First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Neighor

Streator, IL

#1 Dec 31, 2012
All in all, Obama has successfully changed the focus from Debt Reduction to Tax's, and out manipulated the Republicans for sure.

However, I have to admire the Republican tenacity in fighting for Debt Reduction all the way to the last minute.

The Cliff is a win for Obama, as well as a last minute worthless tax increase deal on our most successful citizens.

America is facing a lose/lose outcome either way.

Once Obama gets the $80B from the wealthy,$60B is gone the second the NJ Huricane Relief Bill is signed. <Makes no sense at all....
union

New Lenox, IL

#2 Dec 31, 2012
Neighor wrote:
All in all, Obama has successfully changed the focus from Debt Reduction to Tax's, and out manipulated the Republicans for sure.

However, I have to admire the Republican tenacity in fighting for Debt Reduction all the way to the last minute.

The Cliff is a win for Obama, as well as a last minute worthless tax increase deal on our most successful citizens.

America is facing a lose/lose outcome either way.

Once Obama gets the $80B from the wealthy,$60B is gone the second the NJ Huricane Relief Bill is signed. <Makes no sense at all....
Doesn't the fiscal cliff set in motion a trillion dollars in spending cuts? Isn't that what the republicans want? Spending cuts? So what's the problem?
Neighbor

Western Springs, IL

#3 Dec 31, 2012
Union? Actually no. You may be referrig to the $1T reduction in future spending that Obama take credit for from last year. As in, across the ext 1 years, we ill spend $1T less than we planned to spendkind'a promise. Smell the loop hole?

You & I both are & have been lied to by both parties. Unfortunately,real spending cuts have to be put in place, and fast. The cliff is "real" cuts and now. Had pill to swallow I know.

BTW: I listened to a guy who recently wrote a book on today's Unions. Did you know 67% of Union members never "voted" to join a Union? They got the job & hnad to join/pay dues. <I found that interesting. He went into how many members disagree with where Union Leaders spend their dues too. It was very interesting how members actually get no say in (for example) which politicians get support money, and this support has no input from the dues paying member. Interesting.
Neighbor

Western Springs, IL

#4 Dec 31, 2012
Wow...Bad keyboard again... "Obama takes credit for.... As in, across the next 10 years we will spend $1T less...."
union

New Lenox, IL

#5 Dec 31, 2012
Neighbor wrote:
Union? Actually no. You may be referrig to the $1T reduction in future spending that Obama take credit for from last year. As in, across the ext 1 years, we ill spend $1T less than we planned to spendkind'a promise. Smell the loop hole?

You & I both are & have been lied to by both parties. Unfortunately,real spending cuts have to be put in place, and fast. The cliff is "real" cuts and now. Had pill to swallow I know.

BTW: I listened to a guy who recently wrote a book on today's Unions. Did you know 67% of Union members never "voted" to join a Union? They got the job & hnad to join/pay dues. <I found that interesting. He went into how many members disagree with where Union Leaders spend their dues too. It was very interesting how members actually get no say in (for example) which politicians get support money, and this support has no input from the dues paying member. Interesting.
That is not true...when you get a job that has a Union, Federal Law states that the person MUST sign a Union Card in order to be in the Union...if they refuse to sign, they are considered Gait Share members and only the amount of dues that go to the operation of the Union And enforcement of contract is what they have to pay...so you see, they do have a choice....now there can be a debate over whether paying dues or paying nothing....but they do have a choice in joining a Union.

As for what money goes to candidates...you are partially correct, the PAC fund contributes to different candidates that pass whatever criteria the PAC fund sets up....however, any Union Member can bring up at Union Meetings that certain candidates or office holders do not reflect the views of the Union as a whole and can motion to stop funding them....but I grant you, this does not happen very often...and most of the time the PAC officials have final say.

By the way, most Corporations have PAC's and employees also have very little if no say at all where that's way goes. Also true of the customers. But I digress on that.

If you have never been in a union, there are a lot of misconceptions...the members have a lot of say in the Union, anyone can run for office, everyone has a vote, anyone can vote for whoever they want....it is a very democratic process....I grant you that in very large Unions, there were Mob ties and all that way back when....but I think we all know that is a by-gone era.
union

New Lenox, IL

#6 Dec 31, 2012
union wrote:
<quoted text>That is not true...when you get a job that has a Union, Federal Law states that the person MUST sign a Union Card in order to be in the Union...if they refuse to sign, they are considered Gait Share members and only the amount of dues that go to the operation of the Union And enforcement of contract is what they have to pay...so you see, they do have a choice....now there can be a debate over whether paying dues or paying nothing....but they do have a choice in joining a Union.

As for what money goes to candidates...you are partially correct, the PAC fund contributes to different candidates that pass whatever criteria the PAC fund sets up....however, any Union Member can bring up at Union Meetings that certain candidates or office holders do not reflect the views of the Union as a whole and can motion to stop funding them....but I grant you, this does not happen very often...and most of the time the PAC officials have final say.

By the way, most Corporations have PAC's and employees also have very little if no say at all where that's way goes. Also true of the customers. But I digress on that.

If you have never been in a union, there are a lot of misconceptions...the members have a lot of say in the Union, anyone can run for office, everyone has a vote, anyone can vote for whoever they want....it is a very democratic process....I grant you that in very large Unions, there were Mob ties and all that way back when....but I think we all know that is a by-gone era.
Fair Share members.
non union

Mokena, IL

#7 Jan 1, 2013
keep drinking the cool aid Union. Your a good little follower they have done a good job brain washing. Unions have a purpose, to give LOT's of $ to the heads. Documented very well. the regular Union slug sits at home collecting unemployment while others (non union) work. yes at a lower wage. However like many you can pay non union less by deducting union dues from scale and add a bit more. net net same pay.
Unincorporated

Frankfort, IL

#8 Jan 1, 2013
union wrote:
<quoted text>
Doesn't the fiscal cliff set in motion a trillion dollars in spending cuts? Isn't that what the republicans want? Spending cuts? So what's the problem?
This thread is turning into another union/no union bashfest. The cuts Zero has talked about occur over 10 years. So that's $100 billion a year, right? We are running $1.3 trillion dollar deficits. So instead we will run $1.2 trillion dollar deficits. It is a scam and not even a drop in the bucket of cash we need to fix our financial house. Zero demagogues on EVERY talking point he comes up with. This isn't leadership. A leader does not gloat.

"Keep in mind that just last month Republicans in Congress said they would never agree to raise tax rates on the wealthiest Americans. Obviously, the agreement that's currently being discussed would raise those rates and raise them permanently," he said to applause before the Senate deal was sealed.

Obama's words and tone annoyed Republican lawmakers who seemed to feel that the Democrat was gloating.

The whole article: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/01/us-...
Neighbor

Streator, IL

#9 Jan 1, 2013
Total agreement UNI. I have "never" seen a POTUS taunt like he does. Does he realize a majority of the country disagrees with tax increase no spend decrease? Sure, but his ego will not refrain him.

I sincerely hope the House Vote is NO!
Quit Crying

Frankfort, IL

#10 Jan 1, 2013
Neighbor wrote:
Total agreement UNI. I have "never" seen a POTUS taunt like he does. Does he realize a majority of the country disagrees with tax increase no spend decrease? Sure, but his ego will not refrain him.
I sincerely hope the House Vote is NO!
Obama won the election. Taxes have to be increased to pay for all the debt created by the Republicans under Bush. Don't bother crying about Bush not being President anymore. The damage your hero did is undeniable. Tax cuts coupled with massive increases in spending don't work. I don't expect math wizzes like you and Uni to attempt to figure out how much Obama had to spend keep the country from Bankruptcy. It doesn't matter. You two hacks act like you pay for everything. You don't even work. The rest of us work to support you.
Unincorporated

Frankfort, IL

#11 Jan 1, 2013
Quit Crying wrote:
<quoted text>
Obama won the election. Taxes have to be increased to pay for all the debt created by the Republicans under Bush. Don't bother crying about Bush not being President anymore. The damage your hero did is undeniable. Tax cuts coupled with massive increases in spending don't work. I don't expect math wizzes like you and Uni to attempt to figure out how much Obama had to spend keep the country from Bankruptcy. It doesn't matter. You two hacks act like you pay for everything. You don't even work. The rest of us work to support you.
You remind me of Wilma Flintstone buying a bra 5 sizes too big because, "It was on sale!" Under any administration, Zero's or Bush, or Clinton, or Reagan, the spending cuts NEVER CAME. Zero owns this economy now. No more blaming Bush. He has been out of office for almost 5 years. Find another scapegoat. Zero had to spend money to keep from going broke? That's pretzel logic at best. A damn lie at worst. That would be like me saying I have to run up my credit card to keep from defaulting on my other credit card, it makes no sense. Except to you who pays all our taxes. You are a mighty big piece of shit. You're going to get yours pal. Wait and see.
Neighbor

Streator, IL

#12 Jan 1, 2013
Quit Crying wrote:
<quoted text>
Obama won the election. Taxes have to be increased to pay for all the debt created by the Republicans under Bush. Don't bother crying about Bush not being President anymore. The damage your hero did is undeniable. Tax cuts coupled with massive increases in spending don't work. I don't expect math wizzes like you and Uni to attempt to figure out how much Obama had to spend keep the country from Bankruptcy. It doesn't matter. You two hacks act like you pay for everything. You don't even work. The rest of us work to support you.
You are uninformed, delousional, or an idiot? Which is it?
Your statements are fairy tale based. While you think your pointing & blaming, your own wallet is being drained not by Bush, but Obama. I bet you voted too huh? You might want to read up, or have someone read to you. Face the truth & facts you learn like a man,and then come back.
Politico

Mokena, IL

#14 Jan 1, 2013
refer to prior post
Professor

United States

#15 Jan 1, 2013
Unincorporated wrote:
<quoted text>
You remind me of Wilma Flintstone buying a bra 5 sizes too big because, "It was on sale!" Under any administration, Zero's or Bush, or Clinton, or Reagan, the spending cuts NEVER CAME. Zero owns this economy now. No more blaming Bush. He has been out of office for almost 5 years. Find another scapegoat. Zero had to spend money to keep from going broke? That's pretzel logic at best. A damn lie at worst. That would be like me saying I have to run up my credit card to keep from defaulting on my other credit card, it makes no sense. Except to you who pays all our taxes. You are a mighty big piece of shit. You're going to get yours pal. Wait and see.
See what I mean uni? These ignorant fools need to be crushed by their "GOD" Obama. I really hope they lose everything. I hope they suffer financially. They deserve it and it would make me very very happy!
Unincorporated

Frankfort, IL

#16 Jan 1, 2013
Yes, unfortunately I do. Nice of politico to jump in to offer a handy. I hope they rot. Their hero is a piece of sh*t. Just like all the rest of these guys. They found a grand compromise! What? They increased spending, and taxes. Nice! I believe I called this in the beginning of December.
Politico

Mokena, IL

#17 Jan 2, 2013
Uni still beating off to child porn all day?! you called it? give me a break yopu and 100m others saw the same thing. "you called it" after you googled it you NIT! I starting to get tired of you. hit the road!
Neighbor

Northbrook, IL

#18 Jan 3, 2013
Politico (aka Terry) hows business? Wrist doing any better? I see in the above post that you're cranky today. Try ujsing your other hand, maybe that will help your attitude.
Quit Crying

Frankfort, IL

#19 Jan 3, 2013
Unincorporated wrote:
<quoted text>
You remind me of Wilma Flintstone buying a bra 5 sizes too big because, "It was on sale!" Under any administration, Zero's or Bush, or Clinton, or Reagan, the spending cuts NEVER CAME. Zero owns this economy now. No more blaming Bush. He has been out of office for almost 5 years. Find another scapegoat. Zero had to spend money to keep from going broke? That's pretzel logic at best. A damn lie at worst. That would be like me saying I have to run up my credit card to keep from defaulting on my other credit card, it makes no sense. Except to you who pays all our taxes. You are a mighty big piece of shit. You're going to get yours pal. Wait and see.
Are you retarded? How do you think this country got out of debt after WW2? You don't know because you and your butt buddy neighbor can't read a history book. Yes Obama had to spend money to keep the country from going bankrupt. If you don't get it you never will. It's not OK to be stupid. Bush doesn't get a pass on cutting taxes and increasing spending at the same time. You don't get to blame Obama for trying to fix the most financially irresponsible President of all time. Second, your fat, middle aged sorry ass would NEVER call me a piece of shit to my face. You don't have the balls.
Quit Crying

Frankfort, IL

#20 Jan 3, 2013
Neighbor wrote:
<quoted text>
You are uninformed, delousional, or an idiot? Which is it?
Your statements are fairy tale based. While you think your pointing & blaming, your own wallet is being drained not by Bush, but Obama. I bet you voted too huh? You might want to read up, or have someone read to you. Face the truth & facts you learn like a man,and then come back.
Prove it. Back it up old man.
Neighbor

Naperville, IL

#21 Jan 4, 2013
I said, face it like a man. Now try your response again.

Lastly. keep attacking UNI. He will invite you to a Dojo for a workout. I doubt you'd show. Politico no showed. You're all talk. You add nothing. Now run along and pay your new taxs like a good boy.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Joliet Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Please use abbreviation when addressing trump i... 3 min Shark-Sheeot 12
Weinstein 7 hr Appalled 5
When we elected trump.... 9 hr GhostOfNipsyRussell 1
Systemic Sexism and white male privilege... 10 hr Appalled 17
New Lenox Mustangs a Joke (Sep '10) 10 hr Done2015 60
Trump Hasn't Said A Word 11 hr Appalled 23
Jason Aldean 13 hr Spooky 23

Joliet Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Joliet Mortgages