The Goat Pen

eCat wrote:I was watching some talking heads last night talk about the GOP and I thought they had a great point. Now bear in mind, I don't really agree with alot of what Obama is doing, but they were saying the GOP is focused solely on stopping any initiatives by Obama so its odd to them that the GOP also laments that Obama hasn't done anything to get jobs or the economy back on track when the have essentially filibustered or fought for every action he has taken.

Lmao. what show were you watching, "captains of obviousness?"

The problem with your income taxe system being too progressive is your budget is susceptible to wild swings in revenue.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/47704712

Gator by God's Grace wrote:

eCat wrote:I was watching some talking heads last night talk about the GOP and I thought they had a great point. Now bear in mind, I don't really agree with alot of what Obama is doing, but they were saying the GOP is focused solely on stopping any initiatives by Obama so its odd to them that the GOP also laments that Obama hasn't done anything to get jobs or the economy back on track when the have essentially filibustered or fought for every action he has taken.

Lmao. what show were you watching, "captains of obviousness?"

well I guess it caught my attention because I didn't really connect the two points

I've been saying that since the beginning. The pubs are pissed that they lost and have stuck their thumbs in their ears and are jumping up and down like a 4 year old.

You act like this is some unique situation. The losing side in every single election for the foreseeable future for all time will act this way barring a severe paradigm shift (legit third party, breakdown of party system, full on war, real economic collapse)

This is unprecedented aTm...this level of obstructionism. It really is a unique situation.

the gall of the GOP in forcing the individual mandate into the healthcare act, and then using the existence of the individual mandate as the basis for challenging the healthcare act in the courts is beyond belief...

PNN hates you all.

June 24

That is the expected date that the SCOTUS will come back with their ruling on the Obamacare case. That's exactly 7 days after the Greek election (did you all see the Greek Nazi party spokesman go into an all-out brawl with a Greek Socialist party spokesman on Greek TV? If not, Google it).

If it gets struck down (which looks to be the case), I'm anxious to see the impact on the markets and on those covered by insurance because they are under 26 and on their parents' policy or those that have a pre-existing condition. On top of that, if the Greeks elect a government that bucks on austerity that'll be another straw laying with a thud on that camel known as global financial markets.

Let free markets have their reign and see where the chips fall, seems to be where we're heading. This will be fun from a "PBS 'What If?' Documentary Come To Life" perspective, not so fun for those who have any irons in the short-term capital markets or those who have health concerns.

Bummer dude. Shoulda jumped into the .com craze back in the 90s.

Short term pain for the benefit of this country long term.

aTm wrote:You act like this is some unique situation. The losing side in every single election for the foreseeable future for all time will act this way barring a severe paradigm shift (legit third party, breakdown of party system, full on war, real economic collapse)

this is correct. we really haven't had any severe paradigm shifts in politics since the Vietnam War. this recent desire for austerity in the United States seems to be a knee-jerk reaction to Europe and is a slight paradigm shift, but that shift is really only among some of our educated voters under the age of 50, and it isn't all that many of them (certainly not enough to affect an election on a national level.) you could argue that Ross Perot tried to motivate this shift 20 years ago with his 3rd party and it is just now being taken seriously

sardis wrote:Short term pain for the benefit of this country long term.

The thing is, addressing short term issues and long term issues don't have to be done with the same action. That's what many people don't understand (or what many seem to misunderstand). We've been delevering the past 2.5 years and still posting GDP growth. The long-term issues started to be addressed with the Boehner/Obama talks last Summer...but Cantor killed all that progress. A full contraction of government (interesting aside: If government employment was at 2009 levels, then the unemployment rate would be 7.8%) is not a healthy short-term solution, in my view.

innocentbystander wrote:

aTm wrote:You act like this is some unique situation. The losing side in every single election for the foreseeable future for all time will act this way barring a severe paradigm shift (legit third party, breakdown of party system, full on war, real economic collapse)

this is correct. we really haven't had any severe paradigm shifts in politics since the Vietnam War. this recent desire for austerity in the United States seems to be a knee-jerk reaction to Europe and is a slight paradigm shift, but that shift is really only among some of our educated voters under the age of 50, and it isn't all that many of them (certainly not enough to affect an election on a national level.) you could argue that Ross Perot tried to motivate this shift 20 years ago with his 3rd party and it is just now being taken seriously

It may be true that "for the foreseeable future" we'll be stuck in this assinine, unPatriotic, Congressional obstructionist malaise...but it started with this 2010 Congress. It was not always like this. Not to this level. It's would be hilarious if it wasn't so dangerous. I mean, when you start legislating against YOUR OWN policies because the opposing party has adopted them, then you are officially breaking new ground. I've never seen anything like this in American politics.

However, Congress has made the unabashed filibuster threat a common weapon in Hill politics...and we're weaker for it. Go USA!

Bklyn wrote:It may be true that "for the foreseeable future" we'll be stuck in this assinine, unPatriotic, Congressional obstructionist malaise...but it started with this 2010 Congress. It was not always like this. Not to this level. It's would be hilarious if it wasn't so dangerous. I mean, when you start legislating against YOUR OWN policies because the opposing party has adopted them, then you are officially breaking new ground. I've never seen anything like this in American politics.

However, Congress has made the unabashed filibuster threat a common weapon in Hill politics...and we're weaker for it. Go USA!

Ahhh, but sometimes obstruction is very good. I voted for my Congressmen specifically because he promised me that he would vote against ALL spending and ALL tax increases. His sole job is to be an obstructionist, a reductionist, a royal pain in the ass. I like that, that means he is spending less of my money and letting me keep more of my money.

In case you haven't figured it out yet, IB is an idiot.

I don't even know if it's worth the calories to break down the downstream impacts of obstructionism for obstructionism's sake.

So, I'll just say:

OK

innocentbystander wrote: I like that, that means he is spending less of my money and letting me keep more of my money.

really? did your taxes go down, you drooling nutfuck?

Gator by God's Grace wrote:

innocentbystander wrote: I like that, that means he is spending less of my money and letting me keep more of my money.

really? did your taxes go down, you drooling nutfuck?

they will go UP if the Bush tax cuts are not extended

"and still even people on here (people who can read and own computers) will trot out the same lines that were given full context or disproven before. Americans like the simple narrative."

That's a nice summation of the majority of posters who post in the political forum at Talent's place...

Bklyn wrote:

sardis wrote:Short term pain for the benefit of this country long term.

The thing is, addressing short term issues and long term issues don't have to be done with the same action. That's what many people don't understand (or what many seem to misunderstand). We've been delevering the past 2.5 years and still posting GDP growth. The long-term issues started to be addressed with the Boehner/Obama talks last Summer...but Cantor killed all that progress. A full contraction of government (interesting aside: If government employment was at 2009 levels, then the unemployment rate would be 7.8%) is not a healthy short-term solution, in my view.

Your belief is more close to the Ryan plan than you are willing to admit. Ryan's plan is not a full contraction of government. It's more of a stabilizing in the short-term and balancing the budget in the long term by keeping spending at the 20% gdp level.