Politicians

[KRAM1]

Watching this crap that is playing out in DC and in Austin the last few months has really disappointed me and made me even a bit more jaded toward politicians...all politicians it seems. Both sides seem to be interested in getting elected and re-elected rather than rolling up their sleeves and actually doing the "people's work". I don't care which side of the aisle you are on, it seems both sides are only interested in prolonging their political careers and bowing to the special interest groups that pay into their campaign coffers. Where are the real leaders and real representatives who don't give a darn about what some special interest group thinks of their vote one way or the other and who are willing to make the tough decisions and compromise when it is in the best interests of the nation and its citizens? This is getting to be all about posturing and the bully pulpit until the last second and then...gee...something gets done. We all know there will be an agreement on the debt ceiling issue...so, why do all the childish crap before really getting down to business and hammering out a compromise agreement that works?

Seems to me that if our elected officials really had the citizens best interests in mind that this stuff would get done long before any potential crises developed. As much as I hate to say (as I am philosophically opposed to term limits for representatives and senators) it just may be time for term limits. That would, at least, limit the influence of some special interests as the folks being elected would know their time was limited...then the yahoos would have to come home and live under the laws they enacted while in office.

Maybe I am just frustrated with the current state of affairs in DC and in Austin, probably so, but there is a severe lack of real leadership in both parties from the very top down these days...and it is clearly showing.

Good grief, folks...get on with it and act like grownups for a change. OK, I feel better now...thanks. carry on......

[MeanGreenTexan]

Watching this crap that is playing out in DC and in Austin the last few months has really disappointed me and made me even a bit more jaded toward politicians...all politicians it seems. Both sides seem to be interested in getting elected and re-elected rather than rolling up their sleeves and actually doing the "people's work". I don't care which side of the aisle you are on, it seems both sides are only interested in prolonging their political careers and bowing to the special interest groups that pay into their campaign coffers. Where are the real leaders and real representatives who don't give a darn about what some special interest group thinks of their vote one way or the other and who are willing to make the tough decisions and compromise when it is in the best interests of the nation and its citizens? This is getting to be all about posturing and the bully pulpit until the last second and then...gee...something gets done. We all know there will be an agreement on the debt ceiling issue...so, why do all the childish crap before really getting down to business and hammering out a compromise agreement that works?

Seems to me that if our elected officials really had the citizens best interests in mind that this stuff would get done long before any potential crises developed. As much as I hate to say (as I am philosophically opposed to term limits for representatives and senators) it just may be time for term limits. That would, at least, limit the influence of some special interests as the folks being elected would know their time was limited...then the yahoos would have to come home and live under the laws they enacted while in office.

Maybe I am just frustrated with the current state of affairs in DC and in Austin, probably so, but there is a severe lack of real leadership in both parties from the very top down these days...and it is clearly showing.

Good grief, folks...get on with it and act like grownups for a change. OK, I feel better now...thanks. carry on......

Can't trust any of them.

[Censored by Laurie]

Both sides seem to be interested in getting elected and re-elected rather than rolling up their sleeves and actually doing the "people's work".

Not sure the genesis of this post as a whole, but this is spot on and is the root cause of my political apathy.

[SilverEagle]

Campaign funding reform anyone?

Or, how about doing like the British and limiting campaigning to 6 weeks before the election.

[UNTflyer]

Campaign funding reform anyone?

Or, how about doing like the British and limiting campaigning to 6 weeks before the election.

Can't do that... we have that pesky First Amendment thing.

How about first the American people get out there and vote??? Why pass off the responsibility of controlling government to... THE GOVERNMENT?

Edited July 8, 2011 by UNTflyer

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

Can't trust any of them.

My opinion "Can't trust many of them".

---Most seem to be all about doing what is best for them or their political party.... not what is best for the country or state or their citizens..

-- I hate to pay my electric bill... but I have to pay it if I want to stay cool, have lights, etc. The same with taxes... I hate taxes ... but if I want good services, they have to be paid. Did the tax cuts back in 2002? help the economy... nope... it is far worse than in 1999. when both the state and federal gov. had surpluses and employment was good.

---Congress needs to cut spending and restore tax rates to where before 2001 except for those below average in income.. Not the popular thing to do but the debt is getting out of control.

---Sorta of the same in Texas... We have a great economy most places but a big budget problem due to giving away to many cuts to business ( not to common citizens, note sales tax, gasoline tax, etc. ) Most need to restored to previous levels... again not popular. It does not make sense the have the best economy in America and one of the worse budget problems. I can't see how putting 1000's of educators out of work is helping anything... that and cutting a lot of needed services such as aid to the mentally and physically impaired. We had a $6 billion surplus in 1999.... and now we have a huge problem.

Edited July 8, 2011 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[KRAM1]

Sorry...raising taxes is never the answer. If you want more tax revenue, you need to lower tax rates, not raise them.

[UNTFan23]

My opinion "Can't trust many of them".

---Most seem to be all about doing what is best for them or their political party.... not what is best for the country or state or their citizens..

-- I hate to pay my electric bill... but I have to pay it if I want to stay cool, have lights, etc. The same with taxes... I hate taxes ... but if I want good services, they have to be paid. Did the tax cuts back in 2002? help the economy... nope... it is far worse than in 1999. when both the state and federal gov. had surpluses and employment was good.

---Congress needs to cut spending and restore tax rates to where before 2001 except for those below average in income.. Not the popular thing to do but the debt is getting out of control.

---Sorta of the same in Texas... We have a great economy most places but a big budget problem due to giving away to many cuts to business ( not to common citizens, note sales tax, gasoline tax, etc. ) Most need to restored to previous levels... again not popular. It does not make sense the have the best economy in America and one of the worse budget problems. I can't see how putting 1000's of educators out of work is helping anything... that and cutting a lot of needed services such as aid to the mentally and physically impaired. We had a $6 billion surplus in 1999.... and now we have a huge problem.

The biggest problem with tax cuts is unless there is an existing budget surplus, you really should cut budget expenditures at the same time. The government (at any level) rarely cuts expenditures when it cuts taxes. With many governments the hope is that they actually bring in more revenue through the tax cuts because people have more money to dispense into the economy. Of course, when the economy hits a snag and unemployment jumps to record high numbers, those lower tax rates hit the budget harder than if the tax rates had stayed the same.

If you really want to test the mettle of the economic recovery, lets start raising taxes at every governmental level (federal, state, and municipal) and see how that works out.

[Coffee and TV]

Sorry...raising taxes is never the answer. If you want more tax revenue, you need to lower tax rates, not raise them.

Taxes are at their lowest they've been in 60 years. Corporations are sitting on 2$ trillion and hiring is minimal. Yeah, lowering taxes is surely the solution...

[UNTFan23]

Taxes are at their lowest they've been in 60 years. Corporations are sitting on 2$ trillion and hiring is minimal. Yeah, lowering taxes is surely the solution...

Well, if taxes weren't at such a low point today, there might be the option to lower taxes even more in an attempt to spur the consumer to buy more. Raising taxes will only decrease consumer buying power and encourage further spending cuts by the US consumer, which in turn would hurt several tax revenue streams despite a higher tax rate.

However, if taxes were higher I suspect we might have been worse off than what we are right now. At least the budget cuts might not appear to be so draconian?

I think business hiring is stagnant due to more than just record low tax rates though. With some of the promise to make more policy changes has died away which has made for fewer nervous investors and business leaders, I think a lot of companies are still reading through the Health Care Affordability Act to see what's actually in it.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

Taxes are at their lowest they've been in 60 years. Corporations are sitting on 2$ trillion and hiring is minimal. Yeah, lowering taxes is surely the solution...

---And add to it... Texas is dead last ( 50th) in state taxes per capita... and we are cutting education funding to shreds. At the same time we have Tea-party Texans who want it lowered even more...

[UNTflyer]

Did the tax cuts back in 2002? help the economy... nope...

Actually, the answer is... Yup!

We were teetering on a serious recession after 9/11, and the tax cuts put money back in the hands of the people and businesses (where it belongs).

I laugh when people say the Bush tax cuts hurt the economy, but claim Obama's stimulus is helping. One is government deciding not to take the people's money, the other is a Keynesian tactic of "stimulating" the economy by filtering it through government programs and handing out wads of cash to political allies.

But, then again... some people really believe that government spending *IS* the economy.

[UNTflyer]

Taxes are at their lowest they've been in 60 years. Corporations are sitting on 2$ trillion and hiring is minimal. Yeah, lowering taxes is surely the solution...

The cash being held by corporations didn't start reaching these high levels until late 2009. You are taking two events that happened more than 7 years apart and implying a causal relationship. The percentage of cash assets one year after the tax cuts went into effect were the same as they were two years before Clinton left office when tax rates were higher. In other words, one really has nothing to do with the other.

[JayDub]

I read a quote today attributed to Warren Buffett, though I've been unable to verify if he actually said it. Regardless, it's pretty much greatness:

“We could end the deficit in 5 minutes. You just pass a law that says that, anytime there is a deficit of more than 3% of GDP, all sitting members of congress are ineligible for re-election.”

THAT is the change we need in Washington, first and foremost. Vote all of them out. All of them. Of course, that won't happen...we'll all go to the polls and vote for our favorites like we vote for the MLB All-Star Team: popularity over talent.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

I read a quote today attributed to Warren Buffett, though I've been unable to verify if he actually said it. Regardless, it's pretty much greatness:

THAT is the change we need in Washington, first and foremost. Vote all of them out. All of them. Of course, that won't happen...we'll all go to the polls and vote for our favorites like we vote for the MLB All-Star Team: popularity over talent.

--- He is also on record as opposing the cuts of about 10 years ago.... claimed he all he was do with the extra money was go to Wall Street and buy more stock... and that his secretarys and lower paid employees needed the cuts more. I think he knows a little bit about money and finance.

.

Edited July 9, 2011 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

Actually, the answer is... Yup!

We were teetering on a serious recession after 9/11, and the tax cuts put money back in the hands of the people and businesses (where it belongs).

I laugh when people say the Bush tax cuts hurt the economy, but claim Obama's stimulus is helping. One is government deciding not to take the people's money, the other is a Keynesian tactic of "stimulating" the economy by filtering it through government programs and handing out wads of cash to political allies.

But, then again... some people really believe that government spending *IS* the economy.

---And just when did the spending exceed the income....?? and the debt go climbing out of control... 2001-2009 increased the debt as much as 1788 - 2001. it is still climbing... and the 2% of the population that got 90% of the cuts (by amount) still have them.

---The economy declining in 2001`was more about the dot.com crash or people thinking that that sector would continue to grow rapidly.... it didn't once everyone had computers and computers that needed replacing by better ones. All economic booms end and those who don't think ahead get hurt just as the oil and banking industry that loaned them insane amounts of money did in the 80's. A lot of large companies disappeared including GULF oil. The name is around... not the company.

Edited July 9, 2011 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[UNTFan23]

---And just when did the spending exceed the income....?? and the debt go climbing out of control... 2001-2009 increased the debt as much as 1788 - 2001. it is still climbing...

And the debt has increased by the same amount between 2009 to now as it did 2001-2009 (more than 3 trillion!). We've still got a lot of work to do if we're going to reduce the deficit and the get our country's debt under control. Some people are going be very disappointed in what will have to be done if we're not going to run the country into the ground.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

And the debt has increased by the same amount between 2009 to now as it did 2001-2009 (more than 3 trillion!). We've still got a lot of work to do if we're going to reduce the deficit and the get our country's debt under control. Some people are going be very disappointed in what will have to be done if we're not going to run the country into the ground.

-- You are correct.. except it increased by $5 trillion between 2001-2009... but the rate is the same... (or worse, since the poor economy is collecting less income tax and paying more interest now). Congress is going to have to make some tough unpopular decisions..... that means less spending and increasing taxes (which they fear will get them unelected). NO ONE like taxes and no one likes paying their electric bill either, especially this year... but it has to be done if you want services to continue. We would love to have the national debt we had in 2001... which was about $5.5 trillion. It has jumped $8 trillion in just 10 years... largely because of those tax cuts (the top 2% got 90% of the money, not you) and increased spending, a lot of it just crazy including the worst earmark period in history.

--Texas... somewhat different... the USA in general doesn't have a good ecomony but we do, maybe the best of 50 states.... yet we have one of the worst budget problems. ... why?? because a lot of business cuts have passed out (a lot to contributors)... and none to the common citizen (sales, gasoline, alcohol, tobacco ). Rick Perry had three people EACH give him over $400,000 last year including Bob Perry ( not related) who was behind the Swift Boat group and claiming McCain has a black daughter just before Super Tuesday in the South in 2000 ... Well McCain does... adopted.. but that wasn't mentioned. He may be a Baylor grad but I question he is Christian... bearing false witness seems to be a big problem for him... he rarely tells the "whole truth".

.

Edited July 10, 2011 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[eulesseagle]

---And just when did the spending exceed the income....?? and the debt go climbing out of control... 2001-2009 increased the debt as much as 1788 - 2001. it is still climbing... and the 2% of the population that got 90% of the cuts (by amount) still have them.

---The economy declining in 2001`was more about the dot.com crash or people thinking that that sector would continue to grow rapidly.... it didn't once everyone had computers and computers that needed replacing by better ones. All economic booms end and those who don't think ahead get hurt just as the oil and banking industry that loaned them insane amounts of money did in the 80's. A lot of large companies disappeared including GULF oil. The name is around... not the company.

totally agree....and now government wants us to "voluntariy dontate" to the national debt:

this is from the government web site:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:h2411:

[KRAM1]

totally agree....and now government wants us to "voluntariy dontate" to the national debt:

this is from the government web site:

http://thomas.loc.go...y/z?c112:h2411:

So, here we have the opportunity for all those folks who think we should raise taxes to step up. Warren Buffet can put his money where his thoughts are on taxes and start with a $1,000,000 donation, don't you think? So, come on folks...all those who talk about raising taxes, here's your chance to step up and show that you mean what you say and that you just don't mean for someone else to have their taxes raised for all those "well managed" government programs. Let's get those checks flowing folks...or are you just wanting someone else to pay?

I am all "tounge in cheek" here, but it is pretty interesting that those who want to raise taxes seem to only want to raise them on "other people" such as those they consoder "rich".

[UNT90]

f you really want to test the mettle of the economic recovery, lets start raising taxes at every governmental level (federal, state, and municipal) and see how that works out.

Recovery??? Do you know something that all of America doesn't?

So, here we have the opportunity for all those folks who think we should raise taxes to step up. Warren Buffet can put his money where his thoughts are on taxes and start with a $1,000,000 donation, don't you think? So, come on folks...all those who talk about raising taxes, here's your chance to step up and show that you mean what you say and that you just don't mean for someone else to have their taxes raised for all those "well managed" government programs. Let's get those checks flowing folks...or are you just wanting someone else to pay?

I am all "tounge in cheek" here, but it is pretty interesting that those who want to raise taxes seem to only want to raise them on "other people" such as those they consoder "rich".

No need to be tongue in cheek. I think this is a good idea. My brother and his wife make over 250k combined. He complains about tax breaks for the rich and thinks they should pay more.

He doesn't consider himself in the rich bracket.

He is also a federal employee and considers himself underpaid and gripes about how mismanaged his field is by said federal government, then turns around and professes his belief in nationalized health care.

Just a bundle of conflicting political positions that make for great family fun.

People want a free ride and want someone else to pay for it, plain and simple.

Edited July 10, 2011 by UNT90

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

Recovery??? Do you know something that all of America doesn't?

No need to be tongue in cheek. I think this is a good idea. My brother and his wife make over 250k combined. He complains about tax breaks for the rich and thinks they should pay more.

He doesn't consider himself in the rich bracket.

He is also a federal employee and considers himself underpaid and gripes about how mismanaged his field is by said federal government, then turns around and professes his belief in nationalized health care.

Just a bundle of conflicting political positions that make for great family fun.

People want a free ride and want someone else to pay for it, plain and simple.

---The tax hike that was voted down in December would have raised taxes only on people who made $250,000 or more...... and only on the part over $250,000.... He (your brother)is not all wrong and understands it... The high income people who earn their money with a pay check are paying far more than those whose income is coming from capital gains.... which is is only 15% ... He is likely paying 33%. Twice that rate... I too have relatives making that much... and mostly from a salery. the high income "working class" are the ones really taking it on the chin.... not the Ross Perot, Warren buffet types who pay a lot more because of their higher incomes... but are paying a smaller rate..... that is what matters. He has just cause to gripe some.

Healthcare... not exactly... you are paying for it now... indigent health care at emergency rooms .. they show up and get care. All I ask is really think about what has been happening.. Murdoch USA (FOX) is about as honest as Murdoch London (which had to shut down lately) Many British people were claiming he was trying to create a Murdochacy there with all they did. What they present about healthcare here is greatly flawed. You still may not want it... but their claims are mostly garbage.

..

Edited July 12, 2011 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[eulesseagle]

---The tax hike that was voted down in December would have raised taxes only on people who made $250,000 or more...... and only on the part over $250,000.... He (your brother)is not all wrong and understands it... The high income people who earn their money with a pay check are paying far more than those whose income is coming from capital gains.... which is is only 15% ... He is likely paying 33%. Twice that rate... I too have relatives making that much... and mostly from a salery. the high income "working class" are the ones really taking it on the chin.... not the Ross Perot, Warren buffet types who pay a lot more because of their higher incomes... but are paying a smaller rate..... that is what matters. He has just cause to gripe some.

Healthcare... not exactly... you are paying for it now... indigent health care at emergency rooms .. they show up and get care. All I ask is really think about what has been happening.. Murdoch USA (FOX) is about as honest as Murdoch London (which had to shut down lately) Many British people were claiming he was trying to create a Murdochacy there with all they did. What they present about healthcare here is greatly flawed. You still may not want it... but their claims are mostly garbage.

..

you are absolutely correct and here are more documented examples that the spending is out of control:

http://www.infowars.com/obama-is-establishing-an-executive-dictatorship/

[Censored by Laurie]

you are absolutely correct and here are more documented examples that the spending is out of control:

http://www.infowars.com/obama-is-establishing-an-executive-dictatorship/

Op-Eds, blogs and YouTube clips now equate to "documented examples"?

This is internet thing has so much potential, yet its made us oh so dumber.

[eulesseagle]

Op-Eds, blogs and YouTube clips now equate to "documented examples"?

This is internet thing has so much potential, yet its made us oh so dumber.

you should read the references to all the articles .... investigate its content on the "net" or the library .... decide for yourself. I really do not see anything in the article that has not been reported by all the media outlets from the left to the right...but then again i am not like those two geico guys who live under a rock.