Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  Pirate's Cove (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Obama losing "it"??? « previous next »
Page: 1 2 3 4

John Galt?

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 18831
Offline
« #45 : July 02, 2011, 07:49:36 PM »

Obama's supposed concessions, cutting tax breaks for corp jets, raising the top corp tax, eliminating oil subsidies, etc. is such a ridiculous drop in the oceanic bucket. All his suggestions would raise about $12 billion COMBINED, and the budget is short by $1,300 billion. His proposals aren't even 1/100th of the way there. It is beyond absurd, and clearly he is just trying to "rally the mob" with emotion rather than real solutions.

The FACT is Obama could cut well over $100 billion in spending without Congress saying a word, strictly thru executive orders (or repealing old ones). Pulling troops could save tens of billions alone, plus there are thousands upon thousands of Exec. Orders that cost the Govt. billions to enforce (like all govt agencies MUST use recycled paper EVEN IF IT IS 20% MORE EXPENSIVE, or requirements for minority owned businesses in making govt. contract bids, etc. etc.) all he has to do is put off that golf outing or 2 weeks at Martha's Vineyard and just go thru them all.

I know it is not as fun as standing in front of a crowd of union workers and going rah-rah-rah, but damn it that's yor job, you ran for it, now DO IT!


CBWx2

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5931
Offline
« #46 : July 02, 2011, 08:13:59 PM »

Obama's supposed concessions, cutting tax breaks for corp jets, raising the top corp tax, eliminating oil subsidies, etc. is such a ridiculous drop in the oceanic bucket. All his suggestions would raise about $12 billion COMBINED, and the budget is short by $1,300 billion. His proposals aren't even 1/100th of the way there. It is beyond absurd, and clearly he is just trying to "rally the mob" with emotion rather than real solutions.

The FACT is Obama could cut well over $100 billion in spending without Congress saying a word, strictly thru executive orders (or repealing old ones). Pulling troops could save tens of billions alone, plus there are thousands upon thousands of Exec. Orders that cost the Govt. billions to enforce (like all govt agencies MUST use recycled paper EVEN IF IT IS 20% MORE EXPENSIVE, or requirements for minority owned businesses in making govt. contract bids, etc. etc.) all he has to do is put off that golf outing or 2 weeks at Martha's Vineyard and just go thru them all.

I know it is not as fun as standing in front of a crowd of union workers and going rah-rah-rah, but damn it that's yor job, you ran for it, now DO IT!

I agree with what you've said, but I think it's a smart political move making this an issue. The people want higher taxes on the rich all across the board. Regardless of party, it polls well. If Republicans won't budge on something as simple as this, it only serves to make them look even less appealing not only to independents, but to Republican voters as well.


John Galt?

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 18831
Offline
« #47 : July 02, 2011, 08:41:29 PM »

Obama's supposed concessions, cutting tax breaks for corp jets, raising the top corp tax, eliminating oil subsidies, etc. is such a ridiculous drop in the oceanic bucket. All his suggestions would raise about $12 billion COMBINED, and the budget is short by $1,300 billion. His proposals aren't even 1/100th of the way there. It is beyond absurd, and clearly he is just trying to "rally the mob" with emotion rather than real solutions.

The FACT is Obama could cut well over $100 billion in spending without Congress saying a word, strictly thru executive orders (or repealing old ones). Pulling troops could save tens of billions alone, plus there are thousands upon thousands of Exec. Orders that cost the Govt. billions to enforce (like all govt agencies MUST use recycled paper EVEN IF IT IS 20% MORE EXPENSIVE, or requirements for minority owned businesses in making govt. contract bids, etc. etc.) all he has to do is put off that golf outing or 2 weeks at Martha's Vineyard and just go thru them all.

I know it is not as fun as standing in front of a crowd of union workers and going rah-rah-rah, but damn it that's yor job, you ran for it, now DO IT!

I agree with what you've said, but I think it's a smart political move making this an issue. The people want higher taxes on the rich all across the board. Regardless of party, it polls well. If Republicans won't budge on something as simple as this, it only serves to make them look even less appealing not only to independents, but to Republican voters as well.


It isn't that the Rs won't budge on it, it is that they are saying "not enough". The corp jet thing a an utter joke. The exemption Obama is talking about is a rule that says you can depreciate a corp jet over 5 years instead of 7. The difference is microscopic compared to $1.3 trillion short. The Rs aren't refusing this, they are calling it what it is, a deflection from the REAL issue of spending cuts, REAL spending cuts.

Now if the Rs were really smart, what they'd say is "fine we'll kill the corp jet depreciation difference and the domestic oil&gas subsidies, now what about the other 99.99999% of the deficit? What about the other ONE TRILLION, TWO HUNDRED AND NINETY NINE POINT NINE BILLION???


CBWx2

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5931
Offline
« #48 : July 02, 2011, 08:52:36 PM »

Obama's supposed concessions, cutting tax breaks for corp jets, raising the top corp tax, eliminating oil subsidies, etc. is such a ridiculous drop in the oceanic bucket. All his suggestions would raise about $12 billion COMBINED, and the budget is short by $1,300 billion. His proposals aren't even 1/100th of the way there. It is beyond absurd, and clearly he is just trying to "rally the mob" with emotion rather than real solutions.

The FACT is Obama could cut well over $100 billion in spending without Congress saying a word, strictly thru executive orders (or repealing old ones). Pulling troops could save tens of billions alone, plus there are thousands upon thousands of Exec. Orders that cost the Govt. billions to enforce (like all govt agencies MUST use recycled paper EVEN IF IT IS 20% MORE EXPENSIVE, or requirements for minority owned businesses in making govt. contract bids, etc. etc.) all he has to do is put off that golf outing or 2 weeks at Martha's Vineyard and just go thru them all.

I know it is not as fun as standing in front of a crowd of union workers and going rah-rah-rah, but damn it that's yor job, you ran for it, now DO IT!

I agree with what you've said, but I think it's a smart political move making this an issue. The people want higher taxes on the rich all across the board. Regardless of party, it polls well. If Republicans won't budge on something as simple as this, it only serves to make them look even less appealing not only to independents, but to Republican voters as well.


It isn't that the Rs won't budge on it, it is that they are saying "not enough".

Are those the same ones that have said they are not willing to agree to raising revenues by one cent?

Quote
Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) has laid out what he says can't be part of a debt-ceiling compromise to the president, namely tax increases.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/06/24/6937618-democrats-republicans-at-impasse-on-debt-limit-talks

The corporate jet tax is a talking point for the POTUS, it's not the only revenue increase that the dems have suggested. But no matter what they are, from ending tax loopholes to decreasing oil subsidies, the R's are stonewalling it.


dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46214
Offline
« #49 : July 02, 2011, 09:03:57 PM »

Got this far - then got nervous bc it was too easy perhaps - to identify bs in the budget - and called for taxes - which was the proverbial lead balloon.


NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE          www.nationalreview.com         

The Corner

Biden Group Eyes $1 Trillion in Cuts
By Andrew Stiles
Posted on May 24, 2011 7:41 PM
The bipartisan commission led by Vice President Joe Biden is looking to achieve at least $1 trillion in spending cuts, lawmakers say.

“We are confident that if we keep on this pace we can get to a relatively large number,” Biden told reporters on his way out of the group’s meeting at the Capitol. “I think we are in a position where we are going to be able to get to where we can get to $1 trillion, which will be a down-payment on the process.”

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R., Va.) said the final number could be even higher. “Progress is being made,” Cantor said. “I am confident that we can achieve over $1 trillion in savings at this point, and hopefully more.”

“I think what this reveals is that actually coming together and finding some agreement on spending cuts is not that difficult,” he added.

Biden and Cantor differed, however, as to whether tax increases are on the table as the group works to draft an eventual deal to coincide with a vote to raise the country’s $14.3 trillion debt ceiling — Biden said they must, Cantor said absolutely not. And neither would say exactly where the proposed cuts would come from.

Biden said the group was also considering “trigger” mechanisms that could generate up to $4 trillion in long-term savings (he did not specify a time frame). Republicans have insisted that any increase to the debt limit be offset by spending cuts of equal or greater value.


\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant

CBWx2

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5931
Offline
« #50 : July 02, 2011, 09:08:36 PM »

Republicans have insisted that any increase to the debt limit be offset by spending cuts of equal or greater value.

If only they had insisted on this the 5 times they raised the Debt Ceiling when G.W. Bush was president. I can own up to the vitriol of the Dems being driven by the politics of perception. I only wish the other side could do the same.


Biggs3535

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 31614
Offline
« #51 : July 02, 2011, 09:24:03 PM »

Obama's supposed concessions, cutting tax breaks for corp jets, raising the top corp tax, eliminating oil subsidies, etc. is such a ridiculous drop in the oceanic bucket. All his suggestions would raise about $12 billion COMBINED, and the budget is short by $1,300 billion. His proposals aren't even 1/100th of the way there. It is beyond absurd, and clearly he is just trying to "rally the mob" with emotion rather than real solutions.

The FACT is Obama could cut well over $100 billion in spending without Congress saying a word, strictly thru executive orders (or repealing old ones). Pulling troops could save tens of billions alone, plus there are thousands upon thousands of Exec. Orders that cost the Govt. billions to enforce (like all govt agencies MUST use recycled paper EVEN IF IT IS 20% MORE EXPENSIVE, or requirements for minority owned businesses in making govt. contract bids, etc. etc.) all he has to do is put off that golf outing or 2 weeks at Martha's Vineyard and just go thru them all.

I know it is not as fun as standing in front of a crowd of union workers and going rah-rah-rah, but damn it that's yor job, you ran for it, now DO IT!

The problem is the big government folks that don't realize the insanely out of control spending is the problem.  Those evil rich bastards could be taxed at 100% and the problems would still exist.  Nothing will get better until serious spending cuts are applied.

The rest of it is political lip service.


CBWx2

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5931
Offline
« #52 : July 02, 2011, 09:35:30 PM »

Obama's supposed concessions, cutting tax breaks for corp jets, raising the top corp tax, eliminating oil subsidies, etc. is such a ridiculous drop in the oceanic bucket. All his suggestions would raise about $12 billion COMBINED, and the budget is short by $1,300 billion. His proposals aren't even 1/100th of the way there. It is beyond absurd, and clearly he is just trying to "rally the mob" with emotion rather than real solutions.

The FACT is Obama could cut well over $100 billion in spending without Congress saying a word, strictly thru executive orders (or repealing old ones). Pulling troops could save tens of billions alone, plus there are thousands upon thousands of Exec. Orders that cost the Govt. billions to enforce (like all govt agencies MUST use recycled paper EVEN IF IT IS 20% MORE EXPENSIVE, or requirements for minority owned businesses in making govt. contract bids, etc. etc.) all he has to do is put off that golf outing or 2 weeks at Martha's Vineyard and just go thru them all.

I know it is not as fun as standing in front of a crowd of union workers and going rah-rah-rah, but damn it that's yor job, you ran for it, now DO IT!

The problem is the big government folks that don't realize the insanely out of control spending is the problem.  Those evil rich bastards could be taxed at 100% and the problems would still exist.  Nothing will get better until serious spending cuts are applied.

The rest of it is political lip service.

So again we come to this one million dollar question; Are tax increases and spending cuts mutually exclusive? Because from what I've seen, there is one side that is proposing both, and it's not your side.


dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46214
Offline
« #53 : July 02, 2011, 09:43:56 PM »

No that is not the question.  The question is how long with the insanity of coupling the two items go forward.  There is no connection.  The problem is not a increasing shortage of taxes.  It is spending.  And when Biden - BIDEN for God's sake - can head a committee (frightening in itself) that has identified almost a TRILLION dollars in tax dollars that need not be spend doesn't it seem a bit flipping stupid to ask for more tax dollars.  Just a tad disingenuous.  A bit hypocritical. 

Imagine what the reductions in spending might be with a competent leader.  And think about a tax code, an fair or equitable tax code instead of the aberration the IRS has had foisted upon them.  But then, if there were an equitable tax policy or spending - why would Congress and the President be flattered by the attentions of lobbyists. 
« : July 02, 2011, 09:45:33 PM dbucfan »

\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant

Biggs3535

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 31614
Offline
« #54 : July 02, 2011, 10:05:39 PM »

So again we come to this one million dollar question; Are tax increases and spending cuts mutually exclusive?

Who said they were?  But spending is the biggest issue, and huge cuts need to be made.  Not the pansy-like cuts that are being proposed.

The left can continue with raising-taxes talking point if that makes their base feel better.  But it doesn't address the issue.  Again, tax those evil rich bastards 100% and the problem remains.


CBWx2

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 5931
Offline
« #55 : July 02, 2011, 10:30:42 PM »

No that is not the question.  The question is how long with the insanity of coupling the two items go forward.  There is no connection.  The problem is not a increasing shortage of taxes.  It is spending. 

Actually, I could go off on a tangent of how an increasing shortage of tax revenue IS a big part of the problem, but for the sake of this discussion, it's not even necessary.

Even if you are of the opinion that cuts are more important than increased revenue, surely you have to admit that increased revenue pays off the debt just the same as cuts do. I mean if you owe someone $5, and you don't have it, whether you decide to raise it by selling something you own for $5 dollars or by mowing a lawn and charging $5 dollars for the service, the end result is the same. You have enough to pay off the $5 dollars.

You can certainly make the argument that there is more to be gained in cuts than in increasing revenues, but you can't argue that increasing revenues doesn't help solve the issue. There is this thing that works against you called math.

And when Biden - BIDEN for God's sake - can head a committee (frightening in itself) that has identified almost a TRILLION dollars in tax dollars that need not be spend doesn't it seem a bit flipping stupid to ask for more tax dollars.  Just a tad disingenuous.  A bit hypocritical. 

You do realize that this Trillion dollars is over the course of 10 years, right? Ending the top end Bush tax cuts would raise $690 billion over that same time span. When you add in the interest on the national debt from the impact of the cuts, that figure increases to $830 billion. So you tell me what's the bigger number, 1 trillion, or 1.83 trillion?
« : July 02, 2011, 10:33:00 PM CBWx2 »


dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46214
Offline
« #56 : July 02, 2011, 10:40:51 PM »

Yes - I am aware that a combination of cutting spending and increased revenues would pay reduce both debt and deficit faster IF you beg the question that spending doesn't again grow.  It is relatively clear to anyone who watches Congress and the Executive Branch over the last 50 years that they haven't shown the ability to understand their spending is the issue. 

Yes, as the reports have said - even a committee chaired by Biden has found almost one TRILLION in UNNECESSARY spending that could be eliminated.  You do realize Biden has been in Congress for a while now - and the spending has been going on throughout his tenure.  You do realize that many of the same members of Congress have been there for a fairly long time - and they voted to approve unnecessary spending.  What has suddenly occurred that makes YOU think THEY will suddenly find the ability not to revert to the nonsense that has been going on for so long.

You ignore the issue - it is spending - totally willing to go back to the very same folks who have funded these same people for more taxes - while the taxpayers have now been told BIDEN's committee has found a TRILLION dollars that shouldn't have been spent - AND they expect to find more such issues as their committee continues.  Do you think folks will willingly and stupidly suddenly will or should turn on the tax tap believing now it will be different?  There is that thing called common sense that would prevent intelligent folks to accept that idea blindly. 

\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant
  Page: 1 2 3 4
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  Pirate's Cove (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Obama losing "it"??? « previous next »
:  

Hide Tools Show Tools