roddy

Quote :

"^oSunds like something Palin would say....without checking the facts, the rich benefit the most from the cut....not the middle class....of course, you just follow what the talking heads say, huh? Typical Tea Bagger "

here are the facts, might want to check them out before YOU end up looking like an internet idiot who just follows the talking heads.

tax cuts for those under 250k = 463B
tax cuts for those OVER 250k = 81.5B

http://money.cnn.com/2010/12/07/news/economy/tax_cut_deal_obama/index.htm

I used CNN so you would be more likely to believe it. And yes I realize that there are fewer people that earn over 250k than earn under that. do you realize how percentages work?

1/14/2011 9:17:43 PM

haha, I like how you posted the exact same thing I did. even used the same link, lol. some people just can't get the kool-aid out of their glasses fast enough

1/15/2011 6:51:34 PM

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Politics/paycheck-obama-tax-cut-extension-means/story?id=12423601

Quote :

"The tax cut extension means big bucks for the super-rich. LeBron James, who makes $14.5 million each year, will save more than $600,000 in taxes for this year. A family making $100,000 per year will pay about $6,000 less in taxes than if the tax cuts had expired. The average savings for all Americans, according to the non-partisan Tax Policy Center, is about $2,800."

[Edited on January 15, 2011 at 9:40 PM. Reason : oh yeah, that link has an interview with Queen Teabagger]

1/15/2011 9:37:36 PM

^

Quote :

"do you realize how percentages work? "

1/15/2011 10:56:19 PM

Technically, it was Flavor-Ade.

1/16/2011 11:47:45 AM

Really, guys?

The terrorists have won.

Quote :

"Rep. Dan Burton, R-Ind., renewed his call for the installation of an impenetrable, see-through security shield around the viewing gallery overlooking the House floor. Burton points out that, while guns and some bombs would be picked up by metal detectors, a saboteur could get into the Capitol concealing plastic explosives. The House floor, he pointed out, is the only room where all three branches of government gather to hear the president speak, as President Obama will do when he delivers his State of the Union address on Jan. 25. Burton introduced the legislation in the past, but it's gone nowhere. He's hoping the tragic events of Saturday could help it win more serious consideration by the Republican leadership. "I think the risk is there," Burton told The Washington Examiner. "The threat is more now than it has ever been.""

http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/congress/2011/01/house-members-want-added-security-after-giffords-shooting#ixzz1ApK1BzOf

1/18/2011 9:06:07 AM

Quote :

"Boehner: Barring federal funds for abortion one of GOP's 'highest' priorities"

REALLY?!?!? this is what they're choosing to focus on?

Jesus H Christ!

1/20/2011 4:57:31 PM

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/140607-boehner-saying-retirement-age-needed-to-be-raised-was-mistake

Quote :

"Boehner: Saying retirement age needed to be raised was 'mistake' By Michael O'Brien - 01/27/11 06:55 AM ET House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said he "made a mistake" when he suggested raising the retirement age to 70 last year. "

Quote :

"Boehner and fellow Republicans say there needs to be an "adult conversation" with the public about the program"

1/29/2011 2:46:44 AM

But it isn't a mistake. With the exception of hazardous occupations we should look to raise retirement on folks of our generation since in all likelihood we'll live clear into our 80s-90s and drawing on SS won't be sustainable.

1/29/2011 4:15:04 PM

our life expectancy after reaching 65 hasn't much changed in the past 50 years. most of the gains in life expectancy have been in reduction in childhood deaths and deaths of women during childbirth

^have you worked with someone in their 70s before? they become a drag at a certain point. also, later retirement means more people in the workforce. where are the extra jobs going to come from? where are the jobs that cater to having an elderly person working them?

[Edited on January 29, 2011 at 4:35 PM. Reason : .]

1/29/2011 4:29:41 PM

I think I heard that Spain just went from 65 to 67, maybe only applying to people below a certain age, which seems pretty reasonable.

1/29/2011 4:39:15 PM

what is the advantage of increasing the age?

raising the cap on pay-in would get more money and wouldn't have the adverse unemployment consequences.

1/29/2011 4:43:25 PM

yes, but raising the cap just makes it worse when we eventually have to pay it back
I know you like the whole "soak the rich" thing, but it just doesn't work

[Edited on January 29, 2011 at 4:49 PM. Reason : ]

1/29/2011 4:48:21 PM

how do you mean?

and i'm not pretending to be a know-it-all here. i'd like a fleshed-out description of what you mean.

[Edited on January 29, 2011 at 4:52 PM. Reason : .]

1/29/2011 4:52:06 PM

in SS, your benefits are determined by how much you pay in. if you pay in more, you get back more. Thus, raising the cap simply means that later on we have to pay some people even more. Thus, raising the cap just kicks the can down the road

1/29/2011 4:55:21 PM

Quote :

"^have you worked with someone in their 70s before?"

Actually, yes. One of my co-workers is in his 70s and he's very active. What do you think the life expectancy and healthcare level will be in 30-40 years when we're looking to retire? If there are other options to better help SS then we should take a look at them, but right now all options should be open since (sadly) SS is going to haunt our budget for a long, long time.

1/29/2011 4:55:40 PM

what about the option of abandoning the damn thing

1/29/2011 4:56:29 PM

is there even enough money in it for everyone to be paid out without new money coming in?

1/29/2011 5:11:16 PM

there's no "money in it" right now. It's just a bunch of IOUs

1/29/2011 5:12:36 PM

Quote :

"Thus, raising the cap simply means that later on we have to pay some people even more."

but is the amount more enough to counter-balance the amount we're paying in now?

1/29/2011 5:18:07 PM

wat

1/29/2011 5:21:13 PM

^^^ but there is cashflow, that's my point. its my understanding that right now ss is essentially paid out of what people are paying in, if there is no paying in can they even pay it out?

1/29/2011 5:55:33 PM

sure they can. They can use money from other taxes.

1/29/2011 6:06:58 PM

Quote :

"in SS, your benefits are determined by how much you pay in. if you pay in more, you get back more. Thus, raising the cap simply means that later on we have to pay some people even more. Thus, raising the cap just kicks the can down the road"

SS payout is not based on what you pay in, it's based on how much you make. Additionally, there is a maximum and there are "bendpoints" in the payout rate. Why did you outright make that up? Shit like that just bothers me.

1/29/2011 7:18:07 PM

Quote :

"SS payout is not based on what you pay in, it's based on how much you make."

And how much you pay in is certainly related to how much you make, right? And how much you pay in might be determined by the cap. If you make more than the cap, then you pay tax only up to the capped earnings amount. Yes, it's semantically wrong, but the point is still the same: if you raise the cap, you raise the benefits of people who make more than the cap. But, leave it to Kris to bitch about semantics and ignore the actual point

1/29/2011 10:22:02 PM

^correct both the tax and the benefit are currently capped. Which is about the only good thing I can say about SS.

Quote :

"^have you worked with someone in their 70s before? they become a drag at a certain point. also, later retirement means more people in the workforce. where are the extra jobs going to come from? where are the jobs that cater to having an elderly person working them? "

You do realize you can SAVE YOUR OWN MONEY and retire whenever you want. SS was meant to SUPPLEMENT your retirement not BE your retirement.

Although I strongly favor private accounts that can be passed down to family. That would build serious private wealth overtime, even for low earners. Esp if you can only withdrawl a certain percentage. It is ONE way to eliminate the need for SS over time.

1/29/2011 10:37:15 PM

Quote :

"Yes, it's semantically wrong"

No, it's wrong about the point you are trying to make.

Quote :

"if you raise the cap, you raise the benefits of people who make more than the cap"

No you don't, not unless you remove the payout cap or change the payout system in some other way. The fact is that the payouts will remain THE EXACT SAME no matter what you do with the amount paid in, in the instance that you remove the pay in cap but keep the payout cap, you would increase the the pay in while keeping the payout the same.

1/30/2011 1:48:46 AM

Quote :

"No, it's wrong about the point you are trying to make."

No, its fucking not. The point was that raising the cap raises the benefit. which it fucking does. do you have ANY evidence that it doesn't, especially when pretty much everyone agrees that it does?

Quote :

"No you don't, not unless you remove the payout cap or change the payout system in some other way. The fact is that the payouts will remain THE EXACT SAME no matter what you do with the amount paid in, in the instance that you remove the pay in cap but keep the payout cap, you would increase the the pay in while keeping the payout the same."

ORLY?
http://www.epi.org/economic_snapshots/entry/webfeatures_snapshots_20050217/

Quote :

"This cap affects benefits as well: calculation of Social Security benefits are based on a formula that does not take earnings over the cap into account. Since higher income during one's working life translates into higher Social Security benefits, removing the cap on the benefit side would increase Social Security payments to high-wage earners. "

http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba470
oh, look at that. Even the SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION AGREES: lifting the cap, alone, simply delays insolvency.

2/1/2011 6:07:27 PM

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/02/01/dws-rape-language/

"Rep. Wasserman Schultz: Bill Redefining Rape To Prevent Abortions Is ‘A Violent Act Against Women’ "

Quote :

"By narrowing the Hyde Amendment language, Republicans would exclude the following situations from coverage: women who say no but do not physically fight off the perpetrator, women who are drugged or verbally threatened and raped, and minors impregnated by adults. As the National Women’s Law Center’s Steph Sterling puts it, this new standard of force “takes us back to a time where just saying no was not enough.” "

Quote :

"“It really is — to suggest that there is some kind of rape that would be okay to force a woman to carry the resulting pregnancy to term, and abandon the principle that has been long held, an exception that has been settled for 30 years, is to me a violent act against women in and of itself,” Wasserman Schultz said."

2/2/2011 3:33:09 AM

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/02/01/ap-sources-house-gop-readies-restrictions-epa/

House GOP Readies Ban on EPA Greenhouse Gas Regulations

Quote :

"The officials said the bill would nullify all of the steps the EPA has taken to date on the issue, including a threshold finding that greenhouse gases constitute a danger to the public health and welfare. In addition, it seeks to strip the agency of its authority to use the law in any future attempts to crack down on the emissions from factories, utilities and other stationary sources. "

2/2/2011 10:37:35 AM

The EPA aught to focus on pollutants like mercury, NOx, sound, light, etc. and dare the Republicans to rail against it. That's the fight I want to see.

2/2/2011 8:43:31 PM

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/#41380015
More aptly, right after the 3min mark when she starts talking about the GOP's paranoia over oil.

2/3/2011 2:45:17 AM

Republicans Vote To Repeal Obama-Backed Bill That Would Destroy Asteroid Headed For Earth

http://www.theonion.com/articles/republicans-vote-to-repeal-obamabacked-bill-that-w,19025/

2/3/2011 10:51:51 AM

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/02/boehner-denies-c-spans-request-to-allow-its-cameras-in-the-house.php?ref=fpb

"Boehner Denies C-SPAN's Request To Allow Its Cameras In The House"

Quote :

""I believe the American people -- and the dignity and decorum of the United States House of Representatives -- are best served by the current system of televised proceedings provided by the House Recording Studio," Boehner wrote to C-SPAN Chairman Brian Lamb. C-SPAN wrote Boehner back in November, urging he allow their cameras to televise House floor debates. Currently, the cameras used to cover House floor debates are owned and operated by Congress, and reactionary shots are prohibited. ... Interestingly, Boehner wrote C-SPAN a year ago, saying he and other House Republicans supported the network's efforts to install its own cameras. "

Quote :

"C-SPAN released a statement saying, the network is "disappointed" by the decision. We continue to feel that the public is best served by seeing a more complete picture of the legislative process than what's delivered by Congressionally-controlled cameras and will continue to work with Speaker Boehner and other leaders in the House in hope of one day gaining access on behalf of the media."

He called for transparency up until he took power. Reminds me of the NC GOP that called for independent commission or panel to do redistricting, up until they took power, and then they abandon their calls for fairness.

2/4/2011 5:08:26 PM

Newsflash: politicians act like politicians! Coverage at 8!

2/4/2011 5:19:27 PM

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/02/tea-party-leader-boehner-looks-like-a-fool-should-be-defeated-in-a-primary/

Quote :

"TRENDING: Tea Party leader: Boehner looks 'like a fool,' should be defeated in a primary Washington (CNN) – In another display of the Tea Party movement turning on its own ideological supporters, the head of one prominent group has said that House Speaker John Boehner looks “like a fool” as House Republicans push spending cuts in their budget proposal. And that leader wants the Tea Party movement to set a goal for 2012: to defeat Boehner in a Republican primary."

Quote :

"“Early on, the GOP promised to cut $100 billion from the budget,” Phillips wrote in the website posting. “The Republicans in the House quickly went squishy on that"

Looks like both sides of the aisle can agree on something... not liking Speaker Boehner.

3/3/2011 2:29:10 AM

Rep. King: US Muslims insufficiently cooperative

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/03/06/politics/main20039905.shtml

Quote :

"King said the Muslim community could and should do more to work with law enforcement to stop its members from radicalizing and recruiting others to commit violence. "I don't believe there is sufficient cooperation" by American Muslims with law enforcement, King said Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union." "Certainly my dealings with the police in New York and FBI and others say they do not believe they get the same - they do not give the level of cooperation that they need." In New York City on Sunday, about 300 protestors gathered in Times Square to speak out against King's hearing, criticizing it as xenophobic and saying that singling out Muslims, rather than extremists, is unfair. McDonough said that instead of condemning whole communities, the U.S. needs to protect them from intimidation. McDonough spoke to an interfaith forum at a Northern Virginia mosque known for its longtime relationship and cooperation with the FBI. The executive director of the center, Imam Mohamed Magid, also spoke, as did speakers from a local synagogue and a Presbyterian church. After McDonough's remarks, King told The Associated Press he agreed with what the deputy national security adviser said. "I think it's a validation of everything I've been trying to do," King said, adding that he and McDonough spoke Friday evening. "There is a real threat, it's a serious threat.""

3/8/2011 9:12:25 PM

Tea Party lumps Boehner in with Bush, part of the group that expanded govt and debt. Big government conservatives they are called. So you can understand their dislike for him. Esp when he called No Child Left Behind one of his proudest moments.

3/8/2011 9:25:39 PM

Looks like they caved on the Planned Parenthood rider.....

4/8/2011 9:17:41 PM

And made the Senate vote on it.

And made the Senate vote on repealing Obamacare.

And banned funds to be used for abortions in DC.
And continued the DC school voucher program.

The Democrats initially offered $0Bn in budget cuts. The Republicans: $32Bn.

Final cut: $38.5Bn.

And Harry Reid had to accept cuts that he said were draconian would never accept.

Yeah, dude....total cave by Boehner.

4/9/2011 8:15:33 AM

^ That is not true. Boehner called for ~$35 billion in cuts back in February. His Tea Party buddies wanted ~$60 billion.

But speaking of Boehner, what is the deal with his "personal initiative to provide federally funded vouchers for District of Columbia students to attend private schools."

Why am I paying for kids in DC to go to private school?

4/9/2011 11:26:27 PM

DC is a weird place where federal politicians can try out crazy new policy initiatives without too many people caring because it isn't a very large city/district and Congress controls almost all of its budget

4/10/2011 12:47:35 AM

and if you don't have any kids, you should be asking why you are paying for kids to go to any school

4/10/2011 12:48:48 AM

Quote :

"Boehner called for ~$35 billion in cuts back in February. His Tea Party buddies wanted ~$60 billion. "

Didn't they pledge 100b at some point too?

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/09/budget-deal-doesnt-thrill-some-in-the-tea-party-movement/

Quote :

"And Rep. Michele Bachmann says the agreement "is a disappointment for me and for millions of Americans who expected $100 billion in cuts." The Minnesota Republican, who is chair of the House Tea Party caucus and is seriously considering a run for the GOP presidential nomination, adds that, "Sadly, we're missing the mandate given us by voters last November, and for that reason I voted against the Continuing Resolution." More dissent comes from Judson Phillips, head of the Tea Party Nation, the group that last year put on the first national Tea Party convention. Phillips, who has been very critical recently of House Speaker John Boehner's actions when it comes to the budget, asks in an email to supporters, "Can someone please tell me how this is anything other than John Boehner hauling up the white flag because he is unwilling to fight? Can anyone please tell me how this is anything but a complete victory for the liberal Democrats"

4/10/2011 9:13:25 AM

Quote :

"DC is a weird place where federal politicians can try out crazy new policy initiatives without too many people caring because it isn't a very large city/district and Congress controls almost all of its budget"

don't forget the fact that all of its residents don't have a voting member in congress

4/10/2011 9:45:04 AM

Quote :

"and if you don't have any kids, you should be asking why you are paying for kids to go to any school"

If you have to ask yourself that, the answer is that we, as a society, decided long ago that everybody needs a basic education so that we don't devolve into a fucking third world country. Everybody benefits from having the population, at large, not being illiterate and unskilled.

I can't believe I just answered that. Jesus.

4/10/2011 1:29:41 PM

hurrrrrr

4/10/2011 1:29:41 PM

Quote :

"don't forget the fact that all of its residents don't have a voting member in congress"

Yes. That, too.

Kind of like the social experiments conducted upon the US Military.

Quote :

"Everybody benefits from having the population, at large, not being illiterate and unskilled."

How's that working for us?

[Edited on April 10, 2011 at 10:37 PM. Reason : brizzackets]

4/10/2011 10:33:29 PM

Quote :

"If you have to ask yourself that, the answer is that we, as a society, decided long ago that everybody needs a basic education so that we don't devolve into a fucking third world country. Everybody benefits from having the population, at large, not being illiterate and unskilled."

that's the ostensible answer. the real answer is that it's much easier to control the people when you control the education system

4/10/2011 11:02:45 PM

So your solution is to let corporations control education instead of the people...? LOL

Not that your viewpoint isn't tin-foil-hat-nutty.

4/10/2011 11:06:22 PM