The Democrat Thread

[NorthSideSox72]

And President s***head 's idea is to propose a budget that spends 1.76 times what the gov't takes in in revenue. f***ing brilliant. But then says we all have to live within our means. PLease justify this this piece of s***.

Let's be a little honest here. NEITHER party is interested in real budgetary restraint here. Everyone who knows a damn thing about the budget realizes that the discretionary spending is a small percentage of the beast, and that cutting 10% versus cutting 15%, while a good discussion to have, isn't going to really solve the problem. Medicare, Soc Sec, Defense, other entitlements, Health Care, business tax policy, the insane number of tax deductions and credits out there... those are the big animals, and none of the party goons are even whispering about those. Sure, there are the few in the GOP and Dems who are, but they are the minority.

 

So don't pretend this is some giant lefty conspiracy.

 

[Soxbadger]

A state could change their own laws to allow for murder technically. It would be similar to the make my day law, that some states have. Now federal law trump state law. So you could be prosecuted federally for murder under a federal statute.

 

The easiest comparison is medicinal marijuana in Cali. In Cali its legal for certain entities to sell marijuana. The federal govt still could enforce federal drug laws against the people (and often did under Bush.)

 

And President s***head 's idea is to propose a budget that spends 1.76 times what the gov't takes in in revenue. f***ing brilliant. But then says we all have to live within our means. PLease justify this this piece of s***.

 

Well his real proposal was to allow the Bush tax cuts to expire which would have increased revenue. When you are balancing any budget you have 2 different ways to do it: A) Increase revenue and B ) Decrease expenditures.

 

Unfortunately we have a group of people who are unwilling to do anything in terms of A).

 

And unfortunately you can only cut B so much because B includes things that are necessary.

 

Its like if a family had a budget. And the family needs to spend $100 a week to survive. If you only have $80 and you need $100, your only option is to make more money. You cant cut to $80 because you are dead anyways.

 

Thus if you want to place blame, please place it on the people who are unwilling to pay more taxes to balance the budget.

 

Unless you want to cut the defense budget down to what normal countries spend, then we probably can get some where. But as long as we cant cut certain things, our only option is to raise revenue.

 

So you can call Obama a s***head until the cows come home, but it doesnt change the fact that we could have come pretty close to balancing the budget if Republicans allowed the US govt to generate more revenue.

 

/shrugs

 

Dont act pissed if you really dont want to solve the problem.

Edited February 15, 2011 by Soxbadger

[Balta1701]

If anyone wants to see the current state of laughable party-gutter politics in Congress nowadays, just look at the reactions to Obama's budget. Derision from the left AND right - which is fine if it makes any sense. But the descriptions people are spewing are just utterly ridiculous. You've got Lefties like JJ Jr and some liberal organizations saying that Obama is promoting radical right wing agendas, and GOP folks saying the exact opposite, all with a straight face. Its a little terrifying, really.

I'm personally partial to Senator Jeff Sessions's statements yesterday, on CNN. Here he is being asked if the $1.1 trillion in 10-year cuts proposed by the President's budget is a good starting point.

when you hear the $1.1 trillion in savings over ten years, what's your take? Is that a good start, senator?

 

SEN. JEFF SESSIONS, RANKING MEMBER OF THE SENATE BUDGET COMMITTEE: No, it's not. This is a ten-year budget. It sets the president's plans and what the country should do for the next 10 years. We -- I expect, according to projections, $12 trillion to $14 trillion in new debt added during that time, so $1 trillion reduction is insignificant and does not get us off the right course, and historically, we know the president's numbers are inflated, so it will be less reduction than that.

 

And here's Senator Sessions a few moments later in that same interview, praising the Republican budget for...saving $1 trillion in spending over 10 years.

CHETRY: I just want to ask you. You said on Fox News yesterday that $1 trillion in savings over ten years would be, quote, "The way you get the budget balanced." So, you seem to be at least somewhat satisfied with the $1 trillion figure.

 

SESSIONS: Well, if I made that comment, I misspoke. What I meant to say is even the $100 billion House proposal in reducing spending will amount to $1 trillion. And that's a step. I mean, because, you carry it out for ten years and you save $1 trillion in that fashion. So, spending reductions add up more than a lot of people think.

I think that sums up the budget debate well.

[StrangeSox]

Both sides full of s***, using it only to attack their opponents' preferred programs and praise their own while not really caring about the budget at all?

[Balta1701]

Both sides full of s***, using it only to attack their opponents' preferred programs and praise their own while not really caring about the budget at all?

Add in the corruption that is the DOD and you've got it all covered.

[StrangeSox]

That falls under the "preferred programs" clause

[Soxbadger]

Both sides are full of it, I think most rational people can agree with this. Its not that difficult to figure out expenditures and either make more money than them or cut until you are at them.

 

The problem is that both sides are looking at the issue idealistically instead of pragmatically.

[Balta1701]

That falls under the "preferred programs" clause

Yeah, but the difference with the DOD is that it always falls under both sides' preferred programs.

[Soxy]

Well your friendly neighbor to the north is having a bit of a meltdown. Scott Walker's "Budget Repair Bill" dissolves state workers right to collective bargaining (unless, of course, your union endorsed him in the election) and gives state workers what amounts to about a 7-10% paycut (depending upon the furlough situation it could be slightly more than 10%). This is particularly rough for UW system employees, some of whom haven't had a cost of living increase in over 5 years.

 

Big rallies in Madison tomorrow. Private unions (and public unions whose collective bargaining units would not be disbanded) are expected to turn out. Students have also been protesting on behalf of their faculty and staff.

 

Walker has also threatened to use the national guard in case workers strike.

[StrangeSox]

LOL.

 

I mean that with the deepest sympathies.

[NorthSideSox72]

Well your friendly neighbor to the north is having a bit of a meltdown. Scott Walker's "Budget Repair Bill" dissolves state workers right to collective bargaining (unless, of course, your union endorsed him in the election) and gives state workers what amounts to about a 7-10% paycut (depending upon the furlough situation it could be slightly more than 10%). This is particularly rough for UW system employees, some of whom haven't had a cost of living increase in over 5 years.

 

Big rallies in Madison tomorrow. Private unions (and public unions whose collective bargaining units would not be disbanded) are expected to turn out. Students have also been protesting on behalf of their faculty and staff.

 

Walker has also threatened to use the national guard in case workers strike.

lol wut? Use them to what, teach classes in their place?

 

Seriously, this guy has seemed like an idiot from day one. Not for making the cuts, mind you - some of those are probably necesary, even though I'm sure it sucks for a lot of people. But for going past that point, and doing things like threatening to use the National Guard against strikes, or turning down $1B in federal funding just to make a political point.

 

[HuskyCaucasian]

New Florida Republican Governor Rick Scott announced Wednesday he is rejecting money for the federal high-speed rail system that would have linked Orlando and Tampa. Apparently the ridership study was favorable to the line, but he canceled the project anyways. He didnt want of that "dirty" big government money.

Edited February 16, 2011 by Athomeboy_2000

[StrangeSox]

The House GOP budget bill raises the Pentagon's budget.

[NorthSideSox72]

New Florida Republican Governor Rick Scott announced Wednesday he is rejecting money for the federal high-speed rail system that would have linked Orlando and Tampa. Apparently the ridership study was favorable to the line, but he canceled the project anyways. He didnt want of that "dirty" big government money.

 

Well, in this case, its not nearly as laughably stupid as Walker's decision. Florida was still on the hook for billions of their own, so there is a strong argument to be made about it. And I don't know the financial projections of the line either, so its possible that Florida's contribution may not be offset by the gains.

 

His statement that these projections are historically over-optimistic is complete garbage of course. I can think of a couple major cities that put regional lines in place in recent years - Denver and Albuquerque/Santa Fe - both of which have had ridership well ABOVE projections. I don't know of any that have been implemented that were below.

 

And selfishly, my response to Florida is... Great! More money for the Midwest network! Bring it on!

 

To be clear, I think that in general, passenger rail and high speed upgrades are a good investment, and I certainly believe its worthwhile in the case of the midwestern network. But I won't go calling Florida stupid for cancelling theirs, since I honestly don't know the math well enough.

 

The House GOP budget bill raises the Pentagon's budget.

 

LOL, yeah, that GOP will be our budgetary savior! Not like those evil Liberals!

[Balta1701]

LOL, yeah, that GOP will be our budgetary savior! Not like those evil Liberals!

If we cut taxes more we can make up the difference.

[Balta1701]

I think we can all agree that this settles the health care debate once and for all.

The Canadian-born Bieber never plans on becoming an American citizen. “You guys are evil,” he says with a laugh. “Canada’s the best country in the world. We go to the doctor and we don’t need to worry about paying him, but here, your whole life, you’re broke because of medical bills. My bodyguard’s baby was premature, and now he has to pay for it. In Canada, if your baby’s premature, he stays in the hospital as long as he needs to, and then you go home.”

[Soxy]

lol wut? Use them to what, teach classes in their place?

 

Seriously, this guy has seemed like an idiot from day one. Not for making the cuts, mind you - some of those are probably necesary, even though I'm sure it sucks for a lot of people. But for going past that point, and doing things like threatening to use the National Guard against strikes, or turning down $1B in federal funding just to make a political point.

 

Seriously, I would love to see some 18 year old guardsman come in and teach my class about the finer points of the visual cortex. I would show up to watch that.

 

I am not super pissed about the paycut--we get a really cheap rate on insurance and retirement and all that so it's fair I should pay more. However, a modest cost of living increase every biennium is not, in my opinion, too much to ask for. Especially when facing a 7-10% paycut. I AM super pissed that he is refusing to negotiate and is trying to end collective bargaining.. This unilateral crap is nonsense.

[Balta1701]

This unilateral crap is nonsense.

That's because the goal is not the pay cuts or the balanced budget. The goal is to piss off liberals.

[Soxy]

That's because the goal is not the pay cuts or the balanced budget. The goal is to piss off liberals.

 

Oh clearly. That is absolutely clear--after doing the debt restructuring that he wants to do the budget will actually be balanced. This is retribution plain and simple. Why else would unions that endorsed him get to keep their collective bargaining rights? f***ing Walker.

[StrangeSox]

 

Basically what fox did in an interview with Dr.Ron Paul that i had posted earlier is take the straw poll announcement from cpac 2010 where Mitt Romney supporters loudly booed the announcement of Paul's win and used that footage and represented it as the straw poll announcement of 2011 cpac.

 

Then they had the balls to ask Paul to defend himself against those boos.

[Soxbadger]

So are you trying to tell me that Fox News is not fair and balanced?

 

I wonder how much traction thatll get.

[Balta1701]

New Florida Republican Governor Rick Scott announced Wednesday he is rejecting money for the federal high-speed rail system that would have linked Orlando and Tampa. Apparently the ridership study was favorable to the line, but he canceled the project anyways. He didnt want of that "dirty" big government money.

After a bit of thought, if this rail line had existed, I'd have been on it before, and I'd have blown a lot more money at the bar in Orlando than the zero dollars I actually blew since I had to be the DD to get us back across the peninsula after visiting KSC.

[StrangeSox]

So are you trying to tell me that Fox News is not fair and balanced?

 

I wonder how much traction thatll get.

 

It never hurts to point out how blatantly biased to their preferred narratives Fox News is. Again. Because lots of people are still susceptible to the same bulls***, different story.

[Balta1701]

Well, in this case, its not nearly as laughably stupid as Walker's decision. Florida was still on the hook for billions of their own, so there is a strong argument to be made about it. And I don't know the financial projections of the line either, so its possible that Florida's contribution may not be offset by the gains.

At least according to the Orlando Sentinel, this is incorrect; there were companies willing to foot the remaining $280 million of the cost not covered by the Feds and be on the hook for any cost overruns, in exchange for being the company that ran the rail line and could take profits off of it.

Florida's $2.6 billion high-speed project would be paid for almost entirely by the feds. Washington has agreed to send Florida all but $280 million of its cost. And some companies vying to run the trains indicate they'd cover the state's share. They're willing to do that because they believe running the Orlando-Tampa route would give them a leg up on operating a second high-speed rail line from Orlando to Miami — and other fast trains outside Florida.

 

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said he feared his state would have to pay for costly rail-project overruns. But meetings last month between Florida transportation officials and companies wanting to operate the trains reportedly revealed the companies' willingness to cover any construction overages.

 

Wisconsin Gov.-elect Scott Walker said his state would have had to pay too much to operate and maintain its rail line. But the company that runs high-speed trains in Florida would have to operate and maintain them for 30 years. The state, Florida DOT's Kevin Thibault told us, wouldn't have to pick up the cost.

 

Florida would need 23,000 people to build the rail line, and to find as many as 1,000 workers to operate it. The train would stimulate businesses along the line and help turn Orlando and Tampa into a single market that attracts entrepreneurs eager to reap the benefits of the nation's most advanced transit system.

 

And it would offer commuters and tourists an alternative to an increasingly gridlocked I-4. It also would prove cheaper than the alternative: Building another lane of Interstate 4 — just from Tampa to Lakeland — would cost $3 billion.

[NorthSideSox72]

At least according to the Orlando Sentinel, this is incorrect; there were companies willing to foot the remaining $280 million of the cost not covered by the Feds and be on the hook for any cost overruns, in exchange for being the company that ran the rail line and could take profits off of it.

Well, IF all that is true - the cost overruns were basically zero to the state and the cost of building another lane was $3B - then this was indeed yet another idiot sheep deciding to hook up to the "hate it 'cause it was Obama" train.

 

I'm going to put this out there now... in five years, when these buffoons have been run out of office and the states willing to take the project capital (IL, CA for example) suddenly have billions of new investment and thousands of new jobs and cheaper transportation... history will laugh at said buffoons. Plus, since CA and IL would have a huge leg up on these initiatives, all the companies that will be making and maintaining the systems will likely set up shop in those states, providing even more jobs and tax revenue.

 

That $2.6B that FL is giving up is enough to do huge work in IL, CA and IL. I am looking forward to that.

 

Again, IF these articles are true.