goemaw.com
General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: Bookcat on July 24, 2011, 10:20:29 PM
-
http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/14/republican-tax-stand-a-bust-with-public/?iref=obnetwork
But House Republicans - an overwhelming majority of whom have signed a pledge to this effect - refuse to consider any kind of tax increase, not matter who it hits.
Turns out, most Americans don't share their conviction.
A full 67% of Americans favor a deal to raise the debt ceiling that includes taxes on wealthy individuals and corporations, according to a poll released Thursday by Quinnipiac University.
And according to Gallup, only 20% of Americans want a deal that consists only of spending cuts. That's the position of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor and many of his colleagues.
time to shoot the messenger :thumbs:
-
They did a segment about this on Stewert or Colbert's show recently, highlighting the insane differences in the existing polls. They should an assortment of polls that stated everything from extreme public favor to extreme public disfavor. :dunno:
-
Raising the debt ceiling is just putting off disaster a little longer.
-
Raising the debt ceiling is just putting off disaster a little longer.
This is true with every single thing we do, though. I'm not sure why we would stop with the debt ceiling.
-
I would guess most of the people that elected these guys/gals support them, even though much of the country does not.
-
I think there's a shift (and this was on Meet the Press yesterday, too) where politicians care more about placating their base than what most American's want because they are facing stiffer competitions in the primaries than they used to. They need to placate the base to continue their political careers more than the majority of voters because it's pointless to satisfy them unless you can get out of your own primary.
The debt ceiling has to get raised. I think anyone with a brain understands the implications of it not being raised. What I don't think the Republicans understand is that all of this sabre rattling isn't really helping them. I think the vast majority of the nation is under agreement that we need to have serious conversations about how our nation does business, but it's not going to get done in a matter of weeks. They have one major 'to-do' that needs to get done before they can start hammering out specifics, but they don't want to let this opportunity to essentially hold the economy hostage to get what they want pass them by.
Personally, I couldn't be more disgusted with House Republicans than I am right now. They're playing chicken with a train.
-
Personally, I couldn't be more disgusted with House Republicans than I am right now. They're playing chicken with a train.
I think this lib rag sums it up well:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/congress-continues-debate-over-whether-or-not-nati,20977/
-
Personally, I couldn't be more disgusted with House Republicans than I am right now. They're playing chicken with a train.
I think this lib rag sums it up well:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/congress-continues-debate-over-whether-or-not-nati,20977/
:thumbs:
-
What I find interesting is Obama's refusal to accept a short term increase in the debt ceiling. It's as if he knows he can't "not spend" and will need another increase right away. It would be an opportunity to be reelected if he took the smaller increase and made it last through his term, and could actually run on his fiscal record.
-
What I find interesting is Obama's refusal to accept a short term increase in the debt ceiling. It's as if he knows he can't "not spend" and will need another increase right away. It would be an opportunity to be reelected if he took the smaller increase and made it last through his term, and could actually run on his fiscal record.
Fascinating, did not know Obama had the power to unilaterally budgets. Must be part of his redefinition of america everyone's been talking about. Congrats Hussein!
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
-
I think there's a shift (and this was on Meet the Press yesterday, too) where politicians care more about placating their base than what most American's want because they are facing stiffer competitions in the primaries than they used to. They need to placate the base to continue their political careers more than the majority of voters because it's pointless to satisfy them unless you can get out of your own primary.
The debt ceiling has to get raised. I think anyone with a brain understands the implications of it not being raised. What I don't think the Republicans understand is that all of this sabre rattling isn't really helping them. I think the vast majority of the nation is under agreement that we need to have serious conversations about how our nation does business, but it's not going to get done in a matter of weeks. They have one major 'to-do' that needs to get done before they can start hammering out specifics, but they don't want to let this opportunity to essentially hold the economy hostage to get what they want pass them by.
Personally, I couldn't be more disgusted with House Republicans than I am right now. They're playing chicken with a train.
So our problem here is debt....to solve the problem...let's incur more debt!
-
I think there's a shift (and this was on Meet the Press yesterday, too) where politicians care more about placating their base than what most American's want because they are facing stiffer competitions in the primaries than they used to. They need to placate the base to continue their political careers more than the majority of voters because it's pointless to satisfy them unless you can get out of your own primary.
The debt ceiling has to get raised. I think anyone with a brain understands the implications of it not being raised. What I don't think the Republicans understand is that all of this sabre rattling isn't really helping them. I think the vast majority of the nation is under agreement that we need to have serious conversations about how our nation does business, but it's not going to get done in a matter of weeks. They have one major 'to-do' that needs to get done before they can start hammering out specifics, but they don't want to let this opportunity to essentially hold the economy hostage to get what they want pass them by.
Personally, I couldn't be more disgusted with House Republicans than I am right now. They're playing chicken with a train.
So our problem here is debt....to solve the problem...let's incur more debt!
Do you think the problem would be solved by leaving the debt ceiling where it is and defaulting?
-
I think there's a shift (and this was on Meet the Press yesterday, too) where politicians care more about placating their base than what most American's want because they are facing stiffer competitions in the primaries than they used to. They need to placate the base to continue their political careers more than the majority of voters because it's pointless to satisfy them unless you can get out of your own primary.
The debt ceiling has to get raised. I think anyone with a brain understands the implications of it not being raised. What I don't think the Republicans understand is that all of this sabre rattling isn't really helping them. I think the vast majority of the nation is under agreement that we need to have serious conversations about how our nation does business, but it's not going to get done in a matter of weeks. They have one major 'to-do' that needs to get done before they can start hammering out specifics, but they don't want to let this opportunity to essentially hold the economy hostage to get what they want pass them by.
Personally, I couldn't be more disgusted with House Republicans than I am right now. They're playing chicken with a train.
So our problem here is debt....to solve the problem...let's incur more debt!
Do you think the problem would be solved by leaving the debt ceiling where it is and defaulting?
I guess better default now rather than later.
-
I think there's a shift (and this was on Meet the Press yesterday, too) where politicians care more about placating their base than what most American's want because they are facing stiffer competitions in the primaries than they used to. They need to placate the base to continue their political careers more than the majority of voters because it's pointless to satisfy them unless you can get out of your own primary.
The debt ceiling has to get raised. I think anyone with a brain understands the implications of it not being raised. What I don't think the Republicans understand is that all of this sabre rattling isn't really helping them. I think the vast majority of the nation is under agreement that we need to have serious conversations about how our nation does business, but it's not going to get done in a matter of weeks. They have one major 'to-do' that needs to get done before they can start hammering out specifics, but they don't want to let this opportunity to essentially hold the economy hostage to get what they want pass them by.
Personally, I couldn't be more disgusted with House Republicans than I am right now. They're playing chicken with a train.
So our problem here is debt....to solve the problem...let's incur more debt!
Do you think the problem would be solved by leaving the debt ceiling where it is and defaulting?
I guess better default now rather than later.
How is that better?
-
I think there's a shift (and this was on Meet the Press yesterday, too) where politicians care more about placating their base than what most American's want because they are facing stiffer competitions in the primaries than they used to. They need to placate the base to continue their political careers more than the majority of voters because it's pointless to satisfy them unless you can get out of your own primary.
The debt ceiling has to get raised. I think anyone with a brain understands the implications of it not being raised. What I don't think the Republicans understand is that all of this sabre rattling isn't really helping them. I think the vast majority of the nation is under agreement that we need to have serious conversations about how our nation does business, but it's not going to get done in a matter of weeks. They have one major 'to-do' that needs to get done before they can start hammering out specifics, but they don't want to let this opportunity to essentially hold the economy hostage to get what they want pass them by.
Personally, I couldn't be more disgusted with House Republicans than I am right now. They're playing chicken with a train.
So our problem here is debt....to solve the problem...let's incur more debt!
Do you think the problem would be solved by leaving the debt ceiling where it is and defaulting?
I guess better default now rather than later.
How is that better?
Because were just piling on more debt, which someday we'll have to pay. Eventually it's gonna collapse.
-
someday we'll have to pay
Have fun with that.
-
I think there's a shift (and this was on Meet the Press yesterday, too) where politicians care more about placating their base than what most American's want because they are facing stiffer competitions in the primaries than they used to. They need to placate the base to continue their political careers more than the majority of voters because it's pointless to satisfy them unless you can get out of your own primary.
The debt ceiling has to get raised. I think anyone with a brain understands the implications of it not being raised. What I don't think the Republicans understand is that all of this sabre rattling isn't really helping them. I think the vast majority of the nation is under agreement that we need to have serious conversations about how our nation does business, but it's not going to get done in a matter of weeks. They have one major 'to-do' that needs to get done before they can start hammering out specifics, but they don't want to let this opportunity to essentially hold the economy hostage to get what they want pass them by.
Personally, I couldn't be more disgusted with House Republicans than I am right now. They're playing chicken with a train.
So our problem here is debt....to solve the problem...let's incur more debt!
There is no choice in the matter. If we don't increase the debt ceiling by 8/2, our rating is going to get downgraded. If that happens, the global stock markets are going to suffer immediately. The bond market is going to crash. The consequences would be worse than 2008.
How we tackle the debt going forward is inconsequential to this debate. They are two separate issues. The only reason they're linked together is because House Republicans are holding the economy hostage to get what they want. I mean, it's smart on their part, politically, to do this. However, realistically, it's been absolutely moronic to do this because A) we're getting critically close to doing something monumentally devastating, B) it shows the world how broken and polarized our political system has become, and C) it's shown the American people that there is no place in this political spectrum for centrists; we are apparently only interested in pushing forward agendas that extremists on the right and left are interested in pushing.
This country can tackle the debt problem by reworking the tax code, rethinking entitlements, slashing extraneous defense spending, and being more judicious on discretionary spending. However, every single one of those topics is a monumental task in and of itself and will not be fixed, intelligently, in the next week. To think we can is asinine.
-
I think there's a shift (and this was on Meet the Press yesterday, too) where politicians care more about placating their base than what most American's want because they are facing stiffer competitions in the primaries than they used to. They need to placate the base to continue their political careers more than the majority of voters because it's pointless to satisfy them unless you can get out of your own primary.
The debt ceiling has to get raised. I think anyone with a brain understands the implications of it not being raised. What I don't think the Republicans understand is that all of this sabre rattling isn't really helping them. I think the vast majority of the nation is under agreement that we need to have serious conversations about how our nation does business, but it's not going to get done in a matter of weeks. They have one major 'to-do' that needs to get done before they can start hammering out specifics, but they don't want to let this opportunity to essentially hold the economy hostage to get what they want pass them by.
Personally, I couldn't be more disgusted with House Republicans than I am right now. They're playing chicken with a train.
I agree but the problem is once the ceiling is passed, the whole issue is tabled until it is up again and everyone panics. Assuming that if the new ceiling gets passed both parties will sit down and take a long hard look at reducing the debt, balancing the budget and developing a long term strategy to pay off the debt while enacting an equitable tax system is more than a fairy tale.
-
http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/14/republican-tax-stand-a-bust-with-public/?iref=obnetwork
But House Republicans - an overwhelming majority of whom have signed a pledge to this effect - refuse to consider any kind of tax increase, not matter who it hits.
Turns out, most Americans don't share their conviction.
A full 67% of Americans favor a deal to raise the debt ceiling that includes taxes on wealthy individuals and corporations, according to a poll released Thursday by Quinnipiac University.
And according to Gallup, only 20% of Americans want a deal that consists only of spending cuts. That's the position of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor and many of his colleagues.
time to shoot the messenger :thumbs:
I assume you felt the same way when Healthcare "Reform" was passed on Christmas Eve or whatev, in the face of public opinion*. Guns up hypocrite :thumbs:
*including in the face of many "Representative's" constituents
:flush: :flush: :flush: :flush: :flush:
-
What I find interesting is Obama's refusal to accept a short term increase in the debt ceiling. It's as if he knows he can't "not spend" and will need another increase right away. It would be an opportunity to be reelected if he took the smaller increase and made it last through his term, and could actually run on his fiscal record.
Fascinating, did not know Obama had the power to unilaterally budgets. Must be part of his redefinition of america everyone's been talking about. Congrats Hussein!
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
Veto is a unilateral power.
If he has no place in the discussion, why does he constantly feel the need to inject himself into the forefront of the convo? I think he's done a press conf on average every 3 days over the last couple of weeks re: the debt ceiling. Clearly his propaganda team feels it benefits him to be "out in front" on this issue and to ram his message (which is totally devoid of substance per usual) into the mainstream. Strategically this doesn't seem to be working because his rhetoric is flat out nonsensical at this point. He just says numbers and then criticizes repubs.
It's like we have one house, two senates, and no executive (e.g. leadership).
-
Cut spending, nothing else matters. Close all the worthless government agencies that do nothing, and fire all those people.
-
Cut spending, nothing else matters. Close all the worthless government agencies that do nothing, and fire all those people.
like...
-
Yeah, just fire a bunch of people, that will solve all our problems.
-
Cut spending, nothing else matters. Close all the worthless government agencies that do nothing, and fire all those people.
like...
Education
-
Downsize:
Department of Agriculture
Department of Education
Department of Labor
IRS
Military
Department of Defense
Eliminate:
US Botanic Garden
African Development Foundation
Vietnam Education Foundation
Broadcasting Board of Governors
The Office of National Drug Control Policy
FCC
National Agricultural Statistics Service
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA)
OSHA (they are self-sustaining but they rough ridin' suck)
The National Railroad Passenger Corporation
US Border Patrol
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
Postal Service
Office of Government Ethics
National Institute of Food and Agriculture
National Gallery of Art
Rural Development
National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare
National Drug Intelligence Center
Environmental Protection Agency
Migratory Bird Conservation Commission
Lead Hazard Control
Institute of Peace
International Broadcasting Bureau
Government Accountability Office
Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration
Bureau of Indian Affairs
ATF
State of California
Council on Environmental Quality
Defense Security Cooperation Agency
Defense Security Service
Drug Enforcement Administration
Economic Development Administration
Economic Research Service
Energy Information Administration
-
We have un Godly large bureaucracy and in many industries is ran by the corporations that they regulate meaning there's an absence of a free market. So, USDA, FDA, DEA, ATF (all they're good for is funneling guns into Mexico), EPA, DEA (especially), FEMA...to name a few.
Believe it or not, there was a time in American history where we didn't have all these and we were just fine. In theory they would work ok but conflict of interests ruins everything.
Privatizing education (which I realize will never happen) would be nice too.
-
Another speech? Constantine was going to nail Ashley :dubious:
-
It's very hard for me to fathom that someone could even begin to defend a federal bureaucracy that is scheduled to spend approximately $3,600,000,000,000.00 this fiscal year.
How can you not think that there may be some room for improvement there? That number is embarrassingly large. It obviously unsustainable.
-
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg18.imageshack.us%2Fimg18%2F4135%2Fgallupdeficit042011.jpg&hash=fc50959934d567b11f0bccdb2deb4cb2fb0a41e3)
-
Downsize:
Department of Agriculture
Department of Education
Department of Labor
IRS
Military
Department of Defense
Eliminate:
US Botanic Garden
African Development Foundation
Vietnam Education Foundation
Broadcasting Board of Governors
The Office of National Drug Control Policy
FCC
National Agricultural Statistics Service
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA)
OSHA (they are self-sustaining but they effing suck)
The National Railroad Passenger Corporation
US Border Patrol
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
Postal Service
Office of Government Ethics
National Institute of Food and Agriculture
National Gallery of Art
Rural Development
National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare
National Drug Intelligence Center
Environmental Protection Agency
Migratory Bird Conservation Commission
Lead Hazard Control
Institute of Peace
International Broadcasting Bureau
Government Accountability Office
Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration
Bureau of Indian Affairs
ATF
State of California
Council on Environmental Quality
Defense Security Cooperation Agency
Defense Security Service
Drug Enforcement Administration
Economic Development Administration
Economic Research Service
Energy Information Administration
so who will assume regulatory authority? The state of California? ELIMINATED! COST SAVINGS REALIZED! LOL.
-
Downsize:
Department of Agriculture
Department of Education
Department of Labor
IRS
Military
Department of Defense
Eliminate:
US Botanic Garden
African Development Foundation
Vietnam Education Foundation
Broadcasting Board of Governors
The Office of National Drug Control Policy
FCC
National Agricultural Statistics Service
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA)
OSHA (they are self-sustaining but they rough ridin' suck)
The National Railroad Passenger Corporation
US Border Patrol
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
Postal Service
Office of Government Ethics
National Institute of Food and Agriculture
National Gallery of Art
Rural Development
National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare
National Drug Intelligence Center
Environmental Protection Agency
Migratory Bird Conservation Commission
Lead Hazard Control
Institute of Peace
International Broadcasting Bureau
Government Accountability Office
Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration
Bureau of Indian Affairs
ATF
State of California
Council on Environmental Quality
Defense Security Cooperation Agency
Defense Security Service
Drug Enforcement Administration
Economic Development Administration
Economic Research Service
Energy Information Administration
http://money.cnn.com/2011/07/25/news/economy/post_office_shut_downs/index.htm?hpt=hp_t2
-
Downsize:
Department of Agriculture
Department of Education
Department of Labor
IRS
Military
Department of Defense
Eliminate:
US Botanic Garden
African Development Foundation
Vietnam Education Foundation
Broadcasting Board of Governors
The Office of National Drug Control Policy
FCC
National Agricultural Statistics Service
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA)
OSHA (they are self-sustaining but they effing suck)
The National Railroad Passenger Corporation
US Border Patrol
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
Postal Service
Office of Government Ethics
National Institute of Food and Agriculture
National Gallery of Art
Rural Development
National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare
National Drug Intelligence Center
Environmental Protection Agency
Migratory Bird Conservation Commission
Lead Hazard Control
Institute of Peace
International Broadcasting Bureau
Government Accountability Office
Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration
Bureau of Indian Affairs
ATF
State of California
Council on Environmental Quality
Defense Security Cooperation Agency
Defense Security Service
Drug Enforcement Administration
Economic Development Administration
Economic Research Service
Energy Information Administration
so who will assume regulatory authority? The state of California? ELIMINATED! COST SAVINGS REALIZED! LOL.
Sarcasm much? Jesus Christ liberals sure take things so seriously.
-
I think there's a shift (and this was on Meet the Press yesterday, too) where politicians care more about placating their base than what most American's want because they are facing stiffer competitions in the primaries than they used to. They need to placate the base to continue their political careers more than the majority of voters because it's pointless to satisfy them unless you can get out of your own primary.
The debt ceiling has to get raised. I think anyone with a brain understands the implications of it not being raised. What I don't think the Republicans understand is that all of this sabre rattling isn't really helping them. I think the vast majority of the nation is under agreement that we need to have serious conversations about how our nation does business, but it's not going to get done in a matter of weeks. They have one major 'to-do' that needs to get done before they can start hammering out specifics, but they don't want to let this opportunity to essentially hold the economy hostage to get what they want pass them by.
Personally, I couldn't be more disgusted with House Republicans than I am right now. They're playing chicken with a train.
I agree but the problem is once the ceiling is passed, the whole issue is tabled until it is up again and everyone panics. Assuming that if the new ceiling gets passed both parties will sit down and take a long hard look at reducing the debt, balancing the budget and developing a long term strategy to pay off the debt while enacting an equitable tax system is more than a fairy tale.
Here's my thing. I agree with everything you just said, but I think we're diving too much into granular details at this point. I think they could make progress without whining about specifics.
They can debate corporate jet tax loopholes after we steer the ship away from the iceburg.
-
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg18.imageshack.us%2Fimg18%2F4135%2Fgallupdeficit042011.jpg&hash=fc50959934d567b11f0bccdb2deb4cb2fb0a41e3)
I agree with this. We need to slash the military budget in half for fiscal 2012.
That would lump me in with the people who think we're spending way to much on unnecessary programs.
-
Most politicians should be fired too, add them to my list.
-
I like California.
-
We need congressional district reform
-
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg18.imageshack.us%2Fimg18%2F4135%2Fgallupdeficit042011.jpg&hash=fc50959934d567b11f0bccdb2deb4cb2fb0a41e3)
I agree with this. We need to slash the military budget in half for fiscal 2012.
That would lump me in with the people who think we're spending way to much on unnecessary programs.
They military industrial complex will kill any politician that pushes that.
Just ask Kennedy.
-
Downsize:
Department of Agriculture
Department of Education
Department of Labor
IRS
Military
Department of Defense
Eliminate:
US Botanic Garden
African Development Foundation
Vietnam Education Foundation
Broadcasting Board of Governors
The Office of National Drug Control Policy
FCC
National Agricultural Statistics Service
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA)
OSHA (they are self-sustaining but they rough ridin' suck)
The National Railroad Passenger Corporation
US Border Patrol
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
Postal Service
Office of Government Ethics
National Institute of Food and Agriculture
National Gallery of Art
Rural Development
National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare
National Drug Intelligence Center
Environmental Protection Agency
Migratory Bird Conservation Commission
Lead Hazard Control
Institute of Peace
International Broadcasting Bureau
Government Accountability Office
Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration
Bureau of Indian Affairs
ATF
State of California
Council on Environmental Quality
Defense Security Cooperation Agency
Defense Security Service
Drug Enforcement Administration
Economic Development Administration
Economic Research Service
Energy Information Administration
I assume you only send and receive mail via UPS and FedEx?
-
lol @ hemmy right now.
-
Yeah, just fire a bunch of people, that will solve all our problems.
No it will. I'm sure all of these rough ridin' crybabies in the private sector always crying about the government will willingly do all they can to pull the national unemployment rate from 20%. I always hoped that fuckwads who complained about government sector jobs weren't people who actual businesses. I would hope these people are smart enough to know that government employees keep their shitty restaurants open.
-
We have un Godly large bureaucracy and in many industries is ran by the corporations that they regulate meaning there's an absence of a free market. So, USDA, FDA, DEA, ATF (all they're good for is funneling guns into Mexico), EPA, DEA (especially), FEMA...to name a few.
Believe it or not, there was a time in American history where we didn't have all these and we were just fine. In theory they would work ok but conflict of interests ruins everything.
Privatizing education (which I realize will never happen) would be nice too.
There was also a time in history where self-regulating businesses led to things like rough ridin' rivers catching fire. If that's your definition of just fine, I'd hate to see what moderately bad looks like.
-
We have un Godly large bureaucracy and in many industries is ran by the corporations that they regulate meaning there's an absence of a free market. So, USDA, FDA, DEA, ATF (all they're good for is funneling guns into Mexico), EPA, DEA (especially), FEMA...to name a few.
Believe it or not, there was a time in American history where we didn't have all these and we were just fine. In theory they would work ok but conflict of interests ruins everything.
Privatizing education (which I realize will never happen) would be nice too.
There was also a time in history where self-regulating businesses led to things like rough ridin' rivers catching fire. If that's your definition of just fine, I'd hate to see what moderately bad looks like.
Funny you mention that, seeing as that BP wrecked an entire eco-system and got off scot free
-
We have un Godly large bureaucracy and in many industries is ran by the corporations that they regulate meaning there's an absence of a free market. So, USDA, FDA, DEA, ATF (all they're good for is funneling guns into Mexico), EPA, DEA (especially), FEMA...to name a few.
Believe it or not, there was a time in American history where we didn't have all these and we were just fine. In theory they would work ok but conflict of interests ruins everything.
Privatizing education (which I realize will never happen) would be nice too.
There was also a time in history where self-regulating businesses led to things like rough ridin' rivers catching fire. If that's your definition of just fine, I'd hate to see what moderately bad looks like.
Funny you mention that, seeing as that BP wrecked an entire eco-system and got off scot free
One of those actually happened. :jerk:
-
We have un Godly large bureaucracy and in many industries is ran by the corporations that they regulate meaning there's an absence of a free market. So, USDA, FDA, DEA, ATF (all they're good for is funneling guns into Mexico), EPA, DEA (especially), FEMA...to name a few.
Believe it or not, there was a time in American history where we didn't have all these and we were just fine. In theory they would work ok but conflict of interests ruins everything.
Privatizing education (which I realize will never happen) would be nice too.
There was also a time in history where self-regulating businesses led to things like rough ridin' rivers catching fire. If that's your definition of just fine, I'd hate to see what moderately bad looks like.
Funny you mention that, seeing as that BP wrecked an entire eco-system and got off scot free
One of those actually happened. :jerk:
But the clean up costs have been passed on to the US taxpayer :ck:
-
We have un Godly large bureaucracy and in many industries is ran by the corporations that they regulate meaning there's an absence of a free market. So, USDA, FDA, DEA, ATF (all they're good for is funneling guns into Mexico), EPA, DEA (especially), FEMA...to name a few.
Believe it or not, there was a time in American history where we didn't have all these and we were just fine. In theory they would work ok but conflict of interests ruins everything.
Privatizing education (which I realize will never happen) would be nice too.
There was also a time in history where self-regulating businesses led to things like rough ridin' rivers catching fire. If that's your definition of just fine, I'd hate to see what moderately bad looks like.
Funny you mention that, seeing as that BP wrecked an entire eco-system and got off scot free
One of those actually happened. :jerk:
But the clean up costs have been passed on to the US taxpayer :ck:
Link?
-
We have un Godly large bureaucracy and in many industries is ran by the corporations that they regulate meaning there's an absence of a free market. So, USDA, FDA, DEA, ATF (all they're good for is funneling guns into Mexico), EPA, DEA (especially), FEMA...to name a few.
Believe it or not, there was a time in American history where we didn't have all these and we were just fine. In theory they would work ok but conflict of interests ruins everything.
Privatizing education (which I realize will never happen) would be nice too.
There was also a time in history where self-regulating businesses led to things like rough ridin' rivers catching fire. If that's your definition of just fine, I'd hate to see what moderately bad looks like.
Funny you mention that, seeing as that BP wrecked an entire eco-system and got off scot free
One of those actually happened. :jerk:
But the clean up costs have been passed on to the US taxpayer :ck:
Link?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/epic/bpdot/8598628/BP-wins-legal-challenge-over-oil-spill-clean-up.html
Basically said eff you to 100k people and the government has to foot the bill.
-
That article doesn't say what you think it does:
Moreover, BP and the agencies comprising the Unified Area Command have been and are cleaning up the Gulf of Mexico. An injury is not redressable by a citizen suit when the injury is already being addressed.
He also pointed out that US government agencies, not BP, are directing the clean-up. Therefore a court order could not "resolve any potential deficiency in the ongoing clean-up".
Basically the same third parties should be suing the government too, which will also get tossed. :users:
Edit: Also just realized you think 100k people were ruled against here. The judge only tossed a portion of a series of suits filed by environmental groups.
Here's the basics of the article so you can understand them:
Government is directing the clean-up.
BP is paying for government directed clean-up.
Environmental groups sue because they don't like the clean-up.
Judge tells environmental groups it's up to the government to determine deficiencies of clean-up and sue if necessary.
BP is still paying for the clean-up.
-
Yeah, just fire a bunch of people, that will solve all our problems.
No it will. I'm sure all of these rough ridin' crybabies in the private sector always crying about the government will willingly do all they can to pull the national unemployment rate from 20%. I always hoped that fuckwads who complained about government sector jobs weren't people who actual businesses. I would hope these people are smart enough to know that government employees keep their shitty restaurants open.
They aren't.
-
this thread is another example of why the government sucks.
instead of solving a rough ridin' problem, it's a bunch of whiny ass democrats and a bunch of pompous ass republicans whipping out their dicks and bitching about who is bigger.
Shut the eff up, all of you. JFC.
democrats are bigger, for the record
-
I still don't see where it say's they're paying for it :ck: But regardless, I agree with OK_cat....government sucks.
-
I assume you only send and receive mail via UPS and FedEx?
Doesn't matter if we got to keep the money that would otherwise go to those programs. Besides, 99% of paper mail could easily be eliminated.
-
I assume you only send and receive mail via UPS and FedEx?
Doesn't matter if we got to keep the money that would otherwise go to those programs. Besides, 99% of paper mail could easily be eliminated.
How much taxpayer money do you think goes to the USPS?
Hint: They don't get any.
Also, the USPS is the 2nd largest employer in the US (Wal-Mart is 1st). You are suggesting the elimination of a whole lot of well-paying* jobs.
*Well-paying for being a mail man, anyway.
-
I assume you only send and receive mail via UPS and FedEx?
Doesn't matter if we got to keep the money that would otherwise go to those programs. Besides, 99% of paper mail could easily be eliminated.
How much taxpayer money do you think goes to the USPS?
Even if they shut it down today, there is something like 50 billion in unfunded union retirement benefits outstanding.
-
I assume you only send and receive mail via UPS and FedEx?
Doesn't matter if we got to keep the money that would otherwise go to those programs. Besides, 99% of paper mail could easily be eliminated.
How much taxpayer money do you think goes to the USPS?
Even if they shut it down today, there is something like 50 billion in unfunded union retirement benefits outstanding.
They don't get taxpayer funding.
-
If the post office could turn a profit then they can stay around, but if not...
-
If the post office could turn a profit then they can stay around, but if not...
They are a not-for-profit business/quasi government department. It is illegal for them to turn a profit.
-
If the post office could turn a profit then they can stay around, but if not...
They are a not-for-profit business/quasi government department. It is illegal for them to turn a profit.
Well, if they could work on not losing money hand over fist...
-
If the post office could turn a profit then they can stay around, but if not...
They are a not-for-profit business/quasi government department. It is illegal for them to turn a profit.
Well, if they could work on not losing money hand over fist...
It is their problem. They don't receive any taxpayer funding. The government shouldn't just eliminate them because you don't like them.
-
Anyone who has ever waited in line at the post office knows they should be eliminated.
-
Also, they need to legalize drugs to increase tax revenue, reduce violence, and give a reprieve to our overwhelmed prison system
-
I still don't see where it say's they're paying for it :ck: But regardless, I agree with OK_cat....government sucks.
:facepalm:
Reading is hard.
-
If the post office could turn a profit then they can stay around, but if not...
They are a not-for-profit business/quasi government department. It is illegal for them to turn a profit.
Well, if they could work on not losing money hand over fist...
If every business was required to pre-fund pension programs, they'd all lose money hand over fist.
-
I assume you only send and receive mail via UPS and FedEx?
Doesn't matter if we got to keep the money that would otherwise go to those programs. Besides, 99% of paper mail could easily be eliminated.
How much taxpayer money do you think goes to the USPS?
Even if they shut it down today, there is something like 50 billion in unfunded union retirement benefits outstanding.
They don't get taxpayer funding.
You are right, they "borrow" money from the US Treasury.
-
They will default on their loans this year.
-
http://www.wibw.com/nationalnews/headlines/Nearly_3700_post_offices_slated_to_close_126203353.html
Your little post office could be slated to close as the U.S. Postal Service tries to find ways to cut red ink.
Postmaster General Patrick Donahoe released a long-awaited "post office study" of nearly 3,700 potential closings in all 50 states and Washington, D.C.
-
The only person at my house that would notice the mailman not showing up anymore is my dog.
Yes, my dog is a person.
-
http://www.wibw.com/nationalnews/headlines/Nearly_3700_post_offices_slated_to_close_126203353.html
Your little post office could be slated to close as the U.S. Postal Service tries to find ways to cut red ink.
Postmaster General Patrick Donahoe released a long-awaited "post office study" of nearly 3,700 potential closings in all 50 states and Washington, D.C.
The post office isn't funded through stamps? :horrorsurprise:
I bet UPS could figure out how to do the mail for 25 cents a letter and still collect a profit.
-
http://www.wibw.com/nationalnews/headlines/Nearly_3700_post_offices_slated_to_close_126203353.html
Your little post office could be slated to close as the U.S. Postal Service tries to find ways to cut red ink.
Postmaster General Patrick Donahoe released a long-awaited "post office study" of nearly 3,700 potential closings in all 50 states and Washington, D.C.
The post office isn't funded through stamps? :horrorsurprise:
I bet UPS could figure out how to do the mail for 25 cents a letter and still collect a profit.
Yeah, UPS can't figure out how to deliver lots of more expensive (an profitable) crap to every address in the U.S. That's why when my grandparents live in the middle of rough ridin' nowhere receive something from "UPS" it's delivered by the USPS. UPS will take it to the nearest post office then pay the USPS to deliver it.
-
http://www.wibw.com/nationalnews/headlines/Nearly_3700_post_offices_slated_to_close_126203353.html
Your little post office could be slated to close as the U.S. Postal Service tries to find ways to cut red ink.
Postmaster General Patrick Donahoe released a long-awaited "post office study" of nearly 3,700 potential closings in all 50 states and Washington, D.C.
The post office isn't funded through stamps? :horrorsurprise:
I bet UPS could figure out how to do the mail for 25 cents a letter and still collect a profit.
Yeah, UPS can't figure out how to deliver lots of more expensive (an profitable) crap to every address in the U.S. That's why when my grandparents live in the middle of rough ridin' nowhere receive something from "UPS" it's delivered by the USPS. UPS will take it to the nearest post office then pay the USPS to deliver it.
So UPS sub-contracts these routes to the USPS who operates them at a loss while UPS makes a profit? ZOMG! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
There's no way UPS couldn't figure this out better than the US Govt.
Fun fact, did you know that private companies are constitutionally prohibited from operating a post service?
-
So UPS sub-contracts these routes to the USPS who operates them at a loss while UPS makes a profit? ZOMG! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
There's no way UPS couldn't figure this out better than the US Govt.
Fun fact, did you know that private companies are constitutionally prohibited from operating a post service?
That's the rough ridin' point you dolt. UPS wouldn't deliver to those locations at all if it weren't for the USPS, which wouldn't deliver to those locations either except for that whole mandate from Congress thing. Also, USPS would have actually have made a profit over the last four years if it didn't have to prepay retirement benefits -- something no other federal or private agency is required to do.
-
I think it's pretty cool that I can may for whatever a stamp costs now and my grandma will get her card in 2 days. Hell, it takes me 12 hours just to drive to her house. :dunno:
-
Please tell me you don't have a business degree.
Let's break this down
That's the rough ridin' point you dolt. UPS wouldn't deliver to those locations at all if it weren't for the USPS, unverifiable statement, also untrue
which wouldn't deliver to those locations either except for that whole mandate from Congress thing. which "whole mandate thing"
Also, USPS would have actually have made a profit over the last four years if it didn't have to prepay retirement benefits -- something no other federal or private agency is required to do.false statement. All financial reporting companies with defined benefit pensions have to fund the pensions annually. Why the USPS would even be subject to such oppressive reporting requirements is unknown, but you made it up, not me.
The flagship of efficiency for our federal govt is a complete abortion. Yet all of your solutions to the problems facing this country is more government. Nice thought process, dolt.
-
Please tell me you don't have a business degree.
Let's break this down
That's the rough ridin' point you dolt. UPS wouldn't deliver to those locations at all if it weren't for the USPS, unverifiable statement, also untrue
which wouldn't deliver to those locations either except for that whole mandate from Congress thing. which "whole mandate thing"
Also, USPS would have actually have made a profit over the last four years if it didn't have to prepay retirement benefits -- something no other federal or private agency is required to do.false statement. All financial reporting companies with defined benefit pensions have to fund the pensions annually. Why the USPS would even be subject to such oppressive reporting requirements is unknown, but you made it up, not me.
The flagship of efficiency for our federal govt is a complete abortion. Yet all of your solutions to the problems facing this country is more government. Nice thought process, dolt.
First, I'd like to know how your brain works that an "unverifiable statement" is also "untrue". Those are mutually exclusive terms you know. To claim something is untrue, you must first ascertain its veracity, or you know, verify the statement.
As for the mandate, the USPS must deliver mail six days a week to every address in the nation. UPS contracts with USPS to deliver to the middle of nowhere because UPS did the analysis that it was unprofitable to deliver to those locations. The postal service was actually included in the Constitution and the mandate from congress ensured that everyone received mail.
And in 2006, congress in it's infinite wisdom, determined that the USPS had a decade to prefund the next 75 years of retirement benefits. Please tell me what other government agency or private business is subject to that requirement.
This is why no one will answer your list of questions. You're too rough ridin' dumb to even try to learn something.
-
06wildcat just made all the post office haters look like fools.
The USPS systems runs on a 3 years cycle of dealing with pension funding. The reason why you only hear retards run their mouth about it every few years is because of this system. USPS doesn't just fund their pension system, they PRE-fund it ahead of time so you have a hill and valley in profit over the course of the cycle. The post office union even wants to change this but the PMG is a rough ridin' Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) who is going to drive the USPS into the ground.
Anything that is for the good of the nation in the Constitution should not be privatized and held at the whims of the market. If you believe that, youre an idiot.
-
Please tell me you don't have a business degree.
Let's break this down
That's the rough ridin' point you dolt. UPS wouldn't deliver to those locations at all if it weren't for the USPS, unverifiable statement, also untrue
which wouldn't deliver to those locations either except for that whole mandate from Congress thing. which "whole mandate thing"
Also, USPS would have actually have made a profit over the last four years if it didn't have to prepay retirement benefits -- something no other federal or private agency is required to do.false statement. All financial reporting companies with defined benefit pensions have to fund the pensions annually. Why the USPS would even be subject to such oppressive reporting requirements is unknown, but you made it up, not me.
The flagship of efficiency for our federal govt is a complete abortion. Yet all of your solutions to the problems facing this country is more government. Nice thought process, dolt.
First, I'd like to know how your brain works that an "unverifiable statement" is also "untrue". Those are mutually exclusive terms you knowfalse. To claim something is untrue, you must first ascertain its veracity, or you know, verify the statement.false logic
As for the mandate, the USPS must deliver mail six days a week to every address in the nation not what you were talking about. UPS contracts with USPS to deliver to the middle of nowhere because UPS did the analysis that it was unprofitable to deliver to those locationscorrection, more profitable to let the usps eat crap than to deliver itself. The postal service was actually included in the Constitution and the mandate from congress ensured that everyone received mailI pointed out the constitution part, not sure if this is why its in there, you are just talking out of your ass.
And in 2006, congress in it's infinite wisdom, determined that the USPS had a decade to prefund the next 75 years of retirement benefits. Please tell me what other government agency or private business is subject to that requirement.false
This is why no one will answer your list of questions. You're too rough ridin' dumb to even try to learn something.false, they won't answer because they are stereotypical anti-intellectual libs who refuse to acknowledge facts, what's so hard about those questions?
:epicfail:
Do you work for the post office or something? Do you really think there would be know mail if the USPS ceased existence? :lol:
Nobody gives a eff about your bumfuck relatives and their mail. These are the people the libs usually chastise as insignificant, backwoodsy, and failing to get a grip on the modern world. now they are the reason the post office must exist. gmafb
-
:flush:
-
:flush:
zomg you support socialism by wanting the USPS to have $.41 stamps for all mail. We should allow private business to take over and eff over people that live in teh heart of Amurika, the farmers on rural routes, and make them pay more.
-
There is absolutely nothing being said from those that are proposing new taxes that indicates it will not be yet another tax and spend exercise.
-
There is absolutely nothing being said from those that are proposing new taxes that indicates it will not be yet another tax and spend exercise.
right, lets continue Bush/neocon system of less taxes more spending
-
There is absolutely nothing being said from those that are proposing new taxes that indicates it will not be yet another tax and spend exercise.
right, lets continue Bush/neocon system of less taxes more spending
that appears to be the plan
-
Show me anyone currently in the Whitehouse or Congress with any track that indicates that raising revenue will NOT end up being just another tax and spend excercise.
Good luck with that search. It will be a long one.