Federal Shutdown

[shazbot]

I was wondering if someone could explain how an un-elected political party can force a Federal a shut down on the basis of trying to impeded legislation that was one of the reasons the democratically elected party won?

[Mark]

They were elected.

[Rollo]

"un-elected political party"???

Er... all the members of the House of Representatives and the Senate in the United States are elected through at least some process by the people.
Congress 113 has successfully managed to do what Congress 112 and even Truman's "Do Nothing" Congress 80 couldn't; that is, fail monumentally at being a Legislative Body that does things.

US Government 503 Service Unavailable:The Congress failed to fulfill an apparently valid request.
US Government 403 Forbidden: The Congress has understood the request, but is refusing to fulfill it
US Government 404: Not Found

[Starter]

Er... all the members of the House of Representatives and the Senate in the United States are elected through at least some process by the people.
Congress 113 has successfully managed to do what Congress 112 and even Truman's "Do Nothing" Congress 80 couldn't; that is, fail monumentally at being a Legislative Body that does things.

US Government 503 Service Unavailable:The Congress failed to fulfill an apparently valid request.
US Government 403 Forbidden: The Congress has understood the request, but is refusing to fulfill it
US Government 404: Not Found
Some of us consider Congress doing nothing as a good thing. Usually when they do things it results in higher taxes and more onerous regulations on the country. The vast majority of the current crop in both the Senate and the House and from BOTH parties are there for the power and the money. They are, IMO, all liars to some degree and many have sold their souls to anyone who can write a big check.

[D-Type]

They may not constitute the best elected government you could have - but they are the best elected govrenment you have got

Is this a first? A government going on strike!

[Starter]

Is this a first? A government going on strike!
Nope, it was done in the '90s too.

[Gregor-y]

Some of us consider Congress doing nothing as a good thing. Usually when they do things it results in higher taxes and more onerous regulations on the country. The vast majority of the current crop in both the Senate and the House and from BOTH parties are there for the power and the money. They are, IMO, all liars to some degree and many have sold their souls to anyone who can write a big check.
You do realize a shutdown is expensive to the government, let alone all the employees affected, all the people that won't get services, can't reschedule vacations, and so on? Not agreeing to pay for things we've already bought isn't economically sensible, nor is holding the entire country's operations hostage to attack a law that's been passed, judged constitutional, and despite a number of attempts never come close to being changed through the legislature.

There is no way this is a good thing except to a two year old that's just learned the word 'no.' And even they will start crying once they don't get any food. This is going to guarantee no Republican will get near the White House or Senate majority for years, and hopefully help push through a better method of electing representatives, similar to what was done with the Senate a few decades ago.

[odykas]

"un-elected political party"???

US Government 503 Service Unavailable:The Congress failed to fulfill an apparently valid request.
US Government 403 Forbidden: The Congress has understood the request, but is refusing to fulfill it
US Government 404: Not Found

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

How about:
US Government 301 Moved Permanently: The Congress is not here anymore and you are redirected to http://www.nothere.com
US Government 400 Bad Request: The Congress did not accept your request due to bad syntax
US Government 500 Internal Server Error: The Congress has no available resources to process your request

[shazbot]

My question was not very well worded I must admit. I suppose what I'm wondering is one of the reasons the Democrats got elected was health care reform, which is currently being stymied by the Republicans.

[janvanvurpa]

My question was not very well worded I must admit. I suppose what I'm wondering is one of the reasons the Democrats got elected was health care reform, which is currently being stymied by the Republicans.

The ironic thing is this terrible plan the Tea-party fringe of the Republican party have shut the Gubbymint down for is.............

A Republican plan: (follow the links, it is almost hilarious..
If we want to be accurate its "The Heritage Foundation" plan

Who?
From Wiki

Early years
Edwin Feulner

The Heritage Foundation was founded in 1973 by Paul Weyrich, Edwin Feulner and Joseph Coors.[5] Growing out of discontent with Richard Nixon's embrace of the "liberal consensus" and the nonpolemical, cautious nature of existing think tanks,[6] Weyrich and Feulner sought to create an organization that would supply policymakers with concise, timely position papers. With $200,000 from Coors, the Analysis and Research Association was created in 1970. New supporters and board members joined, including petroleum executive Edward Noble and Richard Mellon Scaife. Eventually, the organization split into a public interest law center and a separate public policy foundation, the latter of which was incorporated as The Heritage Foundation on February 16, 1973. Weyrich was its first president. Later, under president Frank J. Walton, the Heritage Foundation introduced using direct mail fundraising and Heritage's annual income grew to $1 million per year in 1976.[



The health insurance mandate in the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is an idea hatched in 1989 by Stuart M. Butler at Heritage in a publication titled "Assuring Affordable Health Care for All Americans".[20] This was also the model for Mitt Romney's health care plan in Massachusetts. [21]

From a real Leftie magazine "Forbes":
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2011/10/20/how-a-conservative-think-tank-invented-the-individual-mandate/


How the Heritage Foundation, a Conservative Think Tank, Promoted the Individual Mandate
Avik Roy Avik

James Taranto, who writes the Wall Street Journal’s excellent “Best of the Web” column, put forth a lengthy and informative discussion yesterday on the conservative origins of the individual mandate, whose inclusion in Obamacare is today its most controversial feature on the Right.

This came up at Tuesday’s Western Republican Leadership Conference Debate, where Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich tussled on the question:

ROMNEY: Actually, Newt, we got the idea of an individual mandate from you.

GINGRICH: That’s not true. You got it from the Heritage Foundation.

ROMNEY: Yes, we got it from you, and you got it from the Heritage Foundation and from you.

GINGRICH: Wait a second. What you just said is not true. You did not get that from me. You got it from the Heritage Foundation.

ROMNEY: And you never supported them?

GINGRICH: I agree with them, but I’m just saying, what you said to this audience just now plain wasn’t true.

(CROSSTALK)

ROMNEY: OK. Let me ask, have you supported in the past an individual mandate?

GINGRICH: I absolutely did with the Heritage Foundation against Hillarycare.

ROMNEY: You did support an individual mandate?

ROMNEY: Oh, OK. That’s what I’m saying. We got the idea from you and the Heritage Foundation.

GINGRICH: OK. A little broader.

ROMNEY: OK.

They were all for it, until Obama took up their idea.
Utterslime balls.

[janvanvurpa]

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/b ... acare.html (http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2013/10/millions-flee-obamacare.html)


« Boehner Advises Americans to Delay Getting Cancer for a Year
Main

October 1, 2013
Millions Flee Obamacare
Posted by Andy Borowitz

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/boro-flee.jpg
UNITED STATES (The Borowitz Report)—Millions of Tea Party loyalists fled the United States in the early morning hours today, seeking what one of them called “the American dream of liberty from health care.”

Harland Dorrinson, 47, a tire salesman from Lexington, Kentucky, packed up his family and whatever belongings he could fit into his Chevy Suburban just hours before the health-insurance exchanges opened, joining the Tea Party’s Freedom Caravan with one goal in mind: escape from Obamacare.

“My father didn’t have health care and neither did my father’s father before him,” he said. “I’ll be damned if I’m going to let my children have it.”

But after driving over ten hours to the Canadian border, Mr. Dorrinson was dismayed to learn that America’s northern neighbor had been in the iron grip of health care for decades.

“The border guard was so calm when he told me, as if it was the most normal thing in the world,” he said. “It’s like he was brainwashed by health care.”

Turning away from Canada, Mr. Dorrinson joined a procession of Tea Party cars heading south to Mexico, noting, “They may have drug cartels and narcoterrorism down there, but at least they’ve kept health care out.”

Mr. Dorrinson was halfway to the southern border before he heard through the Tea Party grapevine that Mexico, too, has public health care, as do Great Britain, Japan, Turkey, Spain, Belgium, New Zealand, Slovenia, and dozens of other countries to which he had considered fleeing.

Undaunted, Mr. Dorrinson said he had begun looking into additional countries, like Chad and North Korea, but he expressed astonishment at a world seemingly overrun by health care.

“It turns out that the United States is one of the last countries on earth to get it,” he said. “It makes me proud to be an American.”

[Starter]

The ironic thing is this terrible plan the Tea-party fringe of the Republican party have shut the Gubbymint down for is.............

A Republican plan: (follow the links, it is almost hilarious..
If we want to be accurate its "The Heritage Foundation" plan

They were all for it, until Obama took up their idea.
Utterslime balls.
Welcome back.

What some don't seem to understand is that everything isn't always black and white. There has been graft and corruption in Congress since just about day one. Any government has some of that and, mostly, you can live with it. The issue is that it has reached epic proportions in the last twenty years or so. The so called legislators are so busy chasing dollars they have no time to actually look at and consider the things they pass. There have been several times in the last couple Congresses that many of them voted for bills they hadn't even read. Most bills aren't even prepared by the legislators. They are written by staff and, in some cases, lobbyists. Both parties participate fully in this sham of good governance.

As for US healthcare, I agree that reforms were desperately needed - and that comes from someone who is not a fan of big government. My point on this is that while reforms were certainly needed, Obamacare was not the solution. There are a few good things in Obamacare, no question, but there are many bad things too. Instead of passing a huge package where no one really knew or understood what was in the legislation, they should have brought each area up separately and had open debate and then passed or dropped them based on the merits of each part. Instead it was pushed down everybody's throat.

As for Obama, he'll go down as one of the worst presidents. Part of the problem is that, while Congress has always been fairly partisan, the President needs to rise above all that. Obama has been an absentee from the deliberative process. He has no relationships with anyone in Congress. I expect several of his initiatives to be overturned once they reach the Supreme Court. Before you accuse me of being a racist or right wing lackey, I should point out that I voted for this turkey the first time around. I stand embarrassed by my poor judgement. I had been hoping for someone to rise above the bull excrement put out by both of the major parties.

[Gregor-y]

My question was not very well worded I must admit. I suppose what I'm wondering is one of the reasons the Democrats got elected was health care reform, which is currently being stymied by the Republicans.
It's because of a number of things.

1. The House of Representatives is elected through rules that allow states to develop their own boundaries for a number of representatives based on their population. State governments typically draw boundaries to retain their own party's dominance in the national body. This was also done with the US Senate (through in those cases it was often the state government that chose their senators) until direct election by all voters in the state was passed as a constitutional amendment, forcing all states to use this standard. A number of states that have a few or no Democratic representatives actually had more people voting Democratic than Republican across the state, but retain Republicans because of how boundaries are drawn. Typically cities with large populations have less representation in the House of Representatives than rural areas.

2. The Republican party has a number of its own rules, one of which is not to disagree when voting. This means if there's disagreement as there is now, all Republicans feel the obligation to support their party, similar to other country's parliamentary systems. Most of them don't agree with the current path but are politically unable to vote any other way.

3. Republican intransigence is actually a new thing. Other than once in the 1990s no party has intentionally held up the workings of the entire government as a means to forward a particular agenda. Republicans can't accomplish anything through voting because they don't control enough of the Senate and of course could not override the President, so they have decided it's better to destroy the livelihood of workers, veterans, anyone receiving assistance, anyone going on vacation to a park, anyone needing a passport or visa and all their associated families and businesses in order to announce their opposition to a particular law. Short of seceding over the fear of eliminating slavery there's not a lot of precedent for what's happening at the moment.

So yes, this is a Republican problem caused by Republicans. They've been digging themselves into a hole for years, and are now just lashing out in frustration. Kind of like Al Shabaab over in Somalia. After steadily losing support it's being whittled down to the psychotics that want to destroy everything just to prove how right they are.

[Starter]

It's because of a number of things.
A couple of misleading statements here.


1. The House of Representatives is elected through rules that allow states to develop their own boundaries for a number of representatives based on their population. State governments typically draw boundaries to retain their own party's dominance in the national body. This was also done with the US Senate (through in those cases it was often the state government that chose their senators) until direct election by all voters in the state was passed as a constitutional amendment, forcing all states to use this standard.
This is true.

A number of states that have a few or no Democratic representatives actually had more people voting Democratic than Republican across the state, but retain Republicans because of how boundaries are drawn.
This is misleading because both parties do it. I live in Maryland which is heavily democratic overall. There are two regions which lean more Republican - western Maryland and the eastern shore. The Democratic legislature has redrawn boundary lines to essentially disenfranchise those voters and to try and ensure that every one elected from Maryland is a Democrat. So lets be clear about BOTH parties playing dirty.


2. The Republican party has a number of its own rules, one of which is not to disagree when voting. This means if there's disagreement as there is now, all Republicans feel the obligation to support their party, similar to other country's parliamentary systems. Most of them don't agree with the current path but are politically unable to vote any other way.
Um,you haven't noticed that the Democrats do the same thing? I'd also replace the word "most" with "many" in your last sentence.


3. Republican intransigence is actually a new thing. Other than once in the 1990s no party has intentionally held up the workings of the entire government as a means to forward a particular agenda. Republicans can't accomplish anything through voting because they don't control enough of the Senate and of course could not override the President, so they have decided it's better to destroy the livelihood of workers, veterans, anyone receiving assistance, Most receiving assistance will continue to do so. anyone going on vacation to a park, anyone needing a passport or visa and all their associated families and businesses in order to announce their opposition to a particular law. Short of seceding over the fear of eliminating slavery there's not a lot of precedent for what's happening at the moment.
Partly wrong. There will be little or no impact on those receiving assistance or those needing passports or visas.



So yes, this is a Republican problem caused by Republicans. They've been digging themselves into a hole for years, and are now just lashing out in frustration. Kind of like Al Shabaab over in Somalia. After steadily losing support it's being whittled down to the psychotics that want to destroy everything just to prove how right they are.
Completely wrong. The problem was caused DIRECTLY by BOTH Democratic and Republican congresses who spent more money than they took in over many years. If there was no debt there COULD NOT POSSIBLY BE A DEBT CEILING CRISIS.

[Rollo]

The so called legislators are so busy chasing dollars they have no time to actually look at and consider the things they pass. There have been several times in the last couple Congresses that many of them voted for bills they hadn't even read. Most bills aren't even prepared by the legislators. They are written by staff and, in some cases, lobbyists. Both parties participate fully in this sham of good governance.

As for US healthcare, I agree that reforms were desperately needed - and that comes from someone who is not a fan of big government. My point on this is that while reforms were certainly needed, Obamacare was not the solution. There are a few good things in Obamacare, no question, but there are many bad things too. Instead of passing a huge package where no one really knew or understood what was in the legislation, they should have brought each area up separately and had open debate and then passed or dropped them based on the merits of each part. Instead it was pushed down everybody's throat.

This is an aspect that I really don't get about American politics. You'd think that if people have been elected to a legislative body, they'd actually read and debate the legislation. Last week we actually saw Ted Cruz read "Green Eggs And Ham" and whatever his intentions were, basically he's just held the Congress in contempt and publicly wasted time whilst being paid for it.


As for Obama, he'll go down as one of the worst presidents. Part of the problem is that, while Congress has always been fairly partisan, the President needs to rise above all that. Obama has been an absentee from the deliberative process. He has no relationships with anyone in Congress. I expect several of his initiatives to be overturned once they reach the Supreme Court. Before you accuse me of being a racist or right wing lackey, I should point out that I voted for this turkey the first time around. I stand embarrassed by my poor judgement. I had been hoping for someone to rise above the bull excrement put out by both of the major parties.

This I think is a failing of the US Congress as a system. This sort of thing can not happen in a Westminster System in the same way. There's standing orders in the UK (as a result of the Parliament Act 1911) and Australia had its own battle which resulted in the Govenor-General sacking government and then the entire parliament in 1975 for failing to do its job.

I would have framed the US Constitution so that at very least, the President is forced to have some consultative process with the Congress by law through some sort of meetings in the same way that the Crown does with the Prime Minister/Premier in Westminster parliaments... but sadly no.

[shazbot]

Thanks for the intelligent replies! As a legal alien as Sting would say, I find it very confusing to say the least. It doesn't sound like it works very well at all in these situations? I dread to think of what it would take to move closer to the UK system of government.

[Gregor-y]

A couple of misleading statements here.
Not misleading at all, unless you can't see through blind hatred of the President.

This is misleading because both parties do it. I live in Maryland which is heavily democratic overall. There are two regions which lean more Republican - western Maryland and the eastern shore. The Democratic legislature has redrawn boundary lines to essentially disenfranchise those voters and to try and ensure that every one elected from Maryland is a Democrat. So lets be clear about BOTH parties playing dirty.
Yes both parties do it. Republicans seem to be doing it a lot more to retain a commanding position even with a minority of a state's population. Thus the latest attempts to restrict voting rights. Democrats aren't doing that, so it's not appropriate to assign equal blame. And when was the last time a minority of Democrats shut down the government?



Um,you haven't noticed that the Democrats do the same thing? I'd also replace the word "most" with "many" in your last sentence.
No, no, no. This is absolutely not true in any way shape or form. The Democratic party has never (other than before 1964; and most of those were southern segregationists that all became Republicans) voted in a single block the way Republicans do. When has the Democratic party ever worked as a single body to intentionally harm the country? Even the Republicans were only dumb enough to do it once before. Don't try to make this into an everyone is to blame argument, because it's only one party that is doing this.


Partly wrong. There will be little or no impact on those receiving assistance or those needing passports or visas.
This is not true. It affects passport services, the Veteran's Administration, enforcement of environmental laws, social services and all national parks are closed. Do you have a vacation planned and hotels booked? Too bad! Shoulder surgery at the VA? Got to wait and reschedule? Therapy for your PTSD? Guess you'll just have to go shoot up a multiplex instead.




Completely wrong. The problem was caused DIRECTLY by BOTH Democratic and Republican congresses who spent more money than they took in over many years. If there was no debt there COULD NOT POSSIBLY BE A DEBT CEILING CRISIS.
There has been a debt for decades; centuries, even, depending on conditions. It's never been considered a bad thing by either party until Republicans began to tout it as an issue after 1992. ALL of these problems are on the Republican party. Do not even attempt to make an equivalency argument, here.

[Gregor-y]

This I think is a failing of the US Congress as a system. This sort of thing can not happen in a Westminster System in the same way. There's standing orders in the UK (as a result of the Parliament Act 1911) and Australia had its own battle which resulted in the Govenor-General sacking government and then the entire parliament in 1975 for failing to do its job.

I would have framed the US Constitution so that at very least, the President is forced to have some consultative process with the Congress by law through some sort of meetings in the same way that the Crown does with the Prime Minister/Premier in Westminster parliaments... but sadly no.

It was a very early experiment, and to be honest I don't think anyone predicted any party would be so stupid as to intentionally cripple the country for political gain. Obviously the US founders had never heard of Republicans.

[Gregor-y]

There will be little or no impact on those receiving assistance or those needing passports or visas.
One more; it affects anyone in college receiving grants.

[Gregor-y]

Thanks for the intelligent replies! As a legal alien as Sting would say, I find it very confusing to say the least. It doesn't sound like it works very well at all in these situations? I dread to think of what it would take to move closer to the UK system of government.
Actually I think the solution would be to elect representatives directly from states rather than allow local governments to determine boundaries.

The US Senate was determined by state governments (many in less open ways than the current House districts) until 1913 when direct elections required all states to have the same system for selecting their representatives. Something similar for the House would solve most of our problems, mainly because it would force the Republican party to become more mainstream or be relegated to the equivalent of European 'national front' parties, with more moderate parties appearing in their place.

[Gregor-y]

This is an interview with the editor of the National Review, which itself is a conservative magazine. It explains what the problem is and should remove any doubt about who is to blame other than the most politically blinded among us:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/10/01/why-boehner-doesnt-just-ditch-the-right/

[Rollo]

It was a very early experiment, and to be honest I don't think anyone predicted any party would be so stupid as to intentionally cripple the country for political gain. Obviously the US founders had never heard of Republicans.

Oh I don't know...

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/washing.asp
The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty
- George Washington, Farewell Address, 19 Sep 1796

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=j9N ... &q&f=false (http://books.google.com.au/books?id=j9NKAAAAYAAJ&dq=John+Adams+works&pg=PA511&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false)
There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution.
- John Adams, Letter to Jonathan Jackson, 2 Oct 1780

I just think that the concept of factionalism (which is formalised with the codification of political parties) is just a natural consequence of human nature. Paul even wrote about the problem of factionalism to the Corinthian church in the year 54; Suetonius speaks constantly of factionalism in "The Twelve Caesars" which was written in 121, so it's not like it's a terribly new idea.

[Gregor-y]

Parties such as we know them did begin during the first President's term, but again how many actually went through and intentionally caused damage like this?

This article from the National Review; what kind of party allows itself to be held hostage by a minority of it;s voters, and in turn harm the entire country? Short of the American Know-Nothing party which never really gained any power nationally when has any party been this stupid?
http://m.nationalreview.com/corner/360122/holding-firm-robert-costa

[Starter]

Not misleading at all, unless you can't see through blind hatred of the President.
I guess you didn't read this part of a previous post of mine in this thread: "Before you accuse me of being a racist or right wing lackey, I should point out that I voted for this turkey the first time around. I stand embarrassed by my poor judgement. I had been hoping for someone to rise above the bull excrement put out by both of the major parties."


Yes both parties do it. Republicans seem to be doing it a lot more to retain a commanding position even with a minority of a state's population. Thus the latest attempts to restrict voting rights. Democrats aren't doing that, so it's not appropriate to assign equal blame. And when was the last time a minority of Democrats shut down the government?
If you agree both parties do it, then why did you single out Republicans ? I'm also not sure what you mean when you suggest Republicans are doing it when they are in a minority. How does a minority get to gerrymander districts? Also, what are you talking about with attempts to restrict voting rights? The only thing lately is North Carolina requiring IDs from potential voters to prove citizenship (having a legal right to vote). Are you suggesting that non citizens be allowed to cast ballots?


No, no, no. This is absolutely not true in any way shape or form. The Democratic party has never (other than before 1964; and most of those were southern segregationists that all became Republicans) voted in a single block the way Republicans do. When has the Democratic party ever worked as a single body to intentionally harm the country? Even the Republicans were only dumb enough to do it once before. Don't try to make this into an everyone is to blame argument, because it's only one party that is doing this.
Two things here. There have been many, many times in both the house and senate that votes were along party lines. I don't suggest that it is a good thing, just that it is most definitely NOT a new phenomenon. The highlighted part of your statement is an unnecessary piece of hyperbola.


This is not true. It affects passport services, the Veteran's Administration, enforcement of environmental laws, social services and all national parks are closed. Do you have a vacation planned and hotels booked? Too bad! Shoulder surgery at the VA? Got to wait and reschedule? Therapy for your PTSD? Guess you'll just have to go shoot up a multiplex instead.
It affects passport services in what way? And I said nothing about any of the other things you've mentioned. Of course it affects those things.


There has been a debt for decades; centuries, even, depending on conditions. It's never been considered a bad thing by either party until Republicans began to tout it as an issue after 1992. ALL of these problems are on the Republican party. Do not even attempt to make an equivalency argument, here.
There have been times when the US government has not been in debt. I did not say that it was a new thing. I only implied it was a bad thing. Are you suggesting that, because the Republicans brought it up that makes it a Republican problem and it wouldn't be a problem if no one mentioned it? I hasten to add that the Republicans have done little or nothing to solve the debt issue - though they pontificate at length on it.

I have to believe that you misread my entire post. I was in no way defending the Republican party and especially not the Tea Party wing. I had thought that I was pretty clear that I have little regard these days for either side. Your post though comes off as very partisan.

[Starter]

There will be little or no impact on those receiving assistance or those needing passports or visas.
One more; it affects anyone in college receiving grants.
So? It only affects anyone with a federal government grant, not all grants. State and private grants are not affected in the least.

[Gregor-y]

Shutting down the government is hurting the country, not hyperbole. Again, Republicans have taken all the things you say 'both parties do' much farther and caused more harm (in money, livelihood, etc) than Democrats ever have.

In addition to everyone I've mentioned so far, military reservists have had their practices and training cancelled, which means they will not be getting paid. The B&B where I'm staying in Cumberland next week has had a dozen cancellations from people using the C&O Canal National Park. So it's not only hurting college students, federal employees and contractors, the military, and tourists, it's also hitting small businesses!

And I did read your first sentence. I won't say you're a racist, but you are definitely a right-wing lackey if you're defending the shutdown. If not, how jaded do you have to be to not realize that a minority of one party's created this mess?

Here's your original statement. Doesn't sound exactly anti-shutdown and much as a blind right-wing rant, does it?

Some of us consider Congress doing nothing as a good thing. Usually when they do things it results in higher taxes and more onerous regulations on the country. The vast majority of the current crop in both the Senate and the House and from BOTH parties are there for the power and the money. They are, IMO, all liars to some degree and many have sold their souls to anyone who can write a big check.

[Jag_Warrior]

If this dog & pony show drags on until the debt ceiling HAS to be addressed, the long term consequences to the United States and the global financial markets are going to be very real. If the U.S. defaults on its debt for the first time in history, you can mark that as the day when this republic officially entered its period of decline.

The House could be done with this utter foolishness in a few minutes if Boehner would allow the up or down vote on the clean CR that most (sane) members of the House want. But he will not.

[Gregor-y]

And now the Washington Post Editorial staff. Hardly a leftist bunch in any situation:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/house-republicans-are-failing-americans-in-their-effort-to-kill-obamacare/2013/10/01/49995ed0-2ab1-11e3-b139-029811dbb57f_story.html

[Starter]

And now the Washington Post Editorial staff. Hardly a leftist bunch in any situation:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/house-republicans-are-failing-americans-in-their-effort-to-kill-obamacare/2013/10/01/49995ed0-2ab1-11e3-b139-029811dbb57f_story.html
I owe you an apology. I failed to realize you were pulling everyone's leg. That part of your post blew your cover.

[Gregor-y]

No worries. There's no way you can argue the points, anyway.

[Rollo]

http://www.redstate.com/2013/10/02/this ... obamacare/ (http://www.redstate.com/2013/10/02/this-is-about-shutting-down-obamacare/)
Congressmen, this is about shutting down Obamacare.
Democrats keep talking about our refusal to compromise. They don’t realize our compromise is defunding Obamacare. We actually want to repeal it.
This is it. Our endgame is to leave the whole thing shut down until the President defunds Obamacare. And if he does not defund Obamacare, we leave the whole thing shut down.
- Erick Erickson, RedState, 2 Oct 2013

I'm prepared to take this at face value. Mr Erickson repeats the sentiments over at Fox News:
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/10/ ... -shutdown/ (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/10/01/republicans-stand-and-fight-or-risk-getting-nothing-from-government-shutdown/)

From what I can gather about Obamacare, it basically sets up a bunch of rules for insurers designed at making the whole thing cheaper (which is a fair end).
Really only two groups appear to hate it, namely those who think that a single-payer government system like Britain's NHS or Australia's Medicare is the way to go (and I think the most sensible because it's the ultimately the cheapest) and the free-market laissez-faire zealots who are opposed to any government interference even if it results in cheaper prices.
I read through the regulations and if you decide to give Obamacare a miss, you'd only be fined a maximum of US$100 or if the policy costs more than 10% of your annual income, or you already don't pay federal income tax, you'd pay zero.

I could be wrong about this but if this is seriously all that this is over, then I'm afraid Congress 113 is even more toxic than I thought it was. Obamacare passed the House of Reps more than 40 times and if that had happened in Australia, it would have already forced a double dissolution.

[webberf1]

I am honestly gobsmacked at how many people have swallowed Obama's bull**** hook, line and sinker when he himself has more to be held accountable for in this crisis than anyone else.

If only he were one tenth as good a president as he is at PR and making people believe in his blatant hypocrisy.

[webberf1]

If this dog & pony show drags on until the debt ceiling HAS to be addressed, the long term consequences to the United States and the global financial markets are going to be very real. If the U.S. defaults on its debt for the first time in history, you can mark that as the day when this republic officially entered its period of decline.

The House could be done with this utter foolishness in a few minutes if Boehner would allow the up or down vote on the clean CR that most (sane) members of the House want. But he will not.
Two things you need to be aware of:
1. The United States is not a republic, it's an empire. It hasn't been a republic for a long time. And Obama has only been one to continue that transformation.
2. The United States is already well on the decline.

[Rollo]

I am honestly gobsmacked at how many people have swallowed Obama's bull**** hook, line and sinker when he himself has more to be held accountable for in this crisis than anyone else.

And how pray tell is one supposed to negotiate with this?
Our endgame is to leave the whole thing shut down until the President defunds Obamacare. And if he does not defund Obamacare, we leave the whole thing shut down.

Okay, Obama repeals Obamacare. It still doesn't change the fact that Congress is broken and that the health care system is also broken; it's been doomed since February 17, 1971 when Nixon threw it to the lions.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmHTte8jRLk

[Gregor-y]

I am honestly gobsmacked at how many people have swallowed Obama's bull**** hook, line and sinker when he himself has more to be held accountable for in this crisis than anyone else.

If only he were one tenth as good a president as he is at PR and making people believe in his blatant hypocrisy.
Republicans have gone off the deep end in a way that hasn't happened really ever at the national level.

Notice all you get from posters here is conservative platitudes.

[webberf1]

I am honestly gobsmacked at how many people have swallowed Obama's bull**** hook, line and sinker when he himself has more to be held accountable for in this crisis than anyone else.

And how pray tell is one supposed to negotiate with this?
Our endgame is to leave the whole thing shut down until the President defunds Obamacare. And if he does not defund Obamacare, we leave the whole thing shut down.

Okay, Obama repeals Obamacare. It still doesn't change the fact that Congress is broken and that the health care system is also broken; it's been doomed since February 17, 1971 when Nixon threw it to the lions.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmHTte8jRLk
How about you consider for a second why it is that the republicans are even in such a position to have this bargaining power.

It's because Obama has once again presided over a government that has yet again hit the debt ceiling, and is asking for another gigantic extension on its credit limit. Forcing Obama into these negotiations.

That's what you need to understand. The ball has always been in Obama's court on this issue right from the outset. He has had ample opportunity to propose ways of bringing the US budget under control (as it so desperately needs to be done), but has instead gone in completely the other direction, with an utter failure of a stimulus policy which is ridiculously laughable from a cost:benefit analysis. He also campaigned on and subsequently elected on the promise that he would hold Wall Street to account. Instead, not only has he never once held Wall Street to account, he's continually been bailing it out!

If Obama had been able to keep the books in order, the republicans would have ZERO power to stop Obamacare from going ahead. And the republicans have already been kind enough to Obama, caving into Obama's demand for conformity (please don't bull**** yourself into thinking Obama is the one looking for compromise) the last few times the debt ceiling came up by allowing Obamacare to be unimpeded. But it seems that this time: enough is enough. And rightly so. The president needs to be taught a lesson in how to keep spending in order. Balancing the budget is, right now, a FAR more urgent cause for the United States than this healthcare bill.

So the bottom line is this, if Obama can show us he doesn't have to keep raising the United States' already dizzyingly high debt ceiling to get his programs working - then good for him. But if not - he only proves his incompetence and congress is obligated to hold him to account - which is what they're doing right now. And keep in mind, the Republicans' motion is not to scrap Obamacare, but to delay its mandate for one year. More than enough time for Obama to be able to show he at least has SOMETHING in mind to bring the budget under control, don't you think?

To finish, a quote from Obama before getting elected, in 2006:

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit
is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government
can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing
financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s
reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us
domestically and internationally. Leadership means that “the buck stops
here.” Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today
onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt
problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."

You know what? I think he was onto something!

[Starter]

I'm prepared to take this at face value. Mr Erickson repeats the sentiments over at Fox News
Don't get the far right confused with a large number of Americans who oppose Obamacare. I definitely would not have chosen this way to attack it though, I think its a poor strategy and potentially harmful to the country if it goes on too long.

{quote]From what I can gather about Obamacare, it basically sets up a bunch of rules for insurers designed at making the whole thing cheaper (which is a fair end).[/quote]
Do you really believe that a 2000 plus page bill only did that? There are a multitude of things in it.


I read through the regulations and if you decide to give Obamacare a miss, you'd only be fined a maximum of US$100 or if the policy costs more than 10% of your annual income, or you already don't pay federal income tax, you'd pay zero.
The maximum fines can be much more that $100. You only looked at the low end of the scale.


I could be wrong about this but if this is seriously all that this is over, then I'm afraid Congress 113 is even more toxic than I thought it was. Obamacare passed the House of Reps more than 40 times and if that had happened in Australia, it would have already forced a double dissolution.
The Congress has been toxic for a while now, both sides.

[webberf1]

All of this leaves me astonished at how amazingly good Obama and the Democrats have gotten with their PR and spin.

...the fact that they've actually gotten so many people to think it's simply a case of the big bad Republicans just trying to mess with everything the poor, mistreated, wanting to compromise President does. And like how Obama basically said "this healthcare bill has nothing to do with the debt ceiling"... and people ACTUALLY believed him. WOWWWW. He has you hook, line and sinker, my children.

[555-04Q2]

All of this leaves me astonished at how amazingly good Obama and the Democrats have gotten with their PR and spin.

...the fact that they've actually gotten so many people to think it's simply a case of the big bad Republicans just trying to mess with everything the poor, mistreated, wanting to compromise President does. And like how Obama basically said "this healthcare bill has nothing to do with the debt ceiling"... and people ACTUALLY believed him. WOWWWW. He has you hook, line and sinker, my children.

You must understand that Obama inherited the trouble caused by many administrations that came before him. He would need more than 2 terms to fix things, and that's even if his policies are the right ones in the first place.

[Rollo]

How about you consider for a second why it is that the republicans are even in such a position to have this bargaining power.

This is a numbers game in the House. Congress 113 like Congress 112 has a Republican majority in the lower house and a Democrat majority in the Upper House. Congress 112 was officially the least productive Congress ever in terms of legislation passed. Congress 113 is not markedly different.



It's because Obama has once again presided over a government that has yet again hit the debt ceiling, and is asking for another gigantic extension on its credit limit. Forcing Obama into these negotiations.

That's what you need to understand. The ball has always been in Obama's court on this issue right from the outset. He has had ample opportunity to propose ways of bringing the US budget under control (as it so desperately needs to be done), but has instead gone in completely the other direction, with an utter failure of a stimulus policy which is ridiculously laughable from a cost:benefit analysis. He also campaigned on and subsequently elected on the promise that he would hold Wall Street to account. Instead, not only has he never once held Wall Street to account, he's continually been bailing it out!

If Obama had been able to keep the books in order, the republicans would have ZERO power to stop Obamacare from going ahead. And the republicans have already been kind enough to Obama, caving into Obama's demand for conformity (please don't bull**** yourself into thinking Obama is the one looking for compromise) the last few times the debt ceiling came up by allowing Obamacare to be unimpeded. But it seems that this time: enough is enough. And rightly so. The president needs to be taught a lesson in how to keep spending in order. Balancing the budget is, right now, a FAR more urgent cause for the United States than this healthcare bill.

Cut spending to ZERO. I mean cut all of it. On FY2012 figures:
Taxation receipts = $2,449bn
US Federal Debt today = $16,750bn
Current 10yr Note rate= 2.75%
And you're still looking at a repayment date of the debt of 21st Sep 2021.

Wall St can not be held to account because they pretty well much own both political parties and have done for years. It's pretty well much even impossible to negotiate to increase taxation by even a tiny bit because of the Taxpayer Protection Pledge.

I'm not for a second thinking Obama is the one looking for compromise, it's just that he happens to be the prize pig in charge of this exercise in snidery. There honestly is no difference between the two parties and this Congress merely serves as further proof. Both sides have pretty well much been willfully negligent for quite some time now, yet the American people still vote for them for some bizarre reason.

[airshifter]

I'm not for a second thinking Obama is the one looking for compromise, it's just that he happens to be the prize pig in charge of this exercise in snidery. There honestly is no difference between the two parties and this Congress merely serves as further proof. Both sides have pretty well much been willfully negligent for quite some time now, yet the American people still vote for them for some bizarre reason.

I don't think either party is really looking for compromise, and the number of politicians really looking at long term solutions is also very few IMO. There is plenty of blame to go around and really they are doing nothing but further screwing the younger generations. We need people that have the backbone to look at facts and start dealing with the real situation.

Obamacare IMO is just one of many major issues that needs a solution other than promising something we can't fund. We need to either cut a lot of programs, raise a lot of tax money, or find a middle ground.


The posturing going on right now is beyond embarrassing. They went out of their way to provide park personnel to try to keep WWII vets out of the WWII memorial.... a memorial that is normally open even when not staffed. As a note, some US parks operate at a slight profit, but they still just close them all. How stupid is that?


I personally think we should lock them in without pay until they balance the budget, regardless of what method they use. And though the Republicans have been idiots, the Democrats have been just as great of idiots in this situation. Quite a few things would have been funded without question, but both parties are taking on a no negotiation, no compromise attitude. My 14 year old shakes her head at the stupidity we are seeing right now.

[Starter]

Congress 112 was officially the least productive Congress ever in terms of legislation passed. Congress 113 is not markedly different.
Many would say that is not necessarily a bad thing. :p


Wall St can not be held to account because they pretty well much own both political parties and have done for years. It's pretty well much even impossible to negotiate to increase taxation by even a tiny bit because of the Taxpayer Protection Pledge.

I'm not for a second thinking Obama is the one looking for compromise, it's just that he happens to be the prize pig in charge of this exercise in snidery. There honestly is no difference between the two parties and this Congress merely serves as further proof. Both sides have pretty well much been willfully negligent for quite some time now, yet the American people still vote for them for some bizarre reason.
You have clearly seen the truth here. It's much as I stated earlier in this thread. There is very little to choose from between both parties. They have both bamboozled people into a war. The left (Democrats) and the right (Republicans) have convinced many that their position is correct and the opposition are evil people intent on destroying "The American Way of Life". So long as their followers continue to believe this little will be done to correct the issues. They will expend their energies in blaming the other side. And, of course, continue to elect their favorite political "hero" who is facing down the other side. The only people who win here are the incumbent politicians.

The truth is something different. Both of our political parties share equal blame in getting us to the current state. It didn't happen overnight and, even with an honest push to correct things (not likely), would take years to correct. The start would be for a majority of citizens to understand that both political parties have done them ill and begin to elect people who are not beholden to one party or the other. I rate this last possibility as less than that of enough cows landing on the moon to start a dairy.

[anthonyvop]

Shutting down the government is hurting the country, not hyperbole.

It is?

How so?

After the last Shutdown the economy actually improved and unemployment went down.
Aside from government employees who are inconsequential to the argument who is actually suffering?

BTW Closings by the Obama administration that are 100% political like National parks and monuments don't count.

[anthonyvop]

The problem is the media who is on their knees servicing the democrats while the Republicans are actually passing budgets and offering compromise.

[Gregor-y]

And the crazy train has left the station. 800,000 workers are inconsequential, national parks, contractors, regulatory agencies, and a litany of services and support functions aren't even mentioned. Thanks for proving my point about the trend of conservative posting as the shutdown continues.

[Rollo]

The problem is the media who is on their knees servicing the democrats while the Republicans are actually passing budgets and offering compromise.

Link please.

[Rollo]

You have clearly seen the truth here. It's much as I stated earlier in this thread. There is very little to choose from between both parties. They have both bamboozled people into a war. The left (Democrats) and the right (Republicans) have convinced many that their position is correct and the opposition are evil people intent on destroying "The American Way of Life". So long as their followers continue to believe this little will be done to correct the issues. They will expend their energies in blaming the other side. And, of course, continue to elect their favorite political "hero" who is facing down the other side. The only people who win here are the incumbent politicians.

Suppose Romney had been president. He wouldn't have been faced with this problem, he would have been faced with a similar problem but with the hostilities occurring in the other house. Also, he wouldn't have introduced legislation like this which would have caused utter gridlock but it might have been over some other piece of legislation (most likely the defunding of some other program).

[Starter]

Suppose Romney had been president. He wouldn't have been faced with this problem, he would have been faced with a similar problem but with the hostilities occurring in the other house. Also, he wouldn't have introduced legislation like this which would have caused utter gridlock but it might have been over some other piece of legislation (most likely the defunding of some other program).
Can't argue with that. As I said, you have a clear picture.

[Spafranco]

Is this a first? A government going on strike!
Nope, it was done in the '90s too.
it sure did happen in the 90's. I'll never forget a former sister-in-law was to have a meeting with the IRS. Meeting being a very loose word. She was to go the the office at 9AM with all her returns and other items Claims were over one million. Got there and told the office was closed. I believe that day was all there was of the shutdown. She did not have to appear again. Talk about luck.

[Spafranco]

If this dog & pony show drags on until the debt ceiling HAS to be addressed, the long term consequences to the United States and the global financial markets are going to be very real. If the U.S. defaults on its debt for the first time in history, you can mark that as the day when this republic officially entered its period of decline.

The House could be done with this utter foolishness in a few minutes if Boehner would allow the up or down vote on the clean CR that most (sane) members of the House want. But he will not.
One poster at the beginning of the thread was asking how this could happen when the people doing it were not voted in. Of course he was pounced upon by the usual suspects. They knew what the poster meant. For four years this president has had to suffer the indignity of the opposition. Boehner of the permanent tan and tears along with the chinless MacConnell have done their best to impede everything and anything.
They and their tea party cronies with their lunatic ideas and ignorance of what the majority in the world see vis-a -vie Global warming, never was there WMD's created a war through subterfuge, outed a CIA agent, tried to have a bill passed by rushing to the hospital to get a bill signed. Had an AJ that was a complete and utter disgrace lining up Federal Judges to replace them with
their own cronies.
They allowed torture and if you are brave enough to go look at how we are now perceived by some that were once our allies. Jag Warrior,you are correct. This is just the beginning of a slow but assured decline.

[Gregor-y]

Suppose Romney had been president. He wouldn't have been faced with this problem, he would have been faced with a similar problem but with the hostilities occurring in the other house. Also, he wouldn't have introduced legislation like this which would have caused utter gridlock but it might have been over some other piece of legislation (most likely the defunding of some other program).
There's no example of Democrats providing similar resistance to Republican agendas and, of course, nothing about defunding any law let alone shutting down the government over it. There's no 'they would do it too' argument to be made here because it's never been done before except once, also by Republicans.

[webberf1]

All of this leaves me astonished at how amazingly good Obama and the Democrats have gotten with their PR and spin.

...the fact that they've actually gotten so many people to think it's simply a case of the big bad Republicans just trying to mess with everything the poor, mistreated, wanting to compromise President does. And like how Obama basically said "this healthcare bill has nothing to do with the debt ceiling"... and people ACTUALLY believed him. WOWWWW. He has you hook, line and sinker, my children.

You must understand that Obama inherited the trouble caused by many administrations that came before him. He would need more than 2 terms to fix things, and that's even if his policies are the right ones in the first place.
That would only be a valid excuse for Obama if he had made decent attempts to reverse the failed policies of previous administrations - instead he's largely kept them the same or even worsened them.

If you are a president coming in after a failed president, like GWB, it is your duty to right the wrongs. If you not only fail to right those wrongs, but make most of the wrongs even worse then you are even more culpable.

Lets look at how Obama campaigned to get elected vs how he's actually performed:
* Said he'd hold Wall Street to account: he's been bailing out Wall Street since day 1
* Said he'd get the budget under control: the budget has totally blown out of control
* Said he'd create jobs: the amount of full time jobs that have been downgraded to part time jobs, or people permanently leaving the labour market hides the fact that jobs have gone way down
* Said he'd adress poverty: more people are now welfare-dependent than ever
* Said he'd close guantanimo: its still open for business
* Said he respected whistleblowers and the positive impacts they can have: he's cracked down harder on whistleblowers than any president in history
* Said he wouldn't let detroit go bankrupt: detroit went bankrupt
* Said he'd bring the troops home: the troops are either still there or simply replaced with drone strikes
* Said he'd be transparent: he's probably the least transparent president ever. And the IRS scandal was, for me, pretty much as bad as Watergate.

Now for some general points, he has continued the transformation of America from republic to empire. His extensive targeted assassinations programs (via drone strikes) would make the Cold War presidents blush. And the worst thing of all Obama's doings is, IMO, that he has complicitly supported a Federal Reserve monetary policy that is not only the same thing that created the 2007 GFC, but actually it on steroids. So not only have the ultra-low interest rates that inflated the asset bubbles to cause the GFC remained, but the Fed is now also printing $85 BILLION A MONTH to put straight into US treasuries and US RMBS. This has not only made the entire US economy totally dependent on and addicted to QE, but through its inflation is quickly wiping out the middle class of America and actually preventing economic recovery. And in the process Obama and Bernanke are essentially setting up America, and indeed the world for a new crisis far worse than 2007.

President Obama is working America's worst nightmare and Wall Street's best friend - even if millions in America, the world, and the world media haven't woken up to it. You should wake up yourself.

[Spafranco]

The ironic thing is this terrible plan the Tea-party fringe of the Republican party have shut the Gubbymint down for is.............

A Republican plan: (follow the links, it is almost hilarious..
If we want to be accurate its "The Heritage Foundation" plan

They were all for it, until Obama took up their idea.
Utterslime balls.
Welcome back.

What some don't seem to understand is that everything isn't always black and white. There has been graft and corruption in Congress since just about day one. Any government has some of that and, mostly, you can live with it. The issue is that it has reached epic proportions in the last twenty years or so. The so called legislators are so busy chasing dollars they have no time to actually look at and consider the things they pass. There have been several times in the last couple Congresses that many of them voted for bills they hadn't even read. Most bills aren't even prepared by the legislators. They are written by staff and, in some cases, lobbyists. Both parties participate fully in this sham of good governance.

As for US healthcare, I agree that reforms were desperately needed - and that comes from someone who is not a fan of big government. My point on this is that while reforms were certainly needed, Obamacare was not the solution. There are a few good things in Obamacare, no question, but there are many bad things too. Instead of passing a huge package where no one really knew or understood what was in the legislation, they should have brought each area up separately and had open debate and then passed or dropped them based on the merits of each part. Instead it was pushed down everybody's throat.

As for Obama, he'll go down as one of the worst presidents. Part of the problem is that, while Congress has always been fairly partisan, the President needs to rise above all that. Obama has been an absentee from the deliberative process. He has no relationships with anyone in Congress. I expect several of his initiatives to be overturned once they reach the Supreme Court. Before you accuse me of being a racist or right wing lackey, I should point out that I voted for this turkey the first time around. I stand embarrassed by my poor judgement. I had been hoping for someone to rise above the bull excrement put out by both of the major parties.

This guy, the writer is so full of self righteous babble that he states he ignores me when in fact I know he is reading the posts. Why he is ignoring me is that I have stated time and again that he is a water carrying republican and that here once again he shows his colors. Obama, an absentee??!! Crybaby Bohner and the rest of them have had a mandate from the day the president was elected. They would impede every attempt at passing laws. Idiot Cruz with a fake filibuster and now we have have a shutdown. Both occasions by the crybaby republicans.
Now this guy Starter says there are a few good things in Obamacare. Name them. What was pushed down everybody,s throat. He says he voted for the president the first time he was a candidate. My sides hurt at that drivel.
What this Starter and his ilk are for is this; as long as they have everything they want like health insurance they will vote against anyone else who is suffering and can't get it. These people like the author don't have to fork out large amounts to be covered. They have no respect for the president and the main reason is because he is..........

[webberf1]

This guy, the writer is so full of self righteous babble that he states he ignores me when in fact I know he is reading the posts. Why he is ignoring me is that I have stated time and again that he is a water carrying republican and that here once again he shows his colors. Obama, an absentee??!! Crybaby Bohner and the rest of them have had a mandate from the day the president was elected. They would impede every attempt at passing laws. Idiot Cruz with a fake filibuster and now we have have a shutdown. Both occasions by the crybaby republicans.
Now this guy Starter says there are a few good things in Obamacare. Name them. What was pushed down everybody,s throat. He says he voted for the president the first time he was a candidate. My sides hurt at that drivel.
What this Starter and his ilk are for is this; as long as they have everything they want like health insurance they will vote against anyone else who is suffering and can't get it. These people like the author don't have to fork out large amounts to be covered. They have no respect for the president and the main reason is because he is..........
Again... more people following this utterly dumb line of thought like its all the big bad republicans' fault that we're in this situation. My first post pretty much blows that theory (if you can call it that) out the window.

Get real dude. And this is coming from someone who would have (only just, mind you) voted for Obama over Romney in the last election. However, since then its been getting more obvious by the day how much of an utter failure, hypocrite and liar Obama is as a leader.

[Rollo]

We don't like Democrats and we also don't like Republicans but which one is worst? There's only one way to find out...

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-oAQsY4x7c7Q/TtOQLGd5jEI/AAAAAAAAAHo/k3oOOq41PN0/s1600/19_harryhillfight.gif

Hooray boo hooray boo... this whole thing is like watching Rangers and Celtic.

[Mark]

Hooray boo hooray boo... this whole thing is like watching Rangers and Celtic.

And we all know what happened to Rangers.

[Gregor-y]

Zing!

[Spafranco]

The problem is the media who is on their knees servicing the democrats while the Republicans are actually passing budgets and offering compromise.

What are you on? Some derivative of a mind altering drug. God, will you ever get down of your perch for the Republicans/Conservatives and see things for what they are not , as I mentioned before with respect to you, those things that are Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly and Beck opinion.

[Spafranco]

This guy, the writer is so full of self righteous babble that he states he ignores me when in fact I know he is reading the posts. Why he is ignoring me is that I have stated time and again that he is a water carrying republican and that here once again he shows his colors. Obama, an absentee??!! Crybaby Bohner and the rest of them have had a mandate from the day the president was elected. They would impede every attempt at passing laws. Idiot Cruz with a fake filibuster and now we have have a shutdown. Both occasions by the crybaby republicans.
Now this guy Starter says there are a few good things in Obamacare. Name them. What was pushed down everybody,s throat. He says he voted for the president the first time he was a candidate. My sides hurt at that drivel.
What this Starter and his ilk are for is this; as long as they have everything they want like health insurance they will vote against anyone else who is suffering and can't get it. These people like the author don't have to fork out large amounts to be covered. They have no respect for the president and the main reason is because he is..........
Again... more people following this utterly dumb line of thought like its all the big bad republicans' fault that we're in this situation. My first post pretty much blows that theory (if you can call it that) out the window.

Get real dude. And this is coming from someone who would have (only just, mind you) voted for Obama over Romney in the last election. However, since then its been getting more obvious by the day how much of an utter failure, hypocrite and liar Obama is as a leader.

Get real?! Leave your indignant crap elsewhere and don't for one minute believe that you somehow have come to realize some truth that no other person has.
Lose almost everything and you might understand some of what is said. See the fact that those that you voted for in fact adopted the same type of medical care that the president has had to water down to become Obamacare.You and you trite and obtuse characterization of someone, in this case me, do so with impunity in this predominantly conservative forum. Also take note that personally I was one of those who would have taken my extra increase in tax but no, you and your lemming types decided that it was better to let the wealthy stay wealthy and those on the fringes lose all. In my case two homes and every cent I had saved for a happy retirement which will never come. It is YOU and your kind that I blame. And, it is happening all over again.
Your obstructionist party has done nothing, not a thing to help get this country back on track. All you do is cry and moan about the inappropriateness of one bill after another. You are all a farce. You protect the wealthiest who look down on you as minions. Ever read what Roger Penske said about being taxed at a higher rate? Did you? I bet you did not. Next time , when you insult me bring along facts that you can prove rather than abuse my intelligence such as it is. To be taken a little more seriously, you do need to get away from the "dude" slang.

[BleAivano]

Message To USA from Queen Elizabeth

This just in: To the citizens of the United States of America from Her Sovereign Majesty Queen Elizabeth II:

In light of your immediate failure to financially manage yourselves and also in recent years your tendency
to elect incompetent Presidents of the USA and therefore not able to govern yourselves, we hereby give
notice of the revocation of your independence, effective immediately. (You should look up 'revocation'
in the Oxford English Dictionary.)

Her Sovereign Majesty Queen Elizabeth II will resume monarchical duties over all states, commonwealths,
and territories (except Kansas , which she does not fancy).

Your new Prime Minister, David Cameron, will appoint a Governor for America without the need for further elections.

Congress and the Senate will be disbanded. A questionnaire may be circulated sometime next year to
determine whether any of you noticed.

http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-ne ... -elizabeth (http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/10636509-message-to-usa-from-queen-elizabeth)

Lets go Lizzy!! :D :D

[Starter]

Message To USA from Queen Elizabeth

This just in: To the citizens of the United States of America from Her Sovereign Majesty Queen Elizabeth II:

In light of your immediate failure to financially manage yourselves and also in recent years your tendency
to elect incompetent Presidents of the USA and therefore not able to govern yourselves, we hereby give
notice of the revocation of your independence, effective immediately. (You should look up 'revocation'
in the Oxford English Dictionary.)

Her Sovereign Majesty Queen Elizabeth II will resume monarchical duties over all states, commonwealths,
and territories (except Kansas , which she does not fancy).

Your new Prime Minister, David Cameron, will appoint a Governor for America without the need for further elections.

Congress and the Senate will be disbanded. A questionnaire may be circulated sometime next year to
determine whether any of you noticed.

http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-ne ... -elizabeth (http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/10636509-message-to-usa-from-queen-elizabeth)

Lets go Lizzy!! :D :D
Wasn't that posted here during our last election cycle? Still pretty funny though.

[Rollo]

Wasn't that posted here during our last election cycle? Still pretty funny though.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/revocation.asp
It might be more than a decade old...

[anthonyvop]

And the crazy train has left the station. 800,000 workers are inconsequential,

Yes they are. It is not the government's function to provide jobs



national parks, contractors, regulatory agencies, and a litany of services and support functions aren't even mentioned. Thanks for proving my point about the trend of conservative posting as the shutdown continues.

Funny how suddenly we can't walk in the forest, cook ham or generally survive as a society with government oversight.
Even outdoor monuments that are never manned are now closed and guarded by federal employees.

Total political games on the part of the Obama administration


“It’s a cheap way to deal with the situation,” an angry Park Service ranger in Washington says of the harassment. “We’ve been told to make life as difficult for people as we can. It’s disgusting.”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/3/pruden-the-cheap-tricks-of-the-game/#ixzz2gly33IBs

[webberf1]

This guy, the writer is so full of self righteous babble that he states he ignores me when in fact I know he is reading the posts. Why he is ignoring me is that I have stated time and again that he is a water carrying republican and that here once again he shows his colors. Obama, an absentee??!! Crybaby Bohner and the rest of them have had a mandate from the day the president was elected. They would impede every attempt at passing laws. Idiot Cruz with a fake filibuster and now we have have a shutdown. Both occasions by the crybaby republicans.
Now this guy Starter says there are a few good things in Obamacare. Name them. What was pushed down everybody,s throat. He says he voted for the president the first time he was a candidate. My sides hurt at that drivel.
What this Starter and his ilk are for is this; as long as they have everything they want like health insurance they will vote against anyone else who is suffering and can't get it. These people like the author don't have to fork out large amounts to be covered. They have no respect for the president and the main reason is because he is..........
Again... more people following this utterly dumb line of thought like its all the big bad republicans' fault that we're in this situation. My first post pretty much blows that theory (if you can call it that) out the window.

Get real dude. And this is coming from someone who would have (only just, mind you) voted for Obama over Romney in the last election. However, since then its been getting more obvious by the day how much of an utter failure, hypocrite and liar Obama is as a leader.

Get real?! Leave your indignant crap elsewhere and don't for one minute believe that you somehow have come to realize some truth that no other person has.
Lose almost everything and you might understand some of what is said. See the fact that those that you voted for in fact adopted the same type of medical care that the president has had to water down to become Obamacare.You and you trite and obtuse characterization of someone, in this case me, do so with impunity in this predominantly conservative forum. Also take note that personally I was one of those who would have taken my extra increase in tax but no, you and your lemming types decided that it was better to let the wealthy stay wealthy and those on the fringes lose all. In my case two homes and every cent I had saved for a happy retirement which will never come. It is YOU and your kind that I blame. And, it is happening all over again.
Your obstructionist party has done nothing, not a thing to help get this country back on track. All you do is cry and moan about the inappropriateness of one bill after another. You are all a farce. You protect the wealthiest who look down on you as minions. Ever read what Roger Penske said about being taxed at a higher rate? Did you? I bet you did not. Next time , when you insult me bring along facts that you can prove rather than abuse my intelligence such as it is. To be taken a little more seriously, you do need to get away from the "dude" slang.
Wow, you couldn't have packed more fail into a single post if you tried!

Firstly, I laughed like crazy when you called the Republicans 'my party'. Maybe you mistook me for someone else? But in case you didn't: I'm from Australia, I've never voted for either the Republicans or the Democrats, and in one of my previous posts I actually stated that around the time of the 2012 election I thought Obama was the slightly better of the two candidates (although even then I still thought it was the choice between a Douche and a Turd Sandwich). I am not at all a conservative, let alone a hardline conservative. I am very liberal - in the sense that I think our values as a society need to change greatly because the current ones have really got the world in a mess.

The second part is that you failed to address any of the many points I have made so far in this thread: in fact no one on your side of the argument has even come close to doing a decent job of it thus far. The fact remains that Obama is doing an incredibly awful job of being president, and its becoming more obvious how terribad he is by the day to anyone who can look at the situation honestly. The fact that he's making almost all the wrongs more wrong than they were under Bush makes him an even worse president.

Point stands. Wake up, DUDE.

EDIT: PS. If you want to be taxed more, why don't you just donate your money to the government. If not, second best option: just buy up some of those worthless US treasuries every investor with a brain is trying to sell off. Your government is printing $85 billion a month just to keep the bond market from plummeting into oblivion (forget about spending it on better things, Johnny can teach himself how to read), you might as well show some gratitude! :p Yes, that's right Spafranco! You too could own your own little piece of your gazillion dollar-indebted (and hopefully rising, if Obama gets his way) government! There aint nothing like being part of a ponzi scheme! :D

[Spafranco]

[/quote:3m33jrr2]Get real dude. [b]And this is coming from someone who would have (only just, mind you) voted for Obama over Romney in the last election. However, since then its been getting more obvious by the day how much of an utter failure, hypocrite and liar Obama is as a leader Webber



Get real?! Leave your indignant crap elsewhere and don't for one minute believe that you somehow have come to realize some truth that no other person has.
Lose almost everything and you might understand some of what is said. See the fact that those that you voted for in fact adopted the same type of medical care that the president has had to water down to become Obamacare.You and you trite and obtuse characterization of someone, in this case me, do so with impunity in this predominantly conservative forum. Also take note that personally I was one of those who would have taken my extra increase in tax but no, you and your lemming types decided that it was better to let the wealthy stay wealthy and those on the fringes lose all. In my case two homes and every cent I had saved for a happy retirement which will never come. It is YOU and your kind that I blame. And, it is happening all over again.
Your obstructionist party has done nothing, not a thing to help get this country back on track. All you do is cry and moan about the inappropriateness of one bill after another. You are all a farce. You protect the wealthiest who look down on you as minions. Ever read what Roger Penske said about being taxed at a higher rate? Did you? I bet you did not. Next time , when you insult me bring along facts that you can prove rather than abuse my intelligence such as it is. To be taken a little more seriously, you do need to get away from the "dude" slang.

Webber

Firstly, I laughed like crazy when you called the Republicans 'my party'. Maybe you mistook me for someone else? But in case you didn't: I'm from Australia, I've never voted for either the Republicans or the Democrats, and in one of my previous posts I actually stated that around the time of the 2012 election I thought Obama was the slightly better of the two candidates (although even then I still thought it was the choice between a Douche and a Turd Sandwich). I am not at all a conservative, let alone a hardline conservative. I am very liberal - in the sense that I think our values as a society need to change greatly because the current ones have really got the world in a mess.
end webber

Spafranco
Webber,take all of you idiotic claptrap with references as to how our government works and what you think[i][i]you know and go for a walk with some of those marsupials that genius from Australia :stareup: with the banana, Comfort who seems to be of the same ignorant mindset as you. You by your implication created the scenario that you were American not Australian.
It is now my turn to look in the direction at the putrid hogwash that you have wasted so much time writing when in fact it is just senseless words filling a space.
Van Dieman's is probably a place of honor for and you ancestors where you took the starving Irish away for stealing a loaf of bread while their child died with green mouth. You laugh! I cringe at worthless types who when making the voting statement would have done so with clarity ,that if they could vote" etc. A sad indictment of Australians. God help Aborigines.

[airshifter]

I must say, the endless paranoid rants get more comical post by post. Now we not only have the black helicopter theories, we have political parties that will strip a person of all their wealth. And we still have the right wing slanted forum lapping it up. :laugh:

I'm glad Mark occasionally allowed these people to return under another name and dig themselves the same holes over and over. Comedy gold it is!!

[Spafranco]

I must say, the endless paranoid rants get more comical post by post. Now we not only have the black helicopter theories, we have political parties that will strip a person of all their wealth. And we still have the right wing slanted forum lapping it up. :laugh:

I'm glad Mark occasionally allowed these people to return under another name and dig themselves the same holes over and over. Comedy gold it is!!

Out of sheer curiosity, please explain what that post is about?

[Gregor-y]

I believe it concerns watching webber and tony-voo make prize asses of themselves.

[webberf1]

Webber,take all of you idiotic claptrap with references as to how our government works and what you think[i][i]you know and go for a walk with some of those marsupials that genius from Australia :stareup: with the banana, Comfort who seems to be of the same ignorant mindset as you. You by your implication created the scenario that you were American not Australian.
It is now my turn to look in the direction at the putrid hogwash that you have wasted so much time writing when in fact it is just senseless words filling a space.
Van Dieman's is probably a place of honor for and you ancestors where you took the starving Irish away for stealing a loaf of bread while their child died with green mouth. You laugh! I cringe at worthless types who when making the voting statement would have done so with clarity ,that if they could vote" etc. A sad indictment of Australians. God help Aborigines.
If you only want to talk about marsupials and Aborigines thats fine, just save it for another thread. I'm more interested in doing something that you obviously are not: talking about the issues. While I'm making valid points about the failure of Obama you're making stupidly inaccurate assumptions about my ethnic background.

If so many people like you hold your president to such low standards of accountability, even when he is blatantly awful, your country unfortunately has no future. I'm talking such low standards as Obama constantly saying over the past week "raising the debt ceiling has nothing to do with raising our debt", and barely anyone seems to raise an eyebrow. How the United States developed such apathy to incompetence (or should I say, straight out deception and dishonesty) I'll never know.

[airshifter]

I believe it concerns watching webber and tony-voo make prize asses of themselves.


Actually it was concerning Glauistean, monadvspec, ____________whatever the resident internet psychologist is attempting to hide behind these days. I'm guessing quite a few can easily fill in the blank. A guaranteed rant of large volumes often not relating to the topic at hand, and always so slanted that they couldn't stand up straight on a listing ship. Still has an erection for Starter, and still claiming that Marks site leans far to the right.

The one about losing everything due to a political party is my favorite. Even the most out of touch wack jobs don't preach such comedy. But when personal responsibility doesn't exist you have to look for bad guys I suppose. :laugh:

I'm guessing said poster does have some experience in the psychology field.... but not as a provider.

[Spafranco]

Webber,take all of you idiotic claptrap with references as to how our government works and what you think[i][i]you know and go for a walk with some of those marsupials that genius from Australia :stareup: with the banana, Comfort who seems to be of the same ignorant mindset as you. You by your implication created the scenario that you were American not Australian.
It is now my turn to look in the direction at the putrid hogwash that you have wasted so much time writing when in fact it is just senseless words filling a space.
Van Dieman's is probably a place of honor for and you ancestors where you took the starving Irish away for stealing a loaf of bread while their child died with green mouth. You laugh! I cringe at worthless types who when making the voting statement would have done so with clarity ,that if they could vote" etc. A sad indictment of Australians. God help Aborigines.
If you only want to talk about marsupials and Aborigines thats fine, just save it for another thread. I'm more interested in doing something that you obviously are not: talking about the issues. While I'm making valid points about the failure of Obama you're making stupidly inaccurate assumptions about my ethnic background.

If so many people like you hold your president to such low standards of accountability, even when he is blatantly awful, your country unfortunately has no future. I'm talking such low standards as Obama constantly saying over the past week "raising the debt ceiling has nothing to do with raising our debt", and barely anyone seems to raise an eyebrow. How the United States developed such apathy to incompetence (or should I say, straight out deception and dishonesty) I'll never know.

You instigate the assault of words. Proclaim that you are strictly on point, pretend to be an American and then take two words from a post, one concerning animals, the other a race of people. If you believe you are that you are all knowing about American politics through pretense, why not work on doing what you claim to be doing and stick to the point.

[Spafranco]

I believe it concerns watching webber and tony-voo make prize asses of themselves.


Actually it was concerning Glauistean, monadvspec, ____________whatever the resident internet psychologist is attempting to hide behind these days. I'm guessing quite a few can easily fill in the blank. A guaranteed rant of large volumes often not relating to the topic at hand, and always so slanted that they couldn't stand up straight on a listing ship. Still has an erection for Starter, and still claiming that Marks site leans far to the right.

The one about losing everything due to a political party is my favorite. Even the most out of touch wack jobs don't preach such comedy. But when personal responsibility doesn't exist you have to look for bad guys I suppose. :laugh:

I'm guessing said poster does have some experience in the psychology field.... but not as a provider.



Here we go again. Let us in on who claims to be a psychologist. Which person on the forum is the one you are targeting as being a/Gluaistean, which in fact is Gaelic. and means car. The other is an abbreviation. I am clueless except for adv probably means advertising and spec is likely specialties. Maybe it's a website.

There are four pages here Shifter with many posters. You are accusing someone once more of what I can't be sure but I could find out from the recorded posts. They can be found very easily.

I'll be the first......are you accusing me of something?

[Mark]

Being a foreigner I have little understanding of what "Obama Care" is all about, anyone care to explain what it's supposed to be doing. Without using rhetoric please ;)

[Starter]

Being a foreigner I have little understanding of what "Obama Care" is all about, anyone care to explain what it's supposed to be doing. Without using rhetoric please ;)
Mark, I'll take a shot at that.

The issue is that the American healthcare system, though providing (for some) the best care in the world, is very expensive. Those without insurance, or at least good insurance, find it economically difficult to avail themselves of said care. That's compounded by the many who choose not to buy insurance which means a smaller base of insurance premiums to pay for the care with. Many employers here provide insurance to employees as one of the benefits along with salary, 401Ks, etc. The cost of the healthcare benefit has been going up rapidly partially because the healthcare field is largely unregulated from a cost basis and providers, drug companies and insurance companies can charge whatever they wish. Over the last 10 or more years employers have been cutting benefits back and/or requiring larger copays and employee contributions as a consequence. This is compounded by the many who have no insurance or are illegal and can't get it even if they could afford it.

The above is the issue. Obamacare was/is an attempt to both broaden the base of payers into the system - everybody pays some sort of premium or penalty - which is why the Supreme Count upheld that the law was constitutional by calling it a tax. It was also an attempt to bring order to the system and level out the playing field.

The problems with both the law and it's application are discussed elsewhere in this thread. Once you get past some of the posts, particularly those of one poster.

[airshifter]

What interests me about the entire "tax" angle is that essentially the government will force collection of fines as a "tax" yet the only government involvement is to force the tax, not provide any service to those people in return for doing so. Those that don't have the income are exempt from the tax and will get 'free" healthcare on the backs of those that pay regular taxes and the penalties of Obamacare.

In that sense it's a way to hide the normal..... those that have pay for those that don't. Yet without any regulation of the health care industry, we are still paying too much for reasonable health care, which is part of the entire problem. So now we have a government that chooses to force people to pay the unreasonable rates, or face penalties.


I'm glad I don't have to worry about any of this mess as it applies to myself or my wife. And if I did, I would disregard the decisions made and make my own regardless. As I see it the entire program is one big mess, not well thought out, and so complex that those voting on it could not possibly understand how it works, much less how to fund it.

[Mark]

I see. So it's kind of like the way car insurance works in the UK, doesn't matter who you buy from, but you must have it? Or is there some government scheme you can pay into?

In the UK we have "National Insurance" which is supposed to be for the purposes of healthcare and pension payments. However as these things usually go it basically morphed into just another tax.

[Spafranco]

What interests me about the entire "tax" angle is that essentially the government will force collection of fines as a "tax" yet the only government involvement is to force the tax, not provide any service to those people in return for doing so. Those that don't have the income are exempt from the tax and will get 'free" healthcare on the backs of those that pay regular taxes and the penalties of Obamacare.

In that sense it's a way to hide the normal..... those that have pay for those that don't. Yet without any regulation of the health care industry, we are still paying too much for reasonable health care, which is part of the entire problem. So now we have a government that chooses to force people to pay the unreasonable rates, or face penalties.


I'm glad I don't have to worry about any of this mess as it applies to myself or my wife. And if I did, I would disregard the decisions made and make my own regardless. As I see it the entire program is one big mess, not well thought out, and so complex that those voting on it could not possibly understand how it works, much less how to fund it.
Oh , the humanity.....poor people will get health care....oh my that is so wrong. They should all die,right Shifter? :dork:

[airshifter]

Similar to car insurance in that sense, but the devil of it lies in all the loopholes and subsidies. The idea was to force people to get coverage thus expanding the user and risk base, and in theory driving prices down. As with anything else, it's driving up prices for young and/or healthy, and the elderly and/or less healthy might get a break.

But as usual here in the US they have attached so much red tape to everything that State adoptation of the Medicaid expansion and about a million other factors can influence who gets help, who pays for themselves, limits, tax deductions.... just about everything. There are requirements for providers concerning co pays, preventative care, etc, etc, etc. Companies have requirements as well, so some are already choosing to limit the number of full time employees.

At the end of the day, it's supposed to make things easier and provide service to more people who can't afford it. I've seen nothing in terms of easier, nothing in terms of savings, and assume I'll get taxed more somehow to pay for everyone that qualifies for all the susidies and such and ends up with very cheap health care. Even those people with subsidies will pay part in most cases.... so it's another bill for those that struggle already.


Here is a version of something that's been floating around. The sad thing is.... quite a few statements in it are true.

"We're going to be "blessed" with a health care plan we are forced to purchase and fined if we don't and which supposedly covers at least ten million more people without adding a single new doctor... yet provides for 16,000 new IRS agents.

It's written by a committee whose chairman says he doesn't understand it and passed by a one-party (Democrat) Congress that didn't read it but exempted themselves from THEIR OWN LAW that was signed by a former Community Organizing President who smokes -- with funding administered by a treasury chief who dodged his taxes -- for which we'll be taxed for four years before any benefits take effect.

All of this from a government which has already bankrupted Social Security and Medicare while being overseen by a surgeon general who is obese and financed by a country that's broke!!!!!

Gee, what could possibly go wrong?"



At the rate things are going I wouldn't be shocked to see things get much worse with the shutdown and such. We don't have the funding for this or a number of things yet neither side is willing to give. And I think much of the US is waking up to the fact that all this "free" stuff is going to cost a lot of people a lot of tax money.

At this point in my life I'm really concerned about leaving our daughter in a good financial spot, because at the rate we are going future generations are really going to be screwed. They will end up paying tax rates similar to countries with more socialized health care and public systems in place, but they won't have those systems in place.... they will be forced to fund systems that still generate profit to the private companies.

[Starter]

Similar to car insurance in that sense, but the devil of it lies in all the loopholes and subsidies. The idea was to force people to get coverage thus expanding the user and risk base, and in theory driving prices down. As with anything else, it's driving up prices for young and/or healthy, and the elderly and/or less healthy might get a break.
There was no question that there would be a huge problem when a 2200 some odd page bill was passed that the legislators were not given time to read; that was written by private companies, lobbyists and some staff; and had many things included which did not pertain to the core issue. As with all American legislation that 2200 page bill isl blossoming into tens of thousands of pages of regulations written by bureaucrats and administered to same. It is nearly as much a jobs bill as a healthcare bill.

[ShiftingGears]

Webber,take all of you idiotic claptrap with references as to how our government works and what you think[i][i]you know and go for a walk with some of those marsupials that genius from Australia :stareup: with the banana, Comfort who seems to be of the same ignorant mindset as you. You by your implication created the scenario that you were American not Australian.
It is now my turn to look in the direction at the putrid hogwash that you have wasted so much time writing when in fact it is just senseless words filling a space.
Van Dieman's is probably a place of honor for and you ancestors where you took the starving Irish away for stealing a loaf of bread while their child died with green mouth. You laugh! I cringe at worthless types who when making the voting statement would have done so with clarity ,that if they could vote" etc. A sad indictment of Australians. God help Aborigines.

Did not even mention Vegemite. Poor stereotyping, would not read again. 2/10.

[Rollo]

At this point in my life I'm really concerned about leaving our daughter in a good financial spot, because at the rate we are going future generations are really going to be screwed. They will end up paying tax rates similar to countries with more socialized health care and public systems in place, but they won't have those systems in place.... they will be forced to fund systems that still generate profit to the private companies.

Re this:
They will end up paying tax rates similar to countries with more socialized health care and public systems in place, but they won't have those systems in place....

I did a calculation based on my income for 2013/14 (we use a 1 Jul - 30 Jun tax year in Australia) and came up with the following figures:

Australia
Taxation: $8122.00
Medicare: $765.00
Total: $8887.00

United States
Taxation: $8673.77

Medicare in Australia is the publicly funded universal healthcare system. People pay 1.5% of their taxable income into the system and if they earn more than $70,000 a year but do not have private health insurance, they pay an additional 1%.
The thing is though, due to things like economies of scale and the fact that a single payer system is better able to negotiate on issues like price, the whole system is in fact cheaper than the United States; with better outcomes when compared to survival rates and life expectancy.


At the end of the day, it's supposed to make things easier and provide service to more people who can't afford it. I've seen nothing in terms of easier, nothing in terms of savings, and assume I'll get taxed more somehow to pay for everyone that qualifies for all the susidies and such and ends up with very cheap health care. Even those people with subsidies will pay part in most cases.... so it's another bill for those that struggle already.

The problem with health care in the United States is that marker power at this stage isn't controlled by either the government or the people who buy into the system. When it comes to negotiation on price, HMOs will pass on on-costs to their "patients" (customers) by way of higher premiums.
In addition to this and the main reason why the Republicans are so very very opposed to this, is that the lobby groups which push them, stand to lose out big time if market power shifts away from them. Obama faces a real problem in that its in the American people's interest not to be spending so much on health care when the system but not in the interests of the businesses which actually deliver the service.
I bet that in 1946 when Aneurin Bevan the then Minister for Health in the Attlee Government was busily setting up the NHS, he probably would have faced considerable opposition. Certainly in Australia, Whitlam's government had to force a double dissolution of parliament in 1974 over the issue and how to pay for it all were 3 of the 21 trigger bills that the Whitlam Government had prior to the 1975 double dissolution when the Governor-General sacked the government.

[Spafranco]

Webber,take all of you idiotic claptrap with references as to how our government works and what you think[i][i]you know and go for a walk with some of those marsupials that genius from Australia :stareup: with the banana, Comfort who seems to be of the same ignorant mindset as you. You by your implication created the scenario that you were American not Australian.
It is now my turn to look in the direction at the putrid hogwash that you have wasted so much time writing when in fact it is just senseless words filling a space.
Van Dieman's is probably a place of honor for and you ancestors where you took the starving Irish away for stealing a loaf of bread while their child died with green mouth. You laugh! I cringe at worthless types who when making the voting statement would have done so with clarity ,that if they could vote" etc. A sad indictment of Australians. God help Aborigines.

Did not even mention Vegemite. Poor stereotyping, would not read again. 2/10.
What are you talking about? Left overs from brewing? 2/10 A date?

[airshifter]

Rollo,

Great points. Here in the US we pay 2.9% Medicare split between the person and the employer. If self employed you pay the total 2.9%. Above 200K income you pay an additional .9%, regardless of having insurance or not.


It's interesting that you bring this point up, as the Obamacare as originally proposed relied heavily on Medicaid expansion. However, the courts ruled that the federal government can't force the states to do this, and a number of states certainly won't. Though the federal government will in theory pay much of the cost, the states still must generate more revenue, similar to the situation of the end users of the insurance. Due to this, it will force many more people into loopholes where they don't qualify for Medicare/Medicaid, yet also don't qualify for the subsidies under Obamacare.

In many of the states that don't expand Medicaid, it will affect a disproportionate number of minorities that fall into these voids, as well as many others in certain income ranges. In short it will often help those that have more, while still leaving the poor in the dark without help. Only in the US could they screw something up so well.




Quite a few people that had insurance that fit their needs are already openly stating they will opt to pay the fines. With the regulations on what must be offered many are now faced with huge premium increases, even if they maintain high deductibles. This great plan seems to cater to the insurance companies rather well, but isn't going to do much to help the people.

[Mark]

Webber,take all of you idiotic claptrap with references as to how our government works and what you think[i][i]you know and go for a walk with some of those marsupials that genius from Australia :stareup: with the banana, Comfort who seems to be of the same ignorant mindset as you. You by your implication created the scenario that you were American not Australian.
It is now my turn to look in the direction at the putrid hogwash that you have wasted so much time writing when in fact it is just senseless words filling a space.
Van Dieman's is probably a place of honor for and you ancestors where you took the starving Irish away for stealing a loaf of bread while their child died with green mouth. You laugh! I cringe at worthless types who when making the voting statement would have done so with clarity ,that if they could vote" etc. A sad indictment of Australians. God help Aborigines.

Did not even mention Vegemite. Poor stereotyping, would not read again. 2/10.
What are you talking about? Left overs from brewing? 2/10 A date?

Enough; neither of these posts are acceptable. The debate in this thread has been periodically good so lets not spoil it with personal stuff.

[airshifter]

Apparently some House members have taken the time from the shutdown issues to break the law and get themselves arrested. What a great example for the people....

[url][/http://news.yahoo.com/police-arrest-8-house-members-immigration-rally-230332327--politics.htmlurl]

[Rollo]

Dear America,

I work as an accountant in Australia. Our taxation year runs from 1 Jul to 30 Jun; American citizens living in Australia will naturally always ask for a 6 month extension to taxation because of the filing requirements here.

http://www.irs.gov/uac/Newsroom/Reminde ... ions-Lapse (http://www.irs.gov/uac/Newsroom/Reminder:-Oct.-15-Tax-Deadline-Remains-During-Appropriations-Lapse)
The Internal Revenue Service today reminded taxpayers that the Oct. 15 deadline remains in effect for people who requested a six-month extension to file their tax return.

Problem...
The IRS e-Services system is currently closed. I tried to ring the IRS but their overseas telephone lines are also closed. I've also tried to see if I could get consular assistance but the US Consulate in Sydney... is also closed?!!
Yet somehow... the IRS is still sending out demand notices and reminders to file by October 15.

What? Just because we're three million years into deep space and the human species is extinct? That means nothing to these people. They'll find us.
- Arnold J Rimmer, on the Outland Revenue - Red Dwarf: Better Than Life (1988)

[Mark]

Because the computer systems are often still running as to shut them down would cost more than to leave them up. In some cases web servers will actually serve the content, and *then* put up a banner saying the content is unavailable.

[odykas]

http://labtestproject.com/files/blc/shutdown/shutdown_linux.png

[Mark]

http://labtestproject.com/files/blc/shutdown/shutdown_linux.png

Stop using XP! :p

[Roamy]

Hey if Americans don't want Obamacare then they can sign a recall petition against thier congressperson. The people voted for this sh!t so give it to them. The Repubs are stupid to shut down the Gov - they should be working on the last ditch save of the Rep Party. But just maybe we will get a strong 3rd party. The is no preventive maintanence for Gov. It either fails or it doesn't. 3 yrs from now the story will have set it own course. Print all the money you want. We are never going to pay it back anyway.

[Rollo]

Print all the money you want. We are never going to pay it back anyway.

Actually... you have to.

The Social Security Trust Fund and Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund own about $2.764tn and the Office of Personnel Management (Federal Employees Retirement funds etc.) own $827bn. The Federal Reserve itself owns about $1.794 trillion and State & Local Government Pension funds, Mutual Funds and other Pension Funds own $2.105tn

I figure that roughly $7.490tn of the soon to be $17tn (so about 44%) will be owned by pension and retirement funds and the like, which means that at some point once the baby boomers start retiring en masse, it will need to be paid out for the oldies to live on; that's when the real fun begins.
The Knickerbocker Crisis of 1907 is going to look like a Sunday School Picnic compared to the six kinds of sheol which are set to be released. When Hades says "release the hounds" they're gunna be Cerberus' spawn.

[Starter]

Print all the money you want. We are never going to pay it back anyway.

Actually... you have to.

The Social Security Trust Fund and Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund own about $2.764tn and the Office of Personnel Management (Federal Employees Retirement funds etc.) own $827bn. The Federal Reserve itself owns about $1.794 trillion and State & Local Government Pension funds, Mutual Funds and other Pension Funds own $2.105tn

I figure that roughly $7.490tn of the soon to be $17tn (so about 44%) will be owned by pension and retirement funds and the like, which means that at some point once the baby boomers start retiring en masse, it will need to be paid out for the oldies to live on; that's when the real fun begins.
The Knickerbocker Crisis of 1907 is going to look like a Sunday School Picnic compared to the six kinds of sheol which are set to be released. When Hades says "release the hounds" they're gunna be Cerberus' spawn.
There's no question that if serious steps are not taken soon, like right now, there will be a complete financial meltdown in the relatively near future. And, unfortunately for many of you, the rest of the world will be dragged into it. Spending is the politician's crack cocaine, they just can't stop.

[Roamy]

there is no way to ever pay this back unless rampant inflation. So one way or the other it is just bullsh!t. Politician kool aide. The dems have created so many have nots they will be in office until the financial explosion. The wealthy and conservatives should figure out a way to buy the Baja and create a new country. Or divide this one up. AZ, UT, MT, ID and UT would be a good start. Probably the dakotas too.

[Rollo]

There's no question that if serious steps are not taken soon, like right now, there will be a complete financial meltdown in the relatively near future. And, unfortunately for many of you, the rest of the world will be dragged into it. Spending is the politician's crack cocaine, they just can't stop.

This isn't a "spending" problem. It's a lack of foresight problem going back until at least the 1960s. I don't know if the government can actually opt out of paying pensions.
The US Government is faced with the realisation that it didn't put funds away to pay for future pensions in much the same way that GM also didn't. Basically you can play politics all you like but both sides have been negligent and asleep at the wheel for at least my lifetime.

[Starter]

Basically you can play politics all you like but both sides have been negligent and asleep at the wheel for at least my lifetime.
Agree completely.

[donKey jote]

"The Tea Party is like UKIP with guns" - Ian Hislop. HIGNFY
I laughed at that when I heard it too :laugh:

Farage isn't in the position to hold the government at ransom over a democratically passed law he doesn't like though... yet ! :p

[Ranger]

I'll predict a GFC II is coming... at least.

As some has pointed out it is not simply the last 5 years that has caused this problem, it has been developing for a very long time.

[airshifter]

An opinion on why the healthcare website is having so many problems.

It seems that there were still a lot of people thinking this was a "free" thing. I had to laugh when government workers with reasonable incomes were excited thinking they would really get free health care. :D

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/10/14/obamacares-website-is-crashing-because-it-doesnt-want-you-to-know-health-plans-true-costs/?partner=yahootix

[Rollo]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/165392/perce ... -high.aspx (http://www.gallup.com/poll/165392/perceived-need-third-party-reaches-new-high.aspx)
Amid the government shutdown, 60% of Americans say the Democratic and Republicans parties do such a poor job of representing the American people that a third major party is needed. That is the highest Gallup has measured in the 10-year history of this question. A new low of 26% believe the two major parties adequately represent Americans.
- Gallup, 14th Oct 2013

I have never voted 1 for a major political party in any election. In the Federal Election we've just had in Australia, we had 9 candidates for 9 parties in our local electorate and I voted the two majors in at 7 and 8.

I suppose that this is mainly directed at Americans, but given that Congress has collectively failed to do its job (ie government), how likely are you to vote for a third or fourth party at a future election?

If enough of you decide to vote for third and fourth parties, you can break the duopoly of selfishness that the two behemoths have. It would take a seismic shift though; is this enough of one?

[Starter]

I suppose that this is mainly directed at Americans, but given that Congress has collectively failed to do its job (ie government), how likely are you to vote for a third or fourth party at a future election?
I can speak for no one but myself. I would most definitely vote for a third party if I thought it would take a more middle road in the direction of the country. I'd prefer slightly right of middle, but I'll take middle.

[airshifter]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/165392/perceived-need-third-party-reaches-new-high.aspx
Amid the government shutdown, 60% of Americans say the Democratic and Republicans parties do such a poor job of representing the American people that a third major party is needed. That is the highest Gallup has measured in the 10-year history of this question. A new low of 26% believe the two major parties adequately represent Americans.
- Gallup, 14th Oct 2013

I have never voted 1 for a major political party in any election. In the Federal Election we've just had in Australia, we had 9 candidates for 9 parties in our local electorate and I voted the two majors in at 7 and 8.

I suppose that this is mainly directed at Americans, but given that Congress has collectively failed to do its job (ie government), how likely are you to vote for a third or fourth party at a future election?

If enough of you decide to vote for third and fourth parties, you can break the duopoly of selfishness that the two behemoths have. It would take a seismic shift though; is this enough of one?


I've voted for other parties in past elections, and will continue to do so if I feel it's the best option. Unfortunately most in the US will cling to their badge of Democrat or Republican IMO. Shocking since when you talk to people very few really lean entirely one direction or the other, and quite a few in both parties are most center in views rather than left or right.

I think until we clean house and get people away from the "Us Party" vs "Them Party" attitude not much will change.

The current situation is a prime example of both parties spending a lot of time pointing fingers and placing blame, yet neither side will do much to resolve the situation. And to be honest at this point I hope neither side gives until the people in the US are really pissed off and see the truth for once. We need people that will say the things that the US voters don't want to hear, that being that we need to get our debt under control and quit screwing future generations.

Overall the US debt can be managed.... we have all the time in the world to fix it if we get it headed in the right direction. But politicians are too busy making false promises to buy votes, and voters are stupid enough to fall for it.... just like the "free" health care we are getting! :rolleyes:

[555-04Q2]

I've voted for other parties in past elections, and will continue to do so if I feel it's the best option. Unfortunately most in the US will cling to their badge of Democrat or Republican IMO. Shocking since when you talk to people very few really lean entirely one direction or the other, and quite a few in both parties are most center in views rather than left or right.

I think until we clean house and get people away from the "Us Party" vs "Them Party" attitude not much will change.

The current situation is a prime example of both parties spending a lot of time pointing fingers and placing blame, yet neither side will do much to resolve the situation. And to be honest at this point I hope neither side gives until the people in the US are really pissed off and see the truth for once. We need people that will say the things that the US voters don't want to hear, that being that we need to get our debt under control and quit screwing future generations.

Overall the US debt can be managed.... we have all the time in the world to fix it if we get it headed in the right direction. But politicians are too busy making false promises to buy votes, and voters are stupid enough to fall for it.... just like the "free" health care we are getting! :rolleyes:

The problem you have, as we all do in democratic countries, is the majority of people are idiots...irrefutable fact sadly...hence there will never be any major changes. No matter what really happens on the ground, voters will fall for the same old tricks, politicians will tell the same old lies, everyone will point fingers because once again nothing is being achieved after the election, you'll have another election and start all over again...and again...and again...

I can't claim that I know more about the US political and financial situation than say someone who lives there, but what I can see from my seat is the US has so many fingers in so many pies, it has made so many commitments and promises, that in reality, I doubt anything major will actually change in the next few decades.

I'm afraid it's just more of the same at the moment, just with a new head of state and the same old idiotic, gullible voters.

[Starter]

The problem you have, as we all do in democratic countries, is the majority of people are idiots...irrefutable fact sadly...hence there will never be any major changes. No matter what really happens on the ground, voters will fall for the same old tricks, politicians will tell the same old lies, everyone will point fingers because once again nothing is being achieved after the election, you'll have another election and start all over again...and again...and again...
I don't agree that a majority of people are idiots, though we certainly have our share. It's that most people are too involved in their daily lives to follow the political arena. So long as their personal ox isn't gored, they pretty much ignore it. Politicians count on this.


I can't claim that I know more about the US political and financial situation than say someone who lives there, but what I can see from my seat is the US has so many fingers in so many pies, it has made so many commitments and promises, that in reality, I doubt anything major will actually change in the next few decades.
That's a pretty accurate observation. We went from somewhat isolationist pre WWll to the (currently) remaining superpower. We have our fingers in most every county's business. That is IMO a bad thing. We should be engaged in the world, but not "running" it.

[Rollo]

THINGY THING ALERT:
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/s ... ml?hp=t1_s (http://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/senate-update-debt-ceiling-government-shutdown-98368.html?hp=t1_s)
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell are finalizing a deal to avert a debt default and reopen the government, capping a frantic day that had Washington bracing for an economic crisis of its own making.
The deal is essentially done, sources say, as aides for the two leaders finish drafting the legislative language Tuesday night.

- via Politico, 15th Oct 2013

There was movement in the Congress, for the word had passed around
That the time to fault the debt had got away...
Therefore, send not to know for whom the bell tolls. It tolls for thee.

[Mark]

I think a credible third party for the USA would be a healthy thing. The two sides seem so entrenched that it sometimes needs a 'third way' to shake things up a bit. People deride the Lib Dems in the UK, but they've changed the direction of the Tory dominated government from what it would have otherwise been.

As ever the problem is money; sure in the UK you need money to start a political party, but in America the amounts are off the scale!

[555-04Q2]

That's a pretty accurate observation. We went from somewhat isolationist pre WWll to the (currently) remaining superpower. We have our fingers in most every county's business. That is IMO a bad thing. We should be engaged in the world, but not "running" it.

Indeed. The problem is, where do you draw the line? It seems the current and past cabinets have not known where to stop or step back and say to themselves, "we shouldn't do this". Even the mighty US has limited resources which it needs to protect/respect. This has not happened.

I've been amazed to see how the US has gone from being a creditor pre 80's / 90's to a massive debtor in the 21st century.

[Mark]

There are parallels I think between the situation the USA has in the world now and the situation of the UK in the past, pre-WW2 and certainly pre-WW1, as the UK at the time was a superpower, involved in everyone's business. Worked out well for a long while, but it gets unsustainable.

[Rollo]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24557469
Republican and Democratic leaders of the US Senate have struck a cross-party deal to end a partial government shutdown and raise the US debt limit.

Somehow I suspect that this whole affair is going to do three things:

1. Polarise dyed in the wool supporters of both sides even further.
2. Alienate people who might have been swinging voters.
3. Create even more people who in future will disengage from the political process.

If these three things happen, then it seems to me that the marginal and wackier fringes will make their voices even stronger because more moderate voices will have left the building. Basically this whole crisis hasn't really done much to either solve the debt crisis or the underlying toxicity of American politics other than to kick the can further down the road.

You don't need to put up with this. Change the game, vote for someone else!

C'mon, go the Whigs!*

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/a6/Modern_Whig_Party_owl.svg/200px-Modern_Whig_Party_owl.svg.png

*Other other parties like the Libertarian, Objectivist and Constitution Parties are available.

[555-04Q2]

The problem the US has (and this affects the whole world economy as well) is that whatever solution/agreement they come up with now, just delays the reality that they are in trouble, they've just put it back another year or so before the process starts all over again.

What is the current US debt level, like 13 trillion or something I believe?

[SGWilko]

The problem the US has (and this affects the whole world economy as well) is that whatever solution/agreement they come up with now, just delays the reality that they are in trouble, they've just put it back another year or so before the process starts all over again.

What is the current US debt level, like 13 trillion or something I believe?

Exactly how would the US ever repay this debt? If the $ wasn't the globally referenced currency, they'd really be in the doo doo.

[555-04Q2]

The problem the US has (and this affects the whole world economy as well) is that whatever solution/agreement they come up with now, just delays the reality that they are in trouble, they've just put it back another year or so before the process starts all over again.

What is the current US debt level, like 13 trillion or something I believe?

Exactly how would the US ever repay this debt? If the $ wasn't the globally referenced currency, they'd really be in the doo doo.

The reality is, this debt will probably never be repaid.

[schmenke]

The problem the US has (and this affects the whole world economy as well) is that whatever solution/agreement they come up with now, just delays the reality that they are in trouble, they've just put it back another year or so before the process starts all over again.

What is the current US debt level, like 13 trillion or something I believe?

Exactly how would the US ever repay this debt? ....

Well, for starters, raise the effective corporate tax rate. Have companies such as IBM, Chevron, Apple, etc. contribute their share.
Just saying...

[Starter]

Exactly how would the US ever repay this debt? If the $ wasn't the globally referenced currency, they'd really be in the doo doo.
You mean we're not now??

[Starter]

Well, for starters, raise the effective corporate tax rate. Have companies such as IBM, Chevron, Apple, etc. contribute their share.
Just saying...
The US corporate rate is already higher than many places in the world. That's one of the reasons so many companies have transferred operations elsewhere. Lower the corporate rate enough to be competitive and close the loopholes and special perks which congress has given to many (campaign contributing) companies over the years. We'd see a net increase in revenue.

[schmenke]

Well, for starters, raise the effective corporate tax rate. Have companies such as IBM, Chevron, Apple, etc. contribute their share.
Just saying...
The US corporate rate is already higher than many places in the world. ....

Yes, but tax breaks and shelters lower the effective tax rate to one of the lowest in the western world. Some US companies are paying next to nothing now.

[airshifter]

The problem the US has (and this affects the whole world economy as well) is that whatever solution/agreement they come up with now, just delays the reality that they are in trouble, they've just put it back another year or so before the process starts all over again.

What is the current US debt level, like 13 trillion or something I believe?

Exactly how would the US ever repay this debt? If the $ wasn't the globally referenced currency, they'd really be in the doo doo.

As with any budget, controlling spending and increasing revenue is the answer. Unlike a personal budget, it doesn't matter if the plan takes 100 years as the country won't reach "retirement" age with income ending.

The bottom line is we have to control spending more. I can think of many ways to do so beyond the obvious that are often stated. Just closing loopholes in personal and corporate taxes would make a huge difference. There are also massive loopholes in entitlement programs that allow people to legally cheat the system.

As an example of said loopholes I'll give one that applies to my family. Both myself and my wife are eligible for VA health care do to our military service. We are in one of the lesser eligibility categories as we didn't retire from the military or have any major service related injuries or disabilities. Under the current system we pay copays and such based on income and liquid assets. A fair deal right? But the loophole exists in how they determine assets. We live debt free and our home, cars, etc are not considered.... just our liquid assets and income. Simply by moving regular bank funds to retirement accounts or material investments would affect how much we pay. The reality is that we have sufficient assets to pay more, yet the loopholes say we don't have to do so.

The same applies to many federal and state agencies. There are people getting food assistance money and such that drive $70,000 cars. The reality is that if you want food you should sell or get a loan against your expensive car and buy food. Certainly there is a difference between someone making XX dollars per year with no assets and one making an equal amount that owns two homes outright.


Another example is the tax system in general leaving way too much illegal not taxed trade going on. If they got rid of income tax and made it all sales taxes, people couldn't cheat. You have to pay tax to buy products. All under the table trade, drug money, anything eventually has to be spent or it is of no use to anyone. This also allows for lower taxes on basics, and higher taxes as items move towards wants and luxuries vs basic needs.



The major problem as I see it is politicians trying to buy votes, and voters willing to vote for someone that promises them tax breaks, something for nothing, etc. I would personally have no problem voting for someone that raises my taxes within reason in relationship to my income and assets if in fact they were going towards good long term solutions that future generations would benefit from. As it is these days, it seems they take more taxes and we get crap in return.

[Starter]

Yes, but tax breaks and shelters lower the effective tax rate to one of the lowest in the western world. Some US companies are paying next to nothing now.
Thought I covered that - "close the loopholes and special perks which congress has given to many". :p

[Starter]

I would personally have no problem voting for someone that raises my taxes within reason in relationship to my income and assets if in fact they were going towards good long term solutions that future generations would benefit from. As it is these days, it seems they take more taxes and we get crap in return.
Nor, in principle, would I. In reality I doubt I'd support such a move. The reason being that I do not trust the politicians to honor the other half of the bargain - cutting spending. They are still going to try and buy votes with giveaways.

[schmenke]

Yes, but tax breaks and shelters lower the effective tax rate to one of the lowest in the western world. Some US companies are paying next to nothing now.
Thought I covered that - "close the loopholes and special perks which congress has given to many". :p

Yeah, sorry, I guess we're saying the same thing :p:

[Rollo]

The US corporate rate is already higher than many places in the world. That's one of the reasons so many companies have transferred operations elsewhere. Lower the corporate rate enough to be competitive and close the loopholes and special perks which congress has given to many (campaign contributing) companies over the years. We'd see a net increase in revenue.

If we saw the IRS given proper teeth and with the ability to put most of Wall St in prison, we'd see companies change their ways. The problem is that Wall St pretty well much owns football clubs playing in the Congress Bowl. Mind you, that was spotted more than 140 years ago.

For the first time since the creation of these enormous corporate bodies, one of them has shown its power for mischief, and has proved itself able to override and trample on law, custom, decency, and every restraint known to society, without scruple, and as yet without check. The belief is common in America that the day is at hand when corporations far greater than the Erie; swaying power such as has never in the world's history been trusted in the hands of mere private citizens will ultimately succeed in directing government itself. Under the American form of society, there is now no authority capable of effective resistance.
- Henry Adams, "The New York Gold Conspiracy", Westminster Review magazine October 1870.

If someone had thrown the entire board of Lehmann Brothers in prison in 2008 instead of condoning their actions by rewarding their grift; along with most of the boards of the companies in the Fortune 500, then maybe things might change but until the day that something similar happens, America is condemned to keep on raising the debt ceiling through a series of rolling deficits ad nauseum.

[Rollo]

Another example is the tax system in general leaving way too much illegal not taxed trade going on. If they got rid of income tax and made it all sales taxes, people couldn't cheat. You have to pay tax to buy products. All under the table trade, drug money, anything eventually has to be spent or it is of no use to anyone. This also allows for lower taxes on basics, and higher taxes as items move towards wants and luxuries vs basic needs.

Consumption taxes by nature fall most squarely on the poorest people in society and those people who have retired as they move into periods of dissaving. Consumption taxes are always advocated by people whose incomes exceed their need to spend it on consumption.
Sales Taxes, GST, VAT - whatever you like to call them, are in my opinion, quite quite evil.

[Starter]

Sales Taxes, GST, VAT - whatever you like to call them, are in my opinion, quite quite evil.

:D All taxes are quite evil. Though necessary too.

[airshifter]

Another example is the tax system in general leaving way too much illegal not taxed trade going on. If they got rid of income tax and made it all sales taxes, people couldn't cheat. You have to pay tax to buy products. All under the table trade, drug money, anything eventually has to be spent or it is of no use to anyone. This also allows for lower taxes on basics, and higher taxes as items move towards wants and luxuries vs basic needs.

Consumption taxes by nature fall most squarely on the poorest people in society and those people who have retired as they move into periods of dissaving. Consumption taxes are always advocated by people whose incomes exceed their need to spend it on consumption.
Sales Taxes, GST, VAT - whatever you like to call them, are in my opinion, quite quite evil.

I strongly disagree. Properly set up consumer taxes allow basic needs to be lower tax or tax exempt, and tax rates to rise as the items become a luxury vs need. Some of our state and local taxes are already structured in this way, and it's very effective. As an example taxes on food items is only 2.5%. Taxes on prepared meals or beverages is 10.5%.

One difference being that unlike federal income taxes, you can't go into a store broke and leave with money due to "credits". This is another failing of our current tax system, where part of it is in fact assistance/welfare/etc rather than a taxation system.

We also have age and income limits locally, where older and less financially secure individuals hit a tax "ceiling" that freezes their property tax and prevents them from being hit by housing value fluctuations and the like.


People spend their money to live. I'm not eating out less because they raised taxes on prepared meals. And when you consider all the under the table money never taxed, the amounts are huge. Even the drug dealers and businesses who grossly cheat their receipts have to buy cars, fuel those cars, etc. Unless they want to make money they never spend, the consumption taxes force them to pay to get products in return.

[555-04Q2]

[Well, for starters, raise the effective corporate tax rate. Have companies such as IBM, Chevron, Apple, etc. contribute their share.
Just saying...

I hear you, but therein lies the problem. Big corporates already contribute massively to taxes, VAT etc. We may think they are getting away with not paying enough but in reality, they pay a substantial amount. If you try and tax them more they move their operations/money to tax havens and then you are worse off. I've done that, found a loop hole in our system and until they close it, I'm saving a fortune in taxes each year as we are taxed to death over here.

A better idea is to spread the tax base to a broader reach. An example is in our country there are over 20 million registered workers but only 4.5 million tax payers (excluding companies). The other 15 million odd are exempt as they are below the "income tax line". Now, I'm sure most of these 15 million odd workers can afford say US$ 50 a year towards tax. Now that adds up to US$ 775 million extra each year. This can be carried over to small businesses that are exempt from taxes etc etc. Now we haven't really harmed anyone too badly there, but do this over a number of areas with minute taxes and suddenly you have an extra few billion dollars to pay for something.

But, all this is in vain if our governments keep spending without thinking/planning ahead. Problem is, taxes aren't really their money, it's our money and it's far too easy to spend other peoples hard earned money and not worry about the end result/problems later on. My biggest problem is most politicians are complete idiots elected by complete idiots (that's right I'm talking to the citizens/voters), after being financed by smart people who put them there with corporate campaign finance to run for elections and then these corporates want their money back from benefits, contract preferences, rebates etc. It's a dog eat dog world out there in political-business world partnership.

In the end, it's only you and I that suffers and trust me, the politicians don't give a feck about us, they only care about the X you put next to their name come election time.

[555-04Q2]

Exactly how would the US ever repay this debt? If the $ wasn't the globally referenced currency, they'd really be in the doo doo.
You mean we're not now??

:laugh: Well, let's be honest here. Where does anyone find US$ 15 - 20 trillion to pay back a debt? No one! :eek:

The problem is the US controls so much of the worlds economy to the point that, if it doesn't start getting it's house in order, and soon, the world economy is going to sneeze really badly, worse than the 2008/2009 period. Hell, half of Europe is about to collapse at the moment!

[Starter]

I strongly disagree. Properly set up consumer taxes allow basic needs to be lower tax or tax exempt, and tax rates to rise as the items become a luxury vs need. Some of our state and local taxes are already structured in this way, and it's very effective. As an example taxes on food items is only 2.5%. Taxes on prepared meals or beverages is 10.5%.
The problem here is that lower income people rely more on "fast food" than you think. When you're working two jobs its difficult to get home to fix a meal.


One difference being that unlike federal income taxes, you can't go into a store broke and leave with money due to "credits". This is another failing of our current tax system, where part of it is in fact assistance/welfare/etc rather than a taxation system.
I agree with that.


We also have age and income limits locally, where older and less financially secure individuals hit a tax "ceiling" that freezes their property tax and prevents them from being hit by housing value fluctuations and the like.
How could you ever administer a ceiling, based on need or age, with a VAT or sales tax? It would be nearly impossible. And the burden placed on businesses to track and report such a tax would be immense. Along with all the other government imposed tasks they have to do now.

[airshifter]

I agree with the fast food, but many people rely on things they don't need. A person can pack a frozen meal, sandwich, etc in minutes. My wife makes lunch for my daughter daily (she hates school food) and she gets a great lunch for a couple bucks.

The ceiling on housing taxes was an example of how it can work. If people are buying luxuries later in life they can pay the tax, as it wasn't taxed when they made and saved that money. I might also add that since this taxes based on consumption, it encourages people to live within their means and make purchases appropriately.

As for collections and filing, these days most of it is automated. We already have differing levels here and it really wasn't a big deal. You set up the tax level when you enter an item into the system. Those businesses are already filing monthly, so the increase in paperwork really doesn't exist.

[Starter]

As for collections and filing, these days most of it is automated. We already have differing levels here and it really wasn't a big deal. You set up the tax level when you enter an item into the system. Those businesses are already filing monthly, so the increase in paperwork really doesn't exist.
Perhaps I misunderstood. We were talking consumption taxes, like VAT or sales tax. I assumed you were suggesting a variable tax of that type. You'd have to issue and police special IDs for need or age based exemptions from those in order to accomplish it. Businesses would bear the burden of tracking and reporting taxes and policing fraud.

[555-04Q2]

I agree with the fast food, but many people rely on things they don't need. A person can pack a frozen meal, sandwich, etc in minutes. My wife makes lunch for my daughter daily (she hates school food) and she gets a great lunch for a couple bucks.

You can also make fresh meals, quickly and cheaply if you know how. Jamie Oliver also did a series on quick healthy meals in minutes which was brilliant. Everyone has 10 minutes to make a fresh meal, 10 minutes is not a long time out of 1440 minutes in a day, and it's better for you. I laugh at people who say they are too busy to make food. They are never too busy to do everything else :crazy:

[henners88]

I agree with the fast food, but many people rely on things they don't need. A person can pack a frozen meal, sandwich, etc in minutes. My wife makes lunch for my daughter daily (she hates school food) and she gets a great lunch for a couple bucks.

You can also make fresh meals, quickly and cheaply if you know how. Jamie Oliver also did a series on quick healthy meals in minutes which was brilliant. Everyone has 10 minutes to make a fresh meal, 10 minutes is not a long time out of 1440 minutes in a day, and it's better for you. I laugh at people who say they are too busy to make food. They are never too busy to do everything else :crazy:
I love my cooking, but I have to say its rare to find a complete Jamie Oliver meal that works both cheaply or in the time he claims it takes to make. I watched Jamie's 15 minute meals yesterday and although he has many of the ingredients sitting around his kitchen, most people don't. I logged into Asda online and checked to see how much one of these meals cost and it came to 16 quid! That's half of my weekly shopping budget for one meal. It's amazing how much dried mushrooms, lemon grass, saffron and pink ginger cost when he thinks its a simple meal lol.

I do like his cooking though and tend to pull tips out of his recipes rather than follow them to the book.

[Starter]

You can also make fresh meals, quickly and cheaply if you know how. Jamie Oliver also did a series on quick healthy meals in minutes which was brilliant. Everyone has 10 minutes to make a fresh meal, 10 minutes is not a long time out of 1440 minutes in a day, and it's better for you. I laugh at people who say they are too busy to make food. They are never too busy to do everything else :crazy:
Do you have ten minutes to make a fresh meal when you get up at 6:30, leave at 7:10 to commute to work so you can arrive on time at 8:00 then work til 5:00 (half hour for lunch), commute to your second job to be there at 6:00 and get off at midnight (no lunch, 15 minute break) and commute back home to arrive by 12:30 or 12:45? That's a schedule that many of the working poor have to live with, at least those with two jobs to make ends meet. Even if you want to make something, you're exhausted and a stop at MickeyD's or Burger King starts to look pretty good.

[Bagwan]

I agree with the fast food, but many people rely on things they don't need. A person can pack a frozen meal, sandwich, etc in minutes. My wife makes lunch for my daughter daily (she hates school food) and she gets a great lunch for a couple bucks.

You can also make fresh meals, quickly and cheaply if you know how. Jamie Oliver also did a series on quick healthy meals in minutes which was brilliant. Everyone has 10 minutes to make a fresh meal, 10 minutes is not a long time out of 1440 minutes in a day, and it's better for you. I laugh at people who say they are too busy to make food. They are never too busy to do everything else :crazy:
I love my cooking, but I have to say its rare to find a complete Jamie Oliver meal that works both cheaply or in the time he claims it takes to make. I watched Jamie's 15 minute meals yesterday and although he has many of the ingredients sitting around his kitchen, most people don't. I logged into Asda online and checked to see how much one of these meals cost and it came to 16 quid! That's half of my weekly shopping budget for one meal. It's amazing how much dried mushrooms, lemon grass, saffron and pink ginger cost when he thinks its a simple meal lol.

I do like his cooking though and tend to pull tips out of his recipes rather than follow them to the book.

This federal shutdown is making me hungry .

16 quid is not likely what the meal costs .
You don't put all of the saffron in one dish , nor the lemon grass or pink ginger .
They sit on your shelf to spice many more meals .

If time is limited in the morning before work , make a big pot of something , and take a dish of it each day .
Make two or three big pots , freeze , and alternate them .

Hey , I'll admit to a grocery store pizza now and then , but it NEVER goes into the oven until it's deep in all the extra meat , cheese , and veggies I add .
And , it always gives me a smile when I think of how smart I was to make the extra that I did , as I eat it for my super easy lunch the next day .

To think that thinking as far ahead as my next week's meals makes me that different from the modern governments because I'm going that far to planning my future is a bit scary , isn't it ?

[henners88]

It was pretty much what it costs without considering the saffron and lemon grass can be used for extra meals. The pink ginger is fresh and is expensive in its own right. Anyway that's by the by, I'm a pretty good cook on a budget and now winter is approaching, my slow cooker will be used every week.

[Gregor-y]

Isn't pink ginger pickled? Roots run from $2.99-$3.99 a pound in the US. More expensive is the honey I mix with shredded ginger, lemon, lime and pineapple juice to make a soda substitute at home. Five pounds of honey from surrounding farms is $22-$25.

I had a ginger root that didn't get used for a month and it started sprouting like a potato so I planted it in a pot and it's been sending up massive stems, getting tangled with the catnip in the hanging basket above it.

[henners88]

It's certainly preserved like a pickle. You find it here in sealed packets rather than jars in health food shops. I hate ginger like that so it won't be anything I buy soon. Reminds me of drinking my Mums hangover cure when I was a teenager lol

[555-04Q2]

You can also make fresh meals, quickly and cheaply if you know how. Jamie Oliver also did a series on quick healthy meals in minutes which was brilliant. Everyone has 10 minutes to make a fresh meal, 10 minutes is not a long time out of 1440 minutes in a day, and it's better for you. I laugh at people who say they are too busy to make food. They are never too busy to do everything else :crazy:
Do you have ten minutes to make a fresh meal when you get up at 6:30, leave at 7:10 to commute to work so you can arrive on time at 8:00 then work til 5:00 (half hour for lunch), commute to your second job to be there at 6:00 and get off at midnight (no lunch, 15 minute break) and commute back home to arrive by 12:30 or 12:45? That's a schedule that many of the working poor have to live with, at least those with two jobs to make ends meet. Even if you want to make something, you're exhausted and a stop at MickeyD's or Burger King starts to look pretty good.

Solution...wake up 10 minutes earlier ;)

Like I said there are 1440 minutes in a day. For heaven's sake, 10 is not a lot!

[Mark]

Except it's not 10 minutes is it, those meals they do on the TV all the prep and measuring has been done in advance and he just whacks it in a pan or whatever, no account is taken of the time taken to clean up afterwards etc etc. That '10 minute' cooking time can easily be 30-40 minutes once you've taken into account the faffing about with the bits which are too boring to show on TV.

[555-04Q2]

I've done the quick meals, as has my wife, and the longest it has taken us to go from start to finish is about 15 minutes.

Now all I hear are excuses ;) How about making the time like we do for other things all day long :)

Otherwise, make some sandwiches in the morning when you wake up (that takes only a few minutes now) and pack them into a small lunch cooler and you have lunch, brunch etc immediately, faster than walking to McDonalds, cheaper and far healthier too! ;)

[Mark]

Otherwise, make some sandwiches in the morning when you wake up (that takes only a few minutes now) and pack them into a small lunch cooler and you have lunch, brunch etc immediately, faster than walking to McDonalds, cheaper and far healthier too! ;)

That's what I do :)

[Starter]

I've done the quick meals, as has my wife, and the longest it has taken us to go from start to finish is about 15 minutes.

Now all I hear are excuses ;) How about making the time like we do for other things all day long :)

Otherwise, make some sandwiches in the morning when you wake up (that takes only a few minutes now) and pack them into a small lunch cooler and you have lunch, brunch etc immediately, faster than walking to McDonalds, cheaper and far healthier too! ;)
How many jobs do you work? How much time is spent each day in commuting. If your answer is one for the first and less than an hour and a quarter for the second, then you don't really understand the issue for the working poor.

[555-04Q2]

I've done the quick meals, as has my wife, and the longest it has taken us to go from start to finish is about 15 minutes.

Now all I hear are excuses ;) How about making the time like we do for other things all day long :)

Otherwise, make some sandwiches in the morning when you wake up (that takes only a few minutes now) and pack them into a small lunch cooler and you have lunch, brunch etc immediately, faster than walking to McDonalds, cheaper and far healthier too! ;)
How many jobs do you work? How much time is spent each day in commuting. If your answer is one for the first and less than an hour and a quarter for the second, then you don't really understand the issue for the working poor.

On the contrary, I came from a very poor background as a youngster. My mother worked 3 jobs, that's right, 3 jobs, 2 during the week and one on the weekends. Before my sister came round, my brother and I used to sit in the corner by her workplaces after school and read books. I worked 16-18 hour days when I first left school. I know all about the working poor. The fact that I am successful now does not mean I have forgotten where I came from and how hard life can be, life can be a real b!tch. That's probably why I appreciate what I have now so much. I take nothing for granted.

No matter how many jobs you work, how long you spend travelling, there is no excuse for poor planning and eating unhealthy fast food all the time. My mother made sure we had at least 3 square healthy meals a day, so what's the excuse other than people being lazy? :)

[Mark]

It's necessity isn't it? Your Mum did what she did because she had to, there wasn't the ready meals etc available then. However now with everyone having a freezer and ready meals are cheap, there's that option available.

[Bagwan]

Pardon me for interrupting the foody hour , but how's it all going with the federal shutdown over there in the US of A ?
Are we all back to normal now ?

[Starter]

Pardon me for interrupting the foody hour , but how's it all going with the federal shutdown over there in the US of A ?
Are we all back to normal now ?
Until the next 90 day period runs out. :p Then we do it all over again.

[Gregor-y]

I don't think Boehner's dumb enough to do it again, but you never know...

[555-04Q2]

It's necessity isn't it? Your Mum did what she did because she had to, there wasn't the ready meals etc available then. However now with everyone having a freezer and ready meals are cheap, there's that option available.

Yes she did :) As a youngster I never really appreciated the predicament she was in after my folks divorced. She was a single mother trying her best to raise 2 boys, and we were naughty little shysters too! Until my stepfather came round a few years later, she worked hard to support us and to this day I still marvel at the bloody minded resolve she had back then. This is why whenever she needs anything now, a car, television, money, anything, I make sure she gets it and wants for nothing :)

Regarding frozen foods, there some surprisingly good ones we get here that are tasty and nutritious, much better than fast foods, but still pricey considering what you get. You pay for convenience I guess!

[555-04Q2]

Pardon me for interrupting the foody hour , but how's it all going with the federal shutdown over there in the US of A ?
Are we all back to normal now ?

As starter said, we gotta wait a while still :D

[webberf1]

I don't think Boehner's dumb enough to do it again, but you never know...
No mention at all for the man who's doing the real damage? The man who's actually allowing the debt ceiling to raise to astronomical levels, and gives the Republicans the power to force him into getting a fresh mandate? The man who allows his agencies to get the blank cheques necessary to monitor 60 million Spanish phone calls in a month (let alone how many in the world total), and yet apparently he can't find anywhere in the budget to reduce spending?

This forum can be so painfully brainless.

[Gregor-y]

I don't think Boehner's dumb enough to do it again, but you never know...
No mention at all for the man who's doing the real damage? The man who's actually allowing the debt ceiling to raise to astronomical levels, and gives the Republicans the power to force him into getting a fresh mandate? The man who allows his agencies to get the blank cheques necessary to monitor 60 million Spanish phone calls in a month (let alone how many in the world total), and yet apparently he can't find anywhere in the budget to reduce spending?

This forum can be so painfully brainless.
Yes, I do blame all the other Republicans that forced Boehner into the shutdown, too, but he's the one that made it happen. And he's supposed to be the leader.

[webberf1]

[quote="Gregor-y":a5l6um4w]I don't think Boehner's dumb enough to do it again, but you never know...
No mention at all for the man who's doing the real damage? The man who's actually allowing the debt ceiling to raise to astronomical levels, and gives the Republicans the power to force him into getting a fresh mandate? The man who allows his agencies to get the blank cheques necessary to monitor 60 million Spanish phone calls in a month (let alone how many in the world total), and yet apparently he can't find anywhere in the budget to reduce spending?

This forum can be so painfully brainless.
Yes, I do blame all the other Republicans that forced Boehner into the shutdown, too, but he's the one that made it happen. And he's supposed to be the leader.[/quote:a5l6um4w]
Irony's not exactly your strong suit, is it?

[donKey jote]

This forum can be so painfully brainless.

or yours either :andrea: :dork: :dozey:

[Gregor-y]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WY_amJ0YZrM

[Jag_Warrior]

I fear that what we've seen for the past 2-3 years is what American governance is going to look like for the foreseeable future. We live in a time of severe bifurcation, with people losing the basic ability to see the world in anything but the most simplistic chocolate vs. vanilla terms. Hopefully, possibly, maybe... sooner than later, the people who have been purged from the GOP after being called RINOs and "establishment Republicans" will find areas of agreement and/or compromise with middle of the road Democrats and we can begin moving forward again. What I'd like to see is for both of the two major parties to lose influence with voters and we then move forward with a third party or independent movement(s). But the average voter is too lazy and apathetic to think for himself. It's so much easier to just be a sheep and follow the herd.

George Washington, in his farewell address to the nation, warned us about the dangers of becoming more loyal to a political party than to the republic. What we are seeing now is Washington's fear coming to life. The founding fathers, I believe, had a desire for us to learn from and perfect Italian politics. But I'm pretty sure they wanted us to be like the Roman Republic, not the governments of post WWII Italy... but that seems to be where we are heading. :dozey:

[555-04Q2]

I fear that what we've seen for the past 2-3 years is what American governance is going to look like for the foreseeable future. We live in a time of severe bifurcation, with people losing the basic ability to see the world in anything but the most simplistic chocolate vs. vanilla terms. Hopefully, possibly, maybe... sooner than later, the people who have been purged from the GOP after being called RINOs and "establishment Republicans" will find areas of agreement and/or compromise with middle of the road Democrats and we can begin moving forward again. What I'd like to see is for both of the two major parties to lose influence with voters and we then move forward with a third party or independent movement(s). But the average voter is too lazy and apathetic to think for himself. It's so much easier to just be a sheep and follow the herd.

George Washington, in his farewell address to the nation, warned us about the dangers of becoming more loyal to a political party than to the republic. What we are seeing now is Washington's fear coming to life. The founding fathers, I believe, had a desire for us to learn from and perfect Italian politics. But I'm pretty sure they wanted us to be like the Roman Republic, not the governments of post WWII Italy... but that seems to be where we are heading. :dozey:

Very good post Jag :)