they decide how much the people get to keep; perfect Statist ideology. In reality, what you're saying is the extra $800 billion that will end up in the citizens' pockets is costing Government. Costing Government what, exactly?? They have grown a massive 30% since Obama took office, and each yearly budget is growing too.

Yes, by all means. Increase the taxes across the board. Let those damn dirty bastards that work two jobs to make ends meet pay more, its in the spirit of the season after all, isnt that right uncle Scrooge.

As it stands now, the republicans would oppose a bill that would officially name america the number one most awesomeness place in the world and the only place that Jeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesus loves if a single democrat showed signs of liking the idea.

Im saying that the government needs money to run. You are taking part in two wars (that your party started). Act like it. If you want to spend money like idiots, at least take money in, dont just put it on your credit card. That shits not free, youll still have to pay it back. In case you havent been watching, just the mention that this disaster of a tax cut might go trough was enough to shake the markets and for speculation that your credit rating might drop. Why? Because your like an idiot with his first credit card. You buy stupid overpriced shit with it, but skip on the basic essentials. And no one wants to lend that idiot money, because he hasnt proven that he can act responsibly with it.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Moongoose Yes, by all means. Increase the taxes across the board. Let those damn dirty bastards that work two jobs to make ends meet pay more, its in the spirit of the season after all, isnt that right uncle Scrooge.

Hey jabroni... almost 50% of our population doesn't pay income taxes. God you're clueless as to what's going on over here, yet you inject yourself into these USA political discussions like you live and work in D.C.

quote:

Im saying that the government needs money to run.

This fact alone does not justify Government from concocting any and every plan they deem necessary to grow Government, and borrow/spend to the hilt. What if they suddenly decide they want to create an agency dedicated to the study of dog stem cell research... should we just say, "well government does after all need money to run such an agency... pay up, rich people!"

quote:

In case you havent been watching, just the mention that this disaster of a tax cut might go trough was enough to shake the markets and for speculation that your credit rating might drop.

It wasn't a tax cut. Show me the Federal income tax rate that was just cut- from what percentage to what percentage. You can't. It is staying the same, and YES there is a difference.

quote:

Why? Because your like an idiot with his first credit card. You buy stupid overpriced shit with it, but skip on the basic essentials. And no one wants to lend that idiot money, because he hasnt proven that he can act responsibly with it.

We do buy lots of shit, but I would argue it's not overpriced; thanks to a (sort of) free market economy, we have more choice and reduced costs on products.

As Obama says, "let me be clear": our problem is NOT that we aren't taxed enough... it's that our government is too large and spends way too much. Way too much. It is so bloated, wasteful, and inefficient.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss

Mmm, the bullshit is strong with this one.

I'm neither Dem or Rep - I can't vote and have a deep understanding of not just the US political system but also various european systems.

What Republicans Voters fail to realise is that revenue has to come from somewhere, and some form of government is needed. You can't spend more AND cut taxes.

Now let's get real here - government spending went up under Bush. Hard. And by hard, I mean fucking scary.

But yet, while this was happening, taxs cuts were introduced by that very republican govt, and the Dems, being the pussies that they are, let it continue.

The money has to come from somewhere, and repüublicans, can't just trun around now and go "we need smaller govt and less spending" after they lapped it up for 8 long and very expensive years.

The tax cuts on the rich and super rich Directly benefited Bush's family and his friends. This is not a point of argument - it is cold hard plain fact, in the same way that Dick Cheyney personally made at least $5bn (at the most conservative estimates) from the Iraq war.

The tax revenue needs to come from somewhere, and cutting spending, with exception to defense (which is nothing more than welfare for private defense contractors), is not the answer - cutting tax breaks on those that make a lot of money is the sensible and fiscally responsible solution. It has been proven that trickle-down reaganomics did work, as so stunningly represented by the poverty gap and the massive recent increase in the wealth of the superrich, the poulation of the poor and the simultaneious shrinking of the middle income bracket.

Therfore suggesting taxes be raised 10% across the board does nothing to address the balance, which is the entire problem in the first place.

As Eddie has commented, there is no excuse for the Zadroga bill not to have been enacted other than protective politics. It is damn easy to to create a panel to oversee spending with incremental and baord supervised released of funds. And let's be honest here; 7.4bn is a drop in the ocean compared to the spending the last administration got signed off without anything in terms of substantiation.