• No deal for US 'super-committee'
    58 replies, posted
[release] [h2]No deal for US 'super-committee'[/h2] [b]The heads of a congressional committee tasked with finding $1.2tn (£762bn) in spending cuts announces it has failed to come to an agreement.[/b] The committee of six Republicans and six Democrats announced after the New York Stock Exchanged closed that their work had ended without a result. The outcome means automatic cuts outlined in the bill that created the committee will go into effect in 2013. The US national debt has just risen above $15tn (£9.5tn). In a statement from the committee's co-chairs, they said that even through "intense deliberations" the panel had not been able "to bridge the committee's significant differences". The reductions triggered by the failure to reach a deal will not be put into place until January 2013. Correspondents say that allows lawmakers to change the nature of the automatic cuts. [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15830176[/url] [/release] FUCK!
This is the problem with having more than one party in the house. We should have listened to George Washington.
doesn't this failure automatically cut the military funding by alot
[QUOTE=Deaglez7;33375585]This is the problem with having more than one party in the house. We should have listened to George Washington.[/QUOTE] Parties with almost polarizing views on most issues mind you
[QUOTE=Stockers678;33375613]Parties with almost polarizing views on most issues mind you[/QUOTE] Having 2 parties in the house is stupid. Whenever one party has an idea, it seems like the other party is ignorant and will always disagree with it. That's what's wrong with America these days. The democrats come up with an idea to make the country better, but then the Republicans whine and moan about it being dumb.
If America was communist this would never happened and everything would be solved instantly.
[QUOTE=Deaglez7;33375669]Having 2 parties in the house is stupid. Whenever one party has an idea, it seems like the other party is ignorant and will always disagree with it. That's what's wrong with America these days. The democrats come up with an idea to make the country better, but then the Republicans whine and moan about it being dumb.[/QUOTE] I have no real clue how US government works. This helped
[QUOTE=Deaglez7;33375669]Having 2 parties in the house is stupid. Whenever one party has an idea, it seems like the other party is ignorant and will always disagree with it. That's what's wrong with America these days. The democrats come up with an idea to make the country better, but then the Republicans whine and moan about it being dumb.[/QUOTE] It goes the other way too.
2013? More than enough time for a Congressional handwave to make the trigger go away.
[QUOTE=Sanitizer;33375704]It goes the other way too.[/QUOTE] Save for the whole "ideas to make the country better" bit. Republicans never have those.
[QUOTE=Sanitizer;33375704]It goes the other way too.[/QUOTE] The difference being that the Republicans actually seem consciously maleficent.
[QUOTE=Deaglez7;33375669]Having 2 parties in the house is stupid. Whenever one party has an idea, it seems like the other party is ignorant and will always disagree with it. That's what's wrong with America these days. The democrats come up with an idea to make the country better, but then the Republicans whine and moan about it being dumb.[/QUOTE] A one party system is an extremely dangerous idea, you know human nature and all that.
Soon, due to the super-committee's inability to come to an agreement on anything, they're going to make the 'Uber-Duber Committee'. It will have two people, one from each party. This bipartisanship will surely let them come to a conclusion. Then, due to the Uber-Duber Committee's indecision, they will make the Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious Committee, which will consist of one guy with split personalities. This will be the first successful introduction of a multi-party system into the US Government. In a spur of the moment decision, the Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious Committee used legal loopholes to replace all Congressmen with turtles. The US debt crisis, surprisingly, was solved within the month.
[QUOTE=N-12_Aden;33375775]A one party system is an extremely dangerous idea, you know human nature and all that.[/QUOTE] Well, having a 2 party system isn't helping us out right now. They can't even agree on anything.
600 billion each for military and non military spending. It takes affect in 2013 and that total is over a period of over 6-9 years. They still have time (HAHA) to make cuts before the cuts hit. As I said before, this isnt drastic at all. The media wants to spin it that way to get people to react more.
[QUOTE=Deaglez7;33375792]Well, having a 2 party system isn't helping us out right now. They can't even agree on anything.[/QUOTE] So what happens if the things the one party agree on are terrifying. You know like the Nazi Party, The Soviets, The current Burma Junta, and others.
I'll believe defence cuts when I see them
[QUOTE=N-12_Aden;33375894]So what happens if the things the one party agree on are terrifying. You know like the Nazi Party, The Soviets, The current Burma Junta, and others.[/QUOTE] Looking at SOPA, the things that both parties agree on are pretty terrifying as well. Literally the only thing they can work together on to make something happen is taking away our rights and giving private companies the right to censor the Internet.
[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;33375957]Looking at SOPA, the things that both parties agree on are pretty terrifying as well. Literally the only thing they can work together on to make something happen is taking away our rights and giving private companies the right to censor the Internet.[/QUOTE] They are not being bribed at all to make deals for this yet for SOPA they are being bribed out their fucking asses, their mother's fucking asses and their children's respective asses.
[QUOTE=N-12_Aden;33375894]So what happens if the things the one party agree on are terrifying. You know like the Nazi Party, The Soviets, The current Burma Junta, and others.[/QUOTE] It's called not voting for them.
cut military spending to 100bn, or even 80bn
[QUOTE=Deaglez7;33375585]This is the problem with having more than one party in the house. We should have listened to George Washington.[/QUOTE] Pretty sure he meant more than 2, not 1
[QUOTE=jordguitar;33375882]600 billion each for military and non military spending. It takes affect in 2013 and that total is over a period of over 6-9 years. They still have time (HAHA) to make cuts before the cuts hit. As I said before, this isnt drastic at all. The media wants to spin it that way to get people to react more.[/QUOTE] If that reaction is to finally respond to our shit political situation then that's fine.
[QUOTE=Amez;33376319]If that reaction is to finally respond to our shit political situation then that's fine.[/QUOTE] I just dont know how they want people to react. It just seems that everyone is mad at the wrong people.
[QUOTE=jordguitar;33376339]I just dont know how they want people to react. It just seems that everyone is mad at the wrong people.[/QUOTE] I absolutely agree. I notice a lot of people are forming uneducated or confused opinions over the wrong people, take for example I spoke with someone that thought everything was Obama's fault.
Well, the defense cuts could potentially could affect Canada too, as the CF-35's would cost more than they already are (way to much) if the F-35 program is trimmed.
Who fucking cares, F-35's are retarded and Canada doesn't need them.
[QUOTE=doonbugie2;33376436]Who fucking cares, F-35's are retarded and Canada doesn't need them.[/QUOTE] My point.
Fuck F-35's, buy the Russian equal of the F-22 Raptor and get a T-50 for 40mill. If the US can buy helicopters from Russia why can't Canada buy Stealth fighters from Russia.
[QUOTE=doonbugie2;33376737]Fuck F-35's, buy the Russian equal of the F-22 Raptor and get a T-50 for 40mill. If the US can buy helicopters from Russia why can't Canada buy Stealth fighters from Russia.[/QUOTE] Remind me again why Canada even needs 5th generation fighters? PS. We bought those Mi-17s because they're for Afghan military pilots, very few of which can fly US-made choppers.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.