On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 15:18:33 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:

On 21/02/2011 2:08 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 12:47:58 -0500, wrote:



how about last year, when teh dems started talking RE regulating wall
street?

THEN WS started to shovel money to the GOP:

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wall-...ry?id=11359466

Face it, corrupt debtors, corrupt corporation and delinquent debtors
like GM all love democrats, they are so willing to screw the taxpayer
for bailouts and corruption.


which, i suppose, is why the GOP cut the capital gains tax on the rich

and threw the economy into recession


You voted for Obama, not me. I don't believe in bailouts. Bailouts
using the tax system is pure corruption. If Chavez does the same thing,
media would say corruption third world. In America we call it bailouts.

hey henry paulson..bush's treasury secretary...was the architect of
the bailouts. it was the GOP's idea. not the dems

On 22/02/2011 5:37 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 15:18:33 -0700,
wrote:

On 21/02/2011 2:08 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 12:47:58 -0500, wrote:



how about last year, when teh dems started talking RE regulating wall
street?

THEN WS started to shovel money to the GOP:

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wall-...ry?id=11359466

Face it, corrupt debtors, corrupt corporation and delinquent debtors
like GM all love democrats, they are so willing to screw the taxpayer
for bailouts and corruption.


which, i suppose, is why the GOP cut the capital gains tax on the rich

and threw the economy into recession

For what difference it will make? Come now. You would have a better
chance saving the Titanic with bubble gum.

Government has to slash at least 50% of its gross spending at a minimum,
and that may not be enough.

You voted for Obama, not me. I don't believe in bailouts. Bailouts
using the tax system is pure corruption. If Chavez does the same thing,
media would say corruption third world. In America we call it bailouts.

hey henry paulson..bush's treasury secretary...was the architect of
the bailouts. it was the GOP's idea. not the dems

So, but he didn't make his marching orders.

--
Socialism is a great ideal as long as someone else pays for it. And when
no one is left to pay for it, they all can share nothing.

On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 19:22:08 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:

On 22/02/2011 5:37 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 15:18:33 -0700,
wrote:


which, i suppose, is why the GOP cut the capital gains tax on the rich

and threw the economy into recession

For what difference it will make? Come now. You would have a better
chance saving the Titanic with bubble gum.

Government has to slash at least 50% of its gross spending at a minimum,
and that may not be enough.

or they could restore the bush tax cuts...taht would elminate AOT of
the deficit since those cuts are the single largest component of the
deficit

On 22/02/2011 9:14 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 19:22:08 -0700,
wrote:

On 22/02/2011 5:37 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 15:18:33 -0700,
wrote:


which, i suppose, is why the GOP cut the capital gains tax on the rich

and threw the economy into recession

For what difference it will make? Come now. You would have a better
chance saving the Titanic with bubble gum.

Government has to slash at least 50% of its gross spending at a minimum,
and that may not be enough.

or they could restore the bush tax cuts...taht would elminate AOT of
the deficit since those cuts are the single largest component of the
deficit

Would not even come close. You could litterally double EVERYONE'S
income tax and DC would still run a deficit. In the end, one way or
another expect massive Greece/Ireland/Iceland types cuts. They are coming.

Warren Buffet and Bill Gates combined after taxes total wealth wouldn't
keep Obama running the government for just 5 weeks.

Debt is so bad in DC, bankruptcy is now inevitable. Yep, liberalism in
debt and currency mismanagement screwed the cat dead.

Think, Obama now debt spends more dollars than America uses in sheets of
toilet paper. Quite literally.

Obama and the Democrats bankrupted the USA.

--
Socialism is a great ideal as long as someone else pays for it. And when
no one is left to pay for it, they all can share nothing.

On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 01:24:24 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 23:14:21 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

or they could restore the bush tax cuts...taht would elminate AOT of
the deficit since those cuts are the single largest component of the
deficit


I agree they should have let ALL of the tax cuts expire but don't
expect that to do much for the deficit.
It was only supposed to be $700 Billion over 10 years for the $250K
and above people.
If you let all of the cuts expire it was $3.7 Trillion over 10 years.
That is still only about a third of the deficit.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/15/news...faqs/index.htm

agreed. we need spending cuts, in defense and medicare, AND tax
increases. unfortunately.

wall street's done us no favors regardless of what the right thinks

On 23/02/2011 4:21 AM, bpuharic wrote:
On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 01:24:24 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 23:14:21 -0500, wrote:

or they could restore the bush tax cuts...taht would elminate AOT of
the deficit since those cuts are the single largest component of the
deficit


I agree they should have let ALL of the tax cuts expire but don't
expect that to do much for the deficit.
It was only supposed to be $700 Billion over 10 years for the $250K
and above people.
If you let all of the cuts expire it was $3.7 Trillion over 10 years.
That is still only about a third of the deficit.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/15/news...faqs/index.htm

agreed. we need spending cuts, in defense and medicare, AND tax
increases. unfortunately.

wall street's done us no favors regardless of what the right thinks

You don't pay taxes do you?

--
Socialism is a great ideal as long as someone else pays for it. And when
no one is left to pay for it, they all can share nothing.

On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 13:40:19 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 06:21:36 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 01:24:24 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 23:14:21 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

or they could restore the bush tax cuts...taht would elminate AOT of
the deficit since those cuts are the single largest component of the
deficit


I agree they should have let ALL of the tax cuts expire but don't
expect that to do much for the deficit.
It was only supposed to be $700 Billion over 10 years for the $250K
and above people.
If you let all of the cuts expire it was $3.7 Trillion over 10 years.
That is still only about a third of the deficit.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/15/news...faqs/index.htm

agreed. we need spending cuts, in defense and medicare, AND tax
increases. unfortunately.


The problem with defense cuts is most if that budget is a jobs
program, building hardware we don't need and the Pentagon doesn't
want.

exactly. it's another form of welfare


I would bring the troops home tho. Why prop up the economy of other
countries when we have as much trouble as we have.
We do have the precedent of having the military working on
infrastructure here with the Army Corps of Engineers. Maybe we should
declare war on bad bridges and roads here with a CCC type service.
The unions would never tolerate it.

yep. the defense budget is a form of foreign aid. most folks dont
realize this, but much of our defense budget is used to defend other
countries.

On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 13:40:19 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 06:21:36 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 01:24:24 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 23:14:21 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

or they could restore the bush tax cuts...taht would elminate AOT of
the deficit since those cuts are the single largest component of the
deficit


I agree they should have let ALL of the tax cuts expire but don't
expect that to do much for the deficit.
It was only supposed to be $700 Billion over 10 years for the $250K
and above people.
If you let all of the cuts expire it was $3.7 Trillion over 10 years.
That is still only about a third of the deficit.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/15/news...faqs/index.htm

agreed. we need spending cuts, in defense and medicare, AND tax
increases. unfortunately.


The problem with defense cuts is most if that budget is a jobs
program, building hardware we don't need and the Pentagon doesn't
want.

I would bring the troops home tho. Why prop up the economy of other
countries when we have as much trouble as we have.
We do have the precedent of having the military working on
infrastructure here with the Army Corps of Engineers. Maybe we should
declare war on bad bridges and roads here with a CCC type service.
The unions would never tolerate it.

So, it should all be done without union workers? Doesn't sound like
much of a jobs effort to me.

On 2/24/2011 2:47 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 13:40:19 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 06:21:36 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 01:24:24 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 23:14:21 -0500, wrote:

or they could restore the bush tax cuts...taht would elminate AOT of
the deficit since those cuts are the single largest component of the
deficit

I agree they should have let ALL of the tax cuts expire but don't
expect that to do much for the deficit.
It was only supposed to be $700 Billion over 10 years for the $250K
and above people.
If you let all of the cuts expire it was $3.7 Trillion over 10 years.
That is still only about a third of the deficit.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/15/news...faqs/index.htm
agreed. we need spending cuts, in defense and medicare, AND tax
increases. unfortunately.

The problem with defense cuts is most if that budget is a jobs
program, building hardware we don't need and the Pentagon doesn't
want.

I would bring the troops home tho. Why prop up the economy of other
countries when we have as much trouble as we have.
We do have the precedent of having the military working on
infrastructure here with the Army Corps of Engineers. Maybe we should
declare war on bad bridges and roads here with a CCC type service.
The unions would never tolerate it.
So, it should all be done without union workers? Doesn't sound like
much of a jobs effort to me.
Screw the unions. What have they done for us?

On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 21:54:58 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 11:47:13 -0800, wrote:

On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 13:40:19 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 06:21:36 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 01:24:24 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 23:14:21 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

or they could restore the bush tax cuts...taht would elminate AOT of
the deficit since those cuts are the single largest component of the
deficit


I agree they should have let ALL of the tax cuts expire but don't
expect that to do much for the deficit.
It was only supposed to be $700 Billion over 10 years for the $250K
and above people.
If you let all of the cuts expire it was $3.7 Trillion over 10 years.
That is still only about a third of the deficit.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/15/news...faqs/index.htm

agreed. we need spending cuts, in defense and medicare, AND tax
increases. unfortunately.


The problem with defense cuts is most if that budget is a jobs
program, building hardware we don't need and the Pentagon doesn't
want.

I would bring the troops home tho. Why prop up the economy of other
countries when we have as much trouble as we have.
We do have the precedent of having the military working on
infrastructure here with the Army Corps of Engineers. Maybe we should
declare war on bad bridges and roads here with a CCC type service.
The unions would never tolerate it.

So, it should all be done without union workers? Doesn't sound like
much of a jobs effort to me.

I was thinking more about what you can do with a half million military
people if we stop the wars and pull back all the people we have
scattered around the world in places where we won the war a half
century ago.

So, you want to use the military to do the same jobs as regular
citizens for 1/10th the pay? I'm sure that would do a lot for the
economy.