Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

If people were actually pretending that they were going to make a difference, sure. But no one is saying, "Cut earmarks and hallelujah! We've fixed the deficit!"

Oh, don't put your head in the sand. Of the Republican platform to fix the deficit eliminating earmarks is one of the top 3 ideas they have.

1. Tax cuts.
2. Repeal Obamacare.
3. Eliminate earmarks.

Of the three NONE of them will make a dent.

 

[WeWantMore]

Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

That's not even close to being true. Find me a Republican who claimed that eliminating earmarks would fix the deficit.
I'm glad you got to bring up the tax cut bogeyman again though. That must have been cathartic for you.

 

[WeWantMore]

Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

Also, look at the reaction to the deficit commission plan. Who has been most vocally opposed? It sure hasn't been Republicans.

 

[Tundra]

Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

Looks like Ireland is saying they are going under because of the bank bailout.
I wonder how much our bank bailout will eventually cost. oh that's right banks paid TARP back so there was no bank bailout.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2010/0522/1224270888132.html

Saturday, May 22, 2010
IT IS no longer a question of whether Ireland will go bust, but when. Unlike Greece, our woes do not stem from government debt, but instead from the government’s open-ended guarantee to cover the losses of the banking system out of its citizens’ wallets.

Even under the most optimistic assumptions about government spending cuts and bank losses, by 2012 Ireland will have a worse ratio of debt to national income than the one that is sinking Greece.

On the face of it, Ireland’s debt position does not appear catastrophic. At the start of the year, Ireland’s government debt was two- thirds of GDP: only half the Greek level. (The State also has financial assets equal to a quarter of GDP, but so do most governments, so we will focus on the total debt.)

All the countries are pouring on the debt. And I think GDP for certain countries went down causing the debt2GDP ratio to get worse.
So USA went from 37% in 2007 to 85% in 2009? and most other countries didn't do that much better. wow I wonder when this debt spiral will stop.

 

[Handyman]

Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

That's not even close to being true. Find me a Republican who claimed that eliminating earmarks would fix the deficit.
I'm glad you got to bring up the tax cut bogeyman again though. That must have been cathartic for you.

Actually it is rather true. I have seen a couple interviews with Eric Cantor and he surely does make it sound like Ear Marks are a way to bring back the fiscal responsibility to Washington. This was pre mid terms though so who knows now.

It isnt that it alone would fix the deficit, but they certainly act like it will make a difference, which it wont.

Hey if you guys want to have fun, watch the Daily Show from last night where John Stewart rips apart John McCain (again) about his stance on Don't Ask Don't Tell. Between the clip of his wife in the new Gay Rights commercial to all the clips of McCain stalling and being two faced flip flops it pretty much shows what a lying sack of crap that man is. As someone who would have voted for him in 2000 this really bothers me...what a fraud.

 

[WeWantMore]

Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

Actually it is rather true. I have seen a couple interviews with Eric Cantor and he surely does make it sound like Ear Marks are a way to bring back the fiscal responsibility to Washington. This was pre mid terms though so who knows now.

You've misunderstood the point Cantor was making then. Here's a quote, which I'm guessing is similar to what he's said in whatever interview you saw.

If we hope to preserve Social Security and Medicare for seniors, younger workers and our children, we must begin the conversation about common-sense ways to reform both programs.

These are big things — and there is little question that turning trillion-dollar deficits into surpluses, while starting to pay down our national debt, is an enormous mountain to climb. Yet the long climb to fiscal responsibility must begin with a few smaller, but necessary, steps.

He's saying that if the Republicans can't find the stones to deal with earmarks, how will they ever have the guts required to make cuts to big ticket items.

If you can find a quote that says something different, I'd love to see it.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

That's exactly how I feel about earmarks. They should be the first step. The "admitting I have a problem" step. If you can get rid of these, you can start getting rid of other things and look at increases in taxes.

I still think they are some of the most egregious additions to the debt however small they may be.

 

[blockski]

Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

You guys do realize that earmarks merely direct spending that has already been approved, right? They don't actually cause new spending.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

You guys do realize that earmarks merely direct spending that has already been approved, right? They don't actually cause new spending.

So that makes them acceptable to you?

 

[Kepler]

Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

All the countries are pouring on the debt. And I think GDP for certain countries went down causing the debt2GDP ratio to get worse.
So USA went from 37% in 2007 to 85% in 2009? and most other countries didn't do that much better. wow I wonder when this debt spiral will stop.

I'm pretty sure this is why the rest of the developed world didn't want a unipolar global economy tied so strongly to the US economy.

It will be interesting to see what happens next if a handful of arrogant jerks on Wall Street too slick for their own good actually immiserate everyone on the planet, even themselves. Well-played, lads. Well-played.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

This has been obvious for decades, of course, but whoever has been in charge of PR for the GOP for that last 30 years should get a raise.

 

[pirate]

Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

I'm pretty sure this is why the rest of the developed world didn't want a unipolar global economy tied so strongly to the US economy.

It will be interesting to see what happens next if a handful of arrogant jerks on Wall Street too slick for their own good actually immiserate everyone on the planet, even themselves. Well-played, lads. Well-played.

Quote from the amazon review of the book:

You won't find gigantic surprises in this book, the usual suspects are examined: originate-to-sell, government-sponsored entities, political pressure to increase homeownership and provide jobs and perks for politicians and their friends, rating agencies, mathematical models divorced from commonsense and reality, CEO's remote from their businesses, and all sorts of people chasing profits and supressing doubts. What this account adds is nuance and balance. Different things mattered at different times, and in most cases there were at least some positive aspects. Things that everyone agrees were bad usually turn out to be bad in this account, but often in slightly different ways than is commonly assumed. Not all doubts were supressed, and a comforting number of people acted with honor and wisdom rather than short-term focus on profits or votes (not a decisive number, unfortunately, but comforting compared to popular conception).

Sounds like it was a group effort...as a mess of this proportion usually is.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

So that makes them acceptable to you?

They sure are acceptable to Michelle Bachmann now. Self proposed leader of the Tea Party.

 

[MinnFan]

Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

The biggest potential upside of eliminating earmarks is that it will make it more difficult to pass massive spending bills. Its going to be tougher to get votes when you can't throw a few million at someone. Looking back at how Obamacare went down there certainly is a chance it wouldn't have passed without earmarks.

 

[blockski]

Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

Here's the thing on earmarks - since they only allocate money that will be spent (rather than make the decision about spending it in the first place), consider what happens if there are no earmarks.

Do you place that decision making power in the hands of the states, with grants allocated via formulas (like much of today's highway funding, for example)? What about the federal executive agencies, letting them allocate funds on the basis of their criteria (like the recent High Speed Rail funding)? How about competitive applications from states (like the Transit New Starts program)?

Earmarking is essentially the process of who decides to spend the money, and where that money will be spent. Earmarks just mean that some of those decisions (really, a very small percentage of them) are made by members of Congress.

Now, I have my opinions on which methods would be better, but I just want to be clear about what we're talking about here. What is certain is that the attention given to earmarks is woefully exaggerated relative to their actual importance.

 

[Tundra]

Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

I'm pretty sure this is why the rest of the developed world didn't want a unipolar global economy tied so strongly to the US economy.

I thought the title "money never sleeps"? was apt. Looks like Ireland and lot of other countries basically did the same thing with their housing market/mortgage backed securities etc... boom using leverage with MBS/CDO/CDS and the bailout.

They are doing the same thing with bank executive bonuses too and Irish supreme court says the banks must pay the deferred compensation no matter what, even after they took control of the banks and it's sending the country to the toilet.

Oh yeah. Warren Buffet thanks Uncle Sam for saving our financial system (IE make him rich and banker friends). And yet after all that they want lower corporate taxes, lower taxes for themselves (rich 1%) And no strings on the insatiable thirst for bigger compensation.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/17/opinion/17buffett.html?ref=opinion

Although people will always criticize the details, Buffett says, they can't criticize the outcome, which was remarkable:

"Uncle Sam, you delivered. People will second-guess your specific decisions; you can always count on that. But just as there is a fog of war, there is a fog of panic � and, overall, your actions were remarkably effective."

Indeed, all of corporate America�s dominoes were lined up, ready to topple at lightning speed. My own company, Berkshire Hathaway, might have been the last to fall, but that distinction provided little solace.

Well Irelands deficit2GDP is 32% and debt2GDP is over 100% and their borrowing cost went up to 9% and they couldn't print money at will. I wonder why Italy hasn't gone belly up with their debt level.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Europ...tml?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=main&asset=&ccode=

Ireland has nationalized three banks and is expected to take over more in a bailout that has already reached euro45 billion ($61 billion) and likely will push the nation's 2010 deficit to a staggering 32 percent of GDP -- ten times the level allowed under EU rules.

Behind Ireland stands Portugal, one of the eurozone's smaller members with 1.8 percent of its economy but one that is considered by some to have done less than the Irish to bring debt and deficits back under control. Next comes Spain, with a proportionally smaller debt burden but a dead-in-the-water economy that is so big -- 11.7 percent of eurozone output -- that it could present a much larger challenge if it needs help.

 

[Tundra]

Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

Here's the thing on earmarks - since they only allocate money that will be spent (rather than make the decision about spending it in the first place), consider what happens if there are no earmarks.

No minnfan is right.

earmarks are deal makers for congress and businesses, it's a *** foe tat, you scratch my back i'll scratch yours, legal bribe buying votes or forwarding certain agenda without regard to anything else. It's a corrputing influence and without it our country will be better off.

 

[MinnFan]

Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

Who gets the earmarks

 

[unofan]

Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

Oh yeah. Warren Buffet thanks Uncle Sam for saving our financial system (IE make him rich and banker friends). And yet after all that they want lower corporate taxes, lower taxes for themselves (rich 1%) And no strings on the insatiable thirst for bigger compensation.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/17/opinion/17buffett.html?ref=opinion

Buffett's an investor in the traditional sense of the word, not a banker. He would have survived any financial meltdown intact, since Berkshire's worth is based on their ownership of Coca-Cola, GEICO, Fruit-of-the-Loom, and the like. He also advocates for higher taxes on the rich. So I'm not sure where you're rant's going.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Obama XVII: Do You Take Your Tea Party with One Sugar or Two?

It would seem to me that fewer nukes in deteriorating Russian facilities would be a 'good' thing. So what exactly does the right relish about the cold war?