wmw999 2,174
Recommended Posts
SkyDekker 1,153
lawrocket[Reply]I expect to see an attempt to repeal Obamacare on the President's desk fairly soon.
Noit gonna happen. Not until the courts work it out.
The GOP will eliminate Reid's filibuster rule. But they won't be smart enough to eliminate the dual track filibuster rule. The GOP would be wise to make threat of filibuster painful. It will actually force both sides to actually work together.
Want to filibuster a bill before the Senate? Then everything else stops. Everything. That's how it used to be. Filibuster was a very big political risk. Not any more. Hence, the threat is enough and there is no consequence.
Agreed, well said.
rushmc 18
wmw999So which is more important for Congress? To really stick it to the President and the Democrats and show that they're "united," or to try to get some legislation that will be signed passed? Maybe even showing that they're more willing to compromise than the Democrats?
The US is a big ship. Wrenching the rudder from side to side every few years is not an effective way to get anywhere, and it wastes a lot of fuel.
Wendy P.
there are over 300 bills passed by the house that the Senate has never debated let alone voted on
With this in mind, what is your recomendation?
BTW, the rudder was so far left we were about to do 360's
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
rushmc 18
lawrocket[Reply]I expect to see an attempt to repeal Obamacare on the President's desk fairly soon.
Noit gonna happen. Not until the courts work it out.
The GOP will eliminate Reid's filibuster rule. But they won't be smart enough to eliminate the dual track filibuster rule. The GOP would be wise to make threat of filibuster painful. It will actually force both sides to actually work together.
Want to filibuster a bill before the Senate? Then everything else stops. Everything. That's how it used to be. Filibuster was a very big political risk. Not any more. Hence, the threat is enough and there is no consequence.
In the end, we the people fare much better when the federal government does not pass any laws
Now, they need to start repealing laws and eliminating depts that write their own regulations
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
wmw999 2,174
I agree that a sunset commission (like Texas has) is a good idea. It's harder to eliminate than it is to create, but when you eliminate intelligently, then you don't have additional infrastructure to build on.
I realize you might like starting with DOE or EPA or something like that. Probably a little big to start with. Got any thoughts about smaller ones to start with? Or even ones at a local level (after all, I'm sure there are taxes in Iowa as well).
Wendy P.
I realize you might like starting with DOE or EPA or something like that. Probably a little big to start with. Got any thoughts about smaller ones to start with? Or even ones at a local level (after all, I'm sure there are taxes in Iowa as well).
Wendy P.
There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)
rushmc 18
wmw999I agree that a sunset commission (like Texas has) is a good idea. It's harder to eliminate than it is to create, but when you eliminate intelligently, then you don't have additional infrastructure to build on.
I realize you might like starting with DOE or EPA or something like that. Probably a little big to start with. Got any thoughts about smaller ones to start with? Or even ones at a local level (after all, I'm sure there are taxes in Iowa as well).
Wendy P.
I don’t think those should go away per se
I think they need to be pulled in and down sized
Eliminations should start with duplicate programs
There may be up to 5 welfare programs that provide food and shelter. Cut that to one or two and help those able to take care of themselves do so
Granted, the programs left would be bigger to begin with but managing one program and watching the dollars (for fraud) would be easier
Local is more manageable as it is more accountable to the people
The fed is not (at this point anyway)
One thing that bothers me is hearing there has to be compromise or we need to work together
Sorry, that is bs. This system was put into place to be contentious. the less laws passed the better off we are as a people
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
quade 3
rushmcEliminations should start with duplicate programs
There may be up to 5 welfare programs that provide food and shelter. Cut that to one or two and help those able to take care of themselves do so
Better yet . . . cut welfare programs to corporations.
If an industry is so fragile it can not exist without government assistance programs, then maybe it shouldn't exist at all is what is supposed to be a capitalist society.
Do alway with ALL corporate welfare programs and restructure tax breaks so they encourage companies to HIRE people rather than outsource. That would help get people off the welfare programs Rush is so against.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
rushmc 18
quade***Eliminations should start with duplicate programs
There may be up to 5 welfare programs that provide food and shelter. Cut that to one or two and help those able to take care of themselves do so
Better yet . . . cut programs to corporations.
If an industry is so fragile it can not exist without government assistance programs, then maybe it shouldn't exist at all is what is supposed to be a capitalist society.
Do alway with ALL corporate welfare programs and restructure tax breaks so they encourage companies to HIRE people rather than outsource. That would help get people off the welfare programs Rush is so against.
I can agree with this AND the other cuts too
Along with all Green company give aways
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
rushmc 18
One other thing that would encourage keeping jobs in the US is reducing government regulations on them
The EPA would be the first department I would down size
(NOTE: I did not say eliminate the EPA)
The EPA would be the first department I would down size
(NOTE: I did not say eliminate the EPA)
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
SkyDekker 1,153
QuoteOne thing that bothers me is hearing there has to be compromise or we need to work together
Sorry, that is bs. This system was put into place to be contentious. the less laws passed the better off we are as a people
So Republicans and Democrats should not work together?
Regarding the less laws. I thought people were upset there has not been a budget passed, that Democrats were holding onto bills etc?
Sounds like the Democrats were doing exactly what you wanted then?
SkyDekker 1,153
QuoteALL corporate welfare programs and restructure tax breaks
Tax breaks for certain behaviour are corporate welfare programs.
rushmc 18
SkyDekkerQuoteOne thing that bothers me is hearing there has to be compromise or we need to work together
Sorry, that is bs. This system was put into place to be contentious. the less laws passed the better off we are as a people
So Republicans and Democrats should not work together?
Regarding the less laws. I thought people were upset there has not been a budget passed, that Democrats were holding onto bills etc?
Sounds like the Democrats were doing exactly what you wanted then?
I am not talking about budget work
I am talking about laws
And yes, they are doing what I want
I bring this up becasue to those on the left who love to call the republicans the party of no. when it was really the Dems who were just that
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
quade 3
SkyDekkerQuoteALL corporate welfare programs and restructure tax breaks
Tax breaks for certain behaviour are corporate welfare programs.
No. GIVING money to companies for doing nothing is corporate welfare and there's quite a bit of it.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
The World's Most Boring Skydiver
SkyDekker 1,153
But in order for a budget to pass (which framework is governed by budget laws) requires parties to work together. You don't want parties to work together, so how would you get a budget passed?
Or you only want to parties to work together on passing a budget, but nothing else?
Ahh ok, so you don't care if it actually helps the US or not, you are concerned about the reputation of your favourite party. Got it.
Or you only want to parties to work together on passing a budget, but nothing else?
QuoteAnd yes, they are doing what I want
I bring this up becasue to those on the left who love to call the republicans the party of no. when it was really the Dems who were just that
Ahh ok, so you don't care if it actually helps the US or not, you are concerned about the reputation of your favourite party. Got it.
Good post. I wish it could go back to being that way.
We, as a country, have gotten too used to managing everything (companies, health, schooling, nutrition, the whole friggin' country) by "target metrics." Which means that we think that as long as we're hitting those, we're going in the "right" direction.
Of course, that means that people try to hit those metrics, forgetting about the whole "direction" thing. But none of these systems are simple enough to manage via just a few variables.
Quarterly bottom lines don't necessarily mean good companies; pills to fix problems don't necessarily mean good health; good test scores doesn't mean a better educated student body, vitamin pills don't mean good nutrition, and "your party in power" sure as shit doesn't mean that life becomes exactly what you want
Most of these things are messy; with more people, more healthcare options, more everything, they get more complicated, not simpler.
Wendy P.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites