If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Times)   That bill that's supposed to be a stop gap for the fiscal cliff? Turns out it's more like a jump ramp than the start of a bridge   (washingtontimes.com) divider line 432
    More: Followup, makeshift, entrance ramp  
•       •       •

4870 clicks; posted to Politics » on 01 Jan 2013 at 6:00 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



432 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-01 07:16:39 PM

Sum Dum Gai: The only practical way to tackle this is at the revenue side - any major spending change will have unintended consequences (or intended consequences - there are plenty who would benefit politically from the government causing a major economic downturn).


yes - in the present day. The only way that makes sense is to raise taxes past the Clinton levels on very high incomes. Of course, that hasn't been proposed by anyone of note.
 
2013-01-01 07:18:04 PM

GAT_00: And we can't do it when people like you claim to care, yet oppose any and all tax raises. You think that somehow we can cut all this spending to fix the deficit when the deficit is mostly caused by tax cuts.


I am not opposed to all tax increases. I am opposed to all tax increases based "on principle", however.
 
2013-01-01 07:19:16 PM

Fart_Machine: IamKaiserSoze!!!: Better yet I would like to see the House pass a Simpson-Bowles type bill

You realize that the Simpson-Bowles bill had even more tax increases right?


Yes. I'm one of the few who think we need a total restructure of the tax system which would generate additional revenues as well as making significant changes in all entitlements and existing agency spending.

Yes, the military too.

This isn't a team sport in reality, both sides have f*cked us good.
 
2013-01-01 07:24:36 PM
If you want to start cutting spending how about eliminating the $88 billion they want to appropriate for the war in Afghanistan this year and just bring the troops home.
 
2013-01-01 07:24:38 PM

skullkrusher: GAT_00: And we can't do it when people like you claim to care, yet oppose any and all tax raises. You think that somehow we can cut all this spending to fix the deficit when the deficit is mostly caused by tax cuts.

I am not opposed to all tax increases. I am opposed to all tax increases based "on principle", however.


That principle apparantly being any tax increase at all.
 
2013-01-01 07:26:48 PM

GAT_00: skullkrusher: GAT_00: And we can't do it when people like you claim to care, yet oppose any and all tax raises. You think that somehow we can cut all this spending to fix the deficit when the deficit is mostly caused by tax cuts.

I am not opposed to all tax increases
. I am opposed to all tax increases based "on principle", however.

That principle apparantly being any tax increase at all.


do try harder
 
2013-01-01 07:27:04 PM

Mrtraveler01: Zombalupagus: [i.imm.io image 600x800]

I hope you posted that ironically. Or else I'd have to say who ever made that is a farking idiot because:

1. It never considers the option that people in that much debt get a second job to bring in more revenue into that household.
-analogy problem: please explain the second job the federal government can get.

2. The debt ceiling doesn't give us permission to spend more, it gives us permission to pay off the debt we already spent. Not raising the debt ceiling is the same as defaulting on our debt obligations. Or to use a retarded analogy like you did, it would be like ordering and eating dinner and dashing out on the check.
.


-actually, in a federal government there never is an intention to pay off its debt, just to keep it under control as a percentage of GDP.

Eiger:
It also ignores the fact that the US government can print money. I'm not aware of any household that can (legally) do that.

- actually the federal government cannot print money, only the federal reserve can use that tool.

Bronyaur1:
Unfortunately, there are ppl who actually believe that this silly little simpleton picture is relevant to the actual economics of the situation. For example, how many households owe their mortgage primarily to their own family members? How many families can, at will, increase their income with the stroke of a pen?

- silly analogy - stroke of a pen: please tell the executive and congress to go forth and stroke.

Erik-k

We're facing medium term financial apocalypse if we don't raise taxes from the lowest levels in living memory. I don't think anybody likes raising taxes, but some of us recognize the need to raise them in order to prevent disaster.

- it isn't that simple. When you consider revenue you must treat social security and medicare taxes as part of the base income taxes. Why, because the federal government has only theoretically segregated those funds in trusts. Since they are part of the general revenue the cost of the programs they support are part of the general expense.

--
While it's not a good analogy, it does help people without an understanding of federal accounting grasp the magnitude of the amounts being bandied about.
 
2013-01-01 07:28:16 PM
spiff.rit.edu

2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-01-01 07:29:11 PM
F*ck the Moonie Times.
 
2013-01-01 07:30:08 PM
Hey, Zombalupagus, you seem to have need some help with the situation you find yourself in here. Believe it or not, there is a way to save face and redeem your credibility! Since you apparently don't know how, I'll give you complete, step-by-step instructions:

• Step 1: Click in the "Comment:" text area below this thread where you type in your responses. I assume that you already have your "Login:" and "Password:" entered. You should see a flashing text bar cursor in the upper left corner of that text area.

• Step 2a: Look at your keyboard. Over on the left side, second row from the bottom, you'll see a large key. It's labeled "Shift". Press and hold this [Shift ] key with your left pinky finger.

• Step 2b: While still holding that key down, hover your right index fingertip over the top row of keys on the typewriter-like alphanumeric portion of the keyboard. These are all small keys. Most of them have numerals (digits) as their bottom labels, and a punctuation symbol as the top label. The digits are in numerical order (except that zero [0] follows nine [9]), so it's easy to find the spot we're looking for: you need to hover the fingertip between two keys, namely, the one labeled [*8] and the one next to it labeled [(9] (the labels here are shown horizontally separated, but actually they're vertically separated: the punctuation symbol is on top of the digit). Now, move your fingertip down one row, and it should be hovering over a key labeled [I]. Press and release that key, then release the [Shift ] key. You should see "I" appear in the "Comments:" edit box, with the bar cursor now flashing just to the right of it.

• Step 2c: Finally, with either thumb, press and release the widest key on the keyboard, one that has no label at all. This is called the "space bar." You should see no text change in the box, but the flashing bar cursor should move slightly to the right, a very short distance away from the "I" that you created in Step 2b.

• Step 3a: Remember how we used the top row of number keys to help find a letter key in Step 2b? Well, let's do it again: this time, we need to hover our left index fingertip between the [@2] and [#3] keys, then move down one row. The key that your fingertip should now be hovering over should be labeled [W]. Press and release it, and remember it because we're going to need it again in Step 4a. You should now see a "w" appear a short distance to the right of the "I" with a small space between them, and the flashing bar cursor now just to the right of the newly-created "w."

Step 3b: With your left fingertip still on or above the [W] key, move it down one row and to the left one key so that hovers over the [A] key. Press and release it, and voila! "a" has now been added just after the "w", and the flashing bar cursor is now just to the right of the newly-created "a"!

Step 3c: Now move your left fingertip one key to the right from the [A] key that you just pressed. This key is the [S] key. Press and release it, and "s" gets added to the right of the "wa" which is a short distance from the "I" from Step 1. So far, you should see "I was" with the flashing bar cursor just to the right of the newly-created "s"!

Step 3d is the same as Step 2c, namely, press the space bar. Again, the flashing bar cursor should move a short distance to the right, visibly separated from the "s."

Step 4a: Remember how I told you back in Step 3a that we'd need the [W] key again? Now's the time! If you forgot where it is, fear not: your left fingertip should still be hovering near the [S] key, and it's one row up and slightly to the left of that! Press and release it. You should now see a second "w" appear a short distance to the right of the "s" with a small space between them, and the flashing bar cursor now just to the right of the newly-created "w."

Step 4b: move your left fingertip not one, but two, keys to the right of the [W] key. It should now be hovering over the [R] key. Press and release it. You should now see an "r" appear just to the right of the "w", and the flashing bar cursor now just to the right of the newly-created "r."

Step 4c: If you haven't moved your right hand much since Step 2b, its index fingertip should still be hovering over or near the [I] key. The one that we want now is just to the right of that: the [O] key. If you lost track of that, you can find it easily by using the numbers trick: this key is just one row below the space between the [(9] and [)0] keys. You should know what to do by now: press and release it, and watch the "o" appear, with the bar cursor moving to just past it.

Step 4d: Now it gets a bit tricky. Move the right index fingertip not just one, but two, keys to the left, so that it's hovering over the [U] key. That's not the one we want to press, though: now, move the fingertip down not one, but two rows. It should now be hovering over the [N] key. Press and release it. "n" appears.

Step 4e: Back to the left index fingertip, which we last left in Step 4b hovering over the [R] key. Move it over one to the right so that it now hovers over the [T] key, then down one row so that it hovers over the [G] key. Press and release that. "g" appears.

Step 4f: Actually, your message as it exists now would be good enough for most FARKers, but just to satisfy the grammar Nazis, move the left fingertip (which should still be hovering over the [N] key) three keys to the right, so that it hovers over a key labeled [>.]. Press and release that.

Step 5: Click [ Add Comment ]. You shouldn't need to click the [ Preview ] button first, as there's no HTML in your short post.

There. That wasn't so hard, now, was it? Why do so few FARKers ever do this?
 
2013-01-01 07:32:16 PM

Sum Dum Gai: skullkrusher: You guys sure are pissed about people pointing out that we spend a farkload more than we generate in revenue

That is a problem, and has been since Reagan, but the key piece that the analogy misses is that changing spending has a drastic effect on receipts.

If the government cut spending by 10% ($380 bn), the effect would be the loss of about as big of a chunk of the economy as the entire 2008-2009 economic downturn, and the effects would likely be as severe (if not more severe, coming as a double-dip recession).

The first recession cost us about $400 bn in lowered tax receipts, so this hypothetical 10% cut would actually make the deficit worse - we've reduced expenses by $380 bn but also reduced revenues by $400bn. That's not even considering the secondary effects (such as increasing government mandatory outlays by increasing unemployment).

The only practical way to tackle this is at the revenue side - any major spending change will have unintended consequences (or intended consequences - there are plenty who would benefit politically from the government causing a major economic downturn).


You remind me of those Republicans whose only response to the oil situation is "Drill, baby, drill!"
 
2013-01-01 07:34:27 PM

skullkrusher: GAT_00: skullkrusher: GAT_00: And we can't do it when people like you claim to care, yet oppose any and all tax raises. You think that somehow we can cut all this spending to fix the deficit when the deficit is mostly caused by tax cuts.

I am not opposed to all tax increases. I am opposed to all tax increases based "on principle", however.

That principle apparantly being any tax increase at all.

do try harder


I cannot recall you ever arguing once for any kind of tax increase
 
2013-01-01 07:34:38 PM
Let me see if I have this straight. Republicans create this fiscal cliff nonsense by refusing to raise the debt ceiling in a simple vote. They do nothing in the intervening year to address the problem, waiting until the last month to do anything substantive. Boehner is unable to get his coalition to agree to a bill that raise LESS revenue through taxes, and promptly adjourns the House for the holidays, saying that now the Senate and White House must do their work for them. The Senate and WH work to craft a bipartisan deal which is only half as effective as it could be in deficit reduction, but nevertheless represents a compromise. They then send it to the House, which now squawks about how terrible the bill is, and threatens to laden it up with tons of spending cuts not agreed to and blow the whole thing to shiat.

fark the GOP. Seriously, fark them.
 
2013-01-01 07:36:21 PM

GAT_00: skullkrusher: GAT_00: skullkrusher: GAT_00: And we can't do it when people like you claim to care, yet oppose any and all tax raises. You think that somehow we can cut all this spending to fix the deficit when the deficit is mostly caused by tax cuts.

I am not opposed to all tax increases. I am opposed to all tax increases based "on principle", however.

That principle apparantly being any tax increase at all.

do try harder

I cannot recall you ever arguing once for any kind of tax increase


you've never seen me post Nancy Pelosi's letter to Boehner in these threads?

I really, really liked the compromise with the increased threshold for tax increases and the delay in spending cuts.
 
2013-01-01 07:40:52 PM

Zombalupagus: [i.imm.io image 600x800]


So cleaning shiate is the only solution?
Can't the family do something about raising the amount of money that comes in?
What should we cut, the kids' food and health services or daddy's gun collection?
 
2013-01-01 07:43:18 PM

COMALite J: Hey, Zombalupagus, you seem to have need some help with the situation you find yourself in here. Believe it or not, there is a way to save face and redeem your credibility! Since you apparently don't know how, I'll give you complete, step-by-step instructions:
i>

Wow, you devote a lot of energy to your hostility.

 
2013-01-01 07:43:24 PM

COMALite J: Hey, Zombalupagus, you seem to have need some help with the situation you find yourself in here. Believe it or not, there is a way to save face and redeem your credibility! Since you apparently don't know how, I'll give you complete, step-by-step instructions:

• Step 1: Click in the "Comment:" text area below this thread where you type in your responses. I assume that you already have your "Login:" and "Password:" entered. You should see a flashing text bar cursor in the upper left corner of that text area.

• Step 2a: Look at your keyboard. Over on the left side, second row from the bottom, you'll see a large key. It's labeled "⇑ Shift". Press and hold this [⇑ Shift ] key with your left pinky finger.

• Step 2b: While still holding that key down, hover your right index fingertip over the top row of keys on the typewriter-like alphanumeric portion of the keyboard. These are all small keys. Most of them have numerals (digits) as their bottom labels, and a punctuation symbol as the top label. The digits are in numerical order (except that zero [0] follows nine [9]), so it's easy to find the spot we're looking for: you need to hover the fingertip between two keys, namely, the one labeled [*8] and the one next to it labeled [(9] (the labels here are shown horizontally separated, but actually they're vertically separated: the punctuation symbol is on top of the digit). Now, move your fingertip down one row, and it should be hovering over a key labeled . Press and release that key, then release the [⇑ Shift ] key. You should see "I" appear in the "Comments:" edit box, with the bar cursor now flashing just to the right of it.

• Step 2c: Finally, with either thumb, press and release the widest key on the keyboard, one that has no label at all. This is called the "space bar." You should see no text change in the box, but the flashing bar cursor should move slightly to the right, a very short distance away from the "I" that you created in Step 2b.

• Step 3a: Remember ...

put. the adderall. down.

back away from the keyboard and put your hands on your head.

 
2013-01-01 07:44:41 PM

Witty_Retort: So cleaning shiate is the only solution?


do it on meth. much faster. scrub that tile, boy.
 
2013-01-01 07:44:57 PM

mediablitz: Zombalupagus: i.imm.io

Simpletons LOVE stupid comparisons. Otherwise, they would have to actually UNDERSTAND the issue.


Oh yes because you are so brilliant.
 
2013-01-01 07:45:23 PM
i1322.photobucket.com
 
2013-01-01 07:45:58 PM
Joseph Weisenthal @TheStalwart
GOP House aide predicting passage of Senate bill: "Members seem tired and ready to go home."

It'd be hilarious if, after hours of complaining and planning all these changes, they just vote on the Senate bill to "go home faster."
 
2013-01-01 07:49:41 PM
Ok, I'm just gonna say my peace (piece?)

To be blunt, the left, the right, the ultra left, the ultra right, and lastly the Welsh, are all acting like a bunch of dicks in this thread.

Goading each other and playing the blame game wont get a deal passed. If you truly want to pass a deal then you should be serious about the situation.

Stop the "0bummer" jokes, and keep off with the "OMG WE THE VICTIMZ HEEAR". You are no victim.

And that goes for everyone
 
2013-01-01 07:52:33 PM
Well, yes... Depending on where you are relatively comparing the situation to, this bill adds to the debt. If you look at where it puts us vs. where we currently stand, as of 1/1/2013, then the tax cuts add to the deficit. But if you compare it to what we've had for the last decade, then what we really have is a maintenance of the status quo on most taxes, with a slight increase on taxes above $400k.

I'm guessing this article is snidely using the former logic to be pessimistic.
 
2013-01-01 07:55:06 PM

Ishidan: See, the problem is:

Liberals watch shows like this:
[img2.targetimg2.com image 410x410]
Conservatives watch shows like this:
[fwallpapers.com image 425x340]

Any questions?


how are those corn pone eating hicks are getting out of this one?
 
2013-01-01 07:55:26 PM

thecolourdead: Zombalupagus: [i.imm.io image 600x800]

Maybe someday people will understand that the national budget isn't analogous to a household budget. Until then, we'll continue to see stupid farking shiat like this.


Wait... you mean micro and macro economics are different things?!
 
2013-01-01 07:57:27 PM

IamKaiserSoze!!!: cameroncrazy1984: IamKaiserSoze!!!: cameroncrazy1984: IamKaiserSoze!!!: OK, the senate just passed a bill that will increase annual taxes by $65 billion against an annual deficit of over $1 trillion.

There's your great progressive victory. Now where's the rest come from?

I hope to hell the House vetoes or significantly amends that piece of crap and gets to work on a comprehensive solution. Better yet I would like to see the House pass a Simpson-Bowles type bill and send it back to the Senate. This shiat has to stop.

Hahahahaha, you're so cute.

thank you.

and you're so young and naïve, but eventually you'll understand.

I understand alright. I understand that nothing will get done as long as the Tea Party controls the House.

OK, so let's say this tax increase goes through and we now have covered 7% of the annual deficit covered. Let's even say we double it and now cover 15%.

Where's the rest come from? You've still got $850 million a year to deal with and that's before the ACA starts adding to the deficit.

Do you see any scenario in which you personally would sacrifice something whether it's additional taxes or delayed eligibility for SocSec or MCare?


Personally, I think cuts to entitlements are necessary.

Telling that you didn't throw military cuts into the mix. We're farked the longest and hardest there.
 
2013-01-01 07:58:32 PM
True leadership by Obama, Reid and Bohner there. Good job, guys.
 
2013-01-01 08:01:28 PM

cman: Ok, I'm just gonna say my peace (piece?)

To be blunt, the left, the right, the ultra left, the ultra right, and lastly the Welsh, are all acting like a bunch of dicks in this thread.

Goading each other and playing the blame game wont get a deal passed. If you truly want to pass a deal then you should be serious about the situation.

Stop the "0bummer" jokes, and keep off with the "OMG WE THE VICTIMZ HEEAR". You are no victim.

And that goes for everyone


So if we all just come together in this thread, the whole budget debate thing in DC will be resolved?
 
2013-01-01 08:03:33 PM

Glancing Blow:
Eiger:
It also ignores the fact that the US government can print money. I'm not aware of any household that can (legally) do that.

- actually the federal government cannot print money, only the federal reserve can use that tool.



I'm pretty sure it can, any time it wants (see Constitutional powers of Congress). It's unlikely to do so, but it can which is an important reality when trying to understand the fundamentally different nature of the federal government from the household.

Additionally, I assume you already know this, but most people don't have a problem with using analogies to explain stuff. The problem w/ the household analogy is that it gives people a fundamentally erroneous understanding of the way national budgets work. Not by coincidence this erroneous understanding leads to "austerity" policies that disproportionately hurt the lower and middle classes and don't even work.
 
2013-01-01 08:04:22 PM

mrshowrules: cman: Ok, I'm just gonna say my peace (piece?)

To be blunt, the left, the right, the ultra left, the ultra right, and lastly the Welsh, are all acting like a bunch of dicks in this thread.

Goading each other and playing the blame game wont get a deal passed. If you truly want to pass a deal then you should be serious about the situation.

Stop the "0bummer" jokes, and keep off with the "OMG WE THE VICTIMZ HEEAR". You are no victim.

And that goes for everyone

So if we all just come together in this thread, the whole budget debate thing in DC will be resolved?


No, I am attempting to point out that everyone is acting like a dick
 
2013-01-01 08:05:27 PM

cman: Ok, I'm just gonna say my peace (piece?)

To be blunt, the left, the right, the ultra left, the ultra right, and lastly the Welsh, are all acting like a bunch of dicks in this thread.

Goading each other and playing the blame game wont get a deal passed. If you truly want to pass a deal then you should be serious about the situation.

Stop the "0bummer" jokes, and keep off with the "OMG WE THE VICTIMZ HEEAR". You are no victim.


I thought I was screwing around on a not very serious website to kill time. Apparently, I'm a member of Congress. Who knew?
 
2013-01-01 08:06:17 PM

thecolourdead: Zombalupagus: [i.imm.io image 600x800]

Maybe someday people will understand that the national budget isn't analogous to a household budget. Until then, we'll continue to see stupid farking shiat like this.


They aren't analogous so long as the government has the ability to borrow as much money as it needs to cover the deficits. The problem is we are treading into waters where there's no guarantee that we will be able to borrow as much as we'd like. Once that happens, the government has to start looking at its budget a little more like your average household does. It's easy to say "just raise revenues," but on average 18% of GDP is the best we've been able to do over the long haul.
 
2013-01-01 08:08:02 PM

Cataholic: treading into waters where there's no guarantee that we will be able to borrow as much as we'd like


Why not? Interest rates are ridiculously low and most of our debt is US-owned.
 
2013-01-01 08:08:32 PM

eiger: Glancing Blow:
Eiger:
It also ignores the fact that the US government can print money. I'm not aware of any household that can (legally) do that.

- actually the federal government cannot print money, only the federal reserve can use that tool.

I'm pretty sure it can, any time it wants (see Constitutional powers of Congress). It's unlikely to do so, but it can which is an important reality when trying to understand the fundamentally different nature of the federal government from the household.

Additionally, I assume you already know this, but most people don't have a problem with using analogies to explain stuff. The problem w/ the household analogy is that it gives people a fundamentally erroneous understanding of the way national budgets work. Not by coincidence this erroneous understanding leads to "austerity" policies that disproportionately hurt the lower and middle classes and don't even work.


Very true, the budget of a federal government is even drastically different from a state government.

The federal governments power to print money is in the literal sense, not for the purpose of expanding the money supply.
 
2013-01-01 08:08:47 PM

cman: mrshowrules: cman: Ok, I'm just gonna say my peace (piece?)

To be blunt, the left, the right, the ultra left, the ultra right, and lastly the Welsh, are all acting like a bunch of dicks in this thread.

Goading each other and playing the blame game wont get a deal passed. If you truly want to pass a deal then you should be serious about the situation.

Stop the "0bummer" jokes, and keep off with the "OMG WE THE VICTIMZ HEEAR". You are no victim.

And that goes for everyone

So if we all just come together in this thread, the whole budget debate thing in DC will be resolved?

No, I am attempting to point out that everyone is acting like a dick


I don't think Farkers have sworn an oath of office with a sacred duty to their constituents.  Despite that Farkers are overall less dickish than the average GOP politician.
 
2013-01-01 08:09:21 PM
Sounds like Boehner made clear to the House GOP that if the House doesn't pass the Senate version in an up-or-down vote, "House Republicans would take the blame for the ensuing economic fallout...The appeal seems to have worked."
House may hold its nose and vote on it after all, despite all the complaining this afternoon.
 
2013-01-01 08:10:28 PM

djkutch: IamKaiserSoze!!!: cameroncrazy1984: IamKaiserSoze!!!: cameroncrazy1984: IamKaiserSoze!!!: OK, the senate just passed a bill that will increase annual taxes by $65 billion against an annual deficit of over $1 trillion.

There's your great progressive victory. Now where's the rest come from?

I hope to hell the House vetoes or significantly amends that piece of crap and gets to work on a comprehensive solution. Better yet I would like to see the House pass a Simpson-Bowles type bill and send it back to the Senate. This shiat has to stop.

Hahahahaha, you're so cute.

thank you.

and you're so young and naïve, but eventually you'll understand.

I understand alright. I understand that nothing will get done as long as the Tea Party controls the House.

OK, so let's say this tax increase goes through and we now have covered 7% of the annual deficit covered. Let's even say we double it and now cover 15%.

Where's the rest come from? You've still got $850 million a year to deal with and that's before the ACA starts adding to the deficit.

Do you see any scenario in which you personally would sacrifice something whether it's additional taxes or delayed eligibility for SocSec or MCare?

Personally, I think cuts to entitlements are necessary.

Telling that you didn't throw military cuts into the mix. We're farked the longest and hardest there.


I did in another post (throw military in)
 
2013-01-01 08:10:33 PM

IamKaiserSoze!!!: OK, so let's say this tax increase goes through and we now have covered 7% of the annual deficit covered. Let's even say we double it and now cover 15%.

Where's the rest come from? You've still got $850 million a year to deal with and that's before the ACA starts adding to the deficit.

Do you see any scenario in which you personally would sacrifice something whether it's additional taxes or delayed eligibility for SocSec or MCare?


This thread is ridiculous, so gonna be a one and done...but I do have one thing to post...

imgs.xkcd.com
 
2013-01-01 08:10:36 PM

cman:
No, I am attempting to point out that everyone is acting like a dick


Even me?

*sadface*
 
2013-01-01 08:10:58 PM

ariseatex: Sounds like Boehner made clear to the House GOP that if the House doesn't pass the Senate version in an up-or-down vote, "House Republicans would take the blame for the ensuing economic fallout...The appeal seems to have worked."
House may hold its nose and vote on it after all, despite all the complaining this afternoon.


I refuse to believe that this is a reality until after the vote actually happens. And even then, I won't believe it until it's signed into law.
 
2013-01-01 08:11:03 PM

IamKaiserSoze!!!: Smackledorfer: IamKaiserSoze!!!: cameroncrazy1984: IamKaiserSoze!!!: OK, the senate just passed a bill that will increase annual taxes by $65 billion against an annual deficit of over $1 trillion.

There's your great progressive victory. Now where's the rest come from?

I hope to hell the House vetoes or significantly amends that piece of crap and gets to work on a comprehensive solution. Better yet I would like to see the House pass a Simpson-Bowles type bill and send it back to the Senate. This shiat has to stop.

Hahahahaha, you're so cute.

thank you.

and you're so young and naïve, but eventually you'll understand.

If someone older than you says that to you do you admit you are wrong and change your mind?

And if someone called you cute would you admit you were wrong and change your mind sir white knight?


You aren't very bright.
 
2013-01-01 08:12:14 PM

Nemo's Brother: True leadership by Obama, Reid and Bohner there. Good job, guys.


I love how you totally ignore the fact that it's the House that's throwing the wrench in this, not the Senate or the White House.

1/10 for pathetic effort, though.

/keep trollin', brother.
 
2013-01-01 08:12:44 PM

Funk Brothers: Good until the taxes are cut for the rich, there is no deal.

Why is Obama a richist?


Why should the rich get extra tax cuts?What's wrong with cutting taxes for everyone?

Obama is rich, by the way.
 
2013-01-01 08:13:17 PM

Cataholic: thecolourdead: Zombalupagus: [i.imm.io image 600x800]

Maybe someday people will understand that the national budget isn't analogous to a household budget. Until then, we'll continue to see stupid farking shiat like this.

They aren't analogous so long as the government has the ability to borrow as much money as it needs to cover the deficits. The problem is we are treading into waters where there's no guarantee that we will be able to borrow as much as we'd like. Once that happens, the government has to start looking at its budget a little more like your average household does. It's easy to say "just raise revenues," but on average 18% of GDP is the best we've been able to do over the long haul.


Exactly. And as the ratio increases the confidence other nations have in the dollar value decreases. This is, in a small way, the same effect as the balance of trade deficit.
 
2013-01-01 08:16:36 PM

Smackledorfer: IamKaiserSoze!!!: Smackledorfer: IamKaiserSoze!!!: cameroncrazy1984: IamKaiserSoze!!!: OK, the senate just passed a bill that will increase annual taxes by $65 billion against an annual deficit of over $1 trillion.

There's your great progressive victory. Now where's the rest come from?

I hope to hell the House vetoes or significantly amends that piece of crap and gets to work on a comprehensive solution. Better yet I would like to see the House pass a Simpson-Bowles type bill and send it back to the Senate. This shiat has to stop.

Hahahahaha, you're so cute.

thank you.

and you're so young and naïve, but eventually you'll understand.

If someone older than you says that to you do you admit you are wrong and change your mind?

And if someone called you cute would you admit you were wrong and change your mind sir white knight?

You aren't very bright.


My God, you must have been brilliant on your HS debate team.
 
2013-01-01 08:18:30 PM

thecolourdead: Zombalupagus: [i.imm.io image 600x800]

Maybe someday people will understand that the national budget isn't analogous to a household budget. Until then, we'll continue to see stupid farking shiat like this.


Maybe some day people realize that debt is debt and eventually it will catch up to you, even if you are a rich country that has no concept of fiscal responsibility.

Naw, no chance.  People like you think it's easy enough to fix by simply printing more money, completely ignoring what has happened every farking time that was attempted through out history.
 
2013-01-01 08:22:05 PM

eiger: It also ignores the fact that the US government can print money.


People who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperinflation
 
2013-01-01 08:23:29 PM
My grandfather came back from WWII and bought a house for $10.
My father bought a house for $67 before he left for Korea, and when he came back he bought another one for $55.
When I came back from Vietnam I bough a house bigger than all of theirs combined for $29.
My son returned from the Gulf war and bought a house 1/3 the size of mine for $789,000.
When the housing bubble burst, I bought a mansion for $687, and sold it last June for $8,956,000, which I used as a downpayment for an RV for $9,851,000.
My granddaughter is an A-10 pilot, and her husband bought a house for $398, and a pony for $159,700.

What has happened to America?
 
2013-01-01 08:30:39 PM

MorePeasPlease: My grandfather came back from WWII and bought a house for $10.
My father bought a house for $67 before he left for Korea, and when he came back he bought another one for $55.
When I came back from Vietnam I bough a house bigger than all of theirs combined for $29.
My son returned from the Gulf war and bought a house 1/3 the size of mine for $789,000.
When the housing bubble burst, I bought a mansion for $687, and sold it last June for $8,956,000, which I used as a downpayment for an RV for $9,851,000.
My granddaughter is an A-10 pilot, and her husband bought a house for $398, and a pony for $159,700.

What has happened to America?


What in the fark are you talking about?
 
2013-01-01 08:33:39 PM

babygoat: MorePeasPlease: My grandfather came back from WWII and bought a house for $10.
My father bought a house for $67 before he left for Korea, and when he came back he bought another one for $55.
When I came back from Vietnam I bough a house bigger than all of theirs combined for $29.
My son returned from the Gulf war and bought a house 1/3 the size of mine for $789,000.
When the housing bubble burst, I bought a mansion for $687, and sold it last June for $8,956,000, which I used as a downpayment for an RV for $9,851,000.
My granddaughter is an A-10 pilot, and her husband bought a house for $398, and a pony for $159,700.

What has happened to America?

What in the fark are you talking about?


I think it's a very clever witticism on how real murricans can't do math. Or he's just a moron.
 
Displayed 50 of 432 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report