Phony Presidential Outrage

[Sa_artman]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

So why doesn't Obama submitt his defecit reduction plan to Congress? Oh, that's right he doesn't have one...and everbody knows that to get at true defecit reduction we are going to have to reign in entitlements; the $3b in private aircraft deperciation won't even come close to closing the defecit/debt. But it allows him to play the class warfare card.

Obama doesn't want to lead the nation into recovery, by proposing entitlement reform, instead he is a poser, trying to look like he is managing the problem, while playing golf and fiddling. Leaving the heavy lifting to Republicans.

Did he even mention entitlement reform in his WH presser?

Is it just me or did Marshall disappear and this buffoon stepped up right away? Spell it with me...'deficit'. I'll slow it down for you. D e f i c i t. Maybe you got it mixed up because your usual hate rhetoric is akin to defecation. I can see how that would confuse you.

[Whirlaway]

[Randy4Candy]

Hey, Marshallbyrd, why doesn't the House rePUBES submit a plan on the floor instead on in the media? Never happen before the election because those a-wholes want to have a shot at reelection.

[TexTushHog]

Originally Posted by bigtex

+1

The only change I would make to the above statement would be to specifically state a modest increase in taxes!

Arguably that depends on how long it takes the economic triggers to kick in.

[gnadfly]

Originally Posted by TexTushHog

We very clearly need both. However, now is not the most opportune time to engage in either. A sensible policy would be to agree to cuts in spending and increases in taxes, but for both to kick in only when the economy meets certain triggers based on economic recovery.

Perhaps you didn't see my post.

Obama HAD the House and 59 Democratic Senators. Yet, except for the taxes in Obamacare, he could NOT get a (substantial) tax bill passed. He could have, but did not, get the "Bush tax cuts" disabled for the top earners. He had plenty of time. Obama (along with Pelosi and Reid) could NOT get a budget passed.

Then the Democrats lost the House in Nov 2010.

What makes you think Obama can get a broad tax increase? He had his opportunity and HE BLEW IT.

Its time to deal, not pose.

[TexTushHog]

At that time, the economy was in a very fragile state and one could argue that Obama thought a tax increase would hurt the economy. I think it's a very weak argument, especial as it pertains to the highest income earners, but that could have been his thinking. But if you want to get up an argument about whether he should have immediately repealed most of the Bush tax cuts, you're going to have to get up a different crowd. You're preaching to the choir.

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

So why doesn't Obama submitt his defecit reduction plan to Congress? Oh, that's right he doesn't have one...and everbody knows that to get at true defecit reduction we are going to have to reign in entitlements; the $3b in private aircraft deperciation won't even come close to closing the defecit/debt. But it allows him to play the class warfare card.

Obama doesn't want to lead the nation into recovery, by proposing entitlement reform, instead he is a poser, trying to look like he is managing the problem, while playing golf and fiddling. Leaving the heavy lifting to Republicans.

Did he even mention entitlement reform in his WH presser?

What heavy lifting? Where is a job creation bill? You really think the 2010 election was about the house repealing Obamacare and that's it?
Deficit reduction includes tax hikes as well as spending reductions. Come on, say it with me. T-A-X-H-I-K-E-S too. The republicans came up with one reduction plan that would give control of Medicare to the....................Insuran ce industry!! They refuse to consider a tax increase which of course is a return to the rates that were in place during a huge economic upswing. In place before it started. So you can't say that will kill our economy. Besides the current rates have been in effect for 8 years. Where are the new jobs?
On top of that, do you understand what the President's job is? The executive branch executes the legislation congress enacts. The President pitches an idea, details are for the congress to work out. And since the republicans won't honor things they put on the table last year, what's a congress to do?
It is obvious that the republicans like things the way they are and will be quite happy to wait for the next election, saying to the people, "remember who did this to you" while pointing fingers at the democrats.
But both parties forget 2 things. Neither of the parties choose who the president will be and it will be remembered who did this. Do you know who will remember and who picks the president?
We do, the 20% independent moderates.
Now I promised the other indies I wouldn't tell any conservatives this, but since it's you............... If you nominate either of the 2 ditzes, you will be crushed. Hate them? Liberals love them!!

[I'dhitit]

The uncertainty of the future pertaining to entitlements including Obamacare is what is causing our economy to not grow. What makes it fair for people to draw unemployment for 2+ years? When do people quit expecting the government to provide everything for them. Obama is an absolute idiot. He's never done anything constructive from a business standpoint in his entire life. "Hope and Change", what a line of shit. When are poeple going to take any responsiblility for their own actions. If I'm hungry I'm going to go out and find a job and provide for myself. Why can't people accept the fact that the government can't keep giving handouts to people that don't want to work. To get any government assistance it should be a requirement that you pass a drug test and every day you should be assigned something constructive to do even if it's picking up trash along the side of the road. As far as tax breaks for the wealthy, give me a break. Those are the people that help create new jobs and technology for all of us. Revenue to the government increases when tax rates are lowered. Thats the incentive for people to bust their butts and start new businesses because they get to keep more of their own money.

Have you ever looked at our government wastes money on? We need 8 year term limits for our senators and congressmen and they should receive no pension whatsoever from the government. It should be considered a privilege to serve and they should not be allowed to build empires for themselves and their families and the special interest groups and lobbyists.

The tax code mess is honestly an easy one to handle. Whether it be a flat tax or a fair tax, I don't care. Do away with the entire tax code and everyone pay the same amount. Assume 15% or whatever. Everyone (businesses and individuals) pays the same amount. If I earn it I would be glad to pay it because I would be knowing that everyone else is contributing the same percentage. No loopholes for anyone. I will then go out there and bust my butt to make as much as I can and I'll be happy to know everyone is treated equallly.

Yes, I own a small business, I have to meet payroll and pay all the bills. One of my employees refused a pay increase because it would cause her foodstamp benefit to decrease. The government is causing the people to remain in lower paying jobs so they don't lose their darn benefits. Does this make sense? I say do away with the government handouts and make people work to their highest ability and let the business reward them according.

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by I'dhitit

Yes, I own a small business, I have to meet payroll and pay all the bills. One of my employees refused a pay increase because it would cause her foodstamp benefit to decrease.

I have never owned a small business but I do sign most of the checks for my office. It stands to reason that I have an excellent working knowledge of what it takes to meet a sizable payroll. If I am to understand this correctly, your employee's pay is low enough that she qualifies for foodstamps. I am the first to admit that I have never had any direct (or indirect) dealings with the foodstamp program.

It seems to me that the purpose of the foodstamps program is to provide essential assistance to those with very limited income. If the pay increase that you offered results in a net loss to the employee due to reduced foodstamp benefits, she seems to have made the correct decision. This appears to be a win/win situation. You win because you do not have to pay a higher wage rate. She wins because she is better able to provide for her family!

Hmmmm, why are you being critical?

Just sayin'

[Doove]

Originally Posted by I'dhitit

One of my employees refused a pay increase because it would cause her foodstamp benefit to decrease.

You must pay well.

Does your employee know what an absolute pathetic loser you think she is because she's on government assistance?

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by I'dhitit

The uncertainty of the future pertaining to entitlements including Obamacare is what is causing our economy to not grow. What makes it fair for people to draw unemployment for 2+ years? When do people quit expecting the government to provide everything for them. Obama is an absolute idiot. He's never done anything constructive from a business standpoint in his entire life. "Hope and Change", what a line of shit. When are poeple going to take any responsiblility for their own actions. If I'm hungry I'm going to go out and find a job and provide for myself. Why can't people accept the fact that the government can't keep giving handouts to people that don't want to work. To get any government assistance it should be a requirement that you pass a drug test and every day you should be assigned something constructive to do even if it's picking up trash along the side of the road. As far as tax breaks for the wealthy, give me a break. You give me a break. Hello, 8 years of tax breaks, 6 under Bush. None of the things in your statements concerning taxes have happened Those are the people that help create new jobs and technology for all of us. Revenue to the government increases when tax rates are lowered. Thats the incentive for people to bust their butts and start new businesses because they get to keep more of their own money.

Have you ever looked at our government wastes money on? We need 8 year term limits for our senators and congressmen and they should receive no pension whatsoever from the government. It should be considered a privilege to serve and they should not be allowed to build empires for themselves and their families and the special interest groups and lobbyists.

The tax code mess is honestly an easy one to handle. Whether it be a flat tax or a fair tax, I don't care. Do away with the entire tax code and everyone pay the same amount. Assume 15% or whatever. Everyone (businesses and individuals) pays the same amount. If I earn it I would be glad to pay it because I would be knowing that everyone else is contributing the same percentage. No loopholes for anyone. I will then go out there and bust my butt to make as much as I can and I'll be happy to know everyone is treated equallly.

Yes, I own a small business, I have to meet payroll and pay all the bills. One of my employees refused a pay increase because it would cause her foodstamp benefit to decrease. The government is causing the people to remain in lower paying jobs so they don't lose their darn benefits. Does this make sense?
It's one of the few things you said that does. This story is missing a lot of info but we'll assume it's real. You gave her a job. One that doesn't pay enough to put food on the table as well as clothes, etc. Since you gave her the job, you must not think she is a slacker. If you offered her a $1 an hour raise and she needs the $3-400 worth of food stamps, the $160 a month you offer won't cover that. Stop and think how she felt telling you that. The gov isn't keeping people in low paying jobs, a lack of skills for a higher paying job does. The gov is not the cure for everything and it isn't the cause of everything. As far as the tax increase goes, an extra $3000 per $100,000 above $250,000 isn't going to keep them from creating jobs. They've had 8 years. Besides, as a small business owner, you know to incorporate to limit personal liability. It is possible to be an employee of your own corp, which never makes a profit because of operating expenses, etc.

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by bigtex

I have never owned a small business but I do sign all of the checks for my office. I believe that I have an excellent working knowledge of what it takes to meet a sizable payroll. If I am to understand this correctly, your employee's pay is low enough that she qualifies for foodstamps. I am the first to admit that I have never had any direct or indirect dealings with the foodstamp program. Quite frankly, we have never had an employee who qualified for foodstamps.

It seems to me that the purpose of the program is to provide assistance to those 'in need' in providing for their families. If the pay increase that you offered results in a net loss to the employee due to reduced foodstamp benefits, she seems to have made the correct decision. This appears to be a win/win situation. You win because you do not have to pay her the pay increase. She wins because she is better able to provide for her family!

Hmmmm, why are being critical?

Just sayin'

I'm trying to keep from quacking. Lots of holes in his tale.

[lilred_robin]

I've missed these types of threads!


At least your employee who is receiving assistance has a job!
She is working, and as such paying (some) income tax.

But I agree on the opinion of those who go for years and years leaching $ that could go to deserving families who are trying to work, trying to do the right thing.

As in her (your employee) case, it is almost a punishment (losing benefits in comparison to the increase in wage) to get a decent paying job.


Goodnight denziens of eccie. While we've received an unscheduled donsa for tomorrow, being Tuesday I still need to get off my ass and run 5 miles before breakfast.

[Doove]

Originally Posted by lilred_robin

But I agree on the opinion of those who go for years and years leaching $ that could go to deserving families who are trying to work, trying to do the right thing.

What about employers who for years and years leech off the government by paying a wage that keeps their employees on the government dole?

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by lilred_robin

I've missed these types of threads!


At least your employee who is receiving assistance has a job!
She is working, and as such paying (some) income tax.

But I agree on the opinion of those who go for years and years leaching $ that could go to deserving families who are trying to work, trying to do the right thing.

As in her (your employee) case, it is almost a punishment (losing benefits in comparison to the increase in wage) to get a decent paying job.


Goodnight denziens of eccie. While we've received an unscheduled donsa for tomorrow, being Tuesday I still need to get off my ass and run 5 miles before breakfast.

Beautiful robin's egg blue eyes. Give us a shout if you come to Austin.