The new budget offer from the White House is unbelievable!

reply to post by macman


You must be a pretty huge failure at negotiating then. Or you don't know the meaning of the word. Or you're trying to invent new meanings for it.. as you do with the word conservative.

If there is no give or take.. there is no negotiation. There you go... all unknowing.. defining yourself again

And yes.. color me amused.

reply to post by macman


Do what?!

Corporate welfare is better than social welfare?



THEY ARE BOTH WELFARE!

I am not opposed to someone getting their unemployment...it was taxed from them...not 99 weeks though.

I am opposed to Government subsidies to the private companies in the the form of food stamps so those private companies can pay lower wages...To me that is just insanity. Do not tax them so much and let them pay better wages....oh right...we tried that and they didn't keep their end of the bargain.

If a company needs Gov bailouts to survive, then they are already dead and too stupid to fall down. Let them die and let an upstart company fill the spot. It is that damn simple.

I am not a cold hearted prick, but the extremism has to die...now. We cannot tax the hell out of everyone and we can't let people starve...

So there is the parameters that you sit down at the table with. Foreign aid? Bye-bye! Screw the rest of the world. it's my money and I want it used here!

reply to post by sheepslayer247


You are confusing the willingness to walk away with complacency.
Those two are not the same.
I personally have gotten more, and seen those get more when patient and willing to walk away if terms are not in my favor.

reply to post by Plexi


Again, you know who I voted for????


You may believe I own hypocrisy, but Ignorance and Arrogance is all yours.

reply to post by Jeremiah65


Foreign aid bye bye? Amen to that. We also spend more on defense than the rest of the world combined... but all reps can see is "look how many ppl are on foodstamps!" SMH

reply to post by Plexi


Still waiting on your correction on labeling.

Or is that something you are going to avoid as well?

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


Not trying to be rude and interrupt your conversation with Chop, but Fannie/Freddie and the Community Reinvestment act has been a very convenient scapegoat for the real causes of the housing-bubble and the economic woes surrounding it.

The main catalyst being the repeal of Glass-Steagal. As I'm sure you know, the repeal of the act allowed banks the ability to do as they pleased and even led to the derivatives and mortgage instruments that really caused a world of hurt to our economy.

It wasn't loans made to people that couldn't afford them that caused the problems. It was the ability of the banks to bundle loans and sell them repeatedly with no concern for liquidity value or ROI. If the market took a bad turn, they simply bundled the mortgages again and sold em.

So it would be wise not to question the intelligence of other members when you, in fact, do not have a firm grasp on why we are in the situation we are in.

reply to post by Plexi


Another lesson needed for you?

Please, go and read my retort above.

You are in the fallacy belief that Caring less means not offering anything.
You, again, are wrong.

reply to post by macman


I don't really need to.. I'm judging you on your hypocritical statements.. not your voting record.

You "label" me (happy?) an elitist progressive liberal.. do you know my voting record?

Oh and the corporate welfare any day comment was priceless ... again .. quite telling ntm defining.

And yes I'm quite arrogant at times... ignorant? nah.. you should take a look in the mirror before you go looking elsewhere for ignorance

Again, as requested previously, let's please take care to focus our comments on the topic and not what we think of other members.

Thanks.

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
...
The main catalyst being the repeal of Glass-Steagal. As I'm sure you know, the repeal of the act allowed banks the ability to do as they pleased and even led to the derivatives and mortgage instruments that really caused a world of hurt to our economy.

It wasn't loans made to people that couldn't afford them that caused the problems. It was the ability of the banks to bundle loans and sell them repeatedly with no concern for liquidity value or ROI. If the market took a bad turn, they simply bundled the mortgages again and sold em.

So it would be wise not to question the intelligence of other members when you, in fact, do not have a firm grasp on why we are in the situation we are in.

Really?... It is obvious of who is truly unaware, and doesn't have a firm grasp on the REASONS for the situation we are in...

You forget that it was BILL CLINTON who declared publicly that "the Glass–Steagall law is no longer appropriate" and it was BILL CLINTON who repealed the Glass-Steagall law...

So, next time you want to question my intelligence make sure you know what the hell you are talking about because so far you have demonstrated the contrary...

Originally posted by Plexi
reply to post by macman

 

I don't really need to.. I'm judging you on your hypocritical statements.. not your voting record.

You "label" me (happy?) an elitist progressive liberal.. do you know my voting record?

Oh and the corporate welfare any day comment was priceless ... again .. quite telling ntm defining.

And yes I'm quite arrogant at times... ignorant? nah.. you should take a look in the mirror before you go looking elsewhere for ignorance

SO more poetic waxing, with no direct answers.

Ok then, sure sure.

reply to post by Plexi


Food stamps, taxation, welfare, etc...etc...etc is all a damn shell game. They tax the corporation...who then says because of taxes they cannot pay better wages. The Gov then starts issuing food stamps to offset the lower wages...it's all huge piles of BS.

It is all about making people dependent...why can't people understand that? If you are dependent, you will do what you are told...or else...it's blatant controls...why do people think it's kindness and compassion...that is NOT what it is about.

Oh man...these things make my brain hurt...

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
I have been reading into the budget proposal and fail to see what is unconstitutional. In fact, this proposal seems to illuminate the fact that congress is untrustworthy and needs to have it's broad powers put on a leash.

On the other hand, if you go to FoxNews and other Right-leaning websites you will see this nonsense being regurgitated over and over again...as if they all got together and decided what today's talking points were going to be.

So all due respect to the OP, but this is just more rhetoric.

You can find this on the FoxNews front page:

OPINION: It's Time for Republicans to Let Obama Own Fiscal Crisis

and this is what the Right is trying to do. They are not interested in doing their duty for the American people, they want to put blame on Obama while they sit back and do nothing.

I hope the Republicans make a counter-offer and let's get the negotiations rolling. Otherwise it will just look like Obama was willing to play ball but the Republicans didn't show up to the game because they couldn't rig it from the start.

First, great thread everyone! I got up to see what happened and was shocked to see how this developed!

To the reply though.... It doesn't matter much either way if you believe me but I will say for what it's worth. I didn't even see a mention about "Constitutionality" from anywhere else when I started this OP last night. The reference I started from was furious about the TAXES.

As mentioned about the taxes? They have nothing to do with my outrage. Taxes are just par for the course and while short sighted and foolish to my thinking, that's a fair point of debate and others have the opposite view on those. Fair enough..and we'll get the chance to see if they work or don't work.


However.......

Timothy Geithner's concept of the outright removal of statutory debt ceiling control by the House of Representatives IS a Constitutional matter and I started the reply noting that I hadn't even seen the Constitutionality of it mentioned in media because I didn't HAVE to...and nor should anyone else.

Still, everyone has had the chance to look by now and the Constitution is anything but vague or unclear about this. I did quote literal section and words in the OP.

The Power of the 'Purse' is *ABSOLUTE* for legal and statutory control to the Legislative Branch and specifically to the House. The only way that can change is if Congress willingly and knowingly gives that authority away to the Executive branch.....and I'm anxious to see that come before the Supreme Court as a test, to be honest. I'm not sure Congress CAN give this power away without Constitutional Amendment.


Why it matters............

People are kinda confused as to how this changes anything. Congress still writes the Budgets, so why should debt ceiling removal matter? Well, that's just it. Congress has NOT been writing budgets since Bush left. His 'carry-over' budget from the 2008/2009 proposal was passed and that was the last budget in a formal layout the United States has seen. Our nation has gone single years in the past without a budget passed and sometimes for political reasons. Election time and such...but this is going into a SECOND TERM without so much as mention made of the fact the US has no budget and hasn't had one for 4 years.

When you look at no budget to formally constrain and contain the Executive Branch spending across the myriad of Government Dept's (Almost ALL of Government someone sees every day and thinks about IS Executive Branch based) then spending outside lines which don't really exist becomes a bit more understandable. Coming to Congress is a required and PUBLIC act...it limits their zeal for asking for more and raising that limit, as it SHOULD, IMO.


Remember folks...it won't ALWAYS BE a Democrat in the White House. It's Short Sighted to an EXTREME to allow bad ideas like this to happen because "Obama can be trusted". TOO many of us said the same ignorant thing when Bush pushed the Patriot Act. Oh was that a lesson about thinking ahead on what President's want done.

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by sheepslayer247

 

You are confusing the willingness to walk away with complacency.
Those two are not the same.
I personally have gotten more, and seen those get more when patient and willing to walk away if terms are not in my favor.

No, I know what complacent means:

marked by self-satisfaction especially when accompanied by unawareness of actual dangers or deficiencies : marked by complacency

I'm sure you can figure out why I used that specific word.

The Republicans will sit around waiting patiently, thinking that good things will come to those that wait, but fail to realize that by the time they wake up from their nap......the train will have left and there will be some major political consequences coming their way.

The fact that they are not even thinking of entering the fight against this budget does not say they are patient....it says that they do not have a plan and are most likely little scared pansies that have no muscle at the bargaining table.

As anyone that has done negotiations knows, like myself, the aggressive is almost always the victor. Those that sit idly by get to pick off of the leftovers.

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by sheepslayer247

 

I personally have gotten more, and seen those get more when patient and willing to walk away if terms are not in my favor.

That might work for you personally; when negotiating for yourself. It doesn't work out so well when you are negotiating on behalf of others. When you fail to do your job and negotiate on behalf of others, then you will quickly find yourself out of a job.

Personally, I hope the Republicans keep "patient" and "walk away". When both houses of congress are Democrat controlled; just make sure you don't forget that you got exactly what you deserves.

reply to post by sheepslayer247

Ok, so why both know that I speak of, in negotiating is not complacency.
What the reps are doing sounds like it though.

Being aggressive gets you know where, if you have to concede on too many fronts.

Amazing!! Obama demands $1.6 trillion tax boost, and an unlimited credit card and brings nothing of substance to the table?? Wow! executive power of the the debt limit. Not Good!! Where are the checks and balances??

Time to walk away and let Obama wear this disaster around his neck. No one to blame but himself. He's got nothing to lose in a lame duck term. Question remains...will all of those dems who seek reelection call Obama's bluff or will they follow him blindly to the end??

Boehner just gave a quick presser and simply stated that they have reached a stalemate... Just walk away and don't look back....

Can't we just sell the Olsen Twins to a Japanese man?

reply to post by LeatherNLace


Negotiating does not mean giving in to the opponent.
If the Reps are truly negotiating on my behalf, then I expect them to hold to what was promised.
Not give in to 0bama and the Dems.

And I have negotiated on behalf of others. I do understand that aspect.
That would be a bigger failure, not actually getting what the person(s) I am negotiating for want.