MAYBE
- These costs wouldn't go up so much if we didn't continually create
more shot-to-hell veterans. Not attacking other countries would go a
long way to reducing the costs of veterans benefits. It seems to me to
be especially egregious to begin a new generation of veterans of foreign
wars (Iraq, Afghanistan) before we even cleared the backlog from
previous ill-advised adventures (Vietnam).
How about we have them start with the Constitution for the United States, and that obscure Paine document "Common Sense".
For those who venerate the founding fathers (and cite "What They Would Have Said"), consider that the enduring legacy of those founders was based in a classical education, including works in Latin and Greek.
If they bypass Twain or, worse, use that new Bowdlerized edition of Huckleberry Finn, there can be no doubt: the nation is doomed!
For those who venerate the founding fathers (and cite "What They Would Have Said"), consider that the enduring legacy of those founders was based in a classical education, including works in Latin and Greek.
If they bypass Twain or, worse, use that new Bowdlerized edition of Huckleberry Finn, there can be no doubt: the nation is doomed!
Most government reports are well massaged cover-your-@$$ documents. Excusing schedule slips, cost overruns, and mission creep.
I've contributed my share to the heap.
I've contributed my share to the heap.
My
American Lit (11th grade) teacher got reamed for requiring her students
to actually read actual literature instead of the standard-issue text.
Which DID have a nice red/white/blue cover and the word America. Pablum
inside. School board-approved pablum.
All
this reading distracts the students, of course, from the main point of
school: to take an endless series of multiple-choice tests. Can't muck
up the test-prep classes with reading for information or knowledge (or,
gasp!, for fun).
Epicurus:
The "Problem" with the clinton era tax rates is that lots of people got
richer, not just the rich. If I'm rich, but so is everybody else, then
I'm not special enough! Time to put the middle class in their place; in
the poorhouse that is.
A freebie for a golpher.
But
if we check with Unskewed Polls, they will assure us that this poll and
others like it are "Oversampled" and all a plot by the
leftist-socialist-marxist-muslimist-obamaist media to portray the GOP as
insensitive to the plight of the poor. And how could anybody think such
a thing?
I'm
Shocked! Shocked! To find that a Murdoch Mouthpiece is a dedicated
neo-con manipulator of public opinion. The likelihood that this will
cause any Foxhole appreciators to do more than circle the wagons against
the depredations of the liberal-socialist-marxist-muslimist-mainstream
media is highly remote.
Actually,
jhillmurphy; I do believe the Republican party is a handmaiden of the
Rupert Murdoch media behemoth. To quote the old adage: "Follow The
Money". And they certainly do!
Murdoch
is just taking a page from William Randolph Hearst here. If you don't
like the news, manufacture some of your own. Make the news, make a
buck.
True.
One might hope it becomes a trend! Promise 'em a soapbox if they'll
resign. It seems to work, at least for those who would rather screech
than think.
Quite
correct: If He will pay more than You, I will sell to Him. That's why
oil prices aren't set by the president. They are determined by worldwide
bidding. NG prices are down locally now because of a local excess.
Export will soon rectify that.
An
even better opportunity to help the trade deficit is to more
aggressively market American Tobacco! No matter the death and
destruction, We Can Make Money! Greed Is Good!
Rep. Boehner gets lots 'n lots of face time on the teevee. What more could any good patriotic American politician ask for?
I
think rstone2 probably has the future pretty well mapped out. I think
that is exactly what they're planning out there in the back room. Wonder
what they'll come up with. I sure hope they share it with the rest of
us. OH!: Maybe a Constitutional Amendment!
Staying
in business, with a payroll of TAXPAYING employees is better than
sending the money to Afghanistan in the form of guns 'n bombs.
Wow,
whatta concept! Raise taxes to the level of the Clinton years, and at
such *HIGH* rates, rich folk will move to... umm... Let me ask you;
where will they move to?
There's a law against masturbation? I thought it just made you blind. Like some justices.
If
the European is here legally then we don't care that he's here. If the
European is here illegally, then we sure as heii don't want him here!
Too bad the natives who were here back when didn't have an INS.
Too bad the natives who were here back when didn't have an INS.
Not even legislators - Lame Duck legislators. Vote and Get Out Of Town. Leave no fingerprints on the bill.
Well, COLLEGE FOOTBALL! Easily the most important factor in quality of life.
The
problem was; If we didn't cut taxes from the Clinton years, we'd PAY
OFF the national debt! And that would be a BAD THING! Thus spake G. W.
Bush. Even so, the CBO foretold that the tax cuts proposed by G. W. Bush
were unsutainable, and would result in HUGE deficits. Thus, congress,
ever willing to punt on third down, agreed to the tax cuts, but set them
to expire. Some (silly people) thought this would actually happen. The
more stalwart of the "Drown It In The Tub" group figured they could
scream "Tax Increase" loud enough to keep the cuts from expiring. So
far, both the exploding-deficit AND the don't-let-the-cuts-expire groups
have proven to be right. Meantime, we are all screwed.
Stepping off the curb is no problem; getting run over by the bus is a problem! Look both ways first.
I think that's WHINER-ies
I am an atheist. I do not believe in Nostradamus. I also do not believe in drrealitycheck.
I
have already downloaded a printable 2013 calendar. Just have to get a
printer now, and I will be all set for the next year. When, if I'm not
mistaken, the End Times will surely arrive! Unless they don't.
On the upside, if this were to actually occur, we wouldn't have to worry about our taxes going up!
The quote from Hard Times seems highly apropos to me.
That the pollution isn't so bad because it could be worse seems a poor argument to me.
Dickens got it right.
That's why we call societies such as ours is becoming "Dickensian".
That the pollution isn't so bad because it could be worse seems a poor argument to me.
Dickens got it right.
That's why we call societies such as ours is becoming "Dickensian".
Exporting
the oil will be fine for Exxon-Mobile and RPetco. You won't see any of
the money though. In fact, the foreign profits will go untaxed by the US
government, adding to the profits of the Oil Corporations. Why is it
that people think the country is a completely socialist economy, with
government owning the businesses? In fact, it's the opposite; the
businesses own the government!
Farmers
"invest" when they plant their field, expecting (at least hoping) to
show a future return on that investment. The government likewise USED to
invest in: schools, roads, dams, aqueducts, parks, seaports, railway
systems. But now, NONONO! The only thing we can afford to invest in is a
bigger military.
I
guess I haven't been paying attention: The feds are following the
California legislature in their budget craziness. I wonder, if (when)
the federal government joins Ca. in paying their contractors with IOU's,
how will the Military-Industrial complex deal with that? Will
Blackwater stage a sit-down strike?
Wow! This could mean the outbreak of peace!
Wow! This could mean the outbreak of peace!
I
see that WILL4567 is another of those who has no knowledge of the
Constitution whatsoever. I find this widespread ignorance of the
founding documents of the country profoundly upsetting. "Article 1,
Section. 7.All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of
Representatives"
Any submittal by the president, or the senate, or the Wall Street Journal (or other Rupert Murdoch mouthpiece), or anybody else has NO LEGAL basis.
Further, even where there is a legal requirement for a budget submittal (such as in the case of the state of California), the lawmakers routinely fail to do their job. With no consequences. Since they are the lawmakers, of course, they will never cause a law to include consequences for their own illegalities.
Any submittal by the president, or the senate, or the Wall Street Journal (or other Rupert Murdoch mouthpiece), or anybody else has NO LEGAL basis.
Further, even where there is a legal requirement for a budget submittal (such as in the case of the state of California), the lawmakers routinely fail to do their job. With no consequences. Since they are the lawmakers, of course, they will never cause a law to include consequences for their own illegalities.
"A
well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free
State..." What became of that Well Regulated Militia that was the FIRST
clause of the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights?
Considering
that all income below $106,000 is taxed at an ADDITIONAL 12.7% (FICA);
why not allow the Bush-era (and Obama-era) tax cuts to return to the
Clinton-era rates for income greater than that 106K? And remember, that
tax reductionof 12.7% is for ALL income greater than 106K, NOT adjusted
income.
If tha maximum amount subject to FICA is somehow considered to be a significant number, then why not let it be a significant number as a threshold for tax rates generally? Instead of a made-up number for Social Security only?
If tha maximum amount subject to FICA is somehow considered to be a significant number, then why not let it be a significant number as a threshold for tax rates generally? Instead of a made-up number for Social Security only?
"Regulators
also said that the fish is unlikely to harm populations of natural
salmon,..." BULL! Sieving the seas for feed for these pen-raised fish
depletes the food supply for free swimming wild fish. The few remaining
wild fish, since the hatchery fish are also flooding the rivers and
nearshore areas, competing with the perpetually endangered wild Salmon.
Face it folks; there's too much money to be made off the "management" of the living resource to allow it to recover to a sustainable level.
Face it folks; there's too much money to be made off the "management" of the living resource to allow it to recover to a sustainable level.
Maybe they should be labelled "90-plus percent Salmon"?
Or "Ten percent Pout"?
My personal solution: If I don't catch it, I don't eat it. Unfortunately, that's a very expensive solution, and not available to non-coastal inhabitants.
Or "Ten percent Pout"?
My personal solution: If I don't catch it, I don't eat it. Unfortunately, that's a very expensive solution, and not available to non-coastal inhabitants.
Thank
you, angel16. I was about to point out that same obscure factoid. Mr.
Kelsey was in considerable trouble for her "Obstructionist Attitude".
Back
when I was fishing salmon commercially, I caught an Atlantic Salmon
while trolling for Chinook off Cape Mendocino (California). It had
apparently gotten out of a net pen somewhere in British Columbia when
the sea lions tore the pen open. Travelled many hundreds of miles. There
have been lots of observations of these genetically altered fish
(chemically neutered) attempting to spawn in BC waters. Disrupting the
nests of native salmon.
Chrichton
was also a Medical Doctor, had some knowledge of biology. And some
knowledge of the fact that many species can switch genders. Ask a
breeder of Parakeets. Or the zoo where the *virgin* Komodo Dragon laid
eggs that hatched!
Surprising
to me that Mr. LaPierre would want to see armed Police from the
"Jackbooted Thug Government" holding our children hostage. How could we
get our kids free from the schools? Turn in our GUNS? What is this man
thinking?
If you hire enough guards, it would certainly solve the unemployment problem.
I
thought it was called "Plan B" after that scifi classic "Plan B From
Outer Space". You know, the one with the attacking pie tins?
Yeah; Plan 9 replaced Plan B, when they ran out of bad dialogue. One can hope the same will happen in DC.
Less
than 60 senators is not "Control of the Senate". Toss in a few *Dem*
senators from little red states, who can be easily logrolled by a threat
from a plutocrat to buy enough votes for their next GOP opponent to
defeat them (think: Ben Nelson), and the "Democrat Controlled Senate" is
the very definition of logjam.
Mr.
Ornstein is quite correct: the House and Senate are in fact the
arbiters of their own rules. They can choose to organize themselves as
they wish. There is, on the other hand, the act of succession. The shift
back during the Eisenhower (?) years from V.P. to cabinet officers in
order of seniority was changed to the Speaker of the House, the
President Pro Tempore of the Senate, et cetera, to insure that whoever
the president was he was an elected official, albeit possibly elected
only by a teensy majority of a teensy congressional district of a teensy
state. Still, the president would never be an UNELECTED person. The
house selecting a private citizen is legal, but conflicts with this. I
think it would be interesting but, face it, we have LOTS of interesting
conflicts going on already. Might not want to add this one.
12/26/2012 4:00 PM GMT+0700
"A
little more stable". Heh. And hey, Hacim, the unemployment rate already
passed 10%, except it's going down, instead of up, as you would
obviously prefer it to.
The
"unelected" part, while it won't happen here, follows pretty logically
from the last time the congress actually acted in a rational and also
successful way: they appointed a "Base Closing Committee" to choose
which military bases to shut down. The members of Congress had no say
except an up/down vote. Saved them from being able to swap votes for
"you vote for my air base, I'll vote for your navy base" pork. They
abandoned their sworn duty because it was just too too traumatic!
If he had nukes, he could do more than "Drown It In The Bathtub".
Yep, the federal deficit is likely to go down. However, state, local, and *personal* deficits are gonna go up! Way up!
This very definitely falls into the category of "be careful what you wish for".
This very definitely falls into the category of "be careful what you wish for".
Enrich
the rich, yes; benefit the rich, I don't think so. How does it benefit
the rich to be citizens of a country that is both bankrupt AND
ungovernable? They seem to have left the "enlightened" off the concept
of "enlightened self-interest".
Taxes
will go up only on the *few remaining* employed people. Income tax is
only collected on income. With no tax base, the tax rates become fairly
meaningless.
12/26/2012 4:24 PM GMT+0700
in reply to this comment
No comments:
Post a Comment