July 4th Tea Party

[quote name='mykevermin']Right. Because it's a personal attack to point out that his initial response, by focusing solely on one type of energy, was therefore incomplete.

I only with the 2008 real values were available. Petrol would skyrocket, and natural gas' growth would be even larger than your chart shows as well.[/QUOTE]

So you still have no real argument of why this bill should be passed?
 
If gas prices skyrocket, we'll see real change on how we view transportation and that can be a good thing.

I'd like to see the highly efficient train come back to replace the automobile. Maybe America might become a community again instead of 300 million assholes trying to get to work on time while talking on their cell phone.
 
[quote name='depascal22']If gas prices skyrocket, we'll see real change on how we view transportation and that can be a good thing.

I'd like to see the highly efficient train come back to replace the automobile. Maybe America might become a community again instead of 300 million assholes trying to get to work on time while talking on their cell phone.[/QUOTE]

How is it a good thing that gas prices go up? All that does is hurt the poor, and the middle class. If gas were to skyrocket, I have a feeling the poor would have a very tough time going to work, or the store to get food. Food prices would skyrocket, and the poor would have trouble being able to keep up with the cost of living.The middle class would also be screwed over, similarly. Ah, but this is all a good thing. Who really cares about the poor, and middle class anyway? What are they going to do? Revolt?
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']How is it a good thing that gas prices go up? All that does is hurt the poor, and the middle class. If gas were to skyrocket, I have a feeling the poor would have a very tough time going to work, or the store to get food. Food prices would skyrocket, and the poor would have trouble being able to keep up with the cost of living.The middle class would also be screwed over, similarly. Ah, but this is all a good thing. Who really cares about the poor, and middle class anyway? What are they going to do? Revolt?[/QUOTE]

It's revolution time, baby! Americans are too lazy to revolt though. Did the Europeans revolt when their gas went over the equivalent of $7 a gallon? No. They started riding bikes, taking the train, and cutting down on wasteful driving. Behavior changed to fit the times.

Yes. It will be rough on the poor and middle class but it's not like the poor are driving several miles to get to work in the first place. Hell, half of the really poor people around me don't have a license in the first place. Too many DUIs. Those people roll around in DUI mobiles aka scooters and do just fine.

People might actually live closer to work and spend more time with their kids. Is that a bad thing? People get to work relaxed and ready for work instead of wound up from a 35 minute drive through hellish downtown traffic. That helps the family and business productivity. Two things I'm sure conservatives should be behind.
 
[quote name='depascal22']It's revolution time, baby! Americans are too lazy to revolt though. Did the Europeans revolt when their gas went over the equivalent of $7 a gallon? No. They started riding bikes, taking the train, and cutting down on wasteful driving. Behavior changed to fit the times.

Yes. It will be rough on the poor and middle class but it's not like the poor are driving several miles to get to work in the first place. Hell, half of the really poor people around me don't have a license in the first place. Too many DUIs. Those people roll around in DUI mobiles aka scooters and do just fine.

People might actually live closer to work and spend more time with their kids. Is that a bad thing? People get to work relaxed and ready for work instead of wound up from a 35 minute drive through hellish downtown traffic. That helps the family and business productivity. Two things I'm sure conservatives should be behind.[/QUOTE]

You know, if things get really bad, its possible there might be a revolution. With the potential of this bill to bankrupt many American families, along with a possible national sales tax, the erosion of rights, these ridiculous bills that might actually pass, (Hate Crimes Bill, No Fly, No Buy Act, The Cyberbullying bill, huge new powers for the Fed, ect.) and the suddenly falling support for Obama, people may actually say, fuck it, I can't stand this anymore, its time for a revolution. The American Revolution started with only around 2% of the population, so it could happen today.
 
[quote name='depascal22']Did the Europeans revolt when their gas went over the equivalent of $7 a gallon? No.[/quote]

We basically have the cheapest gas prices of any country that imports more than it exports. One of the reasons is because the hidden costs of cheap gasoline are well you know hidden.

They started riding bikes, taking the train, and cutting down on wasteful driving. Behavior changed to fit the times.
Click to expand...

The car dependent, gasoline guzzling lifestyle we know today was created/subsidized into being. It is silly to think people will revolt en masse because they have to make some lifestyle changes but I don't think you will have much luck deflating fullmetals fantasies.
 
[quote name='Msut77']The car dependent, gasoline guzzling lifestyle we know today was created/subsidized into being. It is silly to think people will revolt en masse because they have to make some lifestyle changes but I don't think you will have much luck deflating fullmetals fantasies.[/QUOTE]

The government is slowly losing its ability to subsidize that lifestyle.

Once the rubber hits the road and new taxes are required, I'm sure we'll blame somebody for our collective woes. I'm betting on "emmagants".

Why should life be anything but an old Simpsons episode?
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']The government is slowly losing its ability to subsidize that lifestyle.

Once the rubber hits the road and new taxes are required, I'm sure we'll blame somebody for our collective woes. I'm betting on "emmagants".

Why should life be anything but an old Simpsons episode?[/QUOTE]

It was fun while it lasted.
 
[quote name='Msut77']
The car dependent, gasoline guzzling lifestyle we know today was created/subsidized into being. It is silly to think people will revolt en masse because they have to make some lifestyle changes but I don't think you will have much luck deflating fullmetals fantasies.[/QUOTE]
Well, apparently you live in denial. This bill won't just be "some lifestyle changes," it will result in many people losing their current lifestyle, and sinking into complete poverty. In case you don't know, when taxes get high enough, there tends to be revolts. With this bill raising the cost of living, so much, I don't see how there won't be riots, and possible revolution. Look at the French Revolution. The government racked up a huge debt, taxes became way too high, the poor were taxed the most, and they revolted, because they couldn't afford enough food. See any similarities? Look at the American Revolution. The Colonists had no representation, huge taxes, little freedoms, and they revolted. See any similarities?
 
[quote name='Msut77']It was fun while it lasted.[/QUOTE]

The Apocalypse will be fun. Whether it is peak oil, killer virus, zombies, solar flare, Skynet, militant homosexuality, Social Security and Medicare/aid insolvency, President Jenna Bush or politicians telling the truth, there will always be the opportunity for fun.
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']Well, apparently you live in denial.[/quote]

My hats are tinfoil free if that is what you mean.

See any similarities?
Click to expand...

No. But then I am what one would call sane.
 
[quote name='Msut77']My hats are tinfoil free if that is what you mean.



No. But then I am what one would call sane.[/QUOTE]

Oh, so now I'm a conspiracy theorist? Wow.
But I guess this is all the truth: The climate change bill doesn't exist! The American Revolution doesn't exist! The French Revolution doesn't exist! People don't need food to live! There's no such thing as taxes! Energy prices won't go up with this bill! We won't lose any jobs! There will be no global warming because of this bill! We have no debt! There's no such thing as a cost of living! Revolutions are conspiracy theories! Our representatives do everything we want! There is no corruption in our government! There's no gitmo! There's no Hate Crimes Bill, No Fly No Buy Act, or Cyberbullying Bill! Obama's never lied! Politicans never lie! There's no such thing as the Patriot Act! Everyone loves how the government is being run! Everything is perfect! No one would ever want to revolt!
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']Oh, so now I'm a conspiracy theorist? Wow.[/quote]

It is possible you are merely prone to hysteria and don't know all that much about history.
 
[quote name='Msut77']It is possible you are merely prone to hysteria and don't know all that much about history.[/QUOTE]

I don't think you know much about history. You apparently don't know why revolutions happen. Also, you don't actually have a reason why this bill should pass, you just resort to personal attacks. Just like everyone else who is for this bill.
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']I don't think you know much about history.[/quote]

I know plenty about history. I would point out more than you but that isn't much of an achievement.

You apparently don't know why revolutions happen.
Click to expand...

I heard your screeching.

Meanwhile if you weren't a complete know nothing when it comes to history you might have known that tax rates are lower than they were not all that long ago, that the government has been in debt more often than not (and in even worse shape before) or that government corruption isn't new (and that if they didn't revolt during the bush years they ain't gonna revolt now). As for lifestyle changes, people were upset when GM et al. started buying and dismantling streetcars but they didn't revolt.

I ain't even going to touch your ramblings about the American or French Revolution.

you just resort to personal attacks.
Click to expand...

It is not a personal attack to point out that your posts contain more than a soupcon of hysteria and a dash of crazy.
 
[quote name='Msut77']I know plenty about history. I would point out more than you but that isn't much of an achievement.[/quote]

Personal attack.

heard your screeching.

Meanwhile if you weren't a complete know nothing when it comes to history you might have known that tax rates are lower than they were not all that long ago, that the government has been in debt more often than not (and in even worse shape before) or that government corruption isn't new (and that if they didn't revolt during the bush years they ain't gonna revolt now).

I ain't even going to touch your ramblings about the French Revolution.
Click to expand...

Since when has the government been in more debt than now? When has there been more taxes then there will be under this bill? When has government been more corrupt then now? When was the last time there were tea parties, about taxes? When was the last time the government decided that the Constitution doesn't matter?

It is not a personal attack to point out that your posts contain more than a soupcon of hysteria.
Click to expand...
Do you have a reason why this bill should pass? Yes, or no?
 
[quote name='depascal22']If gas prices skyrocket, we'll see real change on how we view transportation and that can be a good thing.

I'd like to see the highly efficient train come back to replace the automobile. Maybe America might become a community again instead of 300 million assholes trying to get to work on time while talking on their cell phone.[/QUOTE]

Why would anyone want their freedom of private transportation taken away? If one likes public transportation then take it, but others don't want the government taking away or restricting through excessive taxation our usage of private transportation.

[quote name='Msut77']snipped[/quote]

Why do you have to use personal attacks in your postings so much msut? A solid argument is able to stand on its own without requiring personal attacks to prop it up. Strengthen your argument instead of blunting it with unnecessary jabs. Using them only makes it appear like you are unable to provide a credible argument, relying on those attacks as your cover.
 
[quote name='Ruined']Why would anyone want their freedom of private transportation taken away? If one likes public transportation then take it, but others don't want the government taking away or restricting through excessive taxation our usage of private transportation.[/QUOTE]

I'm not saying that people want to have private transportation taken away. I'm saying that it will be a good thing for America as a whole if gas prices were so high that people are forced to choose alternatives.

You'll think the same way in 20 years when there are more cars on the road. Most major cities are are already crippled during the morning and evening rush hours. Roads are gridlocked. How is that going to get better if more people drive? The solution is to build more roads.

So it's OK to pump more and more dollars into a system of roads already on the brink of collapse but we shoudn't work on making people use alternatives so we can still use the roads we have now?
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']Personal attack.[/quote]

Not really.

I know quite a bit about history.

You? Very little as seen below.

Since when has the government been in more debt than now?
Click to expand...

As a percentage of GDP? Basically the 40's and some of the 50's.

When has there been more taxes then there will be under this bill
Click to expand...

The highest tax rate in this country used to be 90%, other brackets were higher than they are now as well. The burden did shift a bit to put it mildly, as for "under this bill" there is no doubt your fears are overblown and the costs to lower income people (who you ostensibly are focusing on) are negligible according to what I have read.

When has government been more corrupt then now?
Click to expand...

Ever? Or in American history?

When was the last time there were tea parties, about taxes?
Click to expand...

About taxes without representation or what?
 
[quote name='depascal22']I'm not saying that people want to have private transportation taken away. I'm saying that it will be a good thing for America as a whole if gas prices were so high that people are forced to choose alternatives.

You'll think the same way in 20 years when there are more cars on the road. Most major cities are are already crippled during the morning and evening rush hours. Roads are gridlocked. How is that going to get better if more people drive? The solution is to build more roads.

So it's OK to pump more and more dollars into a system of roads already on the brink of collapse but we shoudn't work on making people use alternatives so we can still use the roads we have now?[/QUOTE]

But, if 20yrs from now the roads actually are so gridlocked and there is so much more traffic to the point that driving is a hassle, people will switch to public transportation naturally because it will be easier and faster.

There is no reason that an artificial attempt to limit peoples freedom through excessive taxation/gas prices needs to be performed. Gas prices need not play a factor in your scenario, the balance will be maintained naturally simply by time & convenience.
 
[quote name='depascal22']I'm not saying that people want to have private transportation taken away. I'm saying that it will be a good thing for America as a whole if gas prices were so high that people are forced to choose alternatives.

You'll think the same way in 20 years when there are more cars on the road. Most major cities are are already crippled during the morning and evening rush hours. Roads are gridlocked. How is that going to get better if more people drive? The solution is to build more roads.

So it's OK to pump more and more dollars into a system of roads already on the brink of collapse but we shoudn't work on making people use alternatives so we can still use the roads we have now?[/QUOTE]

I don't think Ruined understands what it means when people point out the fact that the lifestyle we have now was basically a creation of the government for good and for bad.

This isn't so much about "teh gubberment" taking things away as it is times changing and priorities.
 
[quote name='Msut77']Not really.

I know quite a bit about history.

You? Very little as seen below.



As a percentage of GDP? Basically the 40's and some of the 50's.[/QUOTE]

I never said debt as a percentage of GDP. If you look at our total debt, even with inflation, it is the highest it has ever been. If you look at how much debt there is per person, it is the highest it has ever been.

The highest tax rate in this country used to be 90%, other brackets were higher than they are now as well. The burden did shift a bit to put it mildly, as for "under this bill" there is no doubt your fears are overblown and the costs to lower income people (who you ostensibly are focusing on) are negligible according to what I have read.
Click to expand...
As for taxes, I am talking about the overall tax burden on everyone. This bill would raise the cost of energy by 60%. This would then cause the price of almost everything to go up by a similar amount, because almost everything uses a fuel that emits carbon. If you think a 60% increase in prices is negligible, wow.

Ever? Or in American history?
Click to expand...
Your choice.
About taxes without representation or what?
Click to expand...
No, about the fact that people were pissed off about raising taxes. Although, its not like we have very good representation these days anyway...
 
[quote name='Ruined']But, if 20yrs from now the roads actually are so gridlocked and there is so much more traffic to the point that driving is a hassle, people will switch to public transportation naturally because it will be easier and faster.

There is no reason that an artificial attempt to limit peoples freedom through excessive taxation/gas prices needs to be performed. Gas prices need not play a factor in your scenario, the balance will be maintained naturally simply by time & convenience.[/QUOTE]

So what happens when people are fed up 20 years from now and demand public transportation? The government will throw up their hands and say it'll take at least 20 years to get everything up and running. Maybe we should've done something about this a long time ago.

Here's one example. Solar panels have been proven to lower utility costs and provide clean renewable energy. There's really no reason why every house in America doesn't have a set but what do we see now? People would rather pay for power because it's easy and there's no initial investment other than a security deposit if you have bad credit. When will people switch over? It's already convenient and cost effective.

You think this bill might force people to look at solar or wind and decide to not pay the man for power? Shouldn't conservatives be behind the move to make America self-reliant? I just don't get you guys.
 
[quote name='depascal22']So what happens when people are fed up 20 years from now and demand public transportation? The government will throw up their hands and say it'll take at least 20 years to get everything up and running. Maybe we should've done something about this a long time ago.

Here's one example. Solar panels have been proven to lower utility costs and provide clean renewable energy. There's really no reason why every house in America doesn't have a set but what do we see now? People would rather pay for power because it's easy and there's no initial investment other than a security deposit if you have bad credit. When will people switch over? It's already convenient and cost effective.[/QUOTE]

Solar panels cost a large amount of money, and take a long time to pay back their initial investment, right now. However, where we have come in 20 years in solar development is amazing. Maybe, when the price goes lower, solar panels will be a better option.
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']I never said debt as a percentage of GDP.[/quote]

That is generally the way these things are measured.

Otherwise you end up with "Back in my day bread cost a nickel" style comparisons.

I am talking about the overall tax burden on everyone.
Click to expand...

Again it isn't significantly higher either way and in some cases lower. As for the costs of the energy bill (you are intentionally confusing the differences between taxes and costs having to be paid for anyway just like some do with healthcare) they aren't much for lower income people and there is a lot in the way of benefits.

Your choice.
Click to expand...

This ought to be fun.

No, about the fact that people were pissed off about raising taxes.
Click to expand...

You think taxes were the main thing and the "no representation" part was what exactly?
 
[quote name='Msut77']That is generally the way these things are measured.

Otherwise you end up with "Back in my day bread cost a nickel" style comparisons.[/quote]

That's why you adjust for inflation.

Again it isn't significantly higher either way and in some cases lower. As for the costs of the energy bill (you are intentionally confusing the differences between taxes and costs having to be paid for anyway just like some do with healthcare) they aren't much for lower income people and there is a lot in the way of benefits.
Click to expand...

Its a "stealth tax." Almost everything has a "carbon footprint," and therefore the price would go up. Becoming poorer is not a benefit.

This ought to be fun.



You think taxes were the main thing and the "no representation" part was what exactly?
Click to expand...
You don't understand what I said. I wasn't talking about the Boston Tea Party, so much as I was talking about people gathering in large groups and protesting how high taxes are.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']The Apocalypse will be fun. Whether it is peak oil, killer virus, zombies, solar flare, Skynet, militant homosexuality, Social Security and Medicare/aid insolvency, President Jenna Bush or politicians telling the truth, there will always be the opportunity for fun.[/QUOTE]

Have I mentioned lately how much you add to this board? Seriously.
 
Oh, here's what the head climate guy (although he's not a climatologist, but an astronomer...yes, an astronomer is in charge of our temperature measurement and analysis in this country) thinks about the pile that 219 of our esteemed jerkwads voted for:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-james-hansen/g-8-failure-reflects-us-f_b_228597.html

The fact is that the climate course set by Waxman-Markey is a disaster course. Their bill is an astoundingly inefficient way to get a tiny reduction of emissions. It's less than worthless
Click to expand...

If you don't know, this guy is an extremist on this issue, calling coal trains "death trains" and testifying in defense of British vandals who did thousands of pounds of damage to a new coal-fired power plant in the U.K. He was also recently arrested protesting coal mining methods in West Virginia. But of course he's a neutral scientist when it comes to the temperature data and analysis that "proves" global warming, or climate change, or whatever we're calling it this year. :roll:
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']That's why you adjust for inflation.[/quote]

There is quite a bit more to it than that. If you want it to be apples to apples (which you probably don't).

You don't understand what I said. I wasn't talking about the Boston Tea Party, so much as I was talking about people gathering in large groups and protesting how high taxes are.
Click to expand...

You compared it to the Boston Tea Party earlier and that is what the 'baggers are aping. Now you just look like you are trying to wriggle out of your past words.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Msut77']There is quite a bit more to it than that. If you want it to be apples to apples (which you probably don't).[/quote]
Yeah, there's in increase in GDP, so the debt is supposed to increase, or something like that. The thing is, today there is more debt per person, adjusted for inflation than then. Plus we have all these unfunded obligations, which someday are going to need to be payed. When you add those in, we end up owing much more than the national debt. During the 40s we had no where near as many of those unfunded obligations. Also, back in the 40s we actually payed off our debt. Now, we need the Federal Income Tax just to pay off interest on the debt. Then you look at how we ended up with the debt, and you see that today, it is for wasteful projects, and wars that we fight for no real reason, while in the 1940s it was created because of the war, and new deal.


You compared it to the Boston Tea Party earlier and that is what the 'baggers are aping. Now you just look like you are trying to wriggle out of your past words.
Click to expand...
I said, when was the last time people had tea parties to protest taxes, or something similar.) What else am I suppose to call the gatherings, instead of tea parties? That's what they are known as.

Also, I'd just like to know. Do you have any reason why the Waxmen-Markey bill should pass?
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']The thing is, today there is more debt per person, adjusted for inflation than then.[/quote]

Again there is much more to it than that.

Then you look at how we ended up with the debt, and you see that today, it is for wasteful projects, and wars that we fight for no real reason
Click to expand...

I am not going to say that isn't a part of it but the reason why we have so much of a deficit/debt is that Cons actually believe in a "starve the beast" strategy and it became fashionable not to have to pay for shit.

I said, when was the last time people had tea parties to protest taxes, or something similar
Click to expand...

You did make reference to the actual tea party, I don't consider the 'baggers protesting anything coherent instead they seem to focus on Obama's birth certificate and other nonsense.
 
[quote name='Msut77']Again there is much more to it than that.



I am not going to say that isn't a part of it but the reason why we have so much of a deficit/debt is that Cons actually believe in a "starve the beast" strategy and it became fashionable not to have to pay for shit.[/QUOTE]
Oh, so its all the Conservatives fault? No, its the democrats, and the republicians. Neither of them know how to manage money at all. The repubs borrow and spend, and the democrats tax and spend.


You did make reference to the actual tea party, I don't consider the 'baggers protesting anything coherent instead they seem to focus on Obama's birth certificate and other nonsense.
Click to expand...
Oh, so the people who go to these tea parties all think Obama wasn't born here? Really? That's some stereotyping right there.

BTW, I'm going to ask you again. Why is it that this Waxman-Markey bill should pass?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']Oh, so its all the Conservative's fault?[/quote]

Not "all" just most of it.

Oh, so the people who go to these tea parties think about wasn't born here
Click to expand...

Anyone care to translate?
 
[quote name='Msut77']Not "all" just most of it.



Anyone care to translate?[/QUOTE]

I should probably stop writing anything on my ipod touch. Its always screwing things up.

Edit: All fixed.
 
[quote name='Msut77']Not "all" just most of it.
[/QUOTE]
That's like someone who killed someone with a friend saying, "well, I only stabbed him 5 times, and my friend stabbed him 7, so, uh....., I didn't really kill him. It was the other guy."
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']That's like someone who killed someone with a friend saying, "well, I only stabbed him 5 times, and my friend stabbed him 7, so, uh....., I didn't really kill him. It was the other guy."[/QUOTE]

That is exactly what it isn't like.

so the people who go to these tea parties all think Obama wasn't born here?
Click to expand...

That is what many of them think, the stated reasons don't really hold water as seen above.
 
[quote name='Msut77']That is exactly what it isn't like.



That is what many of them think, the stated reasons don't really hold water as seen above.[/QUOTE]
You're ridiculous. You're another one of these people who think Democrats good:bow:, Republicans bad:evil:. I bet you still think Obama is going to bring "Change." In reality, both of the parties don't care about you, they only care about themselves. Now, are you ever going to answer my question? Why should this Waxman-Markey Bill pass?
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']You're ridiculous.[/quote]

I am knowledgeable.

You're another one of these people who think Democrats...
Click to expand...

No.

I have been around long enough to have been disappointed by the Democratic party numerous times so you can go ahead and cram that BS. However in this case it happens to be undeniably the reality.
 
[quote name='Msut77']I am knowledgeable.



No.

I have been around long enough to have been disappointed by the Democratic party numerous times so you can go ahead and cram that BS. However in this case it happens to be undeniably the reality.[/QUOTE]
Oh, really? Then why are you constantly saying Conservatives and Republicians are murderous, crazy lunatics?
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']Then why are you constantly saying Conservatives and Republicians are murderous, crazy lunatics?[/QUOTE]

Well the ones who are figureheads for the movement and even some of their elected officials are a collection of (for lack of a better word) bugfuck insane people who constantly demonize liberals as treasonous subhuman commie-terrorist enablers.

From Glenn Beck inventing concentration camps for Republicans out of whole clothe to Rush Limbaugh basically wishing for a coup and Michelle Bachmann calling entire swathes of the country anti-american the list is unending.

What I have said constantly is that many buy into it and it is hardly surprising some of those in the movement act on what they are told.

BTW I take this an admission you are not going to even pretend to argue that there is anything resembling equal blame for the deficit/debt.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Msut77']
BTW I take this an admission you are not going to even pretend to argue that there is anything resembling equal blame for the deficit/debt.[/QUOTE]
No, I will. Let's start off with the bailouts. Whose idea was it to create the bailouts? The Democrats. Who signed it into law? A Republican.
There's around 3 trillion:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123851108664173877.html
The War On Terror, which was started by the Republicans, and continued by the Democrats, will cost 3 trillion dollars, just in Iraq:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/07/AR2008030702846.html
These are two recent examples of the Democrats and the Republicans together creating huge debts. With the bailouts could the Republicans together have stopped them? Yes, but they didn't. With the wars in Iraq, and Afghanistan, could the Democrats together have stopped them? Yes, but they didn't. As you can see, both the Democrats, and the Republicans, are both equally responsible for our huge debt. Either of them could have stopped these bills that have created huge debts, but they didn't. The only party who has had a filibuster proof majority is the Democrats, so its not like they couldn't have blocked any major spending bills that would have created huge debts.
 
[quote name='depascal22']So what happens when people are fed up 20 years from now and demand public transportation? The government will throw up their hands and say it'll take at least 20 years to get everything up and running. Maybe we should've done something about this a long time ago.

Here's one example. Solar panels have been proven to lower utility costs and provide clean renewable energy. There's really no reason why every house in America doesn't have a set but what do we see now? People would rather pay for power because it's easy and there's no initial investment other than a security deposit if you have bad credit. When will people switch over? It's already convenient and cost effective.

You think this bill might force people to look at solar or wind and decide to not pay the man for power? Shouldn't conservatives be behind the move to make America self-reliant? I just don't get you guys.[/QUOTE]

Off topic

I don't know if it is true or not, but from what I have heard, building something like a bullet train from San Fran to L.A. is a nightmare because of all the legal battles. Lawyers put it in limbo for a decade or more. Any truth to this?
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']No, I will[/quote]

I doubt it.

Let's start off with the bailouts.
Click to expand...

Let's not. For something like this it would be better to go in chronological order rather than deal with the special circumstances of recent times as Jesse Ventura put it "where Obama has to clean up George W's mess".

Whose idea was it to create the bailouts? The Democrats. Who signed it into law? A Republican.
Click to expand...

I must have missed it where it was purely the Democrats idea to create the bailout.

Also there is a distinction between just having enormous deficit and debt and say creating it with no plan whatsoever to pay it off as a matter of policy.

The War On Terror, which was started by the Republicans, and continued by the Democrats, will cost 3 trillion dollars, just in Iraq:
Click to expand...

I am not saying Democrats are completely clean on this matter but for in many cases their biggest crime was deciding to trust W and crew. Big mistake.

And once again there is a difference between debt/deficit during a war and flat out refusing to pay for any of it. We are the only civilization ever that has cut taxes during a war.

are both equally responsible for our huge debt.
Click to expand...

No. Like I said in the first part of my response, there is no particular (well for you maybe, so lets just say good) reason to focus on just the very recent past and just ignore decades of history and fiscal policy.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Msut77']
Let's not. For something like this it would be better to go in chronological order rather than deal with the special circumstances of recent times as Jesse Ventura put it "where Obama has to clean up George W's mess".[/QUOTE]
Well, considering that we just created over 12.8 trillion in new debt, let's.


I must have missed it where it was purely the Democrats idea to create the bailout.
Click to expand...
Let's see, who introduced the bill? Patrick Kennedy D-RI. Which party were most of the co-sponsors from?
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-1424
Which party's presidential candidate gave a speech on how members of congress should support it? Here's his speech:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Obama_senate_10_01_08.ogg
Also, which party voted overwhelmingly to pass this bailout? Well, you can see for yourself right here:http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll101.xml
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/L...cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=2&vote=00213#top
Here's the answer to all of those questions. The Democrats.
Also, how in the hell did we end up with $12.8 trillion in spending?

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=armOzfkwtCA4&refer=worldwide
As you can see the bulk of the money was spent by the Federal Reserve. Who was that created by? Some Democrats back in 1913.
Also there is a distinction between just having enormous deficit and debt and say creating it with no plan whatsoever to pay it off as a matter of policy.
Click to expand...
I haven't seen any plan to pay off 12.8 trillion. Have you?
I am not saying Democrats are completely clean on this matter but for in many cases their biggest crime was deciding to trust W and crew. Big mistake.

And once again there is a difference between debt/deficit during a war and flat out refusing to pay for any of it. We are the only civilization ever that has cut taxes during a war.


No. Like I said in the first part of my response, there is no particular (well for you maybe, so lets just say good) reason to focus on just the very recent past and just ignore decades of history and fiscal policy.
Click to expand...
Oh, I didn't. Didn't you read the last part of my post? About how the Democrats, at all times, or the Republicans, at many times could have filibustered bad monetary policy, or bills that created large amounts of debt. Then what about the Federal Reserve? Created by Democrats. They print the money, and we have to borrow it from them at interest. We owe the majority of our national debt to the Fed.
Now, I'm not saying all of our problems are the Democrats' fault. They are the fault of the corrupt two party system that lies to get elected. There have been a few honest people who have come out of it in the past 50 years, (John F. Kennedy was probably the last president who actually cared about the people of this country, but of course then he was assassinated.) There are some good people in Congress right now, and there have been a few politicians to actually not be corrupt, and liars in the past few years, but they are heavily outnumbered by the typical Democrats, and Republicans, who say and do anything to get elected, and then do nothing they said they were going to do.
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']Well, considering that we just created over 12.8 trillion in new debt, let's.[/quote]

I saw the other thread.

Have you figured out the difference between spent and pledged yet?

The only reason you choose to ignore history is because you have no argument otherwise.

Also, which party voted overwhelmingly to pass this bailout?
Click to expand...

It was fairly bipartisan.

As you can see the bulk of the money was spent by the Federal Reserve. Who was that created by? Some Democrats back in 1913.
Click to expand...

You are the one arguing to focus purely on the extremely recent past, as I said above it certainly isn't for any honest reasons and only as it suits whatever you think you are arguing.

I haven't seen any plan to pay off 12.8 trillion. Have you?
Click to expand...

I have seen some of his plans to bring down the debt and deficit, some of them even look worthwhile. However this wouldn't be the first time you talk about projections covering very long periods of time and pretend they are anything but.

Oh, I didn't.
Click to expand...

Your use of "Oh____" is getting a little old. Short answer no you didn't.
 
[quote name='Msut77']I saw the other thread.

Have you figured out the difference between spent and pledged yet?[/quote]

Have you seen the video I posted? 8 trillion gone. The rest will be gone soon.
The only reason you choose to ignore history is because you have no argument otherwise.
Click to expand...

I'm not ignoring history, you are saying that I am, and you haven't pointed out these times in history where it was all the Republicans fault.

It was fairly bipartisan.
Click to expand...
Totally

You are the one arguing to focus purely on the extremely recent past, as I said above it certainly isn't for any honest reasons and only as it suits whatever you think you are arguing.
Click to expand...
No, I'm not arguing about only the present time, I just brought up the recent instantces of government spending crazy amounts of money. You however have no examples, past or present.


I have seen some of his plans to bring down the debt and deficit, some of them even look worthwhile. However this wouldn't be the first time you talk about projections covering very long periods of time and pretend they are anything but.
Click to expand...
Could you please link to these plans? I'd love to see them.



Your use of "Oh____" is getting a little old. Short answer no you didn't.
Click to expand...

Oh shit! My use of Oh has pissed off msut. Oh shit! Oh well, who cares.
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']I'm not ignoring history[/quote]

That is exactly what you are doing and it is blindingly obvious why.

you haven't pointed out these times in history where it was all the Republicans fault.
Click to expand...

And to think you sound almost genuinely upset when someone points out you don't know all that much about history.

You can do a google search for something like "national debt by president" and get charts showing when debts rose and when they fell. Under Reagan and the Bushies debts skyrocketed mostly because of their ideology under Clinton it leveled out. Under Obama it is increasing but then these are interesting times we live in, a lot of the money being spent is the piper finally getting paid so to speak.

Totally
Click to expand...

Enough to say "fairly".

I'm not arguing about only the present time
Click to expand...

I have noticed that you brought up the founding of the federal reserve when you think it suited whatever you think you are arguing.

Could you please link to these plans?
Click to expand...

This is another example of something you could have found out through a quick search, one thing I am pretty sure I have pointed out is that healthcare reform usually cited as a cost can actually be a big step in deficit reduction since healthcare costs are a major factor in what is spent (a big part of) of the something like 33 Trillion over the next decade according to the CBO.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']I don't see any links.[/QUOTE]

I told you among other things what would you need to do a proper google search.

Your fingers obviously aren't broken so what is your excuse?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top