Nov 29 Boehner Repsonse to "What Cuts would you make?"

So far, here is the dem plan to tackle the crushing debt problem.

Tax more.
Spend more.

Some things never change.

 

Can I follow you around and click 'dislike' on all of your posts too?

Nevermind. I think I'll go make some money instead.

Have a good day.

 

You forgot Devaluing the dollar

 

LOL. LOL. LOL.

That is all.

 

Presidents do not have that power and you know it.
Man up to your parties responsibility!
The conservatives are to blame for our current state, tanked economy, unemployment, debt and deficit.
You know it, everyone knows it.

 

Conservatives I vote for wouldn't do this.

You must be talking about something else.

 

I won't take that bet.

Boehner, Cantor and Ryan lost this argument once in 2011. I have no faith they will fair any better this time around.

And we all know the "democrats" aren't serious about the topic.


So, yeah. The can will be kicked.

 

You did that all day yesterday after being made a fool of, so, go ahead.

 

Well when the other partys debt solution is to cut taxes and spend more ...it sounds a lot better

 

Nope. It was Hamurabi's code until I realized how stupid it was. Google Hamurabi if you need to. My guess is you might learn something.

 

The conservatives you did vote did do this, everyone knows it.

 

LOL!!
Yeah, right.

 

Ron Paul wanted to cut $1 trillion dollars, and his plan was extremely specific. the liberals and neo-cons rejected him and his ideas, which to me means they are not serious at all about cutting spending and balancing the budget.

 

11-30-2012

12:12 PM - Craftsman clicked Dislikes for this post: Nov 29 Boehner Repsonse to "What Cuts would you make?" by historicus
11:50 AM - historicus clicked Likes for this post: Obama Taking Us Over the Fiscal Cliff As He Proposes MORE Spending by fmw
11:48 AM - historicus clicked Likes for this post: Obama Taking Us Over the Fiscal Cliff As He Proposes MORE Spending by Pollycy
11:45 AM - historicus clicked Likes for this post: Obama Taking Us Over the Fiscal Cliff As He Proposes MORE Spending by Blackrook
11:45 AM - historicus clicked Likes for this post: Obama Taking Us Over the Fiscal Cliff As He Proposes MORE Spending by Pollycy


11-29-2012

06:43 PM - historicus clicked Likes for this post: Obama Taking Us Over the Fiscal Cliff As He Proposes MORE Spending by Indymom
06:33 PM - historicus clicked Likes for this post: Nov 29 Boehner Repsonse to "What Cuts would you make?" by coolguybrad
06:31 PM - historicus clicked Dislikes for this post: Nov 29 Boehner Repsonse to "What Cuts would you make?" by Craftsman
03:26 PM - Craftsman clicked Dislikes for this post: Nov 29 Boehner Repsonse to "What Cuts would you make?" by historicus
02:59 PM - historicus clicked Likes for this post: Fiscal cliff problem: Republicans unable to name their price by Albert Di Salvo
02:51 PM - historicus clicked Dislikes for this post: Nov 29 Boehner Repsonse to "What Cuts would you make?" by Craftsman
02:51 PM - historicus clicked Dislikes for this post: Nov 29 Boehner Repsonse to "What Cuts would you make?" by Craftsman
02:40 PM - Craftsman clicked Dislikes for this post: Nov 29 Boehner Repsonse to "What Cuts would you make?" by historicus
02:38 PM - Craftsman clicked Dislikes for this post: Nov 29 Boehner Repsonse to "What Cuts would you make?" by historicus
02:38 PM - Craftsman clicked Dislikes for this post: Nov 29 Boehner Repsonse to "What Cuts would you make?" by historicus

 

Sorry, you have me confused with someone else. I never voted for anyone in office.

 

I agree with you, but may I rephrase what you said to be more accurate. . .and demonstrate that that extension would benefit EVERYONE, including multi millionaires?

"What is unclear about "vote for extending the tax cuts FOR EVERYONE UP TO $250,000 of income, where ONLY income OVER the $250,000 would be taxed at a rate similar to that in effect prior to the Bush tax cuts."

This means that, even if people make $5 millions a year, they would STILL benefit from keeping the lower tax rate on their FIRST $250,000 of income.

I believe that this is a more accurate statement, and it also shows that there IS NO discrimination against those with higher income. . . since they would also get the lower tax on the basic $250,000.

 

Actually TARP bailed out institutions that the government deemed vital to the economy.

Whether they were or not is too big for me to say.

But TARP did not bail out individual investors who were just as much victims of a corrupt government as anyone else was.

I don't know.

Maybe they shouldn't.

Conservatives have long called for a flat tax that treats all income the same, even the pennies that the average Obama voters manages to scrape up.

But libs cling to the "progressive" tax that punishes the most successful and rewards those who least deserve it.

You say you believe in the flat tax also but go out of your way to support Obama and the libs who will never agree to such a fair system.

BTW: Of all the tax "loopholes" that unconservatives complain about, the capital gains tax probably serves the greatest good since it encourages the wealthy to risk their money when they could move it to another country or just sit on it.

 

I had a love / hate affair with RP - and his supporters seemed to accurately reflect the cause of this. If he went in front of the American people and say "We should legalize pot. Think of the crime we could prevent, the expense we would save on prison costs, the revenues etc...." That would get a TON of votes because it just makes sense. To say "We should legalize all drugs." May or may not make sense. Personally, I think it just might. But it proved he wasn't to be taken seriously as a candidate. That was just going to kill too many votes.
To say "The time for Affirmative Action has passed." Would make sense. Hell, we had an American president while he was running! To say "I wouldn't have voted for the Civil Rights Act and feel it impedes the Free Market." Is so far out in Fringeville USA, it guaranteed a loss. It's not like race discrimination doesn't occur all the time, still.
The same goes for his followers, the Libertarians. Some are among the most intelligent, well-reasoned people I've ever met. Others are just plain whackjobs. Actually not just plain whackjobs - extreme whackjobs. Anyone not staring moon-eyed and believing whole-heartedly in every single principle, "Hates the Constitution" or whatever. Because coincindentally, they're all Constitutional Lawyers, Scholars or have the secret decoder ring or whatever.

I think one of the most brilliant things he said was "If we don't trust our own politicians, why on Earth would we trust the politicians from another country?"

Paul's biggest problem was best stated by a British Nobel laureate. "A demcoracy will never tolerate an honest man."