PDA

View Full Version : The Budget deal of 2015



texan
12-12-2014, 12:13 AM
The democrats gonna shut down the guv!

:drinkupbitchesuo1:

Common
12-12-2014, 12:23 AM
shh it already passed

PolWatch
12-12-2014, 12:24 AM
shh it already passed

gee, what are some folks gonna do with all those party balloons?

Howey
12-12-2014, 12:43 AM
A compromise, just as I predicted. I'm fine with the final product.

hanger4
12-12-2014, 08:09 AM
shh it already passed

shhhhhhh not the Senate.

hanger4
12-12-2014, 08:20 AM
A compromise, just as I predicted. I'm fine with the final product.

You're ok with some roll back of some Dodd-Frank ?? Allowing banks to do
some derivative trading ??

You're ok with the campaign finance changes ?? The changes would allow a single individual to contribute to each national party’s three committees a total of $1.5 million per two-year election cycle. This just about triples the amount that previously
could be given.

Just askin ??

PolWatch
12-12-2014, 08:24 AM
If anyone had any doubt that both parties are the same, the changes to increase donations should prove they are wrong. The price of owning your own senator/congressman has just gone up!

Matty
12-12-2014, 08:31 AM
I will be convinced by the bullshit Arguement that both parties are the same when all the bullshitters complain and denigrate the democrats in equal measure as they do republicans. Until then it's just a pile of bullshit!

PolWatch
12-12-2014, 08:42 AM
Believing that both parties are the same means I believe things like the dems loudly complaining about PAC's and then quietly passing this increase are normal. They are both more interested in getting/keeping power. Both parties talk a good game but when it comes down to actually doing something, their behavior is the same. You can dislike a party's actions without calling them silly names or cussing those who disagree with me.

hanger4
12-12-2014, 09:28 AM
Believing that both parties are the same means I believe things like the dems loudly complaining about PAC's and then quietly passing this increase are normal. They are both more interested in getting/keeping power. Both parties talk a good game but when it comes down to actually doing something, their behavior is the same. You can dislike a party's actions without calling them silly names or cussing those who disagree with me.

"getting/keeping power"

In a nut-shell, the only reason.

Mac-7
12-12-2014, 09:32 AM
Believing that both parties are the same means I believe things like the dems loudly complaining about PAC's and then quietly passing this increase are normal. They are both more interested in getting/keeping power. Both parties talk a good game but when it comes down to actually doing something, their behavior is the same. You can dislike a party's actions without calling them silly names or cussing those who disagree with me.

Then why is the senate amnesty bill not on obumers desk for him to sign if both parties are alike?

PolWatch
12-12-2014, 09:37 AM
Because it is not beneficial to him...if he stood to benefit from that bill it would be signed so fast your head would spin.

zelmo1234
12-12-2014, 09:40 AM
You're ok with some roll back of some Dodd-Frank ?? Allowing banks to do
some derivative trading ??

You're ok with the campaign finance changes ?? The changes would allow a single individual to contribute to each national party’s three committees a total of $1.5 million per two-year election cycle. This just about triples the amount that previously
could be given.

Just askin ??

Yes, the current regulations that still for banks into a percentage of risky loans requires that they be able to move these around to free up capital.

For example the percentage of low income loans is still about 13% And to keep it there you either have to make really risky loans or you have to take your time. For example an elderly couple on a fixed income that meets the requirements, but just sold their home and is spending a little more to get into an aging in place community is a very good loan. if you are a bank that has a few o these in your area, then you can easily meet your requirement and have an even larger percentage. But if you are a bank that is dealing with a large poverty sickened population, you are going to have a hard time finding a low income loan that is not going to be a bad loan, so you can't loan money.

So you trade to get enough loans to meet your requirements.

As far as the donations? If you have enough money to donate 1,5 million every 2 years, you have enough to spend it your self. If you donate it, it is logged and regulations apply to it's use, If you do it on your own? well then you can do whatever you want. either way the money is being spent.

Mac-7
12-12-2014, 09:41 AM
Because it is not beneficial to him...if he stood to benefit from that bill it would be signed so fast your head would spin.

So you think the house repubs would have passed the democrat senate amnesty bill if Der Furher wanted them to?

zelmo1234
12-12-2014, 09:43 AM
I will be convinced by the bull$#@! Arguement that both parties are the same when all the bullshitters complain and denigrate the democrats in equal measure as they do republicans. Until then it's just a pile of bull$#@!!

I am just wondering how they are different?

Democrats just voted for less regulations tax cuts and Republicans just voted for the ACA and immigration reform?

zelmo1234
12-12-2014, 09:44 AM
Then why is the senate amnesty bill not on obumers desk for him to sign if both parties are alike?

Because it does not need to be and there was an elections coming.

The Executive order from Obama did what they all wanted done. Why do you think the Republicans just funded that EO in the budget deal?

Mac-7
12-12-2014, 09:51 AM
Because it does not need to be and there was an elections coming.

The Executive order from Obama did what they all wanted done. Why do you think the Republicans just funded that EO in the budget deal?

The repubs do not control the senate yet.

As I understand it INS is funded only through Feb when repubs will control the senate and house.