Deal Contains Pork From Hog Democrats.

[GrassrootsConservative]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/02/fiscal-deal-includes-estimate-121-billion-in-tax-credits-for-wind-energy/


$12.1 billion from taxpayers going to bird-killing wind-turbines.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/01/02/from-nascar-to-rum-the-10-weirdest-parts-of-the-fiscal-cliff-deal/


A $9 billion “sop for Wall Street banks and major multinationals”

Subsidize Hollywood films (Explanation: The fiscal cliff bill renews “special expensing rules for certain film and television productions,” at a cost of some $75 million per year. Studios in Hollywood and elsewhere can deduct up to $15 million of their costs if more than three-fourths of the movie’s production takes place in the United States)

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/01/eight-corporate-subsidies-in-the-fiscal-cliff-bill-from-goldman-sachs-to-disney-to-nascar.html

$9B Off-shore financing loophole for banks – Sec. 322 is an “Extension of the Active Financing Exception to Subpart F.” Very few tax loopholes have a trade association, but this one does. This strangely worded provision basically allows American corporations such as banks and manufactures to engage in certain lending practices and not pay taxes on income earned from it. According to this Washington Post piece (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/22/AR2010122204963.html), supporters of the bill include GE, Caterpillar, and JP Morgan. Steve Elmendorf, super-lobbyist, has been paid $80,000 in 2012 alone to lobby on the “Active Financing Working Group.” (https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?id=D000046352&year=2012)



{There's that thing you inept Democrat hogs criticized Mitt Romney for just a couple months ago. Absolutely pathetic.}

:rofl:

http://www.cato.org/blog/rum-subsidies-included-fiscal-cliff-pork

Captain Morgan subsidies. That's absurd.

I'll stop there. For now.

[Cigar]

Man you must have really been off the hook during the Bush Administration :smiley_ROFLMAO:

[GrassrootsConservative]

Get your off-topic bullshit out of my thread.

[Alif Qadr]

The situation has literally come to the point of researching to see if these excess add-ons (pork barrel projects) are grounds for federal prosecution or removal from office. I do not recall reading in the Constitution for the United States that Senators and Representatives can add to bills for personal gain. have to look into this.

[Cigar]

Get your off-topic bullshit out of my thread.



The Topic is about Pork Spending and my response to your topic is still the same ... man you must have really been off the hook during the Bush Administration.

[GrassrootsConservative]

The Topic is about Pork Spending and my response to your topic is still the same ... man you must have really been off the hook during the Bush Administration.

If you ask me, every president since Reagan has been awful. Can you please comment on the OP, now?

[nic34]

Welcome to the party alif... this kinda thing has been going on for over 200 years...

Grassroots, you'd give your view more credibility if you'd called out the repub side as well....

[GrassrootsConservative]

Welcome to the party alif... this kinda thing has been going on for over 200 years...

Grassroots, you'd give your view more credibility if you'd called out the repub side as well....

This is the deal proposed by Senate Democrats. The one that House Republicans will take out the pork from and then give it back to the Senate Democrats to look at, so Obama can look arrogant and Joe Biden can laugh condescendingly.

Don't you know how American politics work?

[nic34]

I'm tryin...

[Cigar]

If you ask me, every president since Reagan has been awful. Can you please comment on the OP, now?


Some Administrations go two full terms with nothing more than an open Credit Card and no one says a peep. Then everyone get so surprised at the mysterious deficit that just comes out of nowhere in the first 6 months of a new Presidential term.

How amazing is that?

It has to be magic ... maybe it's Black Magic. :)

[Deadwood]

Man you must have really been off the hook during the Bush Administration :smiley_ROFLMAO:



What an empty, vacuous, gutter slithering misfit fuck off of a post.

Get a fucking brain, OK?

It never changes. Five years Bush has been gone and the social carpet sweepings continue to mindlessly and stupidly justify quasi-criminal behavior because THEY SAY Bush did it.

One Last Time..............


It's Bush's Fault. Whatever we do, he was just as bad!"


You can go now.

Off you go, back into the dumpster....there's a nice fella.

[nic34]

WOW the truth really hurts some....

[GrassrootsConservative]

WOW the truth really hurts some....

Instead of being hurt by it, why don't you try and debate it?

[nic34]

Sure, we SHOULD keep blaming Bush. It's the same as blaming rats for the Black Plague. Just because you're sick of hearing historians say it, doesn't mean it stopped being true.

(Bill Maher)

[Cigar]

What an empty, vacuous, gutter slithering misfit fuck off of a post.

Get a fucking brain, OK?

It never changes. Five years Bush has been gone and the social carpet sweepings continue to mindlessly and stupidly justify quasi-criminal behavior because THEY SAY Bush did it.

One Last Time..............


It's Bush's Fault. Whatever we do, he was just as bad!"


You can go now.

Off you go, back into the dumpster....there's a nice fella.



Dude ... Bush has been gone less than 4 years ... didn't you know Obama's Ingratiation was in January 2009?

Didn't you know the Economy tanked October 2008?
Didn't you know the DOW hit bottom March 2009?

:)

[Cigar]

Instead of being hurt by it, why don't you try and debate it?



There's no debate ... It's Bush mess, and we've been cleaning it up every since, even though Republicans made a pledge on Obama's Ingratiation night to obstruct any and all things he tries.

... and guess what ... none of it worked. :)

[nic34]

You don't like the way the stewardess landed the plane after werewolves ate the flight crew?

Stop electing werewolves.

[GrassrootsConservative]

There's no debate ... It's Bush mess, and we've been cleaning it up every since, even though Republicans made a pledge on Obama's Ingratiation night to obstruct any and all things he tries.

... and guess what ... none of it worked. :)

You can't spend your way out of a mess like George Bush. You have to govern intelligently, and nobody has been doing that.

[hanger4]

There's no debate ... It's Bush mess, and we've been cleaning it up every since, even though Republicans made a pledge on Obama's Ingratiation night to obstruct any and all things he tries.

... and guess what ... none of it worked. :)

How right you are !!

5 trillion added to the debt in 4 years, that's more than Bush's 8 years.

Unemployment unimproved in 4 years.

AAA credit rating gone.

[Cigar]

You can't spend your way out of a mess like George Bush. You have to govern intelligently, and nobody has been doing that.



The last I checked, The Tea Party doesn't like Governing

[Cigar]

How right you are !!

5 trillion added to the debt in 4 years, that's more than Bush's 8 years.

Unemployment unimproved in 4 years.

AAA credit rating gone.


Ever drop a Bowling Ball from 20 feet?

How high would you expect it to bounce?

[nic34]

You can't spend your way out of a mess like George Bush.

Yes you can. Start with rebuilding infrastructure that benefits everyone.


You have to govern intelligently, and nobody has been doing that.

He's done well considering the stated goal of the oppostion. Start by showing how we are worse off than in 2009.

[Cigar]

Yes you can. Start with rebuilding infrastructure that benefits everyone.



He's done well considering the stated goal of the oppostion. Start by showing how we are worse off than in 2009.

I've said this from day one!

Why on earth would Americans not what to put skilled Americans to work on projects that can only be done in America, on projects that requite immediate attention!

Also at a time when interest rates will NEVER EVER be lower while we have plenty of resources.

My only resoling is that Republicans didn't what anything good to happen for America on Obama's watch ... period!

[Alif Qadr]

Welcome to the party alif... this kinda thing has been going on for over 200 years...

Grassroots, you'd give your view more credibility if you'd called out the repub side as well....

I am thinking on the level of high-crimes and treason. The debt of this country is not owned by the citizens, though we are held responsible to repay it, the debt is owned by nations and people other than the United States. I realize the Section Eight, Clause Eight of the Constitution for the United States mentions promoting arts and sciences but this is beyond promoting. This is clear political patronage. I am also aware that in the same Section, Clause Two is mentioned that Congress has the ability to borrow money on the credit of the United States but it mentions nothing about bankrupting the nation nor does it mention selling off the public lands of the United States. This has been done already. China owns national parks as well as seaports of the United States. What is being done with every spending bill amounts to nothing but treason.

[nic34]

alif, china dosen't own nat parks or seaports, they do own much of our DEBT.

[Guerilla]

The situation has literally come to the point of researching to see if these excess add-ons (pork barrel projects) are grounds for federal prosecution or removal from office. I do not recall reading in the Constitution for the United States that Senators and Representatives can add to bills for personal gain. have to look into this.
Yes you really should look into it. If you have not figured out yet that the government often works against its own people for the benefit of CEOs -- then you do not understand the greed of the elite or the corruption of our system. Throughout history American government has done things in interest of the economy and not the people. Perfect examples - Northwoods documents: plans for the invasion of Cuba which included lying to American people to gain support, and killing US citizens and military personnel. Cuba was threatening investments from American capitalists THAT was the problem. Invasion of Libya and overthrowing Gadaffi by US: They invaded because Gadaffi was planning to create an African currency called the Dinar. Which would replace the dollar. So Gadaffi was posing major threats to the American dollar. So it really doesn't matter if you side with democrats or republicans because they both work for the economy and the elite not the American people.

[GrassrootsConservative]

alif, china dosen't own nat parks or seaports, they do own much of our DEBT.

Debt is just another thing for "rich" people to be concerned about for you, isn't it? Just something that exists but doesn't interest you?

It means something, dude, that debt that China owns, that's not just a number... It matters.

[Peter1469]

There's no debate ... It's Bush mess, and we've been cleaning it up every since, even though Republicans made a pledge on Obama's Ingratiation night to obstruct any and all things he tries.

... and guess what ... none of it worked. :)

Increasing the debt by almost $6T is cleaning up Bush's mess? :shocked:

[GrassrootsConservative]

Increasing the debt by almost $6T is cleaning up Bush's mess? :shocked:

Makes sense to the senseless.

[Chris]

nic seems to be saying it's bad no matter what party does it. IOW, two wrongs make it worse.

Cigar seems to be saying if Reps did it then Dems get to too. IOW, two wrongs make a right.

[Deadwood]

You can't spend your way out of a mess like George Bush. You have to govern intelligently, and nobody has been doing that.

actually, what Ceegar is saying is that Obama and Bush are the same...

Not One criticism of Obama is ever answered or debated. The closest we EVER hear is "what about Bush?" Ergo, the 'governing style' is identical.

Now let's talk about Benghazi, what was Bush's comparison?

[Chris]

Yes you can. Start with rebuilding infrastructure that benefits everyone.



He's done well considering the stated goal of the oppostion. Start by showing how we are worse off than in 2009.


I've said this from day one!

Why on earth would Americans not what to put skilled Americans to work on projects that can only be done in America, on projects that requite immediate attention!

Also at a time when interest rates will NEVER EVER be lower while we have plenty of resources.

My only resoling is that Republicans didn't what anything good to happen for America on Obama's watch ... period!

You two forget one thing about your proposal A, how are you going to pay for it?

Only one way, by taking from other uses, B.

Now you're stuck with demonstrating that the money taken from B is better spent on A. IOW, you must demonstrate a multiplier effect.

I wish you two luck.

[nic34]

Then good luck feeding yourself when said infrastructure collapses.

You all DO know what the word "investment" means don't you?

And yes, it does require taking tax money from those USING that infrastructure.

[Chris]

Yes you can. Start with rebuilding infrastructure that benefits everyone.



He's done well considering the stated goal of the oppostion. Start by showing how we are worse off than in 2009.


You two forget one thing about your proposal A, how are you going to pay for it?

Only one way, by taking from other uses, B.

Now you're stuck with demonstrating that the money taken from B is better spent on A. IOW, you must demonstrate a multiplier effect.

I wish you two luck.


Then good luck feeding yourself when said infrastructure collapses.

You all DO know what the word "investment" means don't you?

And yes, it does require taking tax money from those USING that infrastructure.

Wow, now there's a defense of your proposition, pure emotionalism.


it does require taking tax money from those USING that infrastructure.

Problem 2: Say you get your funding for infrastructure. How do you allocate those funds? What I mean is, how could you possibly know which of all infrastructure is most vital for use?

[nic34]

Glad you finally agree that investment (spending) and taxes are needed.

Logistics is another thread....

[Mainecoons]

Oh sure, we definitely need more taxes to pay for more government "investment" boondoggles.

Fool.

[Chris]

Glad you finally agree that investment (spending) and taxes are needed.

Logistics is another thread....

Thanks for answering my questions.

[countryboy]

Some Administrations go two full terms with nothing more than an open Credit Card and no one says a peep. Then everyone get so surprised at the mysterious deficit that just comes out of nowhere in the first 6 months of a new Presidential term.

How amazing is that?

It has to be magic ... maybe it's Black Magic. :)
No one says a peep? Why must you continually lie? On a scale of 1 to 10, your cred is -100,000,000,000,000. http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-rolleyes010.gif

[countryboy]

WOW the truth really hurts some....
Libs wouldn't know the truth if it bit them on the arse.

[Alif Qadr]

alif, china dosen't own nat parks or seaports, they do own much of our DEBT.

It was my error, China attempted to by seaports in California but the have the next best thing (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/858844/posts).
The United Arab Emirates does in fact own six major ports (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11404058/ns/business-world_business/t/foreign-ownership-us-seaports-eyed/#.UOb9GuQ72Ag) in the U.S., this happened during GWB's reign.

As for the national parks, the United Nations now has jurisdiction in Great Smoky Mountains National Park (http://www.tetrahedron.org/articles/new_world_order/Rockefeller_UN_National_Parks.html).

The point is, a country in so much debt is bound to be taken over economically, as Mr. Ross Perot has stated (http://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/america-could-be-taken-over-warns-ross-perot/22610/) last year.

[Alif Qadr]

actually, what ceegar is saying is that obama and bush are the same...

Not one criticism of obama is ever answered or debated. The closest we ever hear is "what about bush?" ergo, the 'governing style' is identical.

exactly!

[nic34]

Oh sure, we definitely need more taxes to pay for more government "investment" boondoggles.

Fool.

Fools think infrastructure builds itself....

[nic34]

Thanks for answering my questions.

Not satisfied with facts?

[Mainecoons]

Fools think infrastructure builds itself....

Bigger fools think that government does anything well or right.

[Deadwood]

Glad you finally agree that investment (spending) and taxes are needed.

Logistics is another thread....

Ooops, another leap of logic...but let us assume there is general agreement in infrastructure spending?

How shall we do it?

As we have seen in the past, especially the old "shovel ready" routine, massive spending does not necessarily equate to a lot of jobs, especially where needed.

In the thirties, you could dig a canal for a TVA hydro generator and supply jobs for 1,000 men for a year. A road building or re-paving might provide 2,000 for two years. Today, it would provide a few weeks work for some heavy equipment operators and some flow through on materials.

And there was the Seattle syndrome. Remember that? $8 million to a Democrat based non-profit to create jobs by retrofitting old homes with new insulation for the coming winter of 2010.

Not one home ever got got renovated. A few dozen people got temporary jobs in non profit organizations for a year as they use the money paying their own fat salaries for 18 months to attend meetings.

No out of work people got even a few days work. Over 1,100 home owners applied for the work.

That was repeated several times per city the last time Obama decided to "help" the economy

And then there were the highways to nowhere and that great fucking bridge in California that they are having fabricated in China...

[hanger4]

It was my error, China attempted to by seaports in California but the have the next best thing (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/858844/posts).
The United Arab Emirates does in fact own six major ports (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11404058/ns/business-world_business/t/foreign-ownership-us-seaports-eyed/#.UOb9GuQ72Ag) in the U.S., this happened during GWB's reign.

As for the national parks, the United Nations now has jurisdiction in Great Smoky Mountains National Park (http://www.tetrahedron.org/articles/new_world_order/Rockefeller_UN_National_Parks.html).

The point is, a country in so much debt is bound to be taken over economically, as Mr. Ross Perot has stated (http://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/america-could-be-taken-over-warns-ross-perot/22610/) last year.

Nobody buys a seaport, they buy a terminal/s and it's been happening long before GWB.

The US has never ratified this treaty so fear not the UN has no jurisdiction.

[patrickt]

Only a liberal could consider government spending an investment and only a total idiot would consider government spending a wise investment. If I invested as President Obama invests I'd be as far in debt as the U.S. with as little hope of ever getting out of debt.

[Chris]

Not satisfied with facts?

Just as you've provided no answers you've provided no facts.

Here is question one again:


You two forget one thing about your proposal A, how are you going to pay for it?

Only one way, by taking from other uses, B.

Now you're stuck with demonstrating that the money taken from B is better spent on A. IOW, you must demonstrate a multiplier effect.

I wish you two luck.

If you need an explicit question, how do you know spending on your infrastructure proposal will generate more wealth than what that money would have been spent on kept in private hands? The response here demands facts about multiplier effects. Please, where are the facts?


Question two was:


Say you get your funding for infrastructure. How do you allocate those funds? What I mean is, how could you possibly know which of all infrastructure is most vital for use?

This too demands facts. Where are they?

[nic34]

Answers:

1. Return top tax rates back to Nixon era levels.

2. Studies probably already been done http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42018.pdf

[Mainecoons]

http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/OB-SQ248_TAXRAT_G_20120418140102.jpg
Note that this chart is BEFORE the ObamaCare tax increases are piled on earners over 250,000 and the recent "compromise" tax increase on those over $400K.

And some required reading for you:

http://blackburn.house.gov/uploadedfiles/jec_republican_staff_analysis_historical_tax_rates _rhetoric_vs_reality.pdf.pdf

You need to start doing better homework before you make statements that show you don't understand the difference between top tax rates versus income actually affected by same and actual money collected by same. Rates have been as high as 90 percent but those rates affected little income and raised little real money.

The problem is spending. The problem has always been spending and it is more than ever the problem now. The tax system is highly progressive. Study after study shows that you can't even cover a year of ObamaDeficits by confiscating all the wealth over one million in America. You are proving the point, however, that this was never about revenue for you lefties, it is nothing more than using a runaway government to conduct your class warfare for you.

You, Nic, are an object lesson in the kind of ignorance that has gotten America in this mess and securely on the path of economic and social decline.

[Chris]

Just as you've provided no answers you've provided no facts.

Here is question one again:

If you need an explicit question, how do you know spending on your infrastructure proposal will generate more wealth than what that money would have been spent on kept in private hands? The response here demands facts about multiplier effects. Please, where are the facts?

If you need an explicit question, how do you know spending on your infrastructure proposal will generate more wealth than what that money would have been spent on kept in private hands? The response here demands facts about multiplier effects. Please, where are the facts?


Question two was:

Say you get your funding for infrastructure. How do you allocate those funds? What I mean is, how could you possibly know which of all infrastructure is most vital for use?

This too demands facts. Where are they?


Answers:

1. Return top tax rates back to Nixon era levels.

2. Studies probably already been done http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42018.pdf


#1 in no way answers the question.

The question isn't where to find the funding but how do you know the funding is better spent on infrastructure vs how it would be spent privately.

#2 In no way answers the question.

Question 2 asks how do you know which infrastructure projects to allocate resources to. The paper, while interesting, does not address that.


That's twice now you have failed completely to even attempt to address the questions.

Give it another try.

[Peter1469]

Top tax rates don't say anything. What are the marginal rates?

Care to return to Nixon level spending?

[nic34]

Not liking the answers is not winning an argument. Keep building those strawmen...:laugh:

[GrassrootsConservative]

Not liking the answers is not winning an argument. Keep building those strawmen...:laugh:

Anything you say is a strawman because you haven't even commented on the OP yet. The first thing I got from you and Cigar was all about how everything is George Bush's fault.

Nothing about the OP from you yet. I'm still waiting.

[Chris]

Not liking the answers is not winning an argument. Keep building those strawmen...:laugh:

You haven't given any answer to dislike.

Questions, again are how do you know the funding is better spent on infrastructure vs how it would be spent privately? And how do you know which infrastructure projects to allocate resources to?

If a businessman were to decide to allocate resources to one plan over another he would certainly be able to give you his reasons. And he wouldn't just blindly allocation resources to a chosen plan but parcel it out to different steps in executing the plan, and would be able to give reasons for each.

I'm assuming in asking you that you have reasons and detailed plans when you say infrastructure. Maybe it's a good idea. But how can I tell with nothing more than "infrastructure"?

[patrickt]

"Conservatives have denounced some of the spending inserted into the $60 billion Hurricane Sandy relief bill that Speaker John Boehner stopped in the House over New Year’s. “They had the opportunity to have a $27 billion to $30 billion dollar legit relief package,” Republican Rep. Darrell Issa said on Fox News this week. But lawmakers “packed it with pork, then dared us not to vote on it. If we’re going to provide relief, we can’t allow it to be doubled with unrelated pork no matter where the relief is.”
“Look at some of what was in the $60 billion bill,” the Wall Street Journal editorial page wrote Thursday (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323374504578219733538204830.html?m od=googlenews_wsj). “$150 million for Alaskan fisheries; $2 million for roof repair at the Smithsonian in Washington; and about $17 billion for liberal activists under the guise of ‘community development’ funds and so-called social service grants.” The Sandy relief bill, the Journal concluded, “has become cover for Congress to revive earmarks and the pork machine.”
http://washingtonexaminer.com/message-from-alaska-our-disaster-relief-isnt-pork/article/2517643#.UOgSym_Ac09

$17,000,000,000 for Community Development and liberals see no problem with this "disaster relief" bill? I wonder why we're bankrupt.