Your Reaction to the State of the Union?
January 25th, 2011
(830 views )
WASHINGTON (AP) - Reaching for unity, President Barack Obama
implored Democrats and Republicans Tuesday night to rally behind an
economic agenda of federal spending on core areas alongside a long,
hard commitment to reining in the nation's debt. He promised to
veto any bill that contained pet projects and said that the
nation's political leadership is now a "shared responsibility."
The president called on Congress to simplify the tax system and
get rid of loopholes, announcing that he would support using the
saved money to lower the corporate tax rate for the first time in
25 years without adding to the deficit.
He called for freezing discretionary government spending outside
of national security for the next five years, saying that would
save $400 billion as a step toward reducing the country's
staggering debt. The president said the budget discipline would
require "painful cuts" in cherished programs without identifying
any of them.
The White House released Obama's prepared speech about an hour
before he delivered it to a joint session of Congress in the House
chamber.
Obama said the nation needs a "bipartisan solution" to
strengthen Social Security and keep the program on firm financial
footing, but he offered no specific prescription. He did set some
limits, though, including that any reform must come "without
slashing benefits for future generations and without subjecting
Americans' guaranteed retirement income to the whims of the stock
market."
Obama's address was built around promoting concentrated spending
in areas such as education, research and transportation and
promising reductions in the nation's staggering debt and reforms of
government at a time when voters are tired of federal bailouts and
regulation.
He was delivering his speech to a television audience in the
tens of millions and, in front of him, the members of the new-look
Congress. Over his shoulder a reminder of the shift in power on
Capitol Hill: new Republican House Speaker John Boehner.
In a broad proposal to reshape the government, Obama said he
would seek authority to merge, consolidate and reorganize federal
agencies. The White House said that would be the first such
overhaul of the bureaucracy in half a century.
The pitch was part of an overarching reform theme in Obama's
address. He also was calling on Congress to become more open and
show when members are meeting with lobbyists.
The public has been clamoring for a leaner government, although
his efforts are likely to be more modest than the government
changes sought by some conservatives.
In tougher language than he's used before, Obama threatened to
veto any legislation that contains the special, targeted
congressional spending measures known as earmarks. He has been
demanding limits on pet projects since his 2008 presidential
campaign, a call he reissued following Republican victories in the
2010 midterm elections.
On health care, the president defended his landmark overhaul law
against Republican efforts to repeal it.
Obama said he knows there's opposition to the law's provision
extending insurance coverage to 30 million people. But with
patients who've benefited from the law watching from the gallery,
he said he's not willing to go back to the days when insurance
companies could deny coverage to people with pre-existing
conditions.
And in a speech with little focus on national security, Obama
appeared to close the door on keeping any significant U.S. military
presence in Iraq beyond the end of the year.
"This year, our civilians will forge a lasting partnership with
the Iraqi people, while we finish the job of bringing our troops
out of Iraq," the president said.
Comments, Pingbacks:
Comment from: Bill F. [Visitor] 
· http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2011/01/obama_foreign_policy_thin.html
· http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2011/01/obama_foreign_policy_thin.html
Obama's State of the Union address thin on foreign policy:
01/25/2011
The focus of this State of the Union address was domestic rather than foreign -- and perhaps properly so, given Americans' continuing preoccupation with the economy. Even in that context, though, President Obama's portrait of U.S. engagement in the world was thin -- and weak.
By Obama's account, the most important American foreign initiatives in 2011 will be retreats -- the withdrawal of troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. The president portrayed the two wars not as vital missions but as loose ends to be wrapped up. In Iraq, he said, "we finish the job of bringing our troops out" -- even though Iraq's pro-Western parties, such as the Kurds, would like at least some American soldiers to stay. In Afghanistan, "we will begin to bring our troops home." Never mind defeating the Taliban -- Obama didn't set that goal.
What of Middle East peace, a great focus of Obama's first two years? The president didn't mention it. Nor did he discuss the spreading popular unrest in the Arab Middle East, other than to say that the United States "stands with the people of Tunisia," whatever that might mean. The efforts to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, and North Korea from expanding its arsenal, were covered with perfunctory phrases.
So will there be any significant American foreign policy initiative in 2011? To judge from the State of the Union, there will be one: a trip by Obama to South America. For better or worse, Brazil, Chile and El Salvador are the new subjects of American foreign policy. Maybe they can offer advice about teacher training, or high-speed rail.
01/25/2011
The focus of this State of the Union address was domestic rather than foreign -- and perhaps properly so, given Americans' continuing preoccupation with the economy. Even in that context, though, President Obama's portrait of U.S. engagement in the world was thin -- and weak.
By Obama's account, the most important American foreign initiatives in 2011 will be retreats -- the withdrawal of troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. The president portrayed the two wars not as vital missions but as loose ends to be wrapped up. In Iraq, he said, "we finish the job of bringing our troops out" -- even though Iraq's pro-Western parties, such as the Kurds, would like at least some American soldiers to stay. In Afghanistan, "we will begin to bring our troops home." Never mind defeating the Taliban -- Obama didn't set that goal.
What of Middle East peace, a great focus of Obama's first two years? The president didn't mention it. Nor did he discuss the spreading popular unrest in the Arab Middle East, other than to say that the United States "stands with the people of Tunisia," whatever that might mean. The efforts to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, and North Korea from expanding its arsenal, were covered with perfunctory phrases.
So will there be any significant American foreign policy initiative in 2011? To judge from the State of the Union, there will be one: a trip by Obama to South America. For better or worse, Brazil, Chile and El Salvador are the new subjects of American foreign policy. Maybe they can offer advice about teacher training, or high-speed rail.
Permalink 01/26/11 @ 09:03
Comment from: Bill F. [Visitor] · http://frontpagemag.com/2011/01/26/president-government/print/
· http://frontpagemag.com/2011/01/26/president-government/print/
President Government:
January 26, 2011
The president’s State of the Union address was a reminder of how fast things can change in Washington—and how much remains the same inside the White House.
Some of the changes were visible and obvious—the absence of Nancy Pelosi and her permanent grin behind the dais, the growing number of Republicans in the chamber, the scrambled seating arrangement that had the welcome effect of tamping down the competing choruses of cheering and jeering.
But other changes—and the evidence of continuity—are better identified by comparing this address with the president’s 2009 and 2010 addresses.
In his 2009 address to Congress (technically not a State of the Union), the president lectured Congress and the American people about how they “managed to spend more money and pile up more debt, both as individuals and through our Government, than ever before.”
Of course, in the intervening months between then and now, he proceeded to go on the biggest spending binge in American history: expending $862 billion on a stimulus that stimulated nothing but the government sector, spawning a $1-trillion healthcare behemoth that will surely grow bigger than his actuaries predicted or imagined, and adding an unprecedented $1.4 trillion in deficit spending.
But yesterday, just 23 months later, he declared, “We need to take responsibility for our deficit” and “rein in our deficits.” He said he was open to “painful cuts” and “willing to eliminate whatever we can honestly afford to do without.” He even proposed a five-year freeze on annual domestic spending at current levels. “This would reduce the deficit by more than $400 billion over the next decade.”
Now that’s change we can believe in. Given that the House just hours earlier passed a measure rolling back spending to FY08 levels, there would seem to be a compromise in the offing. And given that the House controls the purse strings—and budget- and deficit-cutters control the House—the House majority would seem to have some leverage.
Of course, cutting spending will be difficult if Congress keeps, in the president’s words, “larding up legislation with pet projects.” That helps explain why he called for “earmark reform” in 2010. This year he was even sterner, warning that “if a bill comes to my desk with earmarks inside, I will veto it.”
That’s sounds like the Barack Obama of 2008. Of course, as president, he had no problem signing the stimulus bill or the healthcare bill, both loaded with pork and pet projects. One suspects that the president’s tough talk on earmarks may have something to do with the new makeup of Congress.
Another thing that can be attributed to the new makeup of Congress is the president’s slightly chastened posture. In 2009, after all, he was the “I won” president; during the 2011 State of Union, he was the “we can work together” president.
Some of the changes—both rhetorical and actual—reflected in the 2011 address make your eyes roll uncontrollably. For example, the president boasted in yesterday’s address that he’s “ordered a review of government regulations.”
Really? The president’s healthcare-reform law creates 159 new sub-agencies, committees, bureaus and commissions, each with a regulatory role. Likewise, the financial overhaul that was passed in mid-2010 creates 243 brand new federal rulemaking authorities, spawning thousands of new pages in the Federal Register. And the Heritage Foundation has found that in 2010 “an unprecedented 43 major new regulations were imposed by Washington. And based on reports from government regulators themselves, the total cost of these rules topped $26.5 billion.”
The president also displayed a Clintonian level of brazenness during his State of the Union address by taking credit for tax cuts he once campaigned against—“Thanks to the tax cuts we passed, Americans’ paychecks are a little bigger today [and] every business can write off the full cost of the new investments they make this year”—before calling for those same tax cuts to be eliminated. “We simply cannot afford a permanent extension of the tax cuts for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans,” he said.
So, in 2008 and 2009, he was against the extension of those tax rates—they are not “cuts” after seven years on the books. He was then for the extension in December 2010 (because he signed it. He was still for it in the first third of his 2011 State of the Union address. And he was against it in the final third of his 2011 State of the Union address.
That brings us to what remains the same inside the White House. President Obama believes in government. He believes government knows best how to spend the American people’s hard-earned money, how to allocate resources, solve problems, create jobs, and, of course, “invest.”
For President Obama, “invest” as a euphemism for government spending.
In 2009, it was a promise “to invest in areas like energy, health care, and education.” He talked about government’s role in building railroads, creating “a system of public high schools,” laying down highways, sending a man to the Moon, and triggering “an explosion of technology.” Thanks to his recovery plan, he boasted, “we will double this nation’s supply of renewable energy…lay down thousands of miles of power lines… [and] put Americans to work making our homes and buildings more efficient.”
In 2010, it was “invest in our people.” The president vowed to use government to “create the conditions necessary for businesses to expand and hire more workers…building the infrastructure of tomorrow.”
And in 2011, it’s a promise to “invest in biomedical research, information technology, and especially clean energy technology;” a success story that begins “with the help of a government loan;” a future dependent on “100,000 new teachers;” a vision for “thousands of good jobs for the hard-hit construction industry” to “put more Americans to work repairing crumbling roads and bridges;” “investments in innovation, education and infrastructure.”
In a Freudian slip, John McCain once called Barack Obama “Senator Government.” Today, he’s President Government.
January 26, 2011
The president’s State of the Union address was a reminder of how fast things can change in Washington—and how much remains the same inside the White House.
Some of the changes were visible and obvious—the absence of Nancy Pelosi and her permanent grin behind the dais, the growing number of Republicans in the chamber, the scrambled seating arrangement that had the welcome effect of tamping down the competing choruses of cheering and jeering.
But other changes—and the evidence of continuity—are better identified by comparing this address with the president’s 2009 and 2010 addresses.
In his 2009 address to Congress (technically not a State of the Union), the president lectured Congress and the American people about how they “managed to spend more money and pile up more debt, both as individuals and through our Government, than ever before.”
Of course, in the intervening months between then and now, he proceeded to go on the biggest spending binge in American history: expending $862 billion on a stimulus that stimulated nothing but the government sector, spawning a $1-trillion healthcare behemoth that will surely grow bigger than his actuaries predicted or imagined, and adding an unprecedented $1.4 trillion in deficit spending.
But yesterday, just 23 months later, he declared, “We need to take responsibility for our deficit” and “rein in our deficits.” He said he was open to “painful cuts” and “willing to eliminate whatever we can honestly afford to do without.” He even proposed a five-year freeze on annual domestic spending at current levels. “This would reduce the deficit by more than $400 billion over the next decade.”
Now that’s change we can believe in. Given that the House just hours earlier passed a measure rolling back spending to FY08 levels, there would seem to be a compromise in the offing. And given that the House controls the purse strings—and budget- and deficit-cutters control the House—the House majority would seem to have some leverage.
Of course, cutting spending will be difficult if Congress keeps, in the president’s words, “larding up legislation with pet projects.” That helps explain why he called for “earmark reform” in 2010. This year he was even sterner, warning that “if a bill comes to my desk with earmarks inside, I will veto it.”
That’s sounds like the Barack Obama of 2008. Of course, as president, he had no problem signing the stimulus bill or the healthcare bill, both loaded with pork and pet projects. One suspects that the president’s tough talk on earmarks may have something to do with the new makeup of Congress.
Another thing that can be attributed to the new makeup of Congress is the president’s slightly chastened posture. In 2009, after all, he was the “I won” president; during the 2011 State of Union, he was the “we can work together” president.
Some of the changes—both rhetorical and actual—reflected in the 2011 address make your eyes roll uncontrollably. For example, the president boasted in yesterday’s address that he’s “ordered a review of government regulations.”
Really? The president’s healthcare-reform law creates 159 new sub-agencies, committees, bureaus and commissions, each with a regulatory role. Likewise, the financial overhaul that was passed in mid-2010 creates 243 brand new federal rulemaking authorities, spawning thousands of new pages in the Federal Register. And the Heritage Foundation has found that in 2010 “an unprecedented 43 major new regulations were imposed by Washington. And based on reports from government regulators themselves, the total cost of these rules topped $26.5 billion.”
The president also displayed a Clintonian level of brazenness during his State of the Union address by taking credit for tax cuts he once campaigned against—“Thanks to the tax cuts we passed, Americans’ paychecks are a little bigger today [and] every business can write off the full cost of the new investments they make this year”—before calling for those same tax cuts to be eliminated. “We simply cannot afford a permanent extension of the tax cuts for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans,” he said.
So, in 2008 and 2009, he was against the extension of those tax rates—they are not “cuts” after seven years on the books. He was then for the extension in December 2010 (because he signed it. He was still for it in the first third of his 2011 State of the Union address. And he was against it in the final third of his 2011 State of the Union address.
That brings us to what remains the same inside the White House. President Obama believes in government. He believes government knows best how to spend the American people’s hard-earned money, how to allocate resources, solve problems, create jobs, and, of course, “invest.”
For President Obama, “invest” as a euphemism for government spending.
In 2009, it was a promise “to invest in areas like energy, health care, and education.” He talked about government’s role in building railroads, creating “a system of public high schools,” laying down highways, sending a man to the Moon, and triggering “an explosion of technology.” Thanks to his recovery plan, he boasted, “we will double this nation’s supply of renewable energy…lay down thousands of miles of power lines… [and] put Americans to work making our homes and buildings more efficient.”
In 2010, it was “invest in our people.” The president vowed to use government to “create the conditions necessary for businesses to expand and hire more workers…building the infrastructure of tomorrow.”
And in 2011, it’s a promise to “invest in biomedical research, information technology, and especially clean energy technology;” a success story that begins “with the help of a government loan;” a future dependent on “100,000 new teachers;” a vision for “thousands of good jobs for the hard-hit construction industry” to “put more Americans to work repairing crumbling roads and bridges;” “investments in innovation, education and infrastructure.”
In a Freudian slip, John McCain once called Barack Obama “Senator Government.” Today, he’s President Government.
Permalink 01/26/11 @ 09:29
Comment from: John--- [Visitor]
Last night all we heard were vague insinuations of an ambiguous sort of plan, and 2 hellbent agents of doom hellbent to derail it from the 3Monkeys "Hear", "See", and "Speak" no evil of those who have led this country to the brinks of extinction. No doubt about it, ...Middle Class and small business America got triangulated last night. And those who bankrupted, swindled, and extorted her people and are holding $2trillion dollars of your hard earned tax money got away scott free.
No growth equals "zero" opportunity for America's survival. Every bit of the sacrifice will be demanded from working stiffs, from their "broken" promised and contracted in writing entitlements, and the offset lifetime payments on the $13.7deficit.
The jobs of tomorrow will be strictly restruicted to that of the bare bones, no frills, lower benefit variety that in no way keeps up with higher energy costs, new banking surcharges on checking and credit usages, property, food and beverage taxes. Those are what looms ahead, just on the personal level. State and local taxes and surcharges will be heaped on top of that to balance state budgets.
Why because according to all of these shills we have in this appointed quasi leadership structure there is nobody that puts us first ahead of their Free Trade Committments to the dictatorships and oligarchys. As well as their incessant rush to plunge us into the pit with the rush of the worlds human work components.
Pity the small business entrepeneur stuck paying for loans on businesses after what appears to be "consumers" for their goods begin to submerge at years end.
ALL OSAMA, PAUL, AND THE PARROT HEAD FROM MINNESOTA DID LAST NIGHT WAS OFFER YOU THREE DIFFERENT WAYS TO SELECT AMERICA'S DEMISE.
Just because the background talking heads all want to endorse one malevolent practice over the other doesn't make any of them good for mainstream America or its entrepeneurs. Without a "fair" trade committment as a support they will lose to foreign copycats, and to the tax, healthcare and private insurance mark up systems.
WHAM! Bet your bottom dollar, You'll never know what hit you.
ITS TIME TO FACE IT AMERICA, ...WE'VE BEEN HAD!
No growth equals "zero" opportunity for America's survival. Every bit of the sacrifice will be demanded from working stiffs, from their "broken" promised and contracted in writing entitlements, and the offset lifetime payments on the $13.7deficit.
The jobs of tomorrow will be strictly restruicted to that of the bare bones, no frills, lower benefit variety that in no way keeps up with higher energy costs, new banking surcharges on checking and credit usages, property, food and beverage taxes. Those are what looms ahead, just on the personal level. State and local taxes and surcharges will be heaped on top of that to balance state budgets.
Why because according to all of these shills we have in this appointed quasi leadership structure there is nobody that puts us first ahead of their Free Trade Committments to the dictatorships and oligarchys. As well as their incessant rush to plunge us into the pit with the rush of the worlds human work components.
Pity the small business entrepeneur stuck paying for loans on businesses after what appears to be "consumers" for their goods begin to submerge at years end.
ALL OSAMA, PAUL, AND THE PARROT HEAD FROM MINNESOTA DID LAST NIGHT WAS OFFER YOU THREE DIFFERENT WAYS TO SELECT AMERICA'S DEMISE.
Just because the background talking heads all want to endorse one malevolent practice over the other doesn't make any of them good for mainstream America or its entrepeneurs. Without a "fair" trade committment as a support they will lose to foreign copycats, and to the tax, healthcare and private insurance mark up systems.
WHAM! Bet your bottom dollar, You'll never know what hit you.
ITS TIME TO FACE IT AMERICA, ...WE'VE BEEN HAD!
Permalink 01/26/11 @ 10:40
Comment from: Gail [Visitor]
Is KING OBAMA'S STATE OF THE UNION SPEECH A MEA CULPA FOR HIS SPENDING SPREE OF THE TAX STIMULUS AND THE BAILOUT OF WALL STREET AND CRONIES, ETC.?
THE DEBT HAS BEEN SNOWBALLING FOR SOME TIME, E.G., WHEN BUSH JR. TOOK OFFICE, HIS SALARY WAS DOUBLED.
AND, ALL THE COUNTRY GOVERNMENT SALARIES ARE TOP HEAVY.
IF THEY ARE ALL SERIOUS ABOUT THIS DEBT, HOW ABOUT CUTTING THE SALARIES 50%?
THEN, MAKE ALL NOT-FOR-PROFIT PARKS, ASSOCIATIONS, RELIGIONS, NOT-FOR-PROFIT WHATEVER PAY THEIR SHARE OF THE TAXES AND GET IT OFF THE BACKS OF THE WORKING GUY.
WE WILL SEE QUICK WHO IS REALLY INTERESTED IN WHAT AND WHAT IS REALLY IMPORTANT WHEN EVERYONE IS PAYING TAXES, E.G., HOW MUCH THEY REALLY CARE ABOUT KEEPING A PARTICULAR PARK OPEN--WE'LL SEEE WHO COMES UP WITH THE MONEY TO PAY THE TAXES.
THE DEBT HAS BEEN SNOWBALLING FOR SOME TIME, E.G., WHEN BUSH JR. TOOK OFFICE, HIS SALARY WAS DOUBLED.
AND, ALL THE COUNTRY GOVERNMENT SALARIES ARE TOP HEAVY.
IF THEY ARE ALL SERIOUS ABOUT THIS DEBT, HOW ABOUT CUTTING THE SALARIES 50%?
THEN, MAKE ALL NOT-FOR-PROFIT PARKS, ASSOCIATIONS, RELIGIONS, NOT-FOR-PROFIT WHATEVER PAY THEIR SHARE OF THE TAXES AND GET IT OFF THE BACKS OF THE WORKING GUY.
WE WILL SEE QUICK WHO IS REALLY INTERESTED IN WHAT AND WHAT IS REALLY IMPORTANT WHEN EVERYONE IS PAYING TAXES, E.G., HOW MUCH THEY REALLY CARE ABOUT KEEPING A PARTICULAR PARK OPEN--WE'LL SEEE WHO COMES UP WITH THE MONEY TO PAY THE TAXES.
Permalink 01/26/11 @ 11:23
Comment from: Gail [Visitor]
Is KING OBAMA'S STATE OF THE UNION SPEECH A MEA CULPA--IN WORDS ONLY--FOR HIS SPENDING SPREE OF THE TAX STIMULUS AND THE BAILOUT OF WALL STREET AND CRONIES, ETC., WHILE HE PUTS IN PLACE HIS MARXIST AGENDA?
Permalink 01/26/11 @ 11:25
Comment from: peter [Visitor]
rep ryan said we face a burden of debt but last month they passed 1 trillion dollars in tax cuts for the weaalthy and now they recognize we have a large deficit. All the proposals for cutting the deficit is on the back of the middle class senior citizens, Nowhere is there any cuts for farm subsidies energy research oil and gas subsidies. If the gop makes cuts to defense it will be token cuts to show they will cut the waste. They would have been better off not giving the tax cuts and more deeper cuts in defense which gates stated could be done. There priorities are mixed up because just to cut programs is not the way to go. There should be solutions to these problems. Again the middle class will be poorer and wall street bankers and the rich will not have to sacrifice nothing.
Permalink 01/26/11 @ 13:20
Comment from: Mike G [Visitor]
We have heard it said “words matter” or “words have meaning” My thoughts on some of meaning from the address last night:
When we heard the words “invest” it really meant, “ we will continue to spend, even though we don’t have the money”.
When we heard “freezing government spending,” it really meant, “ I am not willing to cut anything or any of our pay or benefits, even if it far exceeds the private sector”.
When we heard, “I will VETO any bill with earmarks” it really meant “we will just call ‘earmarks’ by a different name later and pass the bill.”
When we heard “I will eliminate waste in government” it really meant, “according to my definition of waste, which is close to nothing”
Is it cynical to think this way? Probably. Maybe because in the private sector (non-Union) job, you don’t stay in business or keep your job, if you don’t make money. There are no cost of living raises. You are paid by performance. If the president is sincere, then let him and congress get paid by performance. They can make X amount of money and keep there benefits if their plan creates X amount of private sector jobs. Otherwise, everything they say are just words, with no true meaning and empty promises.
When we heard the words “invest” it really meant, “ we will continue to spend, even though we don’t have the money”.
When we heard “freezing government spending,” it really meant, “ I am not willing to cut anything or any of our pay or benefits, even if it far exceeds the private sector”.
When we heard, “I will VETO any bill with earmarks” it really meant “we will just call ‘earmarks’ by a different name later and pass the bill.”
When we heard “I will eliminate waste in government” it really meant, “according to my definition of waste, which is close to nothing”
Is it cynical to think this way? Probably. Maybe because in the private sector (non-Union) job, you don’t stay in business or keep your job, if you don’t make money. There are no cost of living raises. You are paid by performance. If the president is sincere, then let him and congress get paid by performance. They can make X amount of money and keep there benefits if their plan creates X amount of private sector jobs. Otherwise, everything they say are just words, with no true meaning and empty promises.
Permalink 01/26/11 @ 13:27
Comment from: Mike G [Visitor]
"Nowhere is there any cuts for farm subsidies energy research oil and gas subsidies. If the gop makes cuts to defense it will be token cuts to show they will cut the waste. They would have been better off not giving the tax cuts and more deeper cuts in defense which gates stated could be done."
Peter, the rich were paying the same tax rate for the past 10 years, so it is not a tax-cut. What it would have been was a tax hike on the rich to pay for more government. That being said, I agree with your ideas of further cuts in places that the GOP may resist but I think we will have to settle for give and take and compromise, not all GOP or all Democrat ideas.
I also believe the rich should pay more taxes but not until our government gets its spending habits in order. Otherwise, it is like borrowing more money just to buy us some more time.
Peter, the rich were paying the same tax rate for the past 10 years, so it is not a tax-cut. What it would have been was a tax hike on the rich to pay for more government. That being said, I agree with your ideas of further cuts in places that the GOP may resist but I think we will have to settle for give and take and compromise, not all GOP or all Democrat ideas.
I also believe the rich should pay more taxes but not until our government gets its spending habits in order. Otherwise, it is like borrowing more money just to buy us some more time.
Permalink 01/26/11 @ 13:42
Comment from: Gail [Visitor]
KING OBAMA! LIAR! LIAR! YOUR PANTS ARE ON FIRE!
KING OBAMA IS RUNNING THE WORLD AT THE EXPENSE OF THE UNITED STATES! E.G., CHINA!
THE UNITED STATES IS A POLICE STATE WITH THE LITTLE PEOPLE ON ENTITLEMENT PROGRAMS, WHILE KING OBAMA IS COHORTING WITH HEADS OF STATE OF FOREIGN COUNTRIES
KING OBAMA IS RUNNING THE WORLD AT THE EXPENSE OF THE UNITED STATES! E.G., CHINA!
THE UNITED STATES IS A POLICE STATE WITH THE LITTLE PEOPLE ON ENTITLEMENT PROGRAMS, WHILE KING OBAMA IS COHORTING WITH HEADS OF STATE OF FOREIGN COUNTRIES
Permalink 01/26/11 @ 13:54
Comment from: Gail [Visitor]
p.S. If King Obama wants to save the United States, how about a stiff tariff on the goods from china? GEORGE WASHINGTON PUT TARIFFS ON FOREIGN GOODS IN ORDER THAT AMERICANS COMPETE.
Permalink 01/26/11 @ 13:57
Comment from: Peter [Visitor]
The tax cuts proposed in 2000 were temporary and due to expire in 2011. This was a extension of those tax cuts. It would not be a tax hike but return to the rate of 2000. If the deficit is so bad the gop should not even had considered extending them to add nearly 1 trillion dollars over 10 years nor should they have granted middle class tax cuts. The purpose of those tax cuts were supposed to create jobs but since 2007 no jobs were created and will do very little to expand the economy. It would had been better to put that money into small business. I agree congress should put its fiscal house in order but you do not do that by adding 1 trillion to the deficit. There was no indication in the last congress to make up the lost revenue. This is the reason we are in so much debt it because the congress does not have a plan for medicare social security only wants to make draconian cuts. Kantor has a plan for medicare to give future retirees vouchers and it would increase with inflation. But they do not factor in medical inflation that can run as high as 30% a year, so future retirees would bear the enormous cost of this inflation. There is no planning whatsoever. There is talk of letting some states go for bankruptcy.,which would be disasterous for the municipal bond market. And what supplier would do business with the state knowing their credit was worthless. It is these hair brain ideas that makes you think we elected idiots instead of reps and senators.
Permalink 01/26/11 @ 15:57
Comment from: John--- [Visitor]
MikeG: Mark my words, this boat is dead in the water, ...and listing.
There is no private sector "only"
solution that can cure this nation. This was just another parasitical invitation to ruin. Just like all the others the G-S scams, the Madoff scam & deregulation scams. The banksta's, SWFs and megas are licking their chops awaiting the wave of new adventurers into their webs of deceit and confusion.
This is the same one using a different angle. Obama invites you to put your neck, your business ideas, and assets on the line, then steps to the side as Paul or the magpie from Minnesota with their "lockstep" majority that was bought and paid for in this last election- angle to chop off the customer base that would support your new business and slip your neck into their noose in the same fell swoop. Then having done their jobs as fixers, the banksta's and their collections units swoop in with all the leverage in hand- they can extend your credit at shylock interest rates, choose to buy you out if prospects look good, write it off as a loss but, or DOUBLE BINGO!! shift that loss onto the government loan ledgers so that taxpayers get stuck with the full tab of their doing business.
The banksta's enjoy the double dip and luxury to either buy out at pennies on the dollar or write off the loss and put it on the taxpayer ledgers. Viola! Whoopee! ...and there goes another sector of America into the confines branded for debtors prison or a lifetime as 3rd world indentured servant.
CAVEAT EMPTOR!
Read my lips, these new jobs aren't adding up to expanding anybodys expendable capital. Most to many are returning to work at "lesser" pay with "lowered" benefits.
**** Food, gas, property and school taxes all rising dramatically. You also be should be focusing on the dramatic amount of the increases in ultra violence in todays crime rates and paying closer attention when the killers you see were family men and women killing other family members, children and parents. Then tally the percentage of those killings that were made because of dire financial debt, fear of homelessness or had $$$ as prime motivation. Shouldn't that be part of your analysis and indication of how bad things are in this country?
If not, you don't know a thing about finance and risk.
There is no private sector "only"
solution that can cure this nation. This was just another parasitical invitation to ruin. Just like all the others the G-S scams, the Madoff scam & deregulation scams. The banksta's, SWFs and megas are licking their chops awaiting the wave of new adventurers into their webs of deceit and confusion.
This is the same one using a different angle. Obama invites you to put your neck, your business ideas, and assets on the line, then steps to the side as Paul or the magpie from Minnesota with their "lockstep" majority that was bought and paid for in this last election- angle to chop off the customer base that would support your new business and slip your neck into their noose in the same fell swoop. Then having done their jobs as fixers, the banksta's and their collections units swoop in with all the leverage in hand- they can extend your credit at shylock interest rates, choose to buy you out if prospects look good, write it off as a loss but, or DOUBLE BINGO!! shift that loss onto the government loan ledgers so that taxpayers get stuck with the full tab of their doing business.
The banksta's enjoy the double dip and luxury to either buy out at pennies on the dollar or write off the loss and put it on the taxpayer ledgers. Viola! Whoopee! ...and there goes another sector of America into the confines branded for debtors prison or a lifetime as 3rd world indentured servant.
CAVEAT EMPTOR!
Read my lips, these new jobs aren't adding up to expanding anybodys expendable capital. Most to many are returning to work at "lesser" pay with "lowered" benefits.
**** Food, gas, property and school taxes all rising dramatically. You also be should be focusing on the dramatic amount of the increases in ultra violence in todays crime rates and paying closer attention when the killers you see were family men and women killing other family members, children and parents. Then tally the percentage of those killings that were made because of dire financial debt, fear of homelessness or had $$$ as prime motivation. Shouldn't that be part of your analysis and indication of how bad things are in this country?
If not, you don't know a thing about finance and risk.
Permalink 01/26/11 @ 18:49
Comment from: John--- [Visitor]
MikeG: Mark my words, this boat is dead in the water, ...and listing.
There is no private sector "only"
solution that can cure this nation. This was just another parasitical invitation to ruin. Just like all the others the G-S scams, the Madoff scam & deregulation scams. The banksta's, SWFs and megas are licking their chops awaiting the wave of new adventurers into their webs of deceit and confusion.
This is the same one just using a slightly different angle to get the small business man to bite. Tax write off for 1yr. Big deal both C and S Corp get that already.
Obama invites you to put your neck, your business ideas, and assets on the line, then steps to the side as Paul or the magpie from Minnesota with their "lockstep" majority that was bought and paid for in this last election- angle to chop off the customer base that would support your new business and slip your neck into their noose in the same fell swoop.
By next year the Fed pulls the rug out from under and raises its rates,... Then having done their jobs as fixers, the banksta's and their collections units swoop in with all the leverage in hand- they can extend your credit at shylock interest rates, choose to buy you out if prospects look good, write it off as a loss, or DOUBLE BINGO!! THE BANKSTA cartel sheds their private sector skins and shifts that loss onto the government loan ledgers THE SAME WAY AS THEY DID WITH FANNIE & FREDDIE so that taxpayers get stuck with the full tab of their doing business.
The banksta's enjoy the double dip and luxury to either buy out at pennies on the dollar or write off the loss and put it on the taxpayer ledgers. Viola! Whoopee! ...and there goes another sector of America into the confines branded for debtors prison or a lifetime as 3rd world indentured servant.
CAVEAT EMPTOR!
Read my lips, these new jobs aren't adding up to expanding anybodys expendable capital. Most to many are returning to work at "lesser" pay with "lowered" benefits.
**** Food, gas, property and school taxes all rising dramatically. You also be should be focusing on the dramatic amount of the increases in ultra violence in todays crime rates and paying closer attention when the killers you see were family men and women killing other family members, children and parents. Then tally the percentage of those killings that were made because of dire financial debt, fear of homelessness or had $$$ as prime motivation. Shouldn't that be part of your analysis and indication of how bad things are in this country?
If not, you don't know a thing about finance and risk.
There is no private sector "only"
solution that can cure this nation. This was just another parasitical invitation to ruin. Just like all the others the G-S scams, the Madoff scam & deregulation scams. The banksta's, SWFs and megas are licking their chops awaiting the wave of new adventurers into their webs of deceit and confusion.
This is the same one just using a slightly different angle to get the small business man to bite. Tax write off for 1yr. Big deal both C and S Corp get that already.
Obama invites you to put your neck, your business ideas, and assets on the line, then steps to the side as Paul or the magpie from Minnesota with their "lockstep" majority that was bought and paid for in this last election- angle to chop off the customer base that would support your new business and slip your neck into their noose in the same fell swoop.
By next year the Fed pulls the rug out from under and raises its rates,... Then having done their jobs as fixers, the banksta's and their collections units swoop in with all the leverage in hand- they can extend your credit at shylock interest rates, choose to buy you out if prospects look good, write it off as a loss, or DOUBLE BINGO!! THE BANKSTA cartel sheds their private sector skins and shifts that loss onto the government loan ledgers THE SAME WAY AS THEY DID WITH FANNIE & FREDDIE so that taxpayers get stuck with the full tab of their doing business.
The banksta's enjoy the double dip and luxury to either buy out at pennies on the dollar or write off the loss and put it on the taxpayer ledgers. Viola! Whoopee! ...and there goes another sector of America into the confines branded for debtors prison or a lifetime as 3rd world indentured servant.
CAVEAT EMPTOR!
Read my lips, these new jobs aren't adding up to expanding anybodys expendable capital. Most to many are returning to work at "lesser" pay with "lowered" benefits.
**** Food, gas, property and school taxes all rising dramatically. You also be should be focusing on the dramatic amount of the increases in ultra violence in todays crime rates and paying closer attention when the killers you see were family men and women killing other family members, children and parents. Then tally the percentage of those killings that were made because of dire financial debt, fear of homelessness or had $$$ as prime motivation. Shouldn't that be part of your analysis and indication of how bad things are in this country?
If not, you don't know a thing about finance and risk.
Permalink 01/26/11 @ 19:14
Comment from: Spirit--- [Visitor] · http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBvdHXChNqY&feature=fvst
· http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBvdHXChNqY&feature=fvst
Never Fear!!!
Permalink 01/26/11 @ 19:20
Comment from: Mike G [Visitor]
Peter, as usual you offer a reasonable objective argument and I hope I can respond in the same way. The motive by the Republicans to insist on not raising taxes on the rich because it would somehow kill job creation, is not at all sincere to me either. In my view, in general, political motives by either party and in this particular case, the Republicans, do not align with truth but with certain special interests that help them to advance their own self interests. Anything other then, "by the people and for the people" is self centered and not in the best interest of the majority.
Sometimes however, for totally different reasons we can agree with their choice, which is not the ideal choice but the best viable choice at the time.
Throughout my life I have known people in debt and in every case in my experience only, it was due to their own choices. When fortunate enough to be handed money that could change their life they blew it. They were so used to being in such heavy debt, that it became the standard. So why change? The money was used for some "wish list" and the debt remained. If the money collected from taxing the rich could be put directly in a fund to create jobs, directly to help the most needy or directly to cut the debt then I would have been for it. Otherwise, at best it's use would have been for political reasons, so that some politicians could say, "we were able to slow down the deficit without effecting any programs but we still need more money" or worse case, it would be wasted for some "wish list" without any concern for the debt we are in. I believe when government is willing to lead by example and make the hard choices for the right reasons, then both parties, the rich and the middle class will agree to do the same.
Sometimes however, for totally different reasons we can agree with their choice, which is not the ideal choice but the best viable choice at the time.
Throughout my life I have known people in debt and in every case in my experience only, it was due to their own choices. When fortunate enough to be handed money that could change their life they blew it. They were so used to being in such heavy debt, that it became the standard. So why change? The money was used for some "wish list" and the debt remained. If the money collected from taxing the rich could be put directly in a fund to create jobs, directly to help the most needy or directly to cut the debt then I would have been for it. Otherwise, at best it's use would have been for political reasons, so that some politicians could say, "we were able to slow down the deficit without effecting any programs but we still need more money" or worse case, it would be wasted for some "wish list" without any concern for the debt we are in. I believe when government is willing to lead by example and make the hard choices for the right reasons, then both parties, the rich and the middle class will agree to do the same.
Permalink 01/26/11 @ 19:25
Comment from: Mike G [Visitor]
"Read my lips, these new jobs aren't adding up to expanding anybodys expendable capital. Most to many are returning to work at "lesser" pay with "lowered" benefits. **** Food, gas, property and school taxes all rising dramatically." - John
John, I agree no doubt this is true, it has been happening already and when inflation kicks in it will be in full gear. I agree also, that we don't need to give Corporations more power to fix this and that the answers lie's with government. BUT it is NOT that a seemingly corrupt government should be made bigger and more powerful in order to run the show. Only that government should act the same way they did when Arizona wanted to protect their own borders. They just need to take action to do what is right but this time do what is right for the majority of the American people.
John, I agree no doubt this is true, it has been happening already and when inflation kicks in it will be in full gear. I agree also, that we don't need to give Corporations more power to fix this and that the answers lie's with government. BUT it is NOT that a seemingly corrupt government should be made bigger and more powerful in order to run the show. Only that government should act the same way they did when Arizona wanted to protect their own borders. They just need to take action to do what is right but this time do what is right for the majority of the American people.
Permalink 01/26/11 @ 19:43
Comment from: Spirit--- [Visitor] · http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/27/world/middleeast/27opposition.html
· http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/27/world/middleeast/27opposition.html
MikeG: Take a long hard look at this.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/27/world/middleeast/27opposition.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/27/world/middleeast/27opposition.html
Permalink 01/26/11 @ 22:31
Comment from: Spirit--- [Visitor]
MikeG: HERE'S YOUR ANSWER TO QUESTIONS LEFT ON THE PREVIOUS BOARD.
"But John, how does Government create private sectors jobs? ISN'T THAT THE DOMAIN AND OBLIGATION OF THE "PRIVATE SECTOR" BANKERS & FINANCIALS WHO WERE LENT $3.1 BY OBAMA'S FED- WHO ARE SITTING ON $2TRILLION DOLLARS OF OUR MONEY- RIGHT NOW!
ISN'T IT THE PRIVATE SECTORS/PUBLICS FAULT ITSELF THAT THEY HAVEN'T COMPELLED THIS GOV'T TO ANYTHING TO THEM FOR RENIGHING ON THE PROMISES MADE TO IN ORDER TO RECEIVE THOSE MONEYS? ESPECIALLY SINCE IT WAS THESE SAME BANKERS/FINACIALS WHO SHORT SHRIFTED AND GAMED EVERYONE IN THE FIRST PLACE?
*GIVE THEM THE OPTION JAIL TIME FOR THE GUILTY OR CLOSING- AND SEE WHAT SHAKES OUT OF THAT TREE. Please don't tell me more spending with "job creation bills". They are a temporary band aide at best. If we could sustain decent jobs and real job growth first, then I am okay with the deficit second. HASN'T THE FED SAID, THAT IT HAS ALREADY RECOUPED THE LIONS SHARE OF THE $874B STIMULUS ALREADY? *PERHAPS, WE SHOULD BE CALLING THAT "BLUFF" AND DEMAND RIGHT NOW THAT AT LEAST $500B BE CONSIGNED AND COMMITTED TO ALL OF THESE PROJECTS THAT OBAMA SAYS ARE IN THE WORKS. However, I contend that part of the job problem is the deficit because we are dependent on China, which is tying our hands and forcing policy that is not in the best interest of American jobs. YOU BETCHA'. THAT'S RIGHT CHINA WOULDN'T BE GETTING ALL OF THIS IF OUR "USED TO BE" BENEFACTORS DIDN'T ALREADY AGREE TO SIPHON OUR MONEY OVER TO PAY FOR ALL OF THIS MASSIVE OVERHAUL USING THE VERY LATEST OF TECHNOLOGIES, THAT DON'T EVEN EXIST HERE, AS YET.
======================
Even still, I question, where is our tax dollars going? *DUBAI(The NWO Globalist HQs), CHINA, INDIA AND SOUTH AMERICAN MANUFACTURING INFRASTRUCTURES. Why are we in such debt with little to show for it? Is it fraud? High Entitlements? NO. ZERO "ESTATE TAX" COLLECTIONS!~ Military spending? DON'T FORGET THAT PRIVATE ARMIES ADDS 5X THE COST OF REGULAR ARMY PERSONNEL AND THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE DAMAGES PAYOUTS CAUSED BY THEIR RECKLESS BEHAVIORS. Is it bad, wrong headed policy. MIKE, THERE IS NO DOMESTIC POLICY. THE GAMES CALLED PROCEDURES YOU ARE WATCHING GOING ON IN CONGRESS AND SENATE IS PURE THEATRE- IS TO KEEP EVERYTHING HELD UP BY THIS INCESSANT STONEWALLING AND FILIBUSTER UNTIL WE ARE REDUCED TO 3RD WORLD STANDARDS. Is it simply a mindset that thinks, sue for anything to make money, win the lottery rather then work, let government help you, rather then try and help yourself. NO THAT'S ALL THAT IS LEFT FOR US TO CONSIDER.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE BIGGER PICTURE GO BY THE CORPORATE GOV'T SCHEME ITS SET UP VARIOUS IN TAX LOOPHOLES AND ALLOWS FOR AND CREATES LEGAL PONZI SCHEMES THAT POSITIONS KEY FIGURES TO SUCK IN A WHOLE SECTOR OF PEOPLES ASSETS AND DEFERED RETIREMENT MONEYS, THEN WHEN THE MOMENT IS RIGHT MONEY DISAPPEARS, TONS OF IT, AND NOBODY KNOWS NOTHING., DENIES ANY KNOWLEDGE OF THE SET-UP OR MISLEADING WORDING LOOPHOLES, A FEW LOWER ECHELON FLUNKIES TAKE THE SLAP ON WRIST THAT QUITES THE PUBLIC, AND THOSE BEHIND THE SCENES LAUGH ALL THE WAY TO THE STRONGHOLDS IN DUBAI, SWISS ACCOUNTS OR WHEREEVER.
THIS AGING AMERICA IS NOT WHERE THESE WISEGUYS WANT TO BE WITH THEIR MONEY- JUST IN CASE THEY ARE SOMEHOW EXPOSED, THEY WANT TO BE IMMUNE FROM US LAW AND JURISDICTION. Jackpot!!!!
LET'S CALL IT STOCK EXCHANGE & HIDING PROFIT LOTTO IN THE REVERSE. SURE EVERYONE CAN PLAY- BUT... WITH GOLDMAN-SACHS AS YOUR DEALER.
That mindset takes away from the ones that really need it and forces us to grow government even bigger. NOT IF THE REST OF THE NATION WOKE UP, AND DEMANDING REAL JUSTICE. SEE: TUNISIA, EGYPT, GREECE, FRENCH WORKERS, ITALY V BERLUSCIONI...
WHAT'S HAPPENING IN POOR LITTLE DUMBED DOWN AMERICA??? WE'VE GOT KNUCKLEHEADS FIGHTING OVER WHOSE JOBS AND BENEFITS NEED TO BE CUT, ...AND OBAMA'S BIRTH CERTIFICATE. DUH! Whatever the real reason is, we must change and not throw more money at it.
OR... WE CAN HAVE A CLASS ACTION LAW SUIT TO CALL IN "PAYMENT IN FULL" OF OUR LOANS TO THE FED.
WE CAN DEMAND THAT THOSE HOLDING ONTO THAT MONEY THAT WE LENT TO THEM AND THAT THEY CLAIM IS ADDED TO OUR BURDEN VIA DEFICIT- IS RETURNED IMMEDIATELY ALONG WITH THE COMPOUND INTEREST JUST LIKE THEY CHARGE US.
OK! THEY MIGHT NEED SOME TIME. WE DON'T WANT TO BANKRUPT THE SYSTEM SO LET'S GIVE THEM AN OFFER THAT THEY CAN'T REFUSE.
"But John, how does Government create private sectors jobs? ISN'T THAT THE DOMAIN AND OBLIGATION OF THE "PRIVATE SECTOR" BANKERS & FINANCIALS WHO WERE LENT $3.1 BY OBAMA'S FED- WHO ARE SITTING ON $2TRILLION DOLLARS OF OUR MONEY- RIGHT NOW!
ISN'T IT THE PRIVATE SECTORS/PUBLICS FAULT ITSELF THAT THEY HAVEN'T COMPELLED THIS GOV'T TO ANYTHING TO THEM FOR RENIGHING ON THE PROMISES MADE TO IN ORDER TO RECEIVE THOSE MONEYS? ESPECIALLY SINCE IT WAS THESE SAME BANKERS/FINACIALS WHO SHORT SHRIFTED AND GAMED EVERYONE IN THE FIRST PLACE?
*GIVE THEM THE OPTION JAIL TIME FOR THE GUILTY OR CLOSING- AND SEE WHAT SHAKES OUT OF THAT TREE. Please don't tell me more spending with "job creation bills". They are a temporary band aide at best. If we could sustain decent jobs and real job growth first, then I am okay with the deficit second. HASN'T THE FED SAID, THAT IT HAS ALREADY RECOUPED THE LIONS SHARE OF THE $874B STIMULUS ALREADY? *PERHAPS, WE SHOULD BE CALLING THAT "BLUFF" AND DEMAND RIGHT NOW THAT AT LEAST $500B BE CONSIGNED AND COMMITTED TO ALL OF THESE PROJECTS THAT OBAMA SAYS ARE IN THE WORKS. However, I contend that part of the job problem is the deficit because we are dependent on China, which is tying our hands and forcing policy that is not in the best interest of American jobs. YOU BETCHA'. THAT'S RIGHT CHINA WOULDN'T BE GETTING ALL OF THIS IF OUR "USED TO BE" BENEFACTORS DIDN'T ALREADY AGREE TO SIPHON OUR MONEY OVER TO PAY FOR ALL OF THIS MASSIVE OVERHAUL USING THE VERY LATEST OF TECHNOLOGIES, THAT DON'T EVEN EXIST HERE, AS YET.
======================
Even still, I question, where is our tax dollars going? *DUBAI(The NWO Globalist HQs), CHINA, INDIA AND SOUTH AMERICAN MANUFACTURING INFRASTRUCTURES. Why are we in such debt with little to show for it? Is it fraud? High Entitlements? NO. ZERO "ESTATE TAX" COLLECTIONS!~ Military spending? DON'T FORGET THAT PRIVATE ARMIES ADDS 5X THE COST OF REGULAR ARMY PERSONNEL AND THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE DAMAGES PAYOUTS CAUSED BY THEIR RECKLESS BEHAVIORS. Is it bad, wrong headed policy. MIKE, THERE IS NO DOMESTIC POLICY. THE GAMES CALLED PROCEDURES YOU ARE WATCHING GOING ON IN CONGRESS AND SENATE IS PURE THEATRE- IS TO KEEP EVERYTHING HELD UP BY THIS INCESSANT STONEWALLING AND FILIBUSTER UNTIL WE ARE REDUCED TO 3RD WORLD STANDARDS. Is it simply a mindset that thinks, sue for anything to make money, win the lottery rather then work, let government help you, rather then try and help yourself. NO THAT'S ALL THAT IS LEFT FOR US TO CONSIDER.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE BIGGER PICTURE GO BY THE CORPORATE GOV'T SCHEME ITS SET UP VARIOUS IN TAX LOOPHOLES AND ALLOWS FOR AND CREATES LEGAL PONZI SCHEMES THAT POSITIONS KEY FIGURES TO SUCK IN A WHOLE SECTOR OF PEOPLES ASSETS AND DEFERED RETIREMENT MONEYS, THEN WHEN THE MOMENT IS RIGHT MONEY DISAPPEARS, TONS OF IT, AND NOBODY KNOWS NOTHING., DENIES ANY KNOWLEDGE OF THE SET-UP OR MISLEADING WORDING LOOPHOLES, A FEW LOWER ECHELON FLUNKIES TAKE THE SLAP ON WRIST THAT QUITES THE PUBLIC, AND THOSE BEHIND THE SCENES LAUGH ALL THE WAY TO THE STRONGHOLDS IN DUBAI, SWISS ACCOUNTS OR WHEREEVER.
THIS AGING AMERICA IS NOT WHERE THESE WISEGUYS WANT TO BE WITH THEIR MONEY- JUST IN CASE THEY ARE SOMEHOW EXPOSED, THEY WANT TO BE IMMUNE FROM US LAW AND JURISDICTION. Jackpot!!!!
LET'S CALL IT STOCK EXCHANGE & HIDING PROFIT LOTTO IN THE REVERSE. SURE EVERYONE CAN PLAY- BUT... WITH GOLDMAN-SACHS AS YOUR DEALER.
That mindset takes away from the ones that really need it and forces us to grow government even bigger. NOT IF THE REST OF THE NATION WOKE UP, AND DEMANDING REAL JUSTICE. SEE: TUNISIA, EGYPT, GREECE, FRENCH WORKERS, ITALY V BERLUSCIONI...
WHAT'S HAPPENING IN POOR LITTLE DUMBED DOWN AMERICA??? WE'VE GOT KNUCKLEHEADS FIGHTING OVER WHOSE JOBS AND BENEFITS NEED TO BE CUT, ...AND OBAMA'S BIRTH CERTIFICATE. DUH! Whatever the real reason is, we must change and not throw more money at it.
OR... WE CAN HAVE A CLASS ACTION LAW SUIT TO CALL IN "PAYMENT IN FULL" OF OUR LOANS TO THE FED.
WE CAN DEMAND THAT THOSE HOLDING ONTO THAT MONEY THAT WE LENT TO THEM AND THAT THEY CLAIM IS ADDED TO OUR BURDEN VIA DEFICIT- IS RETURNED IMMEDIATELY ALONG WITH THE COMPOUND INTEREST JUST LIKE THEY CHARGE US.
OK! THEY MIGHT NEED SOME TIME. WE DON'T WANT TO BANKRUPT THE SYSTEM SO LET'S GIVE THEM AN OFFER THAT THEY CAN'T REFUSE.
Permalink 01/27/11 @ 12:28
Comment from: Gail [Visitor]
OPEN THREAD:
The United States Post Office is CLOSING 2,000 POST OFFICES IN THE UNITED STATES IN MARCH, 2011.
AND, IN TELEVISION COMMERCIALS WITH A $100 IN FREE STAMPS, ETC., THEY ENCOURAGE EVERBODY TO PURCHASE THEIR STAMPS ON LINE--ON THE INTERNET.
WHERE ARE ALL THESE PEOPLE GOING TO GET NEW JOBS? WHO BENEFITS FROM PEOPLE BUYING STAMPS ON LINE AND NOT FROM THE POST OFFICE? EVERYBODY DOESN'T HAVE A COMPUTER OR WANT ONE, THEREBY ELIMINATING MORE JOBS. JUST MAKING THE PEOPLE AT THE TOP RICHER.
THE GOVERNMENT BEGS FOR VOLUNTEERS--PEOPLE WHO RECEIVE NO SALARY OR BENEFITS--WHO DO EVERYTHING FOR EVERYBODY--MEALS ON WHEELS--WHO DO THE DRIVING AND DELIVER THE READY-TO-EAT MEAL TO YOUR DOORSTEP AFTER THEY DID THE DRIVING TO THE STORE, PARKING, SHOPPING, FOOD PREPARATION, COOKING.
LIFE USE TO BE NOT ABOUT WORK, BUT TO ENJOY LIFE AND RETIRED FROM ONE JOB AND THAT WAS IT.
TODAY, PEOPLE GO ON TO ONE JOB AFTER ANOTHER, DOUBLE DIPPING WHEN POSSIBLE, SOMETIMES TRIPPLE DIPPING.
Some people have numerous jobs while lots of others have none.
The United States Post Office is CLOSING 2,000 POST OFFICES IN THE UNITED STATES IN MARCH, 2011.
AND, IN TELEVISION COMMERCIALS WITH A $100 IN FREE STAMPS, ETC., THEY ENCOURAGE EVERBODY TO PURCHASE THEIR STAMPS ON LINE--ON THE INTERNET.
WHERE ARE ALL THESE PEOPLE GOING TO GET NEW JOBS? WHO BENEFITS FROM PEOPLE BUYING STAMPS ON LINE AND NOT FROM THE POST OFFICE? EVERYBODY DOESN'T HAVE A COMPUTER OR WANT ONE, THEREBY ELIMINATING MORE JOBS. JUST MAKING THE PEOPLE AT THE TOP RICHER.
THE GOVERNMENT BEGS FOR VOLUNTEERS--PEOPLE WHO RECEIVE NO SALARY OR BENEFITS--WHO DO EVERYTHING FOR EVERYBODY--MEALS ON WHEELS--WHO DO THE DRIVING AND DELIVER THE READY-TO-EAT MEAL TO YOUR DOORSTEP AFTER THEY DID THE DRIVING TO THE STORE, PARKING, SHOPPING, FOOD PREPARATION, COOKING.
LIFE USE TO BE NOT ABOUT WORK, BUT TO ENJOY LIFE AND RETIRED FROM ONE JOB AND THAT WAS IT.
TODAY, PEOPLE GO ON TO ONE JOB AFTER ANOTHER, DOUBLE DIPPING WHEN POSSIBLE, SOMETIMES TRIPPLE DIPPING.
Some people have numerous jobs while lots of others have none.
Permalink 01/27/11 @ 12:50
Comment from: Spirit--- [Visitor]
MikeG: HERE'S YOUR ANSWER TO QUESTIONS LEFT ON THE PREVIOUS BOARD.
"But John, how does Government create private sectors jobs? ISN'T THAT THE DOMAIN AND OBLIGATION OF THE "PRIVATE SECTOR" BANKERS & FINANCIALS WHO WERE LENT $3.1 BY OBAMA'S FED- WHO ARE SITTING ON $2TRILLION DOLLARS OF OUR MONEY- RIGHT NOW!
ISN'T IT THE PRIVATE SECTORS/PUBLICS FAULT ITSELF THAT THEY HAVEN'T COMPELLED THIS GOV'T TO ANYTHING TO THEM FOR RENIGHING ON THE PROMISES MADE TO IN ORDER TO RECEIVE THOSE MONEYS? ESPECIALLY SINCE IT WAS THESE SAME BANKERS/FINACIALS WHO SHORT SHRIFTED AND GAMED EVERYONE IN THE FIRST PLACE?
*GIVE THEM THE OPTION JAIL TIME FOR THE GUILTY OR CLOSING- AND SEE WHAT SHAKES OUT OF THAT TREE. Please don't tell me more spending with "job creation bills". They are a temporary band aide at best. If we could sustain decent jobs and real job growth first, then I am okay with the deficit second. HASN'T THE FED SAID, THAT IT HAS ALREADY RECOUPED THE LIONS SHARE OF THE $874B STIMULUS ALREADY? *PERHAPS, WE SHOULD BE CALLING THAT "BLUFF" AND DEMAND RIGHT NOW THAT AT LEAST $500B BE CONSIGNED AND COMMITTED TO ALL OF THESE PROJECTS THAT OBAMA SAYS ARE IN THE WORKS. However, I contend that part of the job problem is the deficit because we are dependent on China, which is tying our hands and forcing policy that is not in the best interest of American jobs. YOU BETCHA'. THAT'S RIGHT CHINA WOULDN'T BE GETTING ALL OF THIS IF OUR "USED TO BE" BENEFACTORS DIDN'T ALREADY AGREE TO SIPHON OUR MONEY OVER TO PAY FOR ALL OF THIS MASSIVE OVERHAUL USING THE VERY LATEST OF TECHNOLOGIES, THAT DON'T EVEN EXIST HERE, AS YET.
======================
Even still, I question, where is our tax dollars going? *DUBAI(The NWO Globalist HQs), CHINA, INDIA AND SOUTH AMERICAN MANUFACTURING INFRASTRUCTURES. Why are we in such debt with little to show for it? Is it fraud? High Entitlements? NO. ZERO "ESTATE TAX" COLLECTIONS!~ Military spending? DON'T FORGET THAT PRIVATE ARMIES ADDS 5X THE COST OF REGULAR ARMY PERSONNEL AND THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE DAMAGES PAYOUTS CAUSED BY THEIR RECKLESS BEHAVIORS. Is it bad, wrong headed policy. MIKE, THERE IS NO DOMESTIC POLICY. THE GAMES CALLED PROCEDURES YOU ARE WATCHING GOING ON IN CONGRESS AND SENATE IS PURE THEATRE- IS TO KEEP EVERYTHING HELD UP BY THIS INCESSANT STONEWALLING AND FILIBUSTER UNTIL WE ARE REDUCED TO 3RD WORLD STANDARDS. Is it simply a mindset that thinks, sue for anything to make money, win the lottery rather then work, let government help you, rather then try and help yourself. NO THAT'S ALL THAT IS LEFT FOR US TO CONSIDER.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE BIGGER PICTURE GO BY THE CORPORATE GOV'T SCHEME ITS SET UP VARIOUS IN TAX LOOPHOLES AND ALLOWS FOR AND CREATES LEGAL PONZI SCHEMES THAT POSITIONS KEY FIGURES TO SUCK IN A WHOLE SECTOR OF PEOPLES ASSETS AND DEFERED RETIREMENT MONEYS, THEN WHEN THE MOMENT IS RIGHT MONEY DISAPPEARS, TONS OF IT, AND NOBODY KNOWS NOTHING., DENIES ANY KNOWLEDGE OF THE SET-UP OR MISLEADING WORDING LOOPHOLES, A FEW LOWER ECHELON FLUNKIES TAKE THE SLAP ON WRIST THAT QUITES THE PUBLIC, AND THOSE BEHIND THE SCENES LAUGH ALL THE WAY TO THE STRONGHOLDS IN DUBAI, SWISS ACCOUNTS OR WHEREEVER.
THIS AGING AMERICA IS NOT WHERE THESE WISEGUYS WANT TO BE WITH THEIR MONEY- JUST IN CASE THEY ARE SOMEHOW EXPOSED, THEY WANT TO BE IMMUNE FROM US LAW AND JURISDICTION. Jackpot!!!!
LET'S CALL IT STOCK EXCHANGE & HIDING PROFIT LOTTO IN THE REVERSE. SURE EVERYONE CAN PLAY- BUT... WITH GOLDMAN-SACHS AS YOUR DEALER.
"All those w/ Snake Eyes- MUST WIN!!! Everyone else, must FEED THE JACKPOT.
House Rules- Jackpot "snatchers" do not have be present to claim their winnings. They will be directly wired to the nearest Swiss, SWF or offshore account as designated.
That mindset takes away from the ones that really need it and forces us to grow government even bigger. NOT IF THE REST OF THE NATION WOKE UP, AND DEMANDING REAL JUSTICE. SEE: TUNISIA, EGYPT, GREECE, FRENCH WORKERS, ITALY V BERLUSCIONI...
WHAT'S HAPPENING IN POOR LITTLE DUMBED DOWN AMERICA??? WE'VE GOT KNUCKLEHEADS FIGHTING OVER WHOSE JOBS AND BENEFITS NEED TO BE CUT, ...AND OBAMA'S BIRTH CERTIFICATE. DUH! Whatever the real reason is, we must change and not throw more money at it.
OR... WE CAN HAVE A CLASS ACTION LAW SUIT TO CALL IN "PAYMENT IN FULL" OF OUR LOANS TO THE FED.
WE CAN DEMAND THAT THOSE HOLDING ONTO THAT MONEY THAT WE LENT TO THEM AND THAT THEY CLAIM IS ADDED TO OUR BURDEN VIA DEFICIT BUT, THEIRS TO KEEP- IS RETURNED IMMEDIATELY ALONG WITH THE COMPOUND INTEREST JUST LIKE THEY CHARGE US.
OK! THEY MIGHT NEED SOME TIME. WE DON'T WANT TO BANKRUPT THE SYSTEM SO LET'S GIVE THEM AN OFFER THAT THEY CAN'T REFUSE.
"But John, how does Government create private sectors jobs? ISN'T THAT THE DOMAIN AND OBLIGATION OF THE "PRIVATE SECTOR" BANKERS & FINANCIALS WHO WERE LENT $3.1 BY OBAMA'S FED- WHO ARE SITTING ON $2TRILLION DOLLARS OF OUR MONEY- RIGHT NOW!
ISN'T IT THE PRIVATE SECTORS/PUBLICS FAULT ITSELF THAT THEY HAVEN'T COMPELLED THIS GOV'T TO ANYTHING TO THEM FOR RENIGHING ON THE PROMISES MADE TO IN ORDER TO RECEIVE THOSE MONEYS? ESPECIALLY SINCE IT WAS THESE SAME BANKERS/FINACIALS WHO SHORT SHRIFTED AND GAMED EVERYONE IN THE FIRST PLACE?
*GIVE THEM THE OPTION JAIL TIME FOR THE GUILTY OR CLOSING- AND SEE WHAT SHAKES OUT OF THAT TREE. Please don't tell me more spending with "job creation bills". They are a temporary band aide at best. If we could sustain decent jobs and real job growth first, then I am okay with the deficit second. HASN'T THE FED SAID, THAT IT HAS ALREADY RECOUPED THE LIONS SHARE OF THE $874B STIMULUS ALREADY? *PERHAPS, WE SHOULD BE CALLING THAT "BLUFF" AND DEMAND RIGHT NOW THAT AT LEAST $500B BE CONSIGNED AND COMMITTED TO ALL OF THESE PROJECTS THAT OBAMA SAYS ARE IN THE WORKS. However, I contend that part of the job problem is the deficit because we are dependent on China, which is tying our hands and forcing policy that is not in the best interest of American jobs. YOU BETCHA'. THAT'S RIGHT CHINA WOULDN'T BE GETTING ALL OF THIS IF OUR "USED TO BE" BENEFACTORS DIDN'T ALREADY AGREE TO SIPHON OUR MONEY OVER TO PAY FOR ALL OF THIS MASSIVE OVERHAUL USING THE VERY LATEST OF TECHNOLOGIES, THAT DON'T EVEN EXIST HERE, AS YET.
======================
Even still, I question, where is our tax dollars going? *DUBAI(The NWO Globalist HQs), CHINA, INDIA AND SOUTH AMERICAN MANUFACTURING INFRASTRUCTURES. Why are we in such debt with little to show for it? Is it fraud? High Entitlements? NO. ZERO "ESTATE TAX" COLLECTIONS!~ Military spending? DON'T FORGET THAT PRIVATE ARMIES ADDS 5X THE COST OF REGULAR ARMY PERSONNEL AND THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE DAMAGES PAYOUTS CAUSED BY THEIR RECKLESS BEHAVIORS. Is it bad, wrong headed policy. MIKE, THERE IS NO DOMESTIC POLICY. THE GAMES CALLED PROCEDURES YOU ARE WATCHING GOING ON IN CONGRESS AND SENATE IS PURE THEATRE- IS TO KEEP EVERYTHING HELD UP BY THIS INCESSANT STONEWALLING AND FILIBUSTER UNTIL WE ARE REDUCED TO 3RD WORLD STANDARDS. Is it simply a mindset that thinks, sue for anything to make money, win the lottery rather then work, let government help you, rather then try and help yourself. NO THAT'S ALL THAT IS LEFT FOR US TO CONSIDER.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE BIGGER PICTURE GO BY THE CORPORATE GOV'T SCHEME ITS SET UP VARIOUS IN TAX LOOPHOLES AND ALLOWS FOR AND CREATES LEGAL PONZI SCHEMES THAT POSITIONS KEY FIGURES TO SUCK IN A WHOLE SECTOR OF PEOPLES ASSETS AND DEFERED RETIREMENT MONEYS, THEN WHEN THE MOMENT IS RIGHT MONEY DISAPPEARS, TONS OF IT, AND NOBODY KNOWS NOTHING., DENIES ANY KNOWLEDGE OF THE SET-UP OR MISLEADING WORDING LOOPHOLES, A FEW LOWER ECHELON FLUNKIES TAKE THE SLAP ON WRIST THAT QUITES THE PUBLIC, AND THOSE BEHIND THE SCENES LAUGH ALL THE WAY TO THE STRONGHOLDS IN DUBAI, SWISS ACCOUNTS OR WHEREEVER.
THIS AGING AMERICA IS NOT WHERE THESE WISEGUYS WANT TO BE WITH THEIR MONEY- JUST IN CASE THEY ARE SOMEHOW EXPOSED, THEY WANT TO BE IMMUNE FROM US LAW AND JURISDICTION. Jackpot!!!!
LET'S CALL IT STOCK EXCHANGE & HIDING PROFIT LOTTO IN THE REVERSE. SURE EVERYONE CAN PLAY- BUT... WITH GOLDMAN-SACHS AS YOUR DEALER.
"All those w/ Snake Eyes- MUST WIN!!! Everyone else, must FEED THE JACKPOT.
House Rules- Jackpot "snatchers" do not have be present to claim their winnings. They will be directly wired to the nearest Swiss, SWF or offshore account as designated.
That mindset takes away from the ones that really need it and forces us to grow government even bigger. NOT IF THE REST OF THE NATION WOKE UP, AND DEMANDING REAL JUSTICE. SEE: TUNISIA, EGYPT, GREECE, FRENCH WORKERS, ITALY V BERLUSCIONI...
WHAT'S HAPPENING IN POOR LITTLE DUMBED DOWN AMERICA??? WE'VE GOT KNUCKLEHEADS FIGHTING OVER WHOSE JOBS AND BENEFITS NEED TO BE CUT, ...AND OBAMA'S BIRTH CERTIFICATE. DUH! Whatever the real reason is, we must change and not throw more money at it.
OR... WE CAN HAVE A CLASS ACTION LAW SUIT TO CALL IN "PAYMENT IN FULL" OF OUR LOANS TO THE FED.
WE CAN DEMAND THAT THOSE HOLDING ONTO THAT MONEY THAT WE LENT TO THEM AND THAT THEY CLAIM IS ADDED TO OUR BURDEN VIA DEFICIT BUT, THEIRS TO KEEP- IS RETURNED IMMEDIATELY ALONG WITH THE COMPOUND INTEREST JUST LIKE THEY CHARGE US.
OK! THEY MIGHT NEED SOME TIME. WE DON'T WANT TO BANKRUPT THE SYSTEM SO LET'S GIVE THEM AN OFFER THAT THEY CAN'T REFUSE.
Permalink 01/27/11 @ 13:10
Comment from: Gail [Visitor]
Open Thread:
Nassau County, the wealthiest County in New York State, goes BUST! AND BEGGING FOR MONEY FROM THE STATE (The New York Post)
INCOME:
sales tax $1 BILLION
property tax 800 million
state aid 221 million
federal aid 151 million
other fines for license,etc 428 million
TOTAL $2.424 BILLION
EXPENSES:
POLICE $702 MILLION
benefits 455 MILLION
police pensions 52 MILLION
SUB-TOTAL $1.209 BILLION
COUNTY LEGISLATURES 9 MILLION
part-timers (?)
SUB-TOTAL 9 MILLION
MEDICAID 242 MILLION
regular employee pensions 38 MILLION
health insurance curreent 117 MILLION
employees
health insurance retirees 111 MILLION
other (?) 519 MILLION
paying off debt 355 MILLION
SUB- TOTAL $882 MILLION
TOTAL $2.6 BILLION
SHORTFALL OF MINUS $176 MILLION
Is it significant how much is spent on the police (AND/OR part-time legislatures) VERSUS HOW MUCH IS SPENT ON THE POOR PEOPLE?
Nassau County, the wealthiest County in New York State, goes BUST! AND BEGGING FOR MONEY FROM THE STATE (The New York Post)
INCOME:
sales tax $1 BILLION
property tax 800 million
state aid 221 million
federal aid 151 million
other fines for license,etc 428 million
TOTAL $2.424 BILLION
EXPENSES:
POLICE $702 MILLION
benefits 455 MILLION
police pensions 52 MILLION
SUB-TOTAL $1.209 BILLION
COUNTY LEGISLATURES 9 MILLION
part-timers (?)
SUB-TOTAL 9 MILLION
MEDICAID 242 MILLION
regular employee pensions 38 MILLION
health insurance curreent 117 MILLION
employees
health insurance retirees 111 MILLION
other (?) 519 MILLION
paying off debt 355 MILLION
SUB- TOTAL $882 MILLION
TOTAL $2.6 BILLION
SHORTFALL OF MINUS $176 MILLION
Is it significant how much is spent on the police (AND/OR part-time legislatures) VERSUS HOW MUCH IS SPENT ON THE POOR PEOPLE?
Permalink 01/27/11 @ 13:17
Comment from: Gail [Visitor]
Open Thread:
Nassau County, the wealthiest County in New York State, goes BUST! AND BEGGING FOR MONEY FROM THE STATE (The New York Post)
IS IT SIGNIFICANT HOW MUCH IS SPENT ON THE POLICE 9AND/OR PART-TIME LEGISLATURES)(AND/OR part-time legislatures) VERSUS HOW MUCH IS SPENT ON THE POOR PEOPLE?
INCOME:
sales tax $1 BILLION
property tax 800 million
state aid 221 million
federal aid 151 million
other fines for license,etc 428 million
TOTAL $2.424 BILLION
EXPENSES:
POLICE $702 MILLION
benefits 455 MILLION
police pensions 52 MILLION
SUB-TOTAL $1.209 BILLION
COUNTY LEGISLATURES 9 MILLION
part-timers (?)
SUB-TOTAL 9 MILLION
MEDICAID 242 MILLION
regular employee pensions 38 MILLION
health insurance curreent 117 MILLION
employees
health insurance retirees 111 MILLION
other (?) 519 MILLION
paying off debt 355 MILLION
SUB- TOTAL $882 MILLION
TOTAL $2.6 BILLION
SHORTFALL OF MINUS $176 MILLION
Nassau County, the wealthiest County in New York State, goes BUST! AND BEGGING FOR MONEY FROM THE STATE (The New York Post)
IS IT SIGNIFICANT HOW MUCH IS SPENT ON THE POLICE 9AND/OR PART-TIME LEGISLATURES)(AND/OR part-time legislatures) VERSUS HOW MUCH IS SPENT ON THE POOR PEOPLE?
INCOME:
sales tax $1 BILLION
property tax 800 million
state aid 221 million
federal aid 151 million
other fines for license,etc 428 million
TOTAL $2.424 BILLION
EXPENSES:
POLICE $702 MILLION
benefits 455 MILLION
police pensions 52 MILLION
SUB-TOTAL $1.209 BILLION
COUNTY LEGISLATURES 9 MILLION
part-timers (?)
SUB-TOTAL 9 MILLION
MEDICAID 242 MILLION
regular employee pensions 38 MILLION
health insurance curreent 117 MILLION
employees
health insurance retirees 111 MILLION
other (?) 519 MILLION
paying off debt 355 MILLION
SUB- TOTAL $882 MILLION
TOTAL $2.6 BILLION
SHORTFALL OF MINUS $176 MILLION
Permalink 01/27/11 @ 13:27
Comment from: Gail [Visitor]
p.S. $1.209 BILLION ON THE POLICE AND $9 MILLION FOR PART-TIME LEGISLATURES VERSUS $882 MILLION FOR THE POOR
Permalink 01/27/11 @ 13:29
Comment from: John--- [Visitor]
Gail: The most important distinction in this Nassau County deficit is that they haven't been made to make drastic cutbacks in essential services and protections like it has been mandated for the rest of the us around the country. Instead, they [wink,wink] get a state monitor to oversee that their over budget spending is done properly.
Gee, wouldn't you like that option and have somebody else in the state pay for it, creating perhaps their own shortfalls.
Remember this was done several years ago when the MTA & LIRR were cooking their "double" books- and instead of keeping the commuter tax on out of city residents and raising the fares, they choose to drop the commuter tax and have the citys poor people had to pay for it with NYCTA bus and subway fare hikes.
THE COST OF POLITICS IN HIGH PLACES IS PRICELESS
Gee, wouldn't you like that option and have somebody else in the state pay for it, creating perhaps their own shortfalls.
Remember this was done several years ago when the MTA & LIRR were cooking their "double" books- and instead of keeping the commuter tax on out of city residents and raising the fares, they choose to drop the commuter tax and have the citys poor people had to pay for it with NYCTA bus and subway fare hikes.
THE COST OF POLITICS IN HIGH PLACES IS PRICELESS
Permalink 01/27/11 @ 14:39
Comment from: Mike G [Visitor]
John, I noticed something in your responses to my questions that has helped me to fully understand the main difference between conservative and liberal philosophies. There was one question with no response, that I think I now can now answer and is the key to that understanding:
"YET, many here still look toward government to lead us to a better life." Why?
I noticed John, that you place the blame on our situation with "private sector bankers", "the old benefactors", "corporate government TAX loophole -legal ponzi scheme" and TAX dollars going to "DUBAI(The NWO Globalist HQs)." You begin to question what really happened to $874B of stimulus, yet you blame "ZERO ESTATE TAX COLLECTIONS" for the deficit.
Do you notice the inconsistencies and how it ties to my question? On the one hand, it is the private sector and government giveaways of our tax dollars to corporations that is the cause. Yet, on the other hand, you call for more tax dollars from the rich to be given to the same untrustworthy handlers of our money. I think I can explain this now with a simple twist on and old saying:
Teach a man to fish and he will fish for a lifetime. Give a man a fish and and it is a caring gesture. Supply a man with fish daily and it is a disservice, because you control the life of that man and that man depends on you. Take away that fish and the man rebels. The Liberal protests when government takes away their fish. The Conservative protests when government does not let them catch their own fish.
"YET, many here still look toward government to lead us to a better life." Why?
I noticed John, that you place the blame on our situation with "private sector bankers", "the old benefactors", "corporate government TAX loophole -legal ponzi scheme" and TAX dollars going to "DUBAI(The NWO Globalist HQs)." You begin to question what really happened to $874B of stimulus, yet you blame "ZERO ESTATE TAX COLLECTIONS" for the deficit.
Do you notice the inconsistencies and how it ties to my question? On the one hand, it is the private sector and government giveaways of our tax dollars to corporations that is the cause. Yet, on the other hand, you call for more tax dollars from the rich to be given to the same untrustworthy handlers of our money. I think I can explain this now with a simple twist on and old saying:
Teach a man to fish and he will fish for a lifetime. Give a man a fish and and it is a caring gesture. Supply a man with fish daily and it is a disservice, because you control the life of that man and that man depends on you. Take away that fish and the man rebels. The Liberal protests when government takes away their fish. The Conservative protests when government does not let them catch their own fish.
Permalink 01/27/11 @ 21:59
Comment from: Caspian [Visitor] · http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0WbJJIvK7Q&feature=player_embedded
· http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0WbJJIvK7Q&feature=player_embedded
Gerald Celente: Blame blah, China threat & Arab revolutions
Permalink 01/28/11 @ 18:00
Comment from: Caspian [Visitor] · http://www.trendsresearch.com/forecast.html
· http://www.trendsresearch.com/forecast.html
MAJOR TRENDS FORECAST BY GERALD CELENTE
Permalink 01/29/11 @ 08:57
Comment from: Bill F. [Visitor] · http://frontpagemag.com/2011/01/28/the-muslim-brotherhood-on-the-march/print/
· http://frontpagemag.com/2011/01/28/the-muslim-brotherhood-on-the-march/print/
The Muslim Brotherhood on the March:
January 28, 2011
It took the opposition in Tunisia only a month to get rid of President Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali, who fled the country two weeks ago after twenty-three years of control. Inspired and emboldened by that success, Egyptian opposition forces have amassed a fierce popular uprising against their own strongman, Hosni Mubarak, who has ruled since 1981. The fires of discontent in the region continue to grow: today is expected to be the worst day of Egyptian protests since they began and now, Yemen has succumbed to the wave of unrest that is slowly sweeping through North Africa and the Middle East.
We thus appear to be entering a very disconcerting phase in the development of the Muslim world. If dissidents are successful in effecting regime change in key nations, the West should be very concerned about whoever fills the vacuums of power thus created. Indeed, it could be Iran 1979 all over again — and the Muslim Brotherhood is on the march.
Hosni Mubarak in Egypt and Ali Abdallah Salih in Yemen are hardly ideal American friends, but they have at least done their part to keep their countries’ aggressive Islamist factions at bay in an area where options are very much limited in this regard.
Islamist forces in Yemen and Egypt are waiting in the wings as we speak, eager to capitalize on escalating protests which have so far not been principally motivated by Islamic radicalism. A coalition of left-leaning organizations and youth groups, long-opposed to the Mubarak regime, joined together to orchestrate protests in Egypt. These included Kifaya (Enough), the youth-based 6th of April Movement, Karama, The Popular Democratic Movement for Change (HASHD), the National Association for Change, the Justice and Freedom Youth movement, and the Revolutionary Socialists. Free lance journalist Yasmine El Rashidi was in Cairo for the protests and blogged extensively on events for the New York Review of Books. She reports that the movement is largely youth-based and non-sectarian:
To lobby support, the activists used Twitter and Facebook, targeting above all the 60 percent of Egypt’s 80 million people who are under the age of 25. …In Shubra, we joined a marching procession of about one hundred people, mainly Muslims, who were moving slowly through narrow, muddy streets, led by activists chanting into a speaker: “Christian or Muslim it’s not important, similar poverty similar concerns! Hosni Mubarak, Hosni Mubarak, the plane is waiting, the plane is waiting. Saudi Arabia is not far!
otests in Yemen seem to have been well-organized as well. The “Joint Meeting Parties” is an umbrella group representing a number of groups who oppose Salih’s rule. As the situation in Tunisia was heating up, the Joint Meeting Parties decided that their time had come. Thus far the protests, by all reports, have been peaceful and the response of the government restrained. Yet, the Joint Meeting Parties say that they will continue to ramp up the pressure on Salih’s regime, although the organization promises to utilize only non-violent means of protest.
What is interesting, and frightening, about the situations in Egypt and Yemen is how different those nations are economically. Egypt, like Tunisia, is relatively prosperous in North African/Middle Eastern terms. The unemployment rate in Egypt is less than ten per cent and “only” about twenty per cent of the populace lives below the poverty line. On the other hand, the unemployment rate in Yemen is over thirty five per cent and almost half of the nation lives in conditions of poverty. Thus, if we are looking for a common thread connecting discontent in these nations, we can’t rely on economic conditions. There has to be something else. Among the ideas that undoubtedly contribute to all the protests are these: the universal desire for self-determination, the freedom to exchange information and ideas in the modern world, and the belief that no one is entitled to virtual hereditary rule, measured in decades, in the modern world. And so we find ourselves faced with nascent revolutions in two very different countries, both of which may represent very different, but very real, threats to American and our allies if those revolutions are successful.
Up until now, the Muslim Brotherhood, Mubarak’s most powerful opponent in Egypt, has stayed out of recent protests. But as of today, the radical Islamic supremacist group is joining in the fray. This is very bad news for a number of reasons. Young, idealistic revolutionaries are about the worst sort of people to run the machinery of government that one can imagine. Egypt’s protests, if Rashidi is correct, represent a youth movement. If they’re successful, the “under 25” crowd won’t want to be bothered with the tedium of governing, but will rather hope that some more mature folks who say all the right things will assume that particular responsibility. The Muslim Brotherhood, which doesn’t have any qualms about completely misrepresenting itself and its aims in order to achieve its goals, is thus ideally positioned to take advantage of the chaos that would follow Mubarak’s ouster. And, because Egypt is a much more powerful nation than most Middle Eastern states thanks to years of American aid and support, if the Muslim Brotherhood grabbed control in Egypt it would be a disaster along the lines of Khomeini taking over in Iran.
On the other hand, Yemen remains a weak, impoverished nation. Yemen’s chief sources of revenue, its oil reserves, are rapidly drying up. Yet, it’s the poverty and hopelessness of Yemen that makes it especially attractive to Al Qaeda, the country that bin Laden’s terrorists use as their base of operations on the Arabian peninsula. It is thus important to western interests to keep Yemen within our sphere of influence, so that Al Qaeda can be contained and – hopefully – neutralized within its borders. Though Salih has been an uncertain ally, he has been an ally. Should the Yemeni opposition succeed in removing him from power, the same question that confronts us in Egypt remains: will the next regime remain at least outwardly friendly to western interests and values, or will the next regime be infinitely more dangerous than the one we know today?
January 28, 2011
It took the opposition in Tunisia only a month to get rid of President Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali, who fled the country two weeks ago after twenty-three years of control. Inspired and emboldened by that success, Egyptian opposition forces have amassed a fierce popular uprising against their own strongman, Hosni Mubarak, who has ruled since 1981. The fires of discontent in the region continue to grow: today is expected to be the worst day of Egyptian protests since they began and now, Yemen has succumbed to the wave of unrest that is slowly sweeping through North Africa and the Middle East.
We thus appear to be entering a very disconcerting phase in the development of the Muslim world. If dissidents are successful in effecting regime change in key nations, the West should be very concerned about whoever fills the vacuums of power thus created. Indeed, it could be Iran 1979 all over again — and the Muslim Brotherhood is on the march.
Hosni Mubarak in Egypt and Ali Abdallah Salih in Yemen are hardly ideal American friends, but they have at least done their part to keep their countries’ aggressive Islamist factions at bay in an area where options are very much limited in this regard.
Islamist forces in Yemen and Egypt are waiting in the wings as we speak, eager to capitalize on escalating protests which have so far not been principally motivated by Islamic radicalism. A coalition of left-leaning organizations and youth groups, long-opposed to the Mubarak regime, joined together to orchestrate protests in Egypt. These included Kifaya (Enough), the youth-based 6th of April Movement, Karama, The Popular Democratic Movement for Change (HASHD), the National Association for Change, the Justice and Freedom Youth movement, and the Revolutionary Socialists. Free lance journalist Yasmine El Rashidi was in Cairo for the protests and blogged extensively on events for the New York Review of Books. She reports that the movement is largely youth-based and non-sectarian:
To lobby support, the activists used Twitter and Facebook, targeting above all the 60 percent of Egypt’s 80 million people who are under the age of 25. …In Shubra, we joined a marching procession of about one hundred people, mainly Muslims, who were moving slowly through narrow, muddy streets, led by activists chanting into a speaker: “Christian or Muslim it’s not important, similar poverty similar concerns! Hosni Mubarak, Hosni Mubarak, the plane is waiting, the plane is waiting. Saudi Arabia is not far!
otests in Yemen seem to have been well-organized as well. The “Joint Meeting Parties” is an umbrella group representing a number of groups who oppose Salih’s rule. As the situation in Tunisia was heating up, the Joint Meeting Parties decided that their time had come. Thus far the protests, by all reports, have been peaceful and the response of the government restrained. Yet, the Joint Meeting Parties say that they will continue to ramp up the pressure on Salih’s regime, although the organization promises to utilize only non-violent means of protest.
What is interesting, and frightening, about the situations in Egypt and Yemen is how different those nations are economically. Egypt, like Tunisia, is relatively prosperous in North African/Middle Eastern terms. The unemployment rate in Egypt is less than ten per cent and “only” about twenty per cent of the populace lives below the poverty line. On the other hand, the unemployment rate in Yemen is over thirty five per cent and almost half of the nation lives in conditions of poverty. Thus, if we are looking for a common thread connecting discontent in these nations, we can’t rely on economic conditions. There has to be something else. Among the ideas that undoubtedly contribute to all the protests are these: the universal desire for self-determination, the freedom to exchange information and ideas in the modern world, and the belief that no one is entitled to virtual hereditary rule, measured in decades, in the modern world. And so we find ourselves faced with nascent revolutions in two very different countries, both of which may represent very different, but very real, threats to American and our allies if those revolutions are successful.
Up until now, the Muslim Brotherhood, Mubarak’s most powerful opponent in Egypt, has stayed out of recent protests. But as of today, the radical Islamic supremacist group is joining in the fray. This is very bad news for a number of reasons. Young, idealistic revolutionaries are about the worst sort of people to run the machinery of government that one can imagine. Egypt’s protests, if Rashidi is correct, represent a youth movement. If they’re successful, the “under 25” crowd won’t want to be bothered with the tedium of governing, but will rather hope that some more mature folks who say all the right things will assume that particular responsibility. The Muslim Brotherhood, which doesn’t have any qualms about completely misrepresenting itself and its aims in order to achieve its goals, is thus ideally positioned to take advantage of the chaos that would follow Mubarak’s ouster. And, because Egypt is a much more powerful nation than most Middle Eastern states thanks to years of American aid and support, if the Muslim Brotherhood grabbed control in Egypt it would be a disaster along the lines of Khomeini taking over in Iran.
On the other hand, Yemen remains a weak, impoverished nation. Yemen’s chief sources of revenue, its oil reserves, are rapidly drying up. Yet, it’s the poverty and hopelessness of Yemen that makes it especially attractive to Al Qaeda, the country that bin Laden’s terrorists use as their base of operations on the Arabian peninsula. It is thus important to western interests to keep Yemen within our sphere of influence, so that Al Qaeda can be contained and – hopefully – neutralized within its borders. Though Salih has been an uncertain ally, he has been an ally. Should the Yemeni opposition succeed in removing him from power, the same question that confronts us in Egypt remains: will the next regime remain at least outwardly friendly to western interests and values, or will the next regime be infinitely more dangerous than the one we know today?
Permalink 01/29/11 @ 11:33
Comment from: Marlene Vornes [Visitor] · http://ashaimanonline.com/forum/index.php?topic=164277.new#new
This post appears to get a good ammount of visitors. How do you advertise it? It gives a nice unique spin on things. I guess having something useful or substantial to talk about is the most important factor.
Permalink 03/17/11 @ 12:24
Comment from: Spring Chalow [Visitor] · http://ibloxs.free.fr/en/viewtopic.php?pid=75735#p75735
I’d have to give green light with you here. Which is not something I usually do! I love reading a post that will make people think. Also, thanks for allowing me to comment!
Permalink 04/14/11 @ 12:57
Comment from: 3978070 [Visitor] · http://3978070.com
· http://3978070.com
What a lovely day for a 3978070! SCK was here
Permalink 04/19/11 @ 09:43
Comment from: buty [Visitor] · http://konkretne.cba.pl/?p=49356
I'm extremely impressed with your writing skills as well as with the layout on your blog. Is this a paid theme or did you modify it yourself? Anyway keep up the excellent quality writing, it is rare to see a nice blog like this one today..
Permalink 04/20/11 @ 08:16
Comment from: Ephedrin 8mg [Visitor] · http://www.fatburner1.com/fatburner/ephedrin-kaufen.html
Hey ho! Großartiger Blogg! Homepage Fatburner Stacks assistieren beim ultra Abbau von Körperfett! Danke schön!
Permalink 04/20/11 @ 08:37
Comment from: Plumbing London [Visitor] · http://1staction.com
I discovered your blog site on google and check a few of your early posts. Continue to keep up the very good operate. I just additional up your RSS feed to my MSN News Reader. Seeking forward to reading more from you later on!…
Permalink 04/20/11 @ 17:49
Comment from: SolarPowerForHome [Visitor] · http://holidayadvicearticles.com/home-and-family/home-improvement/using-solar-panels-for-household-electricity-generation-what-you-should-know-before-going-solar.html
Hi there,good blog posting. Infos are really fascinating and will save me many time which I have invest in something else instead of searching posts like this :) Im waiting for more, bye :)
Permalink 04/21/11 @ 21:04
Comment from: history of cars [Visitor] · http://newinventions.patsnap.com/invention-timelines/car-evolution-timeline/
Can I just say what a help to discover somebody who actually understands just what they are talking about on the internet. You certainly learn how to take a problem to light and make it very important. Even more people should learn this particular and comprehend it section of the story. I can't believe you're not very popular as you certainly have the gift.
Permalink 04/22/11 @ 03:37
Comment from: All United Van Lines [Visitor] · http://amosochoa821.bravejournal.com
Hi there! Do you use Twitter? I'd like to follow you if that would be okay. I'm undoubtedly enjoying your blog and look forward to new updates.
Permalink 04/22/11 @ 05:02
Comment from: Una Giacomelli [Visitor] · http://leidigaga178.wordpress.com/2011/04/15/sizzling-hot-leidi-gaga-striptease-learn-right-here-so-that-you-can-acquire-out-there-the-best-way-to-watch-it/
Hello! I know this is sort of off-topic but I needed to ask. Does managing a well-established blog such as yours take a lot of work? I am completely new to writing a blog however I do write in my journal every day. I'd like to start a blog so I will be able to share my experience and views online. Please let me know if you have any kind of suggestions or tips for brand new aspiring blog owners. Appreciate it!
Permalink 04/22/11 @ 07:18
Comment from: tips to lose belly fat [Visitor] · http://robinpena821.blogs.experienceproject.com/813174.html
Unusual this submit is totaly unrelated to what I used to be looking out google for, however it used to be indexed at the first page. I suppose your doing something proper if Google likes you sufficient to place you on the first web page of a non similar search.
Permalink 04/22/11 @ 12:02
Comment from: easy ways to make money online [Visitor] · http://www.makemoneyonline-free.org/
Great stuff from you, my friend. Ive read your posts before and you're just Awesome! I love what you've got here, love what you're saying and the way you say it. You make it entertaining and yet you still manage to keep it smart & to the point. I cant wait to read more from you. This is really a great & very well blog!
Permalink 04/22/11 @ 22:24
Comment from: maxum boat covers [Visitor] · http://wholesalemarine.info
¡Gracias!
Permalink 04/22/11 @ 23:16
Comment from: free ipod touch [Visitor] · http://www.articlepinch.com/a-great-review-of-apples-iphone-4/
Fantastic blog! Do you have any hints for aspiring writers? I'm planning to start my own blog soon but I'm a little lost on everything. Would you recommend starting with a free platform like Wordpress or go for a paid option? There are so many choices out there that I'm completely overwhelmed .. Any suggestions? Thank you!
Permalink 04/23/11 @ 10:16
Comment from: free ipod touch no referrals or offers [Visitor] · http://www.haenamfarms.com/board/view.php?uid=12798&startPage=1&board_id=fs_free&category=%252525252525C0%252525252525FC%252525252525C3%252525252525BC
Superb blog! Do you have any suggestions for aspiring writers? I'm planning to start my own site soon but I'm a little lost on everything. Would you advise starting with a free platform like Wordpress or go for a paid option? There are so many options out there that I'm completely overwhelmed .. Any suggestions? Cheers!
Permalink 04/23/11 @ 15:54
Comment from: Pufy Sako [Visitor] · http://www.marc2.pcspace.pl/3464,art,PUFY-do-siedzenia-Nowe-podejscie-do-relaksu.html
There is obviously a bunch to identify about this. I consider you made various good points in features also.
Permalink 04/26/11 @ 18:33
Comment from: How much does botox cost? [Visitor] · http://www.howmuchdoesbotoxcost.org
Howdy! I just would like to give an enormous thumbs up for the good info you may have here on this post. I might be coming again to your blog for extra soon.
Permalink 04/29/11 @ 14:52
Comment from: burberry shirts [Visitor] · http://www.burberry-bag-outlets.com/burberry-clothing-burberry-t-shirt-c-9_31.html
It鈥檚 difficult to get experienced people on this area, however, you could be seen as you know what you鈥檙e talking about! Thanks
Permalink 08/13/11 @ 00:28
Comment from: Jackson Levandowski [Visitor] · http://miamicaterers543.onsugar.com/
Insomnia has been defined as the condition that is characterised by undesired wakefulness. Its results can be both disorienting and threatening. To always keep sleeplessness in check, you need to observe a dietary routine. The following meals are picked for their power to not only cut down your options of owning a restless night time, but also to give you the comfort your entire body demands to go into sleep. We have split them into beverages, standard varieties and snacks.
Permalink 08/13/11 @ 16:19
Comment from: oil abstract painting [Visitor] · http://williamhogarth.tk/
i do believe of which,A good sharp edge utilizing the actual solar energy is it will likely not formulate virtually any co2.
Permalink 08/28/11 @ 20:24
Comment from: Lucius Gogins [Visitor] · http://mvpjordan.info/2011/08/this-can-be-a-pro-app-apple-made-for-pros/