Republicans blatantly destroying Amer...

Republicans blatantly destroying America.

Posted in the Paris Forum

First Prev
of 4
Next Last
Kev

Fort Worth, TX

#1 Nov 28, 2012
REP. JOHN BOEHNER (R-OH), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE "I`m the most
reasonable, responsible person here in Washington. The president knows this. He knows that he and I can work together. Now, the election is over. Now it`s time to get to work."

This was two days after President Obama won reelection. "The
president knows I`m the most reasonable and responsible guy in Washington." And you know, in some ways, John Boehner has proven himself to be pretty reasonable over the years. In June 2002, during George W. Bush`s first term in office, congressional Republicans were faced with the issue of raising the nation`s debt ceiling. That`s the limit for how much the country can borrow to pay for things. And no politician ever likes to raise the debt ceiling. Nobody likes to think the country has to borrow money, but we do. And so, in June of 2002, when that debt ceiling vote came up, that inevitably does, John Boehner voted yes. Let`s do the responsible thing. Let`s raise the debt ceiling. It`s the responsible thing to do. Two years later, November 2004, John Boehner voted to do it again. He voted again under President Bush to raise the debt ceiling. April 2005, at the start of George W. Bush`s second term, John Boehner votes in favor of raising the debt ceiling. No matter how philosophically opposed you might be to borrowing money, however, distasteful it is to you, ideologically, everybody realizes that as long as we are borrowing money, not raising the debt ceiling, defaulting on our debt, would be a very irresponsible thing to do. It would be a disaster for the country. Everybody realizes that. Mr. Responsible himself, John Boehner, realizes that. He says so.
CHRIS WALLACE, FOX NEWS asked "Do you agree with administration officials and other economists that defaulting on the faith and credit of the United States would be a financial disaster?"
BOEHNER replied "That would be a financial disaster not only for our country, but the worldwide economy.
WALLACE "So defaulting on the full faith and credit is unacceptable to you?"
BOEHNER: "I don`t think -- yes, I don`t think it`s a question that`s even on the table."

Failing to raise the debt ceiling is not even on the table.
That`s what John Boehner said last January. And yet just a few months later, with that voting record and with that stated understanding of how bad it would be for this country to not raise the debt ceiling, there was John Boehner, leader of the congressional Republicans, threatening to not raise the debt ceiling, threatening default -- after decades of voting to
raise the debt ceiling, no questions asked under President Bush and under previous presidents, under President Obama the Republicans decided they were not going to do it anymore.

Right around this time last year, Republicans threatened to let the country go into default unless President Obama met their demands. They explicitly recognized that it would cause harm to the country if we failed to raise the debt ceiling, but then they said they were happy to do that. They were willing to incur that harm, to inflict that harm on the country, in order to get other stuff that they wanted. And in the end, those threats from Republicans did hurt the country. For the first time in our history, the United States, because of that brinksmanship, lost our perfect AAA credit rating. The ratings agency Standard & Poor`s downgraded the U.S. credit rating -- meaning that we
would have to pay more interest on money we wanted to borrow.
This was something that had never happened before in American history. This was not a natural occurrence. This was a choice that one side made to cause that problem after they decided for decades under other president that that problem should be avoided.
Kev

Fort Worth, TX

#2 Nov 28, 2012
Here`s how S&P explained their decision to downgrade when they made it. They said, quote, "The political brinksmanship of recent months
highlights what we see as America`s governance and policymaking becoming less stable, less effective and less predictable than what we previously
believe. That statutory debt ceiling and the threat of default have become political bargaining chips in the debate over fiscal policy." Republicans decided in 2011 that they were going to use the full faith and credit of the United States of America as leverage for getting stuff
they wanted. And it had concretely negative, unprecedented consequences for us as a country.
And now, apparently, this year, the lesson they have decided to take from that experience is we should do that again. It`s amazing to me.
This is from Politico.com today, quote, "President Barack Obama made a demand of House Speaker John Boehner near the end of their first White House meeting on the fiscal cliff earlier this month: Raise the debt limit before year`s end.
Boehner`s response: there was a price for everything." A year after congressional republicans forced the downgrade of the U.S. credit rating, they are apparently gearing up to do it all over again. Speaker Boehner told Obama at the White House that the debt ceiling is,
quote, "my leverage." Despite having direct experience of how this plays out, despite using
the debt ceiling as a bargaining chip last year and knowing what that did to the country, now, John Boehner says he sees doing it again this year as his leverage.
So Boehner will destroy the American economy single-handedly unless you give me something that I want. But I haven`t decided what it`s going to be. I will tank this nation`s economy. I will lower the nation`s credit rating again. Thus, wiping away tens of billions of dollars of
American wealth by my own decision unless you give me what I want, because I`m the most reasonable man in Washington.
We can have disagreements on matters of policy. We can disagree on
the ideological tales we tell each other about how to get to the best outcomes for the country. We can even disagree about basic values about
exactly what kind of country we ought to be.
But the thing you can generally assume about everybody who is in public service is that they are public servants, right? They want the
country to be better off.
No matter how you want to get there. Whether or not some people think you`re wrong or whether or not some people even think you`re dumb or
misinformed, there`s a general assumption that if you`re involved in American politics, that at least means that what you want is a good future
for America.
You`re out to help America, not hurt America. You want America to be stronger and better and healthier. Hurting the country on purpose when you
know that`s what you`re doing violates the most basic thing that we think we can assume about why people go into public service, why anybody would go into public service. I think it means that what you`re doing can`t even be called public service.

None of the Republicans are making these threats again. Incredulous Democrats are already starting to talk about maybe there are ways that
President Obama could just raise the debt ceiling unilaterally? If Republicans really are going to do this again, could President Obama come
up with some way to do this on his own just through the executive branch? It is hard to believe that the president would try that, but it is not more hard to believe than the fact that he may ultimately be forced to try it because the Republicans are holding the economy at gunpoint and seem perfectly willing to pull the trigger. I do not know how this is going to end this time, after what happened last night.

Judged:

10

10

9

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
crash

Eucha, OK

#3 Nov 28, 2012
Kev wrote:
REP. JOHN BOEHNER (R-OH), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE "I`m the most
reasonable, responsible person here in Washington. The president knows this. He knows that he and I can work together. Now, the election is over. Now it`s time to get to work."
This was two days after President Obama won reelection. "The
president knows I`m the most reasonable and responsible guy in Washington." And you know, in some ways, John Boehner has proven himself to be pretty reasonable over the years. In June 2002, during George W. Bush`s first term in office, congressional Republicans were faced with the issue of raising the nation`s debt ceiling. That`s the limit for how much the country can borrow to pay for things. And no politician ever likes to raise the debt ceiling. Nobody likes to think the country has to borrow money, but we do. And so, in June of 2002, when that debt ceiling vote came up, that inevitably does, John Boehner voted yes. Let`s do the responsible thing. Let`s raise the debt ceiling. It`s the responsible thing to do. Two years later, November 2004, John Boehner voted to do it again. He voted again under President Bush to raise the debt ceiling. April 2005, at the start of George W. Bush`s second term, John Boehner votes in favor of raising the debt ceiling. No matter how philosophically opposed you might be to borrowing money, however, distasteful it is to you, ideologically, everybody realizes that as long as we are borrowing money, not raising the debt ceiling, defaulting on our debt, would be a very irresponsible thing to do. It would be a disaster for the country. Everybody realizes that. Mr. Responsible himself, John Boehner, realizes that. He says so.
CHRIS WALLACE, FOX NEWS asked "Do you agree with administration officials and other economists that defaulting on the faith and credit of the United States would be a financial disaster?"
BOEHNER replied "That would be a financial disaster not only for our country, but the worldwide economy.
WALLACE "So defaulting on the full faith and credit is unacceptable to you?"
BOEHNER: "I don`t think -- yes, I don`t think it`s a question that`s even on the table."
Failing to raise the debt ceiling is not even on the table.
That`s what John Boehner said last January. And yet just a few months later, with that voting record and with that stated understanding of how bad it would be for this country to not raise the debt ceiling, there was John Boehner, leader of the congressional Republicans, threatening to not raise the debt ceiling, threatening default -- after decades of voting to
raise the debt ceiling, no questions asked under President Bush and under previous presidents, under President Obama the Republicans decided they were not going to do it anymore.
Right around this time last year, Republicans threatened to let the country go into default unless President Obama met their demands. They explicitly recognized that it would cause harm to the country if we failed to raise the debt ceiling, but then they said they were happy to do that. They were willing to incur that harm, to inflict that harm on the country, in order to get other stuff that they wanted. And in the end, those threats from Republicans did hurt the country. For the first time in our history, the United States, because of that brinksmanship, lost our perfect AAA credit rating. The ratings agency Standard & Poor`s downgraded the U.S. credit rating -- meaning that we
would have to pay more interest on money we wanted to borrow.
This was something that had never happened before in American history. This was not a natural occurrence. This was a choice that one side made to cause that problem after they decided for decades under other president that that problem should be avoided.
If your point of posting this was to show you abilities to "cut and Paste " ; Good Job !!!!
haha

Paris, TX

#4 Nov 28, 2012
Jamie Fox's lord and savior will destroy us all. Quit blaming the Republicans, the democrat is in charge and instead of leading he is still campaigning and patting himself on the back. that's all we will get for the next 4 years and worse. Lets' see how you like him in about 6 months. You sheeple are going over just like the rest of us off that cliff.
curious

Blossom, TX

#5 Nov 28, 2012
you cant tell them, they dont believe you,they will see for themselves in due time,they will be so bewildered,it would be funny if it were'nt so sad,you know that democratic stupidity,so reckless,so detrimental to their fellow man,selfish actually
Sunrise

Fort Worth, TX

#6 Nov 28, 2012
haha wrote:
Jamie Fox's lord and savior will destroy us all. Quit blaming the Republicans, the democrat is in charge and instead of leading he is still campaigning and patting himself on the back. that's all we will get for the next 4 years and worse. Lets' see how you like him in about 6 months. You sheeple are going over just like the rest of us off that cliff.
He is starting his campaign for the next 2016.
Kev

Fort Worth, TX

#7 Nov 28, 2012
Republicans have held congress and the house hostage. When they stop playing politics and get things done then we will not have to blame them. Polls show that a majority of people will blame the GOP if you go off the fiscal cliff and not raise the debt ceiling. Your party not mine.

Why people blame Republicans and even Bush for our current troubles is you have to look at your past to see how we got in this terrible mess and learn from their mistakes and not repeat failed policies.

I hope they (GOP) keep up their crap so they will be voted out in 2014. Then we can get something done. The Republican party is already in trouble. They can keep up with the times and change.
cami

Mustang, OK

#8 Nov 28, 2012
Both parties are responsible.
Kev

Fort Worth, TX

#9 Nov 28, 2012
We should go off the fiscal cliff and let all the tax rates go up for everyone. Only deal with them when they want to cut taxes on the middle class and poor
curious

Blossom, TX

#10 Nov 28, 2012
yeah so much trouble we have 30 republican governors right now ,there is a wave coming all right,people blame the R's because the lame stream media is in the tank for ovomit and they are to lazy and uninvolved to do their own research and find the truth of things,say what you will,i have the time,i love my country,i love God,i love my fellow man and i dont want any FREE gimmicks for my vote,and i vote everytime,for conservative,biblical,frugal principals,that does not mean that the old R gaurd doesnt need to go,it does,thats why i voted for ted cruz,mr hall,cornyn your on notice
Sunrise

Fort Worth, TX

#11 Nov 28, 2012
Kev wrote:
Republicans have held congress and the house hostage. When they stop playing politics and get things done then we will not have to blame them. Polls show that a majority of people will blame the GOP if you go off the fiscal cliff and not raise the debt ceiling. Your party not mine.
Why people blame Republicans and even Bush for our current troubles is you have to look at your past to see how we got in this terrible mess and learn from their mistakes and not repeat failed policies.
I hope they (GOP) keep up their crap so they will be voted out in 2014. Then we can get something done. The Republican party is already in trouble. They can keep up with the times and change.
In your opinion, at what point should we, they, whoever is in charge stop raising the debt ceiling? Or is that something that we should be concerned about? How deep should we let the debt get before we cut back on spending? Should we, they, whoever is in charge raise taxes on everyone to bring in more money? Would that even bring in more money?
Just sayen

Lockhart, TX

#12 Nov 28, 2012
Kevs got a great idea. Let's go over the cliff, all rates go up leave them there for a month then let Obama have democrats In the house introduce a tax bill that cuts everybody's taxes except the top 2% and then see if the right wing nuts in congress want to vote Against it. If they do the house will go dEmcratic in the next election.
Radit

Austin, TX

#13 Nov 28, 2012
Sunrise wrote:
<quoted text>In your opinion, at what point should we, they, whoever is in charge stop raising the debt ceiling? Or is that something that we should be concerned about? How deep should we let the debt get before we cut back on spending? Should we, they, whoever is in charge raise taxes on everyone to bring in more money? Would that even bring in more money?
Curious how the ratio of Tax/GDP compares to the Bush era or better yet. Clinton.
Sunrise

Fort Worth, TX

#14 Nov 28, 2012
Radit wrote:
<quoted text>
Curious how the ratio of Tax/GDP compares to the Bush era or better yet. Clinton.
I don't know. I haven't researched it. Please post it, if you find it. It would be interesting.
heartandmind

Europe

#15 Nov 29, 2012
sunrise, i'm not so sure you'll like the results of looking into that.....but here goes anyway.
(there's a few graphs included in the article i couldn't replicate here - so click on the link to see those)

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2...

Tax Cuts Don't Lead to Economic Growth, a New 65-Year Study Finds

Here's a brief economic history of the last quarter-century in taxes and growth.

In 1990, President George H. W. Bush raised taxes, and GDP growth increased over the next five years. In 1993, President Bill Clinton raised the top marginal tax rate, and GDP growth increased over the next five years. In 2001 and 2003, President Bush cut taxes, and we faced a disappointing expansion followed by a Great Recession.

Does this story prove that raising taxes helps GDP? No. Does it prove that cutting taxes hurts GDP? No.

But it does suggest that there is a lot more to an economy than taxes, and that slashing taxes is not a guaranteed way to accelerate economic growth.

That was the conclusion from David Leonhardt's new column today for The New York Times, and it was precisely the finding of a new study from the Congressional Research Service, "Taxes and the Economy: An Economic Analysis of the Top Tax Rates Since 1945."

Analysis of six decades of data found that top tax rates "have had little association with saving, investment, or productivity growth." However, the study found that reductions of capital gains taxes and top marginal rate taxes have led to greater income inequality. Past studies cited in the report have suggested that a broad-based tax rate reduction can have "a small to modest, positive effect on economic growth" or "no effect on economic growth."

Well into the 1950s, the top marginal tax rate was above 90%. Today it's 35%. But both real GDP and real per capita GDP were growing more than twice as fast in the 1950s as in the 2000s. At the same time, the average tax rate paid by the top tenth of a percent fell from about 50% to 25% in the last 60 years, while their share of income increased from 4.2% in 1945 to 12.3% before the recession.

Here are two graphs of the top 0.1% and 0.01%. The first shows average tax rates since 1945 -- down, down, down. The second shows share of total income since 1945 -- up, up, up.

In short, the study found that top tax rates don't appear to determine the size of the economic pie but they can affect how the pie is sliced, especially for the richest households.

The paper is a good reminder to be humble about taxes as a tool for growing the economy. They remain, above all, a tool for collecting revenue and tweaking incentives for specific economic behavior. Congress has cut tax rates repeatedly over the last 60 years, while the country and the global economy have undergone considerable changes that probably had a greater effect on growth. For years after World War II, the U.S. was a singular economic powerhouse with an enormous manufacturing base that employed nearly 40% of the economy. For the last decade-plus, the economy has grown at a considerably slower pace and the gains have accrued to a smaller and more elite share of the economy.

Since: Sep 10

Location hidden

#16 Nov 29, 2012
Unless the democrats come up with some hard, sincere cuts, we should go over the cliff. To hell with trusting the dems to do so later.
heartandmind

Europe

#17 Nov 29, 2012
another article looking at tax rates & how the economy is affected :
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/16/opinion/sun...

(chart included in the linked article cannot be replicated here)

Do Tax Cuts Lead to Economic Growth?

By DAVID LEONHARDT

Published: September 15, 2012

One of the first things you notice in the chart is that the American economy was not especially healthy even before the financial crisis began in late 2007. By 2007 the economy was already on pace for its slowest decade of growth since WWII. The mediocre economic growth, in turn, brought mediocre job & income growth — and the crisis more than erased those gains.

The defining economic policy of the last decade, of course, was the Bush tax cuts. President George W. Bush and Congress, including Mr. Ryan, passed a large tax cut in 2001, sped up its implementation in 2003 and predicted that prosperity would follow.

The economic growth that actually followed — indeed, the whole history of the last 20 years — offers one of the most serious challenges to modern conservatism. Bill Clinton and the elder George Bush both raised taxes in the early 1990s, and conservatives predicted disaster. Instead, the economy boomed, and incomes grew at their fastest pace since the 1960s. Then came the younger Mr. Bush, the tax cuts, the disappointing expansion and the worst downturn since the Depression.

Since that conversation, I have asked the same question of conservative economists and received similar answers.“To me, the Bush tax cuts get too much attention,” said R. Glenn Hubbard, who helped design them as the chairman of Mr. Bush’s Council of Economic Advisers and is now a Romney adviser.“The pro-growth elements of the tax cuts were fairly modest in size,” he added, because they also included politically minded cuts like the child tax credit. Phillip L. Swagel, another former Bush aide, said that even a tax cut as large as Mr. Bush’s “doesn’t translate quickly into higher growth.”

When the top marginal rate was 70 percent or higher, as it was from 1940 to 1980, tax cuts really could make a big difference, notes Donald Marron, director of the highly regarded Tax Policy Center and another former Bush administration official. When the top rate is 35 percent, as it is today, a tax cut packs much less economic punch.

“At the level of taxes we’ve been at the last couple decades and the magnitude of the changes we’ve had, it’s hard to make the argument that tax rates have a big effect on economic growth,” Mr. Marron said. Similarly, a new report from the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service found that, over the past 65 years, changes in the top tax rate “do not appear correlated with economic growth.”

The policies that new presidents pass tend to be ones on which they laid out specifics, be they the Bush and Reagan tax cuts or the Obama health overhaul. Based on the specifics, Mr. Romney puts a higher priority on tax cuts than anything else. Yet the reality of the last two decades has caused conservative economists, and Mr. Ryan himself, to acknowledge the limits of tax cuts.

It is certainly true that strong economic growth helps solve almost every challenge the country faces: the deficit, unemployment, the income slump, even the rise of China. It is also true that some liberals put too much emphasis on the distribution of the pie and not enough on the size.

But when you dig into Mr. Romney’s and Mr. Ryan’s proposals and you consider recent history, the fairest thing to say is that, so far at least, they have laid out a plan to cut taxes. They have not yet explained why and how it is also an economic-growth plan.
Radit

Austin, TX

#18 Nov 29, 2012
6Bid wrote:
Unless the democrats come up with some hard, sincere cuts, we should go over the cliff. To hell with trusting the dems to do so later.
Was the above text too long for you to read? If so, get the hell out of this discussion. If not, why don't we hear your reply/solution. I am all about cuts. Lets cut out the tax breaks, lets cut out the increase in military spending (by bringing our soldiers home we are not the police force of the world. I will not commit my life for another country. I won't ask another person to do the same) We also need to stop this business of giving out foreign aid but refusing to take it when our own country gets hit (let me guess, you have no clue what I'm talking about do you?). Lets raise our education level. What place are we in when compared to the rest of the world? Its unacceptable. We are not even in the top 10. Despicable. Wanna talk about more cuts? Lets make Social Security to where it is able to support itself. If not, refund peoples money. Our country is heading down a road of instability. Notice I said OUR country. Get your lazzy ass up and do something. Stop your bitching. Stop the political games. Stop acting like you know what the hell is going on when you can not be bothered to read (and comprehend) a 30 line post. Lets go over that fiscal cliff. I will hold your hand.
heartandmind

Europe

#19 Nov 29, 2012
a comparison of US tax rates as a percentile of GDP and other country's tax rates and GDP percentile :
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/tax_tot_tax...
(US is way down on the list at number 17)

http://www.businessinsider.com/history-of-tax...

study of historical tax rates vs. GDP in the US.
in the last link, there's several graphs that help show the comparisons from 1900-2010
curious

Blossom, TX

#20 Nov 29, 2012
romney had the right idea,just to many lazy people wanting something for nothing-parasites they usually kill the host if not eliminated in time

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
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.

Paris Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Mestizos and Negroes Fail Again 29 min Trump Victory 21
Roden-Pryor Funeral Directors 2 hr RealTruthRevealed 14
Favorite Bible Verses (Mar '11) 2 hr Tactics 720
Meth ring bust nets 6 arrests in Paris (Sep '12) 11 hr Like It Is 40
PEDC Hits Homerun! 16 hr Fail Not 3
Was God a Christian? 17 hr Tactics 1,158
Judge Judy Dead at 68 (Aug '09) 17 hr Mourner 28

Paris Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Paris Mortgages