http://www.thewashingtoncurrent.com/2011/08/capitol-idea-its-republicans-economy.html
"McConnell and his fellow Republicans actually have ended whatever hopes they may have had to hang the continuing bad economy around Obama's neck next year."
"Yes, this new budget plan will hurt. But, at least, we know who to blame."
John Bohner, WHERE ARE THE JOBS!?????
Things are going great since the Tea Party took over the house and decided that compromise is sinful. JFC
Quote from: swake on August 04, 2011, 02:27:41 PM
Things are going great since the Tea Party took over the house and decided that compromise is sinful. JFC
I'm not sure where the idea of "compromise" is coming from. Who should the Tea Party be compromising with and why? Where was Obama's compromise with the GOP on stimulus (oh I forgot, Obama governed early on his "I won" philosophy) and the following year with Obamacare? But I digress. In November, them "teabaggers" as the left so gleefully called them, after organizing for more than 18 months and getting politically active, got persons that thought like them to run for office, etc., went to the polls and in spectacular fashion took over the House, made gains in the Senate, and generally thrashed the Dems. Here's a link and passage from it detailing the bloodshed:
QuoteRepublicans picked up at least 675 state legislative seats Nov. 2. As with the increases in the House, that gain is the biggest any party has made in state legislative seats since 1938 and is far larger than the GOP's tally in its 1994 landslide. Given the distribution of those gains, Republicans have the power to work their will in the states in ways they can't begin to think about doing in Washington.
Before the midterm elections, Democrats controlled 27 state legislatures outright. Republicans were in charge in 14 states, and eight states were split. (Nebraska, which has a single legislative chamber, is officially nonpartisan). Today, Republicans control 26 state legislatures, Democrats 17, and five have split control. In New York, officials are still determining who is in charge in the state Senate. Republicans control seven more legislatures outright than they did after 1994 and the most since 1952.
Add the results in the gubernatorial races, and the picture brightens even more for the Republicans. Before the midterms, Republicans controlled the governor's mansion and both legislative chambers in only nine states. Today it is 21 states. Democrats are in full command in 11 states, down from 16, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL).
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/13/AR2010111304276.html
With that, I do not understand why people are so freakin stunned that these newly-elected Tea Party candidates would, dare I say, do what they were elected to do and conduct themselves consistent with what got them elected. As I posted in another thread, one of the core Tea Party issues was reigning in spending. You expected these people to just ignore or "forget" these principles? And in light of that "shellacking", as Obama said, why didn't he, the Dems, and the establishment GOP compromise with the Tea Party. Their view was what this country wanted for in favor of.
This debt ceiling fight was the Tea Party's "We Won" moment. But apparently there is little humor there despite some who thought when Obama
said "I won" was pretty damned funny.
Quote
During his private meeting with congressional Democrats and Republicans on Friday, President Obama ended a philosophical debate over tax policy with the simple declaration that his opinion prevailed because "I won."
Democrats called it a light-hearted moment that drew laughs around the table. Republicans said there was laughter but couldn't recall if any of it came from their ranks.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/23/obama-says-view-taxes-prevailed-won#ixzz1U5ivMSXO
Quote from: Teatownclown on August 04, 2011, 02:26:15 PM
http://www.thewashingtoncurrent.com/2011/08/capitol-idea-its-republicans-economy.html
"McConnell and his fellow Republicans actually have ended whatever hopes they may have had to hang the continuing bad economy around Obama's neck next year."
"Yes, this new budget plan will hurt. But, at least, we know who to blame."
John Bohner, WHERE ARE THE JOBS!?????
Sorry bub, the poodle has already made it official as to who owns the economy.
QuoteDemocrats are ready to take responsibility for the state of the economy and they deserve credit for putting it on the right track, the party's chairwoman, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, said on Wednesday.
"We own the economy. We own the beginning of the turnaround and we want to make sure that we continue that pace of recovery, not go back to the policies of the past under the Bush administration that put us in the ditch in the first place," Wasserman Schultz told Mike Allen at POLITICO's 'Playbook Breakfast.'
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57025.html#ixzz1U5muhHDQ
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57025.html
Guido, you are too slow. This is all about global unemployment.
How many people does it take to produce today?
Unemployment in Spain is %20 as opposed to %10 before. Here, it's worse sans real numbers.
The market crash is due to unemployment. You don't get it.
John Boehner, WHERE ARE THE JOBS!???????
Quote from: Teatownclown on August 04, 2011, 03:07:46 PM
Guido, you are too slow. This is all about global unemployment.
How many people does it take to produce today?
Unemployment in Spain is %20 as opposed to %10 before. Here, it's worse sans real numbers.
The market crash is due to unemployment. You don't get it.
John Boehner, WHERE ARE THE JOBS!???????
And the inevitable subject change.
Quote from: guido911 on August 04, 2011, 03:10:34 PM
And the inevitable subject change.
Not really. Linking the Teabagger/GOP economy to the drop in the market vis a vie no money circulating is the real story here. I mean, what have the GOP/Teabaggers done to help the employment situation?
Quote from: guido911 on August 04, 2011, 02:57:37 PM
Where was Obama's compromise with the GOP on stimulus
Did you already forget that half the stimulus was tax cuts?
Quote from: nathanm on August 04, 2011, 05:56:49 PM
Did you already forget that half the stimulus was tax cuts?
Source please that half of stimulus were tax cuts. I hate wiki, but I am not interested in spending a lot of time on taxation aspect in stimulus. From wiki re: taxes
QuoteTax incentives
Total: $288 billion
[edit] Tax incentives for individuals
Total: $237 billion
* $116 billion: New payroll tax credit of $400 per worker and $800 per couple in 2009 and 2010. Phaseout begins at $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 for joint filers.[24]
* $70 billion: Alternative minimum tax: a one year increase in AMT floor to $70,950 for joint filers for 2009.[24]
* $15 billion: Expansion of child tax credit: A $1,000 credit to more families (even those that do not make enough money to pay income taxes).
* $14 billion: Expanded college credit to provide a $2,500 expanded tax credit for college tuition and related expenses for 2009 and 2010. The credit is phased out for couples making more than $160,000.
* $6.6 billion: Homebuyer credit: $8,000 refundable credit for all homes bought between 1/1/2009 and 12/1/2009 and repayment provision repealed for homes purchased in 2009 and held more than three years. This only applies to first-time homebuyers.[37]
* $4.7 billion: Excluding from taxation the first $2,400 a person receives in unemployment compensation benefits in 2009.
* $4.7 billion: Expanded earned income tax credit to increase the earned income tax credit — which provides money to low income workers — for families with at least three children.
* $4.3 billion: Home energy credit to provide an expanded credit to homeowners who make their homes more energy-efficient in 2009 and 2010. Homeowners could recoup 30 percent of the cost up to $1,500 of numerous projects, such as installing energy-efficient windows, doors, furnaces and air conditioners.
* $1.7 billion: for deduction of sales tax from car purchases, not interest payments phased out for incomes above $250,000.
[edit] Tax incentives for companies
Total: $51 billion
* $15 billion: Allowing companies to use current losses to offset profits made in the previous five years, instead of two, making them eligible for tax refunds.
* $13 billion: to extend tax credits for renewable energy production (until 2014).
* $11 billion: Government contractors: Repeal a law that takes effect in 2012, requiring government agencies to withhold three percent of payments to contractors to help ensure they pay their tax bills. Repealing the law would cost $11 billion over 10 years, in part because the government could not earn interest by holding the money throughout the year.
* $7 billion: Repeal bank credit: Repeal a Treasury provision that allowed firms that buy money-losing banks to use more of the losses as tax credits to offset the profits of the merged banks for tax purposes. The change would increase taxes on the merged banks by $7 billion over 10 years.
* $5 billion: Bonus depreciation which extends a provision allowing businesses buying equipment such as computers to speed up its depreciation through 2009.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Recovery_and_Reinvestment_Act_of_2009
Here's another source. http://projects.nytimes.com/44th_president/stimulus. From the latter source, here was the lion share of tax related stimulus (remember the checks):
QuoteTax Cuts for Individuals $116.2 billion
Provide a tax credit at a rate of 6.2 percent of earned income (after federal taxes are taken out), up to $400 for individuals and up to $800 for couples, in 2009 and 2010. The credit begins to phase out at income levels of $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 for married couples filing jointly. Since the credit is "refundable," people with no federal income-tax liability will get money back.
Those really do not appear to be GOP-principled tax refunds, but I will wait for your source.
You're right, it was only 42% tax cuts, not 50%.
Edited for accuracy:
QuoteDemocrats are ready to take responsibility for the state of the economy and they deserve credit for putting it on the right track, the party's chairwoman, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, said on Wednesday.
"We own the economy. We own the beginning of the turnaround and we want to make sure that we continue that pace of recovery, not go back to the policies of the past under the Bush administration that put us in the ditch in the first place,"
"But be assured, if we wind up with a double-dip ice cream cone, um I mean well if the economy gets badder, we will abdi-, abde-, um like what's that word? Oh yeah give that economy thingy back to the tea baggers." Wasserman Schultz told Mike Allen at POLITICO's 'Playbook Breakfast.'
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57025.html#ixzz1U5muhHDQ
Quote from: nathanm on August 04, 2011, 08:53:00 PM
You're right, it was only 42% tax cuts, not 50%.
Nate. Here's the exchange at issue.
GUIDO: "Where was Obama's compromise with the GOP on stimulus?"
NATE: "Did you already forget that half the stimulus was tax cuts?"
Then later...
GUIDO: "...[t]hose really do not appear to be GOP-principled tax refunds, but I will wait for your source."
And I got the above response. Nate sticks to this "tax cuts" compromise Obama made with apparently the "air". No source on an Obama compromise.
Everyone. I advise that anything Nate posts be taken with less than the proverbial grain of salt. He makes sh!t up as he goes.
Quote from: guido911 on August 05, 2011, 11:26:51 AM
Nate. Here's the exchange at issue.
GUIDO: "Where was Obama's compromise with the GOP on stimulus?"
NATE: "Did you already forget that half the stimulus was tax cuts?"
Then later...
GUIDO: "...[t]hose really do not appear to be GOP-principled tax refunds, but I will wait for your source."
And I got the above response. Nate sticks to this "tax cuts" compromise Obama made with apparently the "air". No source on an Obama compromise.
Everyone. I advise that anything Nate posts be taken with less than the proverbial grain of salt. He makes sh!t up as he goes.
Yes he does.....
Quote from: guido911 on August 05, 2011, 11:26:51 AM
Nate. Here's the exchange at issue.
GUIDO: "Where was Obama's compromise with the GOP on stimulus?"
NATE: "Did you already forget that half the stimulus was tax cuts?"
Then later...
GUIDO: "...[t]hose really do not appear to be GOP-principled tax refunds, but I will wait for your source."
And I got the above response. Nate sticks to this "tax cuts" compromise Obama made with apparently the "air". No source on an Obama compromise.
Everyone. I advise that anything Nate posts be taken with less than the proverbial grain of salt. He makes sh!t up as he goes.
B..bu...but what about his graphs?
Quote from: Conan71 on August 05, 2011, 11:52:33 AM
B..bu...but what about his graphs?
Well there's THOSE obviously.
Quote from: guido911 on August 05, 2011, 11:26:51 AM
Nate. Here's the exchange at issue.
GUIDO: "Where was Obama's compromise with the GOP on stimulus?"
NATE: "Did you already forget that half the stimulus was tax cuts?"
Then later...
GUIDO: "...[t]hose really do not appear to be GOP-principled tax refunds, but I will wait for your source."
And I got the above response. Nate sticks to this "tax cuts" compromise Obama made with apparently the "air". No source on an Obama compromise.
Everyone. I advise that anything Nate posts be taken with less than the proverbial grain of salt. He makes sh!t up as he goes.
Yes, but he does it with such confidence and pride. He reminds me of our president.
Quote from: Gaspar on August 05, 2011, 12:24:33 PM
Yes, but he does it with such confidence and pride. He reminds me of our president.
I actually have had fairly amicable discussion recently with Nate. His little slap of "oh you nailed me Guido, it was just 42% not 50%", while ignoring the real point I was making, served only to underscore what I have felt all along about this guy.
Quote from: guido911 on August 05, 2011, 12:44:33 PM
I actually have had fairly amicable discussion recently with Nate. His little slap of "oh you nailed me Guido, it was just 42% not 50%", while ignoring the real point I was making, served only to underscore what I have felt all along about this guy.
I like him, he is one of the smarter liberal posters on this forum. He's just so worshipful of liberal economic philosophy that it's hard for him to accept the reality that the world does not work that way.
Quote from: Gaspar on August 05, 2011, 01:24:12 PM
I like him, he is one of the smarter liberal posters on this forum.
I cannot agree with that. He's all about disgusting class warfare. And if he is one of the "smarter liberal posters", what does that say about the others. :D
Quote from: guido911 on August 05, 2011, 01:31:28 PM
I cannot agree with that. He's all about disgusting class warfare. And if he is one of the "smarter liberal posters", what does that say about the others. :D
Most just follow their emotions, and revel in the rebellion of liberal thought. He tries to use logic, and that must make things very hard for him.
Quote from: Gaspar on August 05, 2011, 01:42:15 PM
Most just follow their emotions, and revel in rebellion of liberal thought. He tries to use logic, and that must make things very hard for him.
Logic and liberal in the same post? That's an oxymoron if there ever was
Quote from: Gaspar on August 05, 2011, 01:42:15 PM
Most just follow their emotions, and revel in rebellion of liberal thought.
That should draw some attention. I will call this guy and see if he can lend to you what he is wearing.
(http://christianburns.files.wordpress.com/2007/01/hs1558762_1.jpg?w=468)
Quote from: guido911 on August 04, 2011, 02:57:37 PM
I'm not sure where the idea of "compromise" is coming from. Who should the Tea Party be compromising with and why? Where was Obama's compromise with the GOP on stimulus (oh I forgot, Obama governed early on his "I won" philosophy) and the following year with Obamacare? But I digress. In November, them "teabaggers" as the left so gleefully called them, after organizing for more than 18 months and getting politically active, got persons that thought like them to run for office, etc., went to the polls and in spectacular fashion took over the House, made gains in the Senate, and generally thrashed the Dems. Here's a link and passage from it detailing the bloodshed:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/13/AR2010111304276.html
With that, I do not understand why people are so freakin stunned that these newly-elected Tea Party candidates would, dare I say, do what they were elected to do and conduct themselves consistent with what got them elected. As I posted in another thread, one of the core Tea Party issues was reigning in spending. You expected these people to just ignore or "forget" these principles? And in light of that "shellacking", as Obama said, why didn't he, the Dems, and the establishment GOP compromise with the Tea Party. Their view was what this country wanted for in favor of.
This debt ceiling fight was the Tea Party's "We Won" moment. But apparently there is little humor there despite some who thought when Obama said "I won" was pretty damned funny.
The Tea Party is all about cut, cut, cut. States are slashing budgets and laying off employees. We are cutting public sector spending at a very fast pace. It's almost like we have been running our own austerity program in a recessionary economy......
I will quote myself from almost a year ago:
Quote
What is the point of contracting the public sector and government spending in a recessionary economy if it just results in smaller tax revenues and larger deficits?
Look, These austerity measures are going to fail, all they are going to succeed in doing is to damage already weakened economies. Keynes predicts this and is being proven correct all over again. Just like Keynesian economics predicted our crash.
It's very basic, we overheated our economy with deficit spending in an expanding economy. Keynes predicts that the larger the upturn, the larger the resulting downturn. Which is exactly what happened. Keynes instructs that during an expansion period governments should cool the economy and keep it growing by running surpluses via lower government spending and higher taxes and during periods of contraction taxes should go down and spending go up in order to lessen the downturn. Keynes goal is to lessen the wave curve of the economic cycle on both the upturn and downturn to result in a gradual upward trend of growth with only small fluctuations up or down.
We fought Keynes with huge deficit spending during a growing economy pre 2008 and now Europe is fighting Keynes again with "Austerity" and it's biting them all over again. It's like we learned nothing from the Great Depression.
All these cuts being pushed from the right are badly damaging the economy and are pushing us into another recession. I told you that Keynes predicts that and I am being proven right every day.
I won't say this is the Republican's economy because I do think that outside of the glare of cameras and tea party threats there are a lot of reasonable Republicans, maybe even most. But everyone, middle ground Republicans more than anyone, are terrified of the Teabaggers and are bending to that small minorities will right now.
So this IS the Tea Party's economy. The least popular party right now according to polls, lower than Ds and Rs is the Tea Party but they are running the show. They are holding everyone hostage and sending us right down the crapper unless someone stops them.
These job cuts are coming primarily at the expense of either constitutional or chartered balanced budget measures that just about every state, if not every state has as well as most municipalities. That pre-dates the Tea Party and these cuts are the end result of shrinking tax revenues due to the economic slowdown since 2007.
That pre-dates the Tea Party's emergence and these cuts would have happened even without them.
It also has very little to do with any sort of Keynesian prediction. As well, Keynesian measures to turn the economy around appear to have failed.
Quote from: Gaspar on August 05, 2011, 01:24:12 PM
I like him, he is one of the smarter liberal posters on this forum. He's just so worshipful of liberal economic philosophy that it's hard for him to accept the reality that the world does not work that way.
Economy doesn't work one way. There are so many variables I bet there are conditions where just about anything will work given the proper circumstances.
Quote from: swake on August 05, 2011, 03:43:59 PM
The least popular party right now according to polls, lower than Ds and Rs is the Tea Party but they are running the show. They are holding everyone hostage and sending us right down the crapper unless someone stops them.
The "Tea Party" is not a "party" like Ds & Rs in my opinion. It's a relatively small number, grass-rooted, politically active, right leaning group of like-minded people. It has power because it is organized and knows how to influence policy it is interested in. I won't try to draw direct comparisons, but I consider the Tea Party to be the economic version of NOW (women's issues-oriented) or the NAACP (African American issues-oriented).
Quote from: guido911 on August 05, 2011, 04:14:11 PM
The "Tea Party" is not a "party" like Ds & Rs in my opinion. It's a relatively small number, grass-rooted, politically active, right leaning group of like-minded people. It has power because it is organized and knows how to influence policy it is interested in. I won't try to draw direct comparisons, but I consider the Tea Party to be the economic version of NOW (women's issues-oriented) or the NAACP (African American issues-oriented).
Step away from your stupid pills.
http://vodpod.com/watch/14596603-bill-maher-gop-always-plays-the-victim?
Quote from: guido911 on August 04, 2011, 08:51:19 PM
Those really do not appear to be GOP-principled tax refunds, but I will wait for your source.
Ah, the no true Scotsman fallacy rears its ugly head. Explain to me what exactly a "GOP-principled tax [cut]" is, and perhaps we can have a productive discussion. If the jobs tax credit doesn't meet the bar, what would?
BTW, Conan, if you consider my interpretation of the numbers I post wrong, feel free to explain where I went wrong.
Quote from: nathanm on August 05, 2011, 06:30:00 PM
Ah, the no true Scotsman fallacy rears its ugly head. Explain to me what exactly a "GOP-principled tax [cut]" is, and perhaps we can have a productive discussion. If the jobs tax credit doesn't meet the bar, what would?
BTW, Conan, if you consider my interpretation of the numbers I post wrong, feel free to explain where I went wrong.
I'm done with you on this subject. YOU called me out and ran your damned mouth on the "tax cuts" in the stimulus was a product of compromise with the GOP. However, you have provided absolutely ZERO evidence that this was in any way a product of compromise with ANYONE but was in fact more of a product of Obama and the left looking to bail out the lower and middle classes. For proof, just look at who qualified for the $400 & $800 checks that made up a lion's share of the "tax cuts" you were chirping about. Not that it really means anything as a practical matter, but you have hot beef injected your credibility/believability as far as I'm concerned.
Quote from: guido911 on August 05, 2011, 07:42:32 PM
I'm done with you on this subject. YOU called me out and ran your damned mouth on the "tax cuts" in the stimulus was a product of compromise with the GOP.
I can't help it if your memory doesn't go back as far as 2009. The stimulus didn't originally include so much in the way of tax cuts. In a failed attempt to get Republican votes, they put a bunch of tax cuts into it and shrank it by about $30 billion. Google News is your friend; it even allows you to search a specific date range.
Quote from: Conan71 on August 05, 2011, 01:55:36 PM
Logic and liberal in the same post? That's an oxymoron if there ever was
::)
Two words: partisan hack.
Quote from: guido911 on August 05, 2011, 07:42:32 PM
I'm done with you on this subject. YOU called me out and ran your damned mouth on the "tax cuts" in the stimulus was a product of compromise with the GOP. However, you have provided absolutely ZERO evidence that this was in any way a product of compromise with ANYONE but was in fact more of a product of Obama and the left looking to bail out the lower and middle classes. For proof, just look at who qualified for the $400 & $800 checks that made up a lion's share of the "tax cuts" you were chirping about. Not that it really means anything as a practical matter, but you have hot beef injected your credibility/believability as far as I'm concerned.
Yep, I can always tell when the frat brothers have had their bi-monthly sleepovers.
I feel like I just walked through the Young Republican locker room, and everybody's shaved all their body hair off and is walking around in towels and slapping each other on the donkey.
Or I just walked through the male bonobo house at the zoo.
Lotsa chest thumpin' either way.
Quote from: we vs us on August 05, 2011, 09:03:59 PM
I feel like I just walked through the Young Republican locker room, and everybody's shaved all their body hair off and is walking around in towels and slapping each other on the donkey.
Or I just walked through the male bonobo house at the zoo.
Lotsa chest thumpin' either way.
Feeling better that the left is starting to weigh in on this thread? Funny that lucky Pierre and you cannot find room to defend Nate's bullcrap.
Quote from: guido911 on August 05, 2011, 09:37:34 PM
Feeling better that the left is starting to weigh in on this thread? Funny that lucky Pierre and you cannot find room to defend Nate's bullcrap.
It's even funnier that you take time out of your day to attack it.
Quote from: guido911 on August 05, 2011, 09:37:34 PM
Feeling better that the left is starting to weigh in on this thread? Funny that lucky Pierre and you cannot find room to defend Nate's bullcrap.
Nate's a big a boy, and luckily for him has facts on his side. You guys are down to flinging poo at this point.
Quote from: we vs us on August 05, 2011, 10:41:19 PM
Nate's a big a boy, and luckily for him has facts on his side.
Really, what facts have you read from Nate that Obama compromised with the GOP in connection with the bullcrap assertion about stimulus tax cuts? Tell us right now, oh "law-abiding illegal" man. If you can't, then you are no better than Nate.
Quote from: guido911 on August 05, 2011, 10:58:36 PM
Really, what facts have you read from Nate that Obama compromised with the GOP in connection with the bullcrap assertion about stimulus tax cuts? ... If you can't, then you are no better than Nate.
I already told you to look on Google News. Why should other people bother to inform you if you're not willing to spend five minutes informing yourself?