US debt crisis: Republicans abandon vote as deadline looms
285 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Glaber;31413927]Maybe we'd actually ge something done, if you didn't rely on your enemies to make the bills or proposals in the first place? I mean, how many democrat bills have there been to try to tackle this? And where's Obama's plan? (This I want a link for)
So far, the only Democrat pan I can think of is Reid's[/QUOTE]
"Enemies"? This is why the US cannot have progress, because of people like glaber calling their countrymen enemies because of differences in political beliefs. The parties are there to construct on each others good parts, therefore bettering the country. However people like you impede this progress by simply trying to take all the power for yourself and prove you are the "better" party when really the country, not the party, should come first.
[QUOTE=Mikedestruct;31415025]"Enemies"? This is why the US cannot have progress, because of people like glaber calling their countrymen enemies because of differences in political beliefs. The parties are there to construct on each others good parts, therefore bettering the country. However people like you impede this progress by simply trying to take all the power for yourself and prove you are the "better" party when really the country, not the party, should come first.[/QUOTE]holy shit i fuckin g love you man
[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];31414914']Obama's specific plan for this called for the Democrats to cut 650 billion in entitlements and to bring in a fair amount in taxes, so that both sides share the sacrifice of giving in to what they don't want. You can't expect us to just cap spending at a level below what is necessary to continue social programs. Entitlements and social programs are a necessity, cutting entitlements is a very bad thing, but it was a move by the Democrats to give in and share sacrifice for the better outcome.
If they were acting like Republicans, then they'd give half that amount, expect the Reps to bring in double through taxes hikes, if even give anything, and walk out in fair talks.
Oh, and both sides agree a spending cap is necessary, but it's not an issue of immediate importance for this immediate issue. It can be hammered out later, but the Republicans need to quite being whiny bitches about it and save that fight for another day, because we don't have time to argue that.[/QUOTE]
How are social programms so wonderfuly important, people have survived very well without them for a very long time. I don't support completely eliminating them, but a very large cut to that 51% percent of our yearly budget would be nice.
Tax increases, even on the wealthy, would hurt the economy. That is something we can't risk in the middle of a recession.
Personaly I think that to really fix the economy, you need to cut regulations. Does the 6 year old really need to pay 500$ to open a lemonaid stand for a day? Does the buisness really need to fill 100 pages of forms to take out a loan or buy properity?
[QUOTE='[sluggo];31415061']
Personaly I think that to really fix the economy, you need to cut regulations. Does the 6 year old really need to pay 500$ to open a lemonaid stand for a day? Does the buisness really need to fill 100 pages of forms to take out a loan or buy properity?[/QUOTE]
Deregulation got us into this shithole in the first place. How would allowing businesses revert to shitty practices stimulate an economy?
[quote]Tax increases, even on the wealthy, would hurt the economy. That is something we can't risk in the middle of a recession.[/quote]
Increasing taxes helps generate cash for the government to use. Increasing taxes on the rich, I mean 'job creators' would help generate more money for the government utilize. Not to mention that a huge number of corporations write-off their taxes to the point where they don't pay shit at all.
Face it, the republicans just shot themselves in the foot; Caused a great nation to collapse; and JUST may have fucked the entire world over. Next election [b]I will for sure vote democrat.[/b]
[QUOTE='[sluggo];31415061']How are social programms so wonderfuly important, people have survived very well without them for a very long time. I don't support completely eliminating them, but a very large cut to that 51% percent of our yearly budget would be nice.
Tax increases, even on the wealthy, would hurt the economy. That is something we can't risk in the middle of a recession.
Personaly I think that to really fix the economy, you need to cut regulations. Does the 6 year old really need to pay 500$ to open a lemonaid stand for a day? Does the buisness really need to fill 100 pages of forms to take out a loan or buy properity?[/QUOTE]
Do you even know what the purpose of welfare is? I don't think you do.
Most violent crime is committed by poor young males largely because they are poor. If you make people not as poor they're less likely to commit crime and assholes like you don't have to feel the need to carry a gun with you wherever you go.
And then theres the fact that nobody should be poor when we have so many millionaires who don't pay enough tax.
Taxing the wealthy would not affect the economy in any way. What makes you think it would?
Hey guys hey
I got a plan now hear this
Cut some of the military spending
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;31414983]Why do you people(sluggo, glaber) support a guy like Boehner, who when offered a way to fix this problem and actually have a solution walks the fuck away?[/QUOTE]
He has proposed a plan that will cut a reasonable amount of spending (Not even including entitlements!) without endangering the economy.
[QUOTE=Zezibesh;31415158]Hey guys hey
I got a plan now hear this
Cut some of the military spending[/QUOTE]
I can already hear republicans whining.
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;31415152]Do you even know what the purpose of welfare is? I don't think you do.
Most violent crime is committed by poor young males largely because they are poor. If you make people not as poor they're less likely to commit crime and assholes like you don't have to feel the need to carry a gun with you wherever you go.
And then theres the fact that nobody should be poor when we have so many millionaires who don't pay enough tax.
Taxing the wealthy would not affect the economy in any way. What makes you think it would?[/QUOTE]
What about the 50% of poorer Americans that don't pay any income tax?
[QUOTE=Zezibesh;31415158]Hey guys hey
I got a plan now hear this
Cut some of the military spending[/QUOTE]but we cant do that, we have to continue to fight the war on TERRURRR and protecting americuhs freeedum
Cant obama pass whatever he wants without anybodys say in it as like a executive order?
No thats not how the US government works.
[QUOTE='[sluggo];31415061'][b]How are social programms so wonderfuly important, people have survived very well without them for a very long time.[/b] I don't support completely eliminating them, but a very large cut to that 51% percent of our yearly budget would be nice.
Tax increases, even on the wealthy, would hurt the economy. That is something we can't risk in the middle of a recession.
Personaly I think that to really fix the economy, you need to cut regulations. Does the 6 year old really need to pay 500$ to open a lemonaid stand for a day? Does the buisness really need to fill 100 pages of forms to take out a loan or buy properity?[/QUOTE]
GTFO.
[QUOTE=ultra_bright;31415257]Cant obama pass whatever he wants without anybodys say in it as like a executive order?[/QUOTE]We have a dictatorship, obviously he can.
[QUOTE='[sluggo];31415061']How are social programms so wonderfuly important, people have survived very well without them for a very long time. I don't support completely eliminating them, but a very large cut to that 51% percent of our yearly budget would be nice.
Tax increases, even on the wealthy, would hurt the economy. That is something we can't risk in the middle of a recession.
Personaly I think that to really fix the economy, you need to cut regulations. Does the 6 year old really need to pay 500$ to open a lemonaid stand for a day? Does the buisness really need to fill 100 pages of forms to take out a loan or buy properity?[/QUOTE]
Social programs keep millions alive, healthy, in the job market, educated, and able to function in society. Taking away social program would be devastating for our economy in 5 years. They keep people alive. They keep people form becoming stupid and staying stupid. They allow those with disabilities and psychological/health problems to function at a level to work in society. They allow the unemployed to continue searching for jobs without becoming homeless.
They are a necessary part of society. You know what we had before social programs? We have millions of poor living on the streets int he 30s and before, and we had very few people educated past a high school education, [i]if even that in many cases[/i]. So yea, people lived without them. The elderly and sick died younger, the people were stupider and unable to progress in social status their lives, and the mentally or physically disabled live don the streets and became useless and died. That's what we had.
Secondly, tax increases don't hurt the economy. The GDP of nations with higher tax rates increases over time, not decreases. This trend was visible in China, Venezuela, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Iceland, Denmark, France, UK, Germany, Canada, and Japan until the global recession. Even now, Venezuela and China's GDP increases at a steady rate, even as their tax rates increase. So don't give me that "it hurts the economy" crap. It would, if competition didn't exist. The idea is that lower taxes allows for more entrepreneurs and therefore more businesses, but low tax rates allow the rich and powerful to maintain their riches and power, therefore making competition difficult and cancelling out any benefit of a low tax rate.
And then, we come to regulations, which should be increased, not decreased. Reasoning being increasing is simply that a regulated corporation is a safer, more competition-friendly, and more equal corporation. The profit incentive is great for boosting an economy, because it bring business and gets things chugging, but it also leads to corruption, cheaper wages for cheaper goods, bad quality control for employees, and corporatism. Regulation prevents this. Sure, it's costly, but the alternative is a 1920s and 30s America in terms of wages, workers' rights, and quality control, and a plutocracy or series of monopolies, at minimum. It's a necessary evil.
Oh how have I forgotten. Republicans are social darwinists.
Here we go Glaber, better read up and read up well.
[url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1109979-Boehner-Out-Debt-Talks-Collapse]All this "crisis" started with your good buddy, Mr. John Boehner, not compromising with President Obama on the debt ceiling.[/url] This caused a slight stir in Congress and threw up a few warning flags and sounded off an alarm. There was still plenty of time at that point to come up with a new deal, despite analysts saying [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1110540-CBS-Bipartisan-debt-deal-just-impossible.-Meanwhile-China-seeks-to-repossess-Hawaii-and-S.-California-if-talks-fail]"Hmmm, fat chance in hell"[/url]. [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1110783-New-US-debt-plans-unveiled-Democrats-offer-to-cut-more-than-twice-as-much-as-Republicans-and-not-to-raise-taxes-if-Medicare-and-Medicaid-are-left-alone]The Democrats came up with a plan that would include $2.7 trillion in tax cuts, including cuts to popular Democrat-supported programs. This was pretty much their last resort.[/url] Republicans went, "Yeeaa... that's not good enough". The next day, not only were [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1110923-Tea-Party-activists-cheer-John-Boehner-to-drive-economy-to-ground.-Meanwhile-Canada-suspects-real-estate-boom-next-week.]Tea Party Activists cheering Boehner to make the deficit default[/url], but also the not-so-subtle hint of [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1111024-Republican-Rep.-warns-of-Obama-impeachment-if-GOP-forces-debt-default]a really bad case being thrown together to get Obama impeached.[/url]
Now sure, both the [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1111330-Embarrassment-for-John-Boehner-after-budget-office-finds-350bn-hole-in-his-original-proposal]Republican[/url] and [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1111559-Democrats-Budget-Cuts-Fall-Short-of-Estimate]Democrat[/url] plans seemed to have their holes, but for the most part, the Democrats have been the ones, trudging through Republican bullshit in an attempt to save the floundering economy. Yet, it seems Glaber, in your little fantasy world, that it's all the Democrats fault. [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1111484-McCain-rips-into-tea-party-lawmakers-and-other-conservatives-accusing-them-of-living-in-a-fantasy-world]Even McCain says to "Shut the fuck up and nut up, because we gotta get this shit done."[/url]
[QUOTE='[sluggo];31415245']What about the 50% of poorer Americans that don't pay any income tax?[/QUOTE]
What about the 2/3 of American corporations and 86% of foreign corporations that don't pay federal income taxes?
[QUOTE=Elizer;31415471]Here we go Glaber, better read up and read up well.
[url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1109979-Boehner-Out-Debt-Talks-Collapse]All this "crisis" started with your good buddy, Mr. John Boehner, not compromising with President Obama on the debt ceiling.[/url] This caused a slight stir in Congress and threw up a few warning flags and sounded off an alarm. There was still plenty of time at that point to come up with a new deal, despite analysts saying [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1110540-CBS-Bipartisan-debt-deal-just-impossible.-Meanwhile-China-seeks-to-repossess-Hawaii-and-S.-California-if-talks-fail]"Hmmm, fat chance in hell"[/url]. [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1110783-New-US-debt-plans-unveiled-Democrats-offer-to-cut-more-than-twice-as-much-as-Republicans-and-not-to-raise-taxes-if-Medicare-and-Medicaid-are-left-alone]The Democrats came up with a plan that would include $2.7 trillion in tax cuts, including cuts to popular Democrat-supported programs. This was pretty much their last resort.[/url] Republicans went, "Yeeaa... that's not good enough". The next day, not only were [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1110923-Tea-Party-activists-cheer-John-Boehner-to-drive-economy-to-ground.-Meanwhile-Canada-suspects-real-estate-boom-next-week.]Tea Party Activists cheering Boehner to make the deficit default[/url], but also the not-so-subtle hint of [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1111024-Republican-Rep.-warns-of-Obama-impeachment-if-GOP-forces-debt-default]a really bad case being thrown together to get Obama impeached.[/url]
Now sure, both the [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1111330-Embarrassment-for-John-Boehner-after-budget-office-finds-350bn-hole-in-his-original-proposal]Republican[/url] and [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1111559-Democrats-Budget-Cuts-Fall-Short-of-Estimate]Democrat[/url] plans seemed to have their holes, but for the most part, the Democrats have been the ones, trudging through Republican bullshit in an attempt to save the floundering economy. Yet, it seems Glaber, in your little fantasy world, that it's all the Democrats fault. [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1111484-McCain-rips-into-tea-party-lawmakers-and-other-conservatives-accusing-them-of-living-in-a-fantasy-world]Even McCain says to "Shut the fuck up and nut up, because we gotta get this shit done."[/url][/QUOTE]he needs links and actual proof man
[QUOTE='[sluggo];31415061'][b]How are social programms so wonderfuly important, people have survived very well without them for a very long time.[/b] I don't support completely eliminating them, but a very large cut to that 51% percent of our yearly budget would be nice.
Tax increases, even on the wealthy, would hurt the economy. That is something we can't risk in the middle of a recession.
Personaly I think that to really fix the economy, you need to cut regulations. Does the 6 year old really need to pay 500$ to open a lemonaid stand for a day? Does the buisness really need to fill 100 pages of forms to take out a loan or buy properity?[/QUOTE]
If by "survive" you mean waiting in soup lines for hours, scrounging through trash cans for food, wandering about the country for jobs, living in massive slums, working months without vacations, working for only a few dollars a day, and finally old people not being able to sustain themselves.
If so then yea, they've "survived" just fine.
The government needs money to pay off debt, you know. How would people giving less money to the government mean the government getting more money?
Tax cuts only work in good economic conditions, look at Reagan, he made tax hikes during bad conditions, and tax cuts during good conditions. The economy has to already be working for tax cuts to work, its not starting the engine, its like giving it oil.
By cutting regulations, yea, the economy might fix itself, but have fun living in one room apartments with 10 other people in slums, working for 20 hours a day for $5, and getting 1 day vacation every month.
Without regulation you know how dirty our food would be? How dangerous workplaces would be? How corrupt corporations would be (like, worse then now)?
[QUOTE=Roof;31415534]he needs links and actual proof man[/QUOTE]
Oh fuck. I sorta just made those blue text, underlined sentences to make my post look pretty :downs:
[QUOTE=Elizer;31415471]Here we go Glaber, better read up and read up well.
[url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1109979-Boehner-Out-Debt-Talks-Collapse]All this "crisis" started with your good buddy, Mr. John Boehner, not compromising with President Obama on the debt ceiling.[/url] This caused a slight stir in Congress and threw up a few warning flags and sounded off an alarm. There was still plenty of time at that point to come up with a new deal, despite analysts saying [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1110540-CBS-Bipartisan-debt-deal-just-impossible.-Meanwhile-China-seeks-to-repossess-Hawaii-and-S.-California-if-talks-fail]"Hmmm, fat chance in hell"[/url]. [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1110783-New-US-debt-plans-unveiled-Democrats-offer-to-cut-more-than-twice-as-much-as-Republicans-and-not-to-raise-taxes-if-Medicare-and-Medicaid-are-left-alone]The Democrats came up with a plan that would include $2.7 trillion in tax cuts, including cuts to popular Democrat-supported programs. This was pretty much their last resort.[/url] Republicans went, "Yeeaa... that's not good enough". The next day, not only were [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1110923-Tea-Party-activists-cheer-John-Boehner-to-drive-economy-to-ground.-Meanwhile-Canada-suspects-real-estate-boom-next-week.]Tea Party Activists cheering Boehner to make the deficit default[/url], but also the not-so-subtle hint of [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1111024-Republican-Rep.-warns-of-Obama-impeachment-if-GOP-forces-debt-default]a really bad case being thrown together to get Obama impeached.[/url]
Now sure, both the [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1111330-Embarrassment-for-John-Boehner-after-budget-office-finds-350bn-hole-in-his-original-proposal]Republican[/url] and [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1111559-Democrats-Budget-Cuts-Fall-Short-of-Estimate]Democrat[/url] plans seemed to have their holes, but for the most part, the Democrats have been the ones, trudging through Republican bullshit in an attempt to save the floundering economy. Yet, it seems Glaber, in your little fantasy world, that it's all the Democrats fault. [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1111484-McCain-rips-into-tea-party-lawmakers-and-other-conservatives-accusing-them-of-living-in-a-fantasy-world]Even McCain says to "Shut the fuck up and nut up, because we gotta get this shit done."[/url][/QUOTE]
That would of taken a while to get all those links - well done man.
[QUOTE=Thom12255;31415625]That would of taken a while to get all those links - well done man.[/QUOTE]
I actually had the entire thing typed in 10 minutes. I had to take a shower.
-insert Fox News spin on Showers being harmful somehow-
[QUOTE='[sluggo];31415061']How are social programms so wonderfuly important, people have survived very well without them for a very long time. I don't support completely eliminating them, but a very large cut to that 51% percent of our yearly budget would be nice.
Tax increases, even on the wealthy, would hurt the economy. That is something we can't risk in the middle of a recession.
Personaly I think that to really fix the economy, you need to cut regulations. Does the 6 year old really need to pay 500$ to open a lemonaid stand for a day? Does the buisness really need to fill 100 pages of forms to take out a loan or buy properity?[/QUOTE]
Oh yea, and by the way, this is exactly why the Republicans are being fucking stupid. Because of just shutting up and compromising like the Democrats, they're fighting tooth and claw for their fucking ideological beliefs, because they're obviously all-important all-correct all-the time. This is NOT and ideological thing, BOTH SIDES need to give some concessions, even if they think it's wrong. Democrats offered to cut trillions in entitlement costs, asking for slightly less through tax income that would require a tax increase. BOTH SIDES NEED TO SACRIFICE. THIS IS NOT AN IDEOLOGICAL ISSUE. THIS IS A "DO IT NOW OR WE WILL BE FUCKED, WE'RE WILLING TO SHARE, ARE YOU?" ISSUE.
[QUOTE='[sluggo];31415245']What about the 50% of poorer Americans that don't pay any income tax?[/QUOTE]
You know who needs those tax cuts? The Poor and Middle Classes. They're the ones who are suffering in this economic climate - Corporate profits have gone up and up and up the past 2 years breaking record profits in some places. They don't need them. Whereas the average income of an American family has lowered. Cutting entitlements would make it even worse as you have to spend more and more of your own money on simple things like health-care and student loans and less money to contribute to buying products and growing the economy.
The wealthy horde that money or pay out extravagant bonuses to people who already make millions. Some say the Bush tax cuts led to the housing bubble blowing apart so badly because the rich were pouring all their money into investment to avoid getting that money taxed. This money isn't used for hiring more workers and it isn't growing the economy through buying products.
If you want the economy to grow and the standard of living to rise then we need tax increases on the rich and tax breaks for the middle class. Close the loopholes, cut unnecessary funding (those two big wars that you don't need being a big one) end the bush tax cuts which led to the economy getting worse and worse over the last decade not better and Health Care reform.
Also I must say lastly - the majority of these corporations have gotten rid of ten of thousands of jobs in the US during the course of these tax cuts and hired the exact same jobs in China and India. They don't need more [b]Corporate Entitlements[/b] to reward them.
[url]http://www.forbes.com/2011/04/13/ge-exxon-walmart-apple-business-washington-corporate-taxes.html[/url]
[release]As many Americans finish up their personal tax returns over the next few days, they'll marvel with horror at how much hard-earned cash gets siphoned up by the government. At times like this, it's satisfying to have a corporate bogeyman to hate--[b]like General Electric, which has faced a withering hail of criticism since The New York Times proclaimed last month that the conglomerate paid no federal taxes in 2010, despite $5 billion in U.S. profits. There goes corporate America again, always sticking it to the little guy.[/b]
But is there any real reason to believe that? Sure, [b]GE has an army of accountants and lobbyists trying to reduce its tax burden, but wouldn't you if you had $150 billion in worldwide revenue and $14.2 billion in pretax income last year?[/b][/release]
If we classify corporations like a person, then they mind as well start paying up like one.
There's a very good HBO documentary that covered how ENRON managed to become the monster it was thanks to the Herbert Bush deregs, and there was another encompassing the financial collapse a few years ago (it's not the film).
[QUOTE=Glaber;31413927]Maybe we'd actually ge something done, if you didn't rely on your enemies to make the bills or proposals in the first place? I mean, how many democrat bills have there been to try to tackle this? And where's Obama's plan? (This I want a link for)
So far, the only Democrat pan I can think of is Reid's[/QUOTE]
Hey Glaber, he's the president, he has to sign the damn thing not propose it. Oh yeah, and let's see I'm pretty sure REID's plan was EVERYTHING the Republicans asked for. dumbass.
GG Republicans, I hope you're happy fucking the entire world up
[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];31415412']Social programs keep millions alive, healthy, in the job market, educated, and able to function in society. Taking away social program would be devastating for our economy in 5 years. They keep people alive. They keep people form becoming stupid and staying stupid. They allow those with disabilities and psychological/health problems to function at a level to work in society. They allow the unemployed to continue searching for jobs without becoming homeless.
They are a necessary part of society. You know what we had before social programs? We have millions of poor living on the streets int he 30s and before, and we had very few people educated past a high school education, [i]if even that in many cases[/i]. So yea, people lived without them. The elderly and sick died younger, the people were stupider and unable to progress in social status their lives, and the mentally or physically disabled live don the streets and became useless and died. That's what we had.
Secondly, tax increases don't hurt the economy. The GDP of nations with higher tax rates increases over time, not decreases. This trend was visible in China, Venezuela, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Iceland, Denmark, France, UK, Germany, Canada, and Japan until the global recession. Even now, Venezuela and China's GDP increases at a steady rate, even as their tax rates increase. So don't give me that "it hurts the economy" crap. It would, if competition didn't exist. The idea is that lower taxes allows for more entrepreneurs and therefore more businesses, but low tax rates allow the rich and powerful to maintain their riches and power, therefore making competition difficult and cancelling out any benefit of a low tax rate.
And then, we come to regulations, which should be increased, not decreased. Reasoning being increasing is simply that a regulated corporation is a safer, more competition-friendly, and more equal corporation. The profit incentive is great for boosting an economy, because it bring business and gets things chugging, but it also leads to corruption, cheaper wages for cheaper goods, bad quality control for employees, and corporatism. Regulation prevents this. Sure, it's costly, but the alternative is a 1920s and 30s America in terms of wages, workers' rights, and quality control, and a plutocracy or series of monopolies, at minimum. It's a necessary evil.[/QUOTE]
Entitlement programs don't keep people educated. That is the fine education system that everyone is required to take part in. If you actualy use your brain, you will do well. Then you can get schollarships into college. Hospitals are required to give medical care in emergency cases and although it may cost a whole lot later. You will have survived. People are more likely to be in the job market if they don't have a constant source of income outside of employment.
Sure we had horrible things happening in the thirties, but now, with our more advanced justice and education systems, that is less likely to happen. Personal success can depend entirly on the effort you put into achieving it.
As for taxes. The only state with no corporate tax (texas) has created half the jobs since the beginning of the recession. This state also has much less regulation and a more conservative economic system.
When it comes to regulation, There is such a thing as a happy medium. We need to have a minimum wage, a standard of quality, and a standard of safety. That however, is about all we need to have. Monopolies can be defeated if a better product is offered and is well distributed.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.