DJIA, NASDAQ, and S&P 500 down big today
-
I agree about the 48 hours (not 5 days parker...I believe it was supposed to be 48 hours)...it was debated for a month before it passed, but I agree with you. This did disappoint me as well.
Pork..you'll never ever get rid of it. One mans pork is another mans stimulus (at least in his mind)
Secrecy? The bill is available for viewing. What portion do you feel was secret.
-
here ya go chuck... enjoy..
-
And again Parker (and everyone else on here that these things apply to) no one is forcing anyone to cash stimulus checks, subsidy checks, etc.... You each chose to do it, you could have simply not cashed them. You could have taken one for the team. You could have bucked the system....but none of you did. Everyone is against a gov't handout until it is going to them.
-
Trafik Jamz;260968 wrote:
And again Parker (and everyone else on here that these things apply to) no one is forcing anyone to cash stimulus checks, subsidy checks, etc.... You each chose to do it, you could have simply not cashed them. You could have taken one for the team. You could have bucked the system....but none of you did. Everyone is against a gov't handout until it is going to them.
ummm.. were did i say anmything about cashing a stimulus/subsidy check.. i was just pointing out that he lied....you and your silly liberal round-about logic....
-
Parker;260967 wrote:
here ya go chuck... enjoy..http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5t8GdxFYBU
the proof is here chuck.... -
You are right Parker. The info I had seen prior to that said 48 hours, but I stand corrected.
At any rate it sat on <u>his</u> desk 5 days before he signed it (congress passed it on Friday and he signed it today Fri, Sat, Sun, Mon, Tues...yup 5 days)....and he got slammed by people like torbs for saying it was there too long. The bill was posted online the night it passed the house & senate (admittedly not by the whitehouse, but it was technically online all over the place).
Meetings were public...I believe, I didn't watch Cspan to find out...I may be wrong.
-
Trafik Jamz;260968 wrote:
And again Parker (and everyone else on here <u>that these things apply to</u>) no one is forcing anyone to cash stimulus checks, subsidy checks, etc.... You each chose to do it, you could have simply not cashed them. You could have taken one for the team. You could have bucked the system....but none of you did. Everyone is against a gov't handout until it is going to them.Grr;260982 wrote:
Parker, you know chuck wont beleive it even if its plainly in sight like thatBTW, i didnt get/cash a stimulus check last year, so there
we both have plain sight blindness I see....
-
D S ohM;260933 wrote:
Im sick of hearing about the shitty economy and politics. Can we talk about something fun? At this point, i'd rather read 40 pages of arguments about how grapefruit and oranges are different.Nothing to argue. the difference is that oranges are good while grapefruit tastes like horse vomit.
-
Like he said, the left has no argument, and anybody that liberal has no methods or actual reasons for their argument. Therefore he is the beacon of light of left wing debate. Someone has to do it, and i would get bored if i couldnt post little one liners criticizing him for it
-
Rexwagon;260945 wrote:
well the proposed bill may not be the greatest bill in every way. it has some good things. plus no one else has tried to do anything else. so if this doesnt work, well its more than the republicans have done. I mean the two sides bitch and moan at each other but only one side comes up with a plan. During these times wouldnt both sides want to come up with a plan and quit fighting with each other. fucken pathetic.The House Republicans did propose a bill that was half the cost (around the $400B) and included more tax cuts. They also believed it would create around 2x more jobs than the current plan. To say they didn't try to do anything is a total misconception and false.
The question between the two parties is not whether something should be done or not, but whether what to do. Dems want more spending and less tax cuts. Republicans want more tax cuts and less spending. That's a short summary.
And for Chuck to QFT you on that means he didn't do his homework either. Tisk tisk.
-
torbs;261050 wrote:
The House Republicans did propose a bill that was half the cost (around the $400B) and included more tax cuts. They also believed it would create around 2x more jobs than the current plan. To say they didn't try to do anything is a total misconception and false.So they try once and fail. Great job, nice token effort. Why not try it in the SENATE, where you aren't going to get run over by an overwhelming majority? Do you have a copy/link to this bill? I tried googling it, but didn't have any luck finding it.
The question between the two parties is not whether something should be done or not, but whether what to do. Dems want more spending and less tax cuts. Republicans want more tax cuts and less spending. That's a short summary.
It's a different philosophy for sure...I think you've over simplified it though. Right now the dems (right or wrong) are saying "we've seen what tax cuts on the rich have brought us over the last 8 years...it doesn't work as planned...the rich pocket the money and ship jobs overseas...blah blah blah" So they are saying lets try stimulating by investing in infrastructure, lowering taxes on those who need the money the most (middle/lower class). They didn't reverse the "Bush tax cuts" like was feared....they left them where they were and tried to help the middle class out a little. Is there pork in that bill? ABSO-FUCKING-LUTELY, I'd love to see a pork free bill as much as everyone else, but it just doesn't happen. Obama was STUPID for saying he was going to get rid of pork in bills, at best you can hope to minimize it.
And for Chuck to QFT you on that means he didn't do his homework either. Tisk tisk.
I did...the senate republicans didn't do shit. This was the one area that I honestly think they could have had a shot at getting a competing bill through. They aren't that overwhelmed there. A carefully crafted bill, IMO, has a decent chance at success in the Senate. But I can assure you that it will require compromises. In case you weren't paying attention, the republicans lost the last election....they are on the brink of seeing a democrat super-majority that wouldn't need a single vote from them ever...and would be filibuster proof. <u>This SCARES THE FUCK OUT OF ME! </u>
So, before they get labeled as obstructionists, perhaps they should come to the table and start making reasonable compromises...it might mean a little more give than take, but at least they would have some chance of shaping policy.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login