The Senate voted 60 to 40 today to end a Republican filibuster of extended unemployment benefits.

[DukeOfYork 28]

Exactly. The GOP had no issue passing trillions of dollars of unfunded legislation and still has no issue caling for more of the same. How can anyone take seriously their "concern" not to add 33 billion to the defict (for over 50 billion worth of an immediate economic benefit no less) when they are sitting there campaigning on making permanent the Bush tax cuts without telling anyone how that 700+ billion proposal (with less than the face value in economic benefit) would actually be paid for.

I oppose unfunded legislation no matter the party. No double-standard here.

So instead of cherry picking my points and giving the obvious "It's Bush's fault" retort, will you resopnd to any other point that has to do with fiscal responsibility on either the personal or government level?

Edited July 21, 2010 by DukeOfYork

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Exactly. The GOP had no issue passing trillions of dollars of unfunded legislation and still has no issue caling for more of the same. How can anyone take seriously their "concern" not to add 33 billion to the defict (for over 50 billion worth of an immediate economic benefit no less) when they are sitting there campaigning on making permanent the Bush tax cuts without telling anyone how that 700+ billion proposal (with less than the face value in economic benefit) would actually be paid for.

It's erroneous to say tax cuts have to be "paid for."

What needs to be "paid for" are the things that the Federal Government continues to spend things on.

You cut spending when you cannot pay for things.

If I can't afford a new TV in Best Buy, then I don't buy it. It's really that simple.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

if your paycheck is electronically deposited, how can you look at it?

Legally, you should be getting some sort of payslip even if its electronic.

[Ban Hammer 13,364]

Legally, you should be getting some sort of payslip even if its electronic.

if aj wanted me to look at my pay slip he woulda said pay slip, he instead said pay check.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I oppose unfunded legislation no matter the party. No double-standard here.

So instead of cherry picking my points and giving the obvious "It's Bush's fault" retort, will you resopnd to any other point that has to do with fiscal responsibility on either the personal or government level?

Wait a second. You claimed the GOP was the party of YES on the issue and opposed only the lack of funding. That's bull. The GOP isn't worried about funding, they're worried about opposing.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

It's erroneous to say tax cuts have to be "paid for."

Semantics. If you run a defict and claim to be concerned about it, you can't sit there and proclaim to support tax cuts which would add hundreds of billions dollars to such deficit. It's like already having a negative cash flow and then telling your creditors that you'll fix the cash flow issue while quitting that second job. Doesn't work.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Semantics. If you run a defict and claim to be concerned about it, you can't sit there and proclaim to support tax cuts which would add hundreds of billions dollars to such deficit. It's like already having a negative cash flow and then telling your creditors that you'll fix the cash flow issue while quitting that second job. Doesn't work.

As I said, erroneous. The government should NEVER run a deficit.

[DukeOfYork 28]

Wait a second. You claimed the GOP was the party of YES on the issue and opposed only the lack of funding. That's bull. The GOP isn't worried about funding, they're worried about opposing.

Obama also said the penalty for failing to have mandatory health insurance wasn't a tax. Saying it isn't so doesn't mean it isn't so. The DOJ is now arguing that the penalty is a tax (and it was called this in the legislation).

Likewise, Republicans are concerned about the lack of funding on the unemployment insurance. We already have borrowed cash waiting to be spent in the stimulus. Democrats didn't want to use it because they like living in the red.

Just because you call it bull doesn't mean it is. If the funding was there or sufficient programs were cut to pay for the unemployment extension, I would have been for it. If Obama had plans that were fiscally responsible and reasonable, I believe the Republicans would support them. But Americans see the direction this country is going in and we don't like it, as you'll see in November.

But just like Paul said, if Best Buy has a tv that I want and I don't have the money for it, I don't buy it. Plain and simple. I don't create more debt to have something else I might like to have. If I wanted that tv, I'd budget for it and maybe cut some monthly expenses to be able to have the money. But this is personal finance 101. I'm sure (I hope) you understand this.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

As I said, erroneous. The government should NEVER run a deficit.

As I said, besides the point. We are running a deficit and nobody that claims to be concerned about defict reduction / elimination can stand there supporting cutting the income w/o offering expense reductions that more than offset the lost income.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

If Obama had plans that were fiscally responsible and reasonable, I believe the Republicans would support them.

You also believe in Santa Claus, yes?

[DukeOfYork 28]

You also believe in Santa Claus, yes?

No, because I don't believe Obama has the ability to push forward plans that are fiscally responsible and reasonable. He's a socialist, so it's not in his nature.

Edited July 21, 2010 by DukeOfYork

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

No, because I don't believe Obama has the ability to push forward plans that are fiscally responsible and reasonable. He's a socialist, so it's not in his nature.

Ah yes, the socialist. Was just waiting from you to swing that tired old bat.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

No, because I don't believe Obama has the ability to push forward plans that are fiscally responsible and reasonable. He's a socialist, so it's not in his nature.

He could have funded it with stimulus but didnt because he wants to demonize repubs.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

As I said, besides the point. We are running a deficit and nobody that claims to be concerned about defict reduction / elimination can stand there supporting cutting the income w/o offering expense reductions that more than offset the lost income.

I would start by cutting all Federal retirement benefits for employees. Fire more than 75% of the federal workforce, and then slash congress' salary by 70%.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

I would start by cutting all Federal retirement benefits for employees. Fire more than 75% of the federal workforce, and then slash congress' salary by 70%.

:thumbs: :thumbs: