kallend 1,619
rushmcthe republicans did win majority numbers in the house
they ran on repealing ACA
Of course, those House Republicans received some 2 MILLION fewer votes than the Dems, thanks to gerrymandered districts.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
billvon 2,379
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>This was forced on the country the by the Democrats.
It was voted on by both houses, signed by the President and approved by the Supreme Court. There could not be a better example of something that has gone through every Constitutional approval process we have.
If people don't like it, we fortunately have a process to repeal it that should be followed. Polls show that people want to give it a chance. The republicans don't want to heed the will of the people, so they figure that by threatening the country with default they can change the law outside the Constitutional process. Fortunately it looks like they will fail.
It was voted on by both houses, signed by the President and approved by the Supreme Court. There could not be a better example of something that has gone through every Constitutional approval process we have.
If people don't like it, we fortunately have a process to repeal it that should be followed. Polls show that people want to give it a chance. The republicans don't want to heed the will of the people, so they figure that by threatening the country with default they can change the law outside the Constitutional process. Fortunately it looks like they will fail.
[Reply]The republicans don't want to heed the will of the people
According to the polls, the ACA IS against the will of the people.
Sure, it's Constitutional. It went by Constitutional process. Just like what the GOP is doing.
Check out that Constitution. What the GOP is doing is exactly what the Constitution empowers them to do.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
This stuff is not nearly as difficult as Congress is making out to be.
Increase personal income taxes mildly
Increase corporate taxes mildly
Cut costs of essential government services mildly
Cut costs of non-essential government services moderately
Require discrectionary spending be lumped together in periodic single-purpose bills (priority based rather than snuck in as riders in unrelated bills)
Increase capital gain taxes moderately
Quit handing out subsidies and tax breaks in exchange for votes
Blues,
Dave
Increase personal income taxes mildly
Increase corporate taxes mildly
Cut costs of essential government services mildly
Cut costs of non-essential government services moderately
Require discrectionary spending be lumped together in periodic single-purpose bills (priority based rather than snuck in as riders in unrelated bills)
Increase capital gain taxes moderately
Quit handing out subsidies and tax breaks in exchange for votes
Blues,
Dave
"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)
(drink Mountain Dew)
This stuff is not nearly as difficult as Congress is making out to be.
Increase personal income taxes mildly - GOP won't go for that
Increase corporate taxes mildly - GOP and Dems won't go for that (well, not without writing exceptions)
Cut costs of essential government services mildly - Dems won't go for that.
Cut costs of non-essential government services moderately. - Dems won't go for that. Neither will GOP.
Require discrectionary spending be lumped together in periodic single-purpose bills (priority based rather than snuck in as riders in unrelated bills) - neither will go for that
Increase capital gain taxes moderately - GOP won't go for that
Quit handing out subsidies and tax breaks in exchange for votes - fuck no. That eliminates the power of both sides.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
Increase personal income taxes mildly - GOP won't go for that
Increase corporate taxes mildly - GOP and Dems won't go for that (well, not without writing exceptions)
Cut costs of essential government services mildly - Dems won't go for that.
Cut costs of non-essential government services moderately. - Dems won't go for that. Neither will GOP.
Require discrectionary spending be lumped together in periodic single-purpose bills (priority based rather than snuck in as riders in unrelated bills) - neither will go for that
Increase capital gain taxes moderately - GOP won't go for that
Quit handing out subsidies and tax breaks in exchange for votes - fuck no. That eliminates the power of both sides.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
So fire all the Democrats and Republicans and hire people that will do the job they were elected to.
Blues,
Dave
Blues,
Dave
"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)
(drink Mountain Dew)
richravizza 25
rushmc***>Its absolutely absure that dems want to be exempt from obamacare.
They're not.
Yes
But they do pay themselves extra tax dollars so they suffer less than the rest of the country
and the ACA would mean that extra money in the form of " health benifits" Woun't be taxed as income.
They have something better,then Us
"VITTER AMENDMENT"
"Con" gress and their staff have Exempted themselves from the ACA.
lawrocket[Reply]Just tax this lot - problem solved.
Hmmm. The article says that the top 1% control about $53 trillion. So taxing the top 1% in the world and taking every fucking dime from them STILL leaves about a $30 trillion hole in the US budget by about 2080.. It's not even 2/3 of what's needed.
Problem solved? No. It's an indication of just how fucking huge the problem is. Even taking every cent from the 1% - worldwide - won't close the gap in the US budget.
Problem not solved. Problem way bigger than that.
Yes it is. Your projections are for 50 years. In 50 years the 1% will have over $800 trillion and own over half the world's wealth.
rushmc
and everytime I hear the its is the law of the land bull shit
I say so was the Bush tax cuts
What exactly is your point, here? The Bush tax cuts, as passed, were good for ten years. And instead of sunsetting away as intended, they have for the most part been extended indefinitely. Given that the House was already controlled by the GOP at this point, surely you're not arguing this extension was forced by the Democrats?
So trying to figure out the point, here.
beowulf
Look into how ACA was voted into law. It was done via gamesmanship and during a very short period when the Democrats had the majority in both the House and the Senate. If it were voted on today it would not pass. There are plenty of polls showing that a majority of those polled do not want it.
You're either slightly mistaken in your recollection, or telling a big fib right now.
It was voted into law 60-39 in the Senate. It occurred during a short period of time when the Democrats had not a majority, but a supermajority in the Senate, an extremely rare circumstance. And of course a necessary one in an environment where the GOP has been willing to indefinitely fillibuster even minor Senate confirmations of ambassadors to minor nations.
And how did they get to have such a majority? Because the GOP was so unpopular in the second term of Bush. Mired by the crash, the wars, they already had lost the House back in 2007, and got destroyed in the 2008 elections.
rushmc***They should have stopped raising the debt limit a long time ago.
Yep
and everytime I hear the its is the law of the land bull shit
I say so was the Bush tax cuts
You mean the same Bush tax cuts that had an end date written into them?
Blues,
Dave
"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)
(drink Mountain Dew)
Hmmm. The article says that the top 1% control about $53 trillion. So taxing the top 1% in the world and taking every fucking dime from them STILL leaves about a $30 trillion hole in the US budget by about 2080.. It's not even 2/3 of what's needed.
Problem solved? No. It's an indication of just how fucking huge the problem is. Even taking every cent from the 1% - worldwide - won't close the gap in the US budget.
Problem not solved. Problem way bigger than that.
My wife is hotter than your wife.