I think we know that it was a mistake to do so back then. Lets see what happens in the present.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/30/bu...nhardt.html?hp
Printable View
I think we know that it was a mistake to do so back then. Lets see what happens in the present.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/30/bu...nhardt.html?hp
The only thing that is certain is that was 80 years ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by Havakasha
Hey - good news about the healthcare plan. Flexible spending will not be eliminated, only reduced, and that's fine with me as I save well under the max. But on the other hand, premiums are going up. My company has done a great job, but this time around, the employees are going to have to take a bite of the $hit sandwich.
I'm watching this University of Maryland (Peter Morici sp?) guy on Fox News, "Washington is doing nothing right... they increase the demand for healthcare and prices are going to go down?" Man, that's a good question.
Here is a hint of a bias. "Washington is doing nothing right".
Bullcrap. FINALLY someone is tackling decades old problems. Health care, financial reform, immigration reform, energy legislation. Now you might not like all the solutions but the attitude that nothing right is being done is just such a negative attitude that its clearly an obvious falsehood. Its like saying nothing is being done right in America. That is so easy for anyone to say and its absolute nonsense,
The CBO that you rely on when it suits you says the deficit is unsustainable, and will be 90% of GDP in 25 years (I think that's the case). Poor Obama, can't use the tool he wants to because Bush f'd it up, right? We'll, he wanted the job. You'd think he'd have an idea other than one that worked 80 years ago. Maybe one that was more fitting to today's environment?? Heck, nylon wasn't even invented then, now today,its evolved to a dog (low growth, low margin).
Here are a couple ideas to get out of this.
1.) incentivize US companies to utilize productive capacity here in the US.
2.) downsize government - it produces nothing, really. If he wants to spend, then spend. Just reduce overhead to make the speding more efficient.
3.) invest in healthcare - don't proceduralize(bureaucrationalize) it. Put assets in place to care for the masses.
4.) incentivize those with jobs to save and spend by reducing taxes
5.) incentivize Americans to buy American goods and services. If there is any complaint from me about Capitalism, it is the wholesale sell out for cheap labor. That should have been addressed. Plus, productive capacity is part of our national security.
Those are some ideas.
"the attitude that nothing right is being done is just such a negative attitude that its clearly an obvious falsehood"Quote:
Originally Posted by Havakasha
That's the dumbest thing ever spelled out on your keyboard. LOL. Perhaps he truly believes all that has been "done" is wrong? Is addressing it the factor for success or failure, or is addressing it correctly? So far, I'd give Obama a solid "F" in bipartisanship. He's not listening to anyone other than those who are likeminded. It's a shame as that is what I had held hope for.
I agree with what. the CBO said and so does Obama. That is consistency. The point is he was handed an enormous deficit and a bad recession and it aint as easy as you seem to make it out to be to 1. Dig out of a recession, create new jobs and grow thew economy and at he same time.and cut the deficit
Now tell me why Bush cheney grew the deficit exponentially when the economy wasn't even bad? You have some ideas. I don't agree with most of them. But at least you are trying. The republican Party it seems to me is only trying to sabotage even incremental change. Why? Because it suits their political goals. That makes it difficult to govern when you need 60 votes in the Senate to pass anything. What I wish morew than anything in the world would be to be able to have a side by side comparison of Obama's ideas versus the Republican parties. Alas we can't do that so we will have to continue to argue these points. .
Quote:
Originally Posted by SiriuslyLong
Indeed a side by side comparison of ideas would be interesting to see as would a non partisan committee of economists. They could hash out details and make recommendations, but you think Obama would ever listen or even acknowledge the likes of Peter Schiff? Not. You argue left vs. right. I argue the system. There is no politician that wants to really fix it. All they care about is their party politics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Havakasha
S&L You and i see the world completely differently. Republicans have repeatedly obstructed Obama PURELY for political reason. They decided opposing him on EVERY piece of legislation is the best way for them to win. The leadership has gone so far as to threaten Republicans committee positions if they so much as think about supporting Obama on legislation.
Obama has tackled education, health care, energy, financial reform, and immigration all within 2 years. Bush/Cheney did nothing for 8 years. History will rendere who was trying to get things done and what was accomplished with legislation passed.
Here is yet just one more example and believe me i can find you plenty more.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0..._n_632078.html
You're using THAT as an example? To me, it's damning. He's gives a speech on it because advocates wanted him to do so? And the guy from Arizona does indeed have a constituency. Maybe the republicans are blocking Obama because they wonder what the Fck is in the 2300 page bill LOL.Quote:
Originally Posted by Havakasha
You act a little pompous you know. You proudly say that Obama "tackled" all these issues, yet we not seen results. What have we seen? I'll tell you what I've seen, but you'll dismiss it and move on to some democratic talking point (tax the rich, medical care is a right....).
Sorry but i think there is enormous amount of evidence the Republicans have decided on a political strategy and chosen to put Party first over country.
Bush/Cheney did nothing in 8 years. Show me where they did please and do remember they controlled the House and Senate for 6 years
You are quite ridiculous. You expect results in less than 2 years on problems that have festered for 40 or more years in some cases? You arent really looking for results because if you were you would have seen progress. Yes, slow and incremental so far but necessary and important for the future of this county. Obama is working hard to cobble together bipartisan groups to tackle energy and immigration as we speak. Republicans are sitting on their hands, and i am not talking about the ones who would never vote for anything he proposes even if it was to feed all the children of the world (a slight exaggeration but i think we all understand the truth in what i am suggesting) who as a little as a month ago said they could find common ground with Obama on immigration and energy. They really are scared to buck their leadership who has threatened them that they would lose their committee chairmanships if they work with Obama. Another sad day in the U.S. like I said, Party over country. Beautiful.
Lets face it i think you actually hate Obama, and its certainly clear you will never like Obama even if he brought peace to the middle east, resolved the afghanistan war, passed comprehensive health care reform, financial reform, energy legislation to move us into the 21st century, immigration reform to help resolve the illegal immigration problem, tax reform, education legislation and helped to put us on a better path in our economy.
Hate is a might potent weapon in the hands of the blind. I hate to say this but i am starting to think you have more in common with John then i could have ever believed.You dont act like John thank god but you sure believe like him
I kinda think we will never agree on much. Its been fun arguing with you, but
not sure what we can do for an encore. Goodnight. Happy 4th of July.
Obama was forced to address immegration due to Arizona. Don't deny it.
I don't hate Obama. I actually had hope, and got my balls busted by my republican friends. But what he is doing is very disappointing - making government bigger and more far reaching. The government doesn't have to actually solve all our problems. All our government need do is to simply provide a framework for our economy and society to work efficiently. 2300 page bills that no one knows what the hell is in them? C'mon.
BTW, I voted for Bob Barr, the libertarian candidate. Would have voted for McCain, but Palin was an absolute "no go". I could not in my right mind contribute to her being next in line to lead our country. No flippen way.
Here, in case you missed it the first time.
http://siriusbuzz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4013
I don't believe one minute that republicans are sitting on their hands. Obama is so far left it is almost impossible to agree with any of his policy. He's politics just like the republicans. If he integrates any of their ideas, his party will alienate him. It works both ways.
My point of view is not that of a republican; it's simply about economics and the role of government. I am a registered non party affiliate. You are a democrat. You are partial. You are biased. It is impossiblet to look at Obama critically. Well maybe you can. Maybe Obama is not left enough for you LOL.
Anyway, it's all Bush's fault. I love Fox News. "Obama demonized oil, wall st, insurance.... even lost Immelt.."
"Obama was forced to address Immigration". Wrong.
Actually it was one of his main campaign pledges, but then you dont seem to follow things very closely. Do you remember something called the Hispanic population. A large Democratic constituency. Google how they have been pushing WAY before Arizona to have immigration reform put on the front burner.
If you dont hate Obama, i have seen nothing to indicate any even handedness of evaluatioin. Your diatribes read like straight from John and Fox news's playbook. To give Obama an "F" on bipartisanship when it is so clearly the Republicans who have voted Zilch on major legislation out of an obvious political strategy is to be beyond absurd. I know you always put down looking
back in history but why dont you check how legislation is normally voted on even in Bush's era.
If you dont believe for one minute that Republicans are sitting on their hands then are clearly not impressed by facts. Sorry but Obama in case you havent noticed has been playing things to the center left on most issues. If you read the huffingtonpost or dailykos or even just followed the news you would understand that the left is very disappointed in Obama and critiques him constantly. This idea that Obama is "far left" is patently absurd that i dont even know what planet you live on. ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS. Again just read what the moderate and far left says. No other proof needed.
Pure unalterated BIAS. Democrat = good, Republican = bad. What amazes me most is that you believe that it only works one way; nope, democrats are NOT politicians, and they always cooperate with the republicans.Quote:
Originally Posted by Havakasha
Since you are an expert, how much left of the left is there? Really?
By the way, -125,000 jobs for $800 Billion. Get your head around this - the American economy is centered about businesses, not the federal government. If you disagree with that, maybe, just maybe John had you pegged correctly :)
Look who is talking about pure unadulterated biaa. For starters S&L gives Obama an "F" for bipartisanship and claims he really had hopes for Obama.
LMFAO.
This is from yesterday.
"President Obama discussed immigration reform during his meeting Tuesday with Senate Republicans on Capitol Hil. Republicans have deemed it politcally beneficial to block the Democrats' initiatives. It doesnt matter as the HIll reported, Obama told them he'd be 'willing to meet the halfway or 75 percent of the way on some of the big issues."
Any objective reading would give Republicans an "F" on bipartisanship but S&L has it reversed. I wonder where he gets his information from?
That is an ABSOLUTE lie that we got 125,00O jobs for 800 billion. That is really pretty shameful S&L. Its well known that the CBO (remember that objective body that you and all Republicans quote on deficits when it suites you and then disparage when it doesnt?) The CBO says it has brought us 2 to 3 million jobs and saved us from 11 % unemployment.
That is pure unadulterated bullcrap that you are spouting and its unbelievable after all our discussions that you would fall back on blatant lies.
The US economy is centered around private business but anyone knows that in times of Depressions and or deep recessions that govt must take up the slack. Conservative and progressive economist both agree. S&L and John dont. You seem to have more and more in common with John and that is particularly scary. He is a blatant liar and rigid ideoogue.
You havent been reading Dailykos and Huffingtonpost if you think people like "us" only think Republicans mess things up. Pure smokescreen on your part to suggest what my beliefs are despite what i have said repeatedly. Please find a Republcian source (Fox news?) that criticizes
the Republican leadership. It doesnt exist.
"The CBO now estimates that the stimulus put as many as 2.8 million people to work in the first three months of this year -- and raised GDP by as much as 4.2%.
The CBO estimates that the stimulus put 1.2 million to 2.8 million to work in the first quarter, and boosted GDP between 1.7% and 4.2%.
Thanks to the stimulus, the unemployment rate was lowered by between .7% and 1.5% in the first quarter, the CBO estimates."
S&L now contends he knows more about economics than the CBO. Classic.
Well the CBO better get with the folks who issue the jobs report because on is on Venus and the other Mars.Quote:
Originally Posted by Havakasha
And don't talk about unemployment as the disenfranchized have improved that number.
Feel free to LYFAO about Obama dissappointing me. I wish I could find the humor. Please, do not argue that democrats are less political than republicans. If you do, simply preface what that prior to trying to make your point. It will save a lot of effort.Quote:
Originally Posted by Havakasha
I'm talking about monthly numbers. The May jobs report cited a net loss of 125,000 due to Census workers moving on. An 85,000 gain for the private sector was cited, but from what I understand, that is about half of what we need.
I'm glad you agree about the US economy being centered about business. You acknowledge so little that sometimes I think you don't even try to understand my point - instead favoring YOUR favorite talking points.
Had a nice 4th so far. Ran a 5k with my kids this AM. My older one was 3rd for her age group and got her name called out to come up for her metal. That was cool.
You keep putting words in my mouth. When did i ever say Democrats were less political than Republicans. Politics is a seriously competetive business You got to stop setting up straw dogs. You have done this several times of late and
i dont quite understand it.
You said -125,000 for 800 billion That was just pure crap. You got to get clearer about what you are talking about otherwise it comes across as a blatant lie.The fact remains if there had been no stimulus or even half that stimulus the economists seem convinced we would be in much more trouble.
You can disbelieve that but its something most experts believe.
i have said in the past that i come from a business family so this idea that you put forward that somehow i dont understand business or dont believe in it as a central component of our economy is made up nonsense. The only argument i make is that there is a necessary balance between govt and business and when business and consumers arent doing well then govt has to step up . You on the other hand seem to completely ignore the fact that govt plays a significant role in our economy.
Check out this next article on subsidies to Oil companies just as an example of how govt helps out some of our biggest industries. No one on the right ever acknowledges it and complains vociferously when govt helps new industries such as solar, wind, hybrid cars etc.
P.S. Glad you had a nice 4th running with your kids. I'm going on a long bike ride in a little while myself. Otherwise I spent the day at Coney island doing some filmmaking. Hot as hell. Looks like the rest of the week is going to be pretty brutal. Stay cool and gather some facts not some Fox tainted data please. :)
Subsidies
Joe Raedle/Getty Images
When the Deepwater Horizon drilling platform set off the worst oil spill at sea in American history, it was flying the flag of the Marshall Islands. Registering there allowed the rig’s owner to significantly reduce its American taxes.The owner, Transocean, moved its corporate headquarters from Houston to the Cayman Islands in 1999 and then to Switzerland in 2008, maneuvers that also helped it avoid taxes.
At the same time, BP was reaping sizable tax benefits from leasing the rig. According to a letter sent in June to the Senate Finance Committee, the company used a tax break for the oil industry to write off 70 percent of the rent for Deepwater Horizon — a deduction of more than $225,000 a day since the lease began.
With federal officials now considering a new tax on petroleum production to pay for the cleanup, the industry is fighting the measure, warning that it will lead to job losses and higher gasoline prices, as well as an increased dependence on foreign oil.
But an examination of the American tax code indicates that oil production is among the most heavily subsidized businesses, with tax breaks available at virtually every stage of the exploration and extraction process.
According to the most recent study by the Congressional Budget Office, released in 2005, capital investments like oil field leases and drilling equipment are taxed at an effective rate of 9 percent, significantly lower than the overall rate of 25 percent for businesses in general and lower than virtually any other industry.
And for many small and midsize oil companies, the tax on capital investments is so low that it is more than eliminated by var-ious credits. These companies’ returns on those investments are often higher after taxes than before.
“The flow of revenues to oil companies is like the gusher at the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico: heavy and constant,” said Senator Robert Menendez, Democrat of New Jersey, who has worked alongside the Obama administration on a bill that would cut $20 billion in oil industry tax breaks over the next decade. “There is no reason for these corporations to shortchange the American taxpayer.”
Oil industry officials say that the tax breaks, which average about $4 billion a year according to various government reports, are a bargain for taxpayers. By helping producers weather market fluctuations and invest in technology, tax incentives are supporting an industry that the officials say provides 9.2 million jobs.
The American Petroleum Institute, an industry advocacy group, argues that even with subsidies, oil producers paid or incurred $280 billion in American income taxes from 2006 to 2008, and pay a higher percentage of their earnings in taxes than most other American corporations.
As oil continues to spread across the Gulf of Mexico, however, the industry is being forced to defend tax breaks that some say are being abused or are outdated.
The Senate Finance Committee on Wednesday announced that it was investigating whether Transocean had exploited tax laws by moving overseas to avoid paying taxes in the United States. Efforts to curtail the tax breaks are likely to face fierce opposition in Congress; the oil and natural gas industry has spent $340 million on lobbyists since 2008, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, which monitors political spending.
Jack N. Gerard, president of the American Petroleum Institute, warns that any cut in subsidies will cost jobs.
“These companies evaluate costs, risks and opportunities across the globe,” he said. “So if the U.S. makes changes in the tax code that discourage drilling in gulf waters, they will go elsewhere and take their jobs with them.”
But some government watchdog groups say that only the industry’s political muscle is preserving the tax breaks. An economist for the Treasury Department said in 2009 that a study had found that oil prices and potential profits were so high that eliminating the subsidies would decrease American output by less than half of one percent.
“We’re giving tax breaks to highly profitable companies to do what they would be doing anyway,” said Sima J. Gandhi, a policy analyst at the Center for American Progress, a liberal research organization. “That’s not an incentive; that’s a giveaway.”
Some of the tax breaks date back nearly a century, when they were intended to encourage exploration in an era of rudimentary technology, when costly investments frequently produced only dry holes. Because of one lingering provision from the Tariff Act of 1913, many small and midsize oil companies based in the United States can claim deductions for the lost value of tapped oil fields far beyond the amount the companies actually paid for the oil rights.