Royal Gossip
June 27, 2017, 01:10:34 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 ... 18   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: US political news II  (Read 32244 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #20 on: November 27, 2012, 03:23:14 pm »

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-kuttner/fiscal-cliff_b_2189593.html

Quote
As President Obama gets closer to making his deal with the Republicans on the budget, the most important thing to keep in mind is that the fiscal cliff is an artificially contrived trap. Were it not for the two Bush wars and the two Bush tax cuts and the House Republican games of brinksmanship with the routine extension of the debt ceiling, there would be no "fiscal cliff."

Rather, there would be a normal, relatively short-term increase in the deficit resulting from a deep recession and the drop in government revenues that it produces. When the economy recovered, the deficit would return to sustainable levels. In the meantime, these deficits are necessary and useful to maintain public spending as a tonic to the economy.

In addition, there are two entirely extraneous questions that do not belong in this debate -- whether Social Security requires any long-term adjustment to assure its solvency, and if so, what kind; and how to restrain the long-term growth in Medicare spending.

In fact, if we get can get back to full employment, there is no Social Security crisis, because Social Security is financed by taxes on payrolls. In the Clinton era, when we had full employment, the crisis kept receding. If we want a little extra insurance, we can lift the cap on income subject to payroll taxes.

Quote
The strategy of the right-wing has been to blur these several distinct issues into a single grand fiscal crisis, the better to reduce government spending and especially to cut Social Security and Medicare. The right-wing, in this case, is a two-headed beast. The Republican right-wing is mainly interested in defending tax cuts for the rich and reducing social spending generally, while the deficit hawks of the center-right want to achieve budget balance and weaken Social Security and Medicare. And since Social Security and Medicare are phenomenally popular, so much the better for the Republicans if they can trick the Democrats into sharing responsibility for the deed.

A further piece of mischief is the premise that we somehow need a 10-year budget deal that reduces the projected deficit by something like $4 to $5 trillion. We don't. What we need is an economic recovery. If we get a recovery with something close to full employment, the deficit naturally comes down as revenues to and current levels of public spending are entirely sustainable -- especially if we go back to the pre-Bush tax levels on the wealthy.
Quote
The Republicans have been tying themselves in knots in order to find other sources of additional revenue to plug the budget gap so that they can keep their pledge to Grover Norquist never to increase tax rates. (Funny how the Norquist pledge is a one-way ratchet. Republicans can vote to cut tax rates on the premise that the economy needs the temporary stimulus, but then if they vote to restore the old rates they are in violation of the pledge. You can see where this leads.)

But there is just not enough money for this budget deal unless a rate hike on the rich is part of the package. Restoring the pre-Bush tax rates on the top 2 percent would raise about $1.2 trillion over a decade. Raising capital gains rates to those of ordinary income and closing other loopholes that benefited mainly the wealthy would raise at most less than another trillion.

The Republicans are letting an unelected shyster run the show for them but in the end the entire party will pay for being misguided.

Logged
Yooper
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11112


Moderator


« Reply #21 on: November 27, 2012, 11:32:42 pm »

There's no doubt about it.  The Republicans, and keep in mind I am a moderate independent, will be demonized no matter what they do.  They are already giving in as much as their constituents require but they will still be the easy scapegoat when this plan falls flat on its face.  Anybody watch the stock market recently?  I say let Obama have everything he wants and wait for the fallout.  Then let the chips fall where they should.

And, O can make all the control freak moves he wants as far as off-shore money goes, but that ship has sailed.  There is absolutely nothing he can do about purchases of property outside of the US or GOLD.  Nothing.  And that's what the big boys and girls have already done.  So, the way it's going to work out is that those who have the money will, as Akasha clearly pointed out, have nothing for which to ask.  These people didn't get where they are by being stupid.  That's the government's blogged down method.

As for fundraising and Christian charity, I have been in this business for over 25 years and do not feel like wasting one second defending my knowledge on this or trying to educate anyone on how philanthropy works.  You either get it and have been in the trenches or you make sweeping, under-educated pronouncements.  The fact of the matter is, no one can give if they don't have it or can afford to risk their investments for their own families. 

The top givers are, by far the majority, people who came from nothing and worked and earned every dime they have and give based on a variety of reasons. They are from every religious group or no religious affiliation.  It's about passion. But, what is and will continue to happen is that giving will decrease.  It won't disappear, not yet, but it will be felt and felt hard because of simple economics within the next 1+ years until wiser heads prevail.  It doesn't take a genius to figure out that if I choose the same level of giving, say to stem cell research, as I did last year, based on the upcoming tax deferred models, I will not have enough in my own household budget to pay my other taxes.  It just doesn't work. 
Logged


\"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.\"  Thomas Jefferson
Kuei Fei
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 35551


Moderator/I'm so royal I piss blue


WWW
« Reply #22 on: November 27, 2012, 11:52:12 pm »

Quote
And, O can make all the control freak moves he wants as far as off-shore money goes, but that ship has sailed.  There is absolutely nothing he can do about purchases of property outside of the US or GOLD.  Nothing.  And that's what the big boys and girls have already done.  So, the way it's going to work out is that those who have the money will, as Akasha clearly pointed out, have nothing for which to ask.These people didn't get where they are by being stupid.  That's the government's blogged down method.

I wish people would remember that; after all, these business people are not celebs who relied on a series of lucky breaks. They worked like fiends and used every brain cell they have to end up making their businesses work and work well. Second, these massive fortunes were built because of high intelligence and sense.
Logged

To receive regular news, go to "@gossippsychotic" to get updates from various other gossip websites such as "Downtown Chatter" or "Royal Gossip Psychotic" and end up reading all about all sorts of peccadilloes.
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #23 on: November 28, 2012, 01:42:30 am »

More of those people inherited their wealth and if they have no loyalty to the nation that made them and their companies wealthy then take their USA company logo away from them and have them put whatever country they are producing in as their new logo.

Yes they won't do that because the USA still has one of the best economies around.

One does not have to know the ins and outs of the charity organizations to understand that giving should come from the heart. People have been charitable since the beginning of time and charity will always be around. The charities that pay people large salaries instead of utilizing more volunteers will probably fail but then it is charity no more but a business.

The stock market used to be a good gauge for the economy but it hasn't been for a couple of decades now because it is filled with to many speculators instead of real traders.
Logged
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #24 on: November 28, 2012, 05:50:03 am »

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/361086/US-deadlock-hits-markets-in-Asia/

Quote
A high-ranking member of the US Senate unnerved investors and sent Wall Street lower on Tuesday after expressing frustration over the budget impasse and the looming "fiscal cliff".

Japan's Nikkei 225 index fell 0.8% to 9,348.55, a day after closing at a seven-month high. South Korea's Kospi shed 0.8% to 1,909.56 and Australia's S&P/ASX 200 lost 0.5% to 4,434.90. Hong Kong's Hang Seng fell 0.8% to 21,672.98.

Mr Obama plans to make a public case this week for his strategy for dealing with the issue as he pressures opposing politicians to allow tax increases on the wealthy while extending tax cuts for families earning 250,000 US dollars or less.

I think the Republicans had better realize that Grover Norquist is an opportunistic shyster before he sinks the party chances in the 2014 elections. Stop playing all these political games and do what needs to be done for the good of the USA.

Increased revenue and spending cuts in the right places are both needed. The wealthy are the only people with the extra revenue. The party is over and now it is time to pay the piper.    Kiss

My taxes will be increased also but I am not going to whine about it because it is a necessity.

Did they all really think that the party would go on forever?
« Last Edit: November 28, 2012, 05:53:02 am by Snokitty » Logged
Yooper
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11112


Moderator


« Reply #25 on: November 28, 2012, 06:01:31 pm »

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-11-28/obama-to-meet-romney-tomorrow-amid-fiscal-cliff-talks

Quote
President Barack Obama plans a private lunch tomorrow with his election opponent Mitt Romney, amid a face-off with congressional Republicans over taxes and spending and how to cut the deficit.

Obama made no mention of his lunch with Romney when talking today about negotiations with Congress. While in Washington, Romney also plans to meet with his former running mate, Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin.

No press.  Smart move.

Quote
“If we get this wrong, the economy’s going to go south,” the president said in an appearance on the White House grounds with a group of people who responded to a White House e-mail solicitation to describe how a tax increase would affect them.

No kidding.  Really?

Hopefully, differences aside, this is a full-frontal realization that working together is the only way to get some common sense on the front burner.  Still wish O would consider Romney for Secretary of the Treasury.  Maybe, just maybe, Obama is realizing he really has no experience in business; he's good at other things, but he needs all the help he can get with this.

Stocks recovered some losses today based on this discussion and hope that there will be serious compromise and to put party affiliations in the vertical file.  We HAVE to.

Logged


\"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.\"  Thomas Jefferson
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #26 on: November 29, 2012, 12:56:54 am »

I agree they must all work together.

I disagree with allowing Mitt into any government position.
Logged
Yooper
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11112


Moderator


« Reply #27 on: November 29, 2012, 06:25:12 am »

http://money.msn.com/investing/the-19-richest-members-of-congress

Quote
Pocketbook issues

The personal wealth of members of Congress increased by more than 5% between 2007 and 2010, on a collective basis, even as median household net worth in the United States dropped by 39%.

The wealthiest lawmakers saw their net worth rise by more than 14%, according to The Washington Post, which recently examined politicians' finances.

Key findings from The Post:

The number of millionaires in Congress dropped in the wake of the Great Recession; the 253 who have served during the current session represent the fewest since 2004. But the total population of millionaires is likely to be underestimated because lawmakers are not required to list their homes among their assets.

Between 2004 and 2010, 72 lawmakers appeared to have doubled their estimated wealth.

At least 150 lawmakers reported receiving more income from outside jobs and investments than from their congressional salaries of $174,000 for rank-and-file members.

Representatives in 2010 had a median estimated wealth of $746,000; for senators, it was $2.6 million.

Since 2004, lawmakers reported more than 3,500 outside jobs paying their spouses more than $1,000 a year. Members of Congress are not required to report how much the spouses are paid or how they earned the money.

Two Words:  Term limits.  Bunch of crooks; all of 'em.  Good comments, tho, and am glad to see that some folks are understanding how ill-equipped Washington is understanding what an 'average American' IS.  And they're approx. 60% Democrat, so the liberals can just eat this one.  There oughta be a law against Feinstein, speaking as a Californian. 
Logged


\"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.\"  Thomas Jefferson
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #28 on: November 29, 2012, 07:03:41 am »

I agree with term limits. It was never meant to be a career but more a service to the country and then one moves on and lets someone else serve in the same capacity. Term limits would not only stop them from being bought by special interests (both parties have them) but it would also bring in fresh ideas from the newcomers.

A few decades ago the Democrats were the big problem and now it has become the Republicans. The USA needs for more than two parties to have a chance at winning. The two main parties have passed rules and laws making it almost impossible for them to be unseated.
Logged
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #29 on: November 29, 2012, 11:38:34 pm »

http://news.yahoo.com/interactive-white-house-secession-petitions-and-presidential-power-235012490.html
Quote
Since President Barack Obama won reelection, the White House website for citizen petitions has received secession requests from all 50 states. In the case of Texas, more than 100,000 people have endured the inconvenience of entering their name and email address in order to support the state’s bid for autonomy. Apparently, in a sign of Americans’ growing distaste for physical activity, 2012 is the year when people stopped threatening to move to a foreign country if their candidate lost the presidency. Instead, they want foreign countries to move to them.

Quote
The petition website, called We the People, is not very useful as a guide to what Americans really care about. But it is useful as a guide to how people think of what the government can do, down to the specific words the authors use in the petitions.

Of the 300 most recent petitions, only three request that the government "protect" something—states rights, email privacy, the planet—while seven request that it "recognize" something—same-sex marriage, *despise* groups, and so forth. Dozens ask that Obama "grant" or "allow" a certain privilege, while only a few suggest he "ban" an action or "prevent" an outcome.

The interactive below arranges the petitions into a tree structure by the principal verb in the title. When you click a blue dot, the tree expands to show all the petitions that begin with that verb. You can mouse over those branches to see the original wording of the petition and search for any word you like by typing a phrase into the box at the top.
Quote
Bigfoot aside, most of the petitions on the site are earnest. This does not mean they are all sane. About 37,000 people have signed a petition suggesting that it be illegal to offend the prophets of major religions. Another petition demands recognition that Israel is responsible for 9/11—that one with only some 600 signatories.

But many present very good ideas. There’s one for reforming the Electoral College and another that suggests all scientific papers based on taxpayer-funded research should be freely accessible online.

If there is one binding force behind the petitions, it is that most of them request that Obama intercede in matters that he has no authority over or rightful business meddling with, regardless of where one comes down on the subject of big government. While the site is technically designed to lobby the government, most petitions appear personally directed at Obama.


Quote
Secession always seemed to me to be something that, by definition, you did without asking permission. (Mutual breakups are as rare in history as they are in love.) But for all the rampant anti-government sentiment in America, many people still believe the president is an omnipotent force who can pass laws on a dime, ban unsavory behavior, manipulate foreign countries with precision, expel citizens at will and otherwise bend the world to his fancy.

This does not mean people love the government. We know they do not. But they still want it to fix their problems with as little trouble as possible.

I think one's local and state governments should be held accountable for the problems within a state and unemployment is a problem in some states. The reason it is not a problem in all states is because some of them have elected the right people instead of a certain party.
Logged
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #30 on: December 01, 2012, 06:19:00 pm »

http://www.politicususa.com/republican-obsession-obstructing-obama-endangering-country.html

Quote
The spectrum of behaviors characterized by abnormal mental or behavioral patterns manifest as violations of normalcy, including a person becoming a danger to others, is a broad definition of insanity. Albert Einstein defined insanity as “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results,” and his definition aptly describes the Republican Party for the past thirty years. However, since President Obama won re-election three weeks ago, members of the GOP in Congress have gone off the rails, and the consequences to the government, and 98% of the people, represents a clear danger to the nation’s fragile economic recovery. Even though the election proved voters rejected Republican obstructionism and loyalty to the wealthy, they are digging in their heels and threatening tactics they used over the past four years as if the people demanded they continue making government unmanageable.

When S&P downgraded the country’s credit rating last year, they said “America’s governance was becoming less stable, less effective, and less predictable,” and blamed Republicans for using “the statutory debt ceiling and the threat of default as political bargaining chips to resist any measure that would raise revenues.” S&P recognized that sequestration leading to the so-called fiscal cliff was “a fallback mechanism designed to encourage Congress to embrace a more balanced approach to deficit reduction,” but they understood Republicans were intent on letting the “2001 and 2003 tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012, remain in place.” The Republican proposals beginning the day after the election informed that S&P recognized what many Americans have witnessed for the past four years and that is the Republicans will continue obstructing any attempt to increase revenue that includes raising taxes on the rich. In fact, they are still pushing Romney’s tax plan for fiscal cliff negotiations that include reducing tax rates for the wealthy and closing tax loopholes for the middle class.
Quote
There are signs that some Republicans realize the election was a repudiation of Republicans and their persistent obstructionism and refusal to help all Americans, but the majority are still of the mindset that preventing economic progress will “make President Obama a one-term President.” The Republican hatred of President Obama transcends economic policy and permeates their entire reason for living. The recent statements by some Senate Republicans that they will not confirm anyone the President nominates to replace Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State has nothing to do with the Benghazi attack that killed four Americans and everything to do obstructing President Obama. Their opposition to any Administration proposal is not founded in sound economic or foreign policies, but their insane obsession with preventing the President from working for the American people.
Quote
Their obsession with protecting the rich is more than just a form of mental illness; it is hazardous to this country’s economic health the American people cannot survive as long as they continue making governance less stable and effective.

President Obama gave Republicans a proposal that cuts the deficit, cuts spending, creates jobs through infrastructure improvements, and preserves tax cuts for 98% of the population and 97% of small businesses. Republicans countered with Romney’s austerity plan and greater tax cuts for the wealthy, and they show no signs of relenting despite the looming fiscal cliff. Americans cannot tolerate another four years of Republican obstructionism just to benefit 2% of the population, or Draconian cuts to social safety nets that tens-of-millions of Americans depend on for basic survival. It has come to the point that Republicans are not doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results, because they are doing the same thing they have for the past four years and expect the same results of making governance impossible, and unfortunately for America, their insane obsession with obstructing the President is a danger to economic recovery and 98% of the population.
Logged
Yooper
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11112


Moderator


« Reply #31 on: December 02, 2012, 06:59:43 pm »

Today, the President marks the 57th anniversary of Rosa Parks (an amazing woman) refusing to give up her seat on the bus with a picture of...himself.

https://twitter.com/whitehouse/statuses/274999871432454144?tw_i=274999871432454144&tw_e=media&tw_p=tweetembed
Logged


\"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.\"  Thomas Jefferson
Snokitty
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 6377



« Reply #32 on: December 02, 2012, 07:43:39 pm »

Good photo it shows how far Black people have come in the USA from the days of Rosa Parks.

A nice concept even though I am afraid racism will survive for many more decades in the USA.
Logged
HC
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1625



« Reply #33 on: December 02, 2012, 08:20:06 pm »

The story of Rosa Parks makes me cry. Just shows how grand a small woman can be.

I've read somewhere that Obama is a descendant of the first slave in USA.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/07/31/media_overjoyed_genealogists_link_obama_to_the_first_slave_but_they_can_t_prove_it
Logged
Yooper
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11112


Moderator


« Reply #34 on: December 03, 2012, 08:17:59 pm »

^So they say.  On his mother's side, who is considered caucasian.  I choose to believe that I and anyone else who chooses to do so am a descendant of the first man and woman on earth, which is really amazing.  Drawing attention to 'race' is something I personally do not support.
Logged


\"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.\"  Thomas Jefferson
HC
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1625



« Reply #35 on: December 03, 2012, 08:45:12 pm »

Well
I hope You don't think I draw attention to race. I am drawing attention to slavery.

I like the idee that the first slave in USA has a descendant as President.
Logged
Yooper
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11112


Moderator


« Reply #36 on: December 03, 2012, 08:49:12 pm »

Not for a moment did I think YOU were doing anything of the kind!
Logged


\"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.\"  Thomas Jefferson
HC
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1625



« Reply #37 on: December 03, 2012, 09:03:17 pm »

Yooper, I'm reliefed  Hi
Logged
YooperModerator
Super Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12881



« Reply #38 on: December 03, 2012, 09:06:12 pm »

Anyone seen forbes mag cover lately? tehe just scroll
http://www.forbes.com/sites/baldwin/2012/11/26/smart-money-strategies-for-obama-2-0/
http://www.forbes.com/special-report/2012/1126_investment-guide.html

Oh sweet irony.... laugh
Logged


\\\"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.\\\"  Thomas Jefferson
Yooper
Princess
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 11112


Moderator


« Reply #39 on: December 03, 2012, 10:48:02 pm »

^What's really funny, Akasha, is if all three gave ALL their money to the gov't it would hold back the current hemorrhage for about 30 minutes. 

Quote
House counter-proposal

Putting the ball back in President Obama's court, House Republicans countered Monday with what they described as a "bold" plan to avert the looming fiscal crisis -- after the White House produced a tax-heavy proposal last week that GOP leaders decried as a "joke."

Answering White House calls to present an "alternative," House Republican leaders unveiled a plan that would agree to $800 billion in "revenue through tax reform" over the next 10 years. It marks a significant step for House Republicans, some of whom opposed such increased revenue before last month's election.

However, the number is half the $1.6 trillion in tax hikes that Obama proposed and Republicans swiftly rejected. And the two sides are likely to continue to butt heads over the issue of an increase in tax rates for the top 2 percent of earners.
 
The White House has insisted on raising those rates next year, while Republicans favor raising revenue instead by closing deductions for top earners and other measures. They reiterated their opposition to tax-rate hikes in the plan Monday.

The administration's latest proposal includes roughly $600 billion in spending cuts. Those cuts, however, would be offset by $200 billion in proposed stimulus and other spending programs. The multi-year stimulus program would include at least $50 billion in fiscal 2013 alone; the administration also wants an extension of unemployment aid. And, in what one House Republican source called a "pipe dream," the administration called for effectively implementing a permanent increase in the debt limit.

Should the White House and Congress fail to reach a deal, a $500 billion mix of tax hikes and austere cutbacks on federal spending will kick in Jan. 1.
Logged


\"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.\"  Thomas Jefferson
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 ... 18   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines | Imprint Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!