Obama Says Republican Fiscal Cliff Of...

Obama Says Republican Fiscal Cliff Offer Doesn't Go Far Enough

There are 58 comments on the www.bloomberg.com story from Dec 4, 2012, titled Obama Says Republican Fiscal Cliff Offer Doesn't Go Far Enough. In it, www.bloomberg.com reports that:

President Barack Obama said in a Bloomberg Television interview that a Republican offer on resolving the so-called fiscal cliff doesn't go far enough and won't raise the revenue needed to shrink the deficit by $4 trillion over the next decade.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.bloomberg.com.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#41 Dec 7, 2012
Dane T wrote:
<quoted text>
Very well stated. I WANT to abide by the Aug '11 bi partisan agreement and JUMP off the Cliff.
We ALL have to MAN UP.
As Howard Dean, a noted Progressive, said on CNN earlier...We must demand that America goes off this Cliff.....we owe it to our kids to eliminate the Bush tax cuts for every taxpayer and take the deep Spending Cuts and deal with at temporary Recession.......rather than leave the ever worsening extinction grade Deficit Tsunami to our kids.
We shouldn't give a crap about whether Obama or Boehner WINS.....we should all care if our KIDS win some relief from this DEBT.
Like Dean you want everyone's taxes raised.

OK, what about the 47%? Shouldn't the takers have to put some skin in the game?

What happens next year when the spending has created even more debt? We all "man up" again? FTS.
Don Joe

Saint Paul, MN

#42 Dec 10, 2012
La Santa Muerte wrote:
<quoted text>
Like Dean you want everyone's taxes raised.
OK, what about the 47%? Shouldn't the takers have to put some skin in the game?
What happens next year when the spending has created even more debt? We all "man up" again? FTS.
the 47%??? Oh, you mean those who have lost everything? They lost the home, they lost the job, they lost their families all due to trickle down, where all the wealth of the nation goes to the top 1%? Are you saying they should give even more to the wealthy?

Where are they going to get it?

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#43 Dec 10, 2012
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
the 47%??? Oh, you mean those who have lost everything? They lost the home, they lost the job, they lost their families all due to trickle down, where all the wealth of the nation goes to the top 1%? Are you saying they should give even more to the wealthy?
Where are they going to get it?
The "47%" lost their homes, jobs, and families??? Where did you hear THAT joke?

Most people who lost their homes shouldn't have been loaned the money to begin with. Blame the politicians and lending institutions, not trickle down.

I'm saying EVERYONE should pay income tax. In case you've forgotten, income taxes go to the government, not the "1%".
Don Joe

Saint Paul, MN

#44 Dec 10, 2012
La Santa Muerte wrote:
<quoted text>
The "47%" lost their homes, jobs, and families??? Where did you hear THAT joke?
Most people who lost their homes shouldn't have been loaned the money to begin with. Blame the politicians and lending institutions, not trickle down.
I'm saying EVERYONE should pay income tax. In case you've forgotten, income taxes go to the government, not the "1%".
No taxation without representation.

Why should I have to pay taxes to a government that only represents the 1%?

And that money only goes to the 1%, and to enforce the rules they force on everyone else. That is why 47% of the people are so poor they don't make enough to buy food, shelter, health care and pay taxes. That is the race to the bottom you are so fond of.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#45 Dec 10, 2012
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
No taxation without representation.
Why should I have to pay taxes to a government that only represents the 1%?
And that money only goes to the 1%, and to enforce the rules they force on everyone else. That is why 47% of the people are so poor they don't make enough to buy food, shelter, health care and pay taxes. That is the race to the bottom you are so fond of.
So now the Obama regime "only represents the 1%?"

You're either insane, playing games, or incredibly stupid.

Everything you mooch off the government is paid for by tax payers. Time for you takers to pay your fair share.
Don Joe

Saint Paul, MN

#46 Dec 11, 2012
La Santa Muerte wrote:
<quoted text>
So now the Obama regime "only represents the 1%?"
You're either insane, playing games, or incredibly stupid.
Everything you mooch off the government is paid for by tax payers. Time for you takers to pay your fair share.
OK, why don't you just keep believing Fox News and everything they tell you. It's much easier than actually thinking for yourself. Just don't expect anyone else to know what you are talking about.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#47 Dec 11, 2012
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>That is why 47% of the people are so poor they don't make enough to buy food, shelter, health care and pay taxes.
That ridiculous statement tells me you believe the voices in your head.
Don Joe

Saint Paul, MN

#48 Dec 11, 2012
La Santa Muerte wrote:
<quoted text>
That ridiculous statement tells me you believe the voices in your head.
The following has been attributed to a Charlie Chaplin movie. Whether he said it or not, it is good. Are there any Charlie Chaplin fans around who could confirm the source or the original author. It seems I had seen this before but from one of the earlier populist leaders:

They take our skills,
They take our labor,
They take our knowledge,
They take our pride,
They take our talent,
Our best ideas,
They take our time,.
They take our lives.
In the end
They take our jobs.
These 'makers',
Then turn around
And call us,'takers'.

Abraham Lincoln did say that all wealth starts with labor. The last line suggests that Mitt Romney may have read that one line at least.
Don Joe

Saint Paul, MN

#49 Dec 11, 2012
La Santa Muerte wrote:
<quoted text>
That ridiculous statement tells me you believe the voices in your head.
The statement that 47% don't pay taxes comes from the GOP. They are proud they can attack almost half of the population who don't make enough to pay taxes. If they don't even make that much, what makes you think they are paid enough for their time and labor to buy everything else one could want or need?

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#50 Dec 11, 2012
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
The following has been attributed to a Charlie Chaplin movie. Whether he said it or not, it is good. Are there any Charlie Chaplin fans around who could confirm the source or the original author. It seems I had seen this before but from one of the earlier populist leaders:
They take our skills,
They take our labor,
They take our knowledge,
They take our pride,
They take our talent,
Our best ideas,
They take our time,.
They take our lives.
In the end
They take our jobs.
These 'makers',
Then turn around
And call us,'takers'.
Abraham Lincoln did say that all wealth starts with labor. The last line suggests that Mitt Romney may have read that one line at least.
Still doesn't change the fact that in order to be fair, EVERYONE should pay federal income tax. It's only fair that we all pay our fair share...you know, to be fair.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#51 Dec 11, 2012
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
The statement that 47% don't pay taxes comes from the GOP. They are proud they can attack almost half of the population who don't make enough to pay taxes. If they don't even make that much, what makes you think they are paid enough for their time and labor to buy everything else one could want or need?
I don't care where it came from. Besides, it's a well known fact that nearly half of American workers don't pay income taxes.

There's nothing written, in other words no right, that we're to be able to buy everything "one could want".

I am glad however that we're seeing places like Michigan becoming right-to-work states. Unions are things of the past and must be done away with. Unfunded federal and state pensions are a real boondoggle.
Aphelion

Melbourne, FL

#52 Dec 11, 2012
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
The following has been attributed to a Charlie Chaplin movie. Whether he said it or not, it is good. Are there any Charlie Chaplin fans around who could confirm the source or the original author. It seems I had seen this before but from one of the earlier populist leaders:
They take our skills,
They take our labor,
They take our knowledge,
They take our pride,
They take our talent,
Our best ideas,
They take our time,.
They take our lives.
In the end
They take our jobs.
These 'makers',
Then turn around
And call us,'takers'.
Abraham Lincoln did say that all wealth starts with labor. The last line suggests that Mitt Romney may have read that one line at least.
Spoken like someone at the bottom of the success ladder looking up and demanding to be considered an equal.

The liberals are all advocates of the welfare state as long as you don't call out those who are on the public dole for what they are .... Takers
Don Joe

Saint Paul, MN

#53 Dec 12, 2012
La Santa Muerte wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't care where it came from. Besides, it's a well known fact that nearly half of American workers don't pay income taxes.
There's nothing written, in other words no right, that we're to be able to buy everything "one could want".
I am glad however that we're seeing places like Michigan becoming right-to-work states. Unions are things of the past and must be done away with. Unfunded federal and state pensions are a real boondoggle.
You are missing the point. When someone earns so little they they can't afford food, shelter, health care and paying taxes, they don't really have a job. They might put in 80 to 100 hours per week working, but the owners of that company realize that they don't have to pay more than that. If that person doesn't like it, they can hire someone else.

That puts effectively the unemployment rate at 47%. The unemployment rates bush left the nation with are worse than the great depression. Obama has done precious little to help.

I will be happy to go along with everyone paying federal income taxes if everyone has an opportunity for some of that income.

You tell me how one can pursue life liberty and the pursuit of happiness without the ability to obtain food and shelter. The government has systematically flooded the labor pool to reduce wages, benefits and to push millions into the streets. There will be consequences. You can't just steal trillions of dollars and walk away.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#54 Dec 12, 2012
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
You are missing the point. When someone earns so little they they can't afford food, shelter, health care and paying taxes, they don't really have a job. They might put in 80 to 100 hours per week working, but the owners of that company realize that they don't have to pay more than that. If that person doesn't like it, they can hire someone else.
That puts effectively the unemployment rate at 47%. The unemployment rates bush left the nation with are worse than the great depression. Obama has done precious little to help.
I will be happy to go along with everyone paying federal income taxes if everyone has an opportunity for some of that income.
You tell me how one can pursue life liberty and the pursuit of happiness without the ability to obtain food and shelter. The government has systematically flooded the labor pool to reduce wages, benefits and to push millions into the streets. There will be consequences. You can't just steal trillions of dollars and walk away.
LMAO! What "point"?

Your first paragraph is a bunch of senseless drivel. People work 80-100 hours a week and can't afford food and shelter? Tell you what - show me the last time an American starved to death.

Your "unemployment rate" claims are ludicrous, and no one pays taxes if they have no income.

So yeah, you're right, I'm missing the point because you have no point.
oh yeah

Virginia Beach, VA

#55 Dec 13, 2012
La Santa Muerte wrote:
<quoted text>
You're either insane, playing games, or incredibly stupid.
LOL, I'm still trying to figure out which of these Don Joe is.

I'm starting to suspect "all of the above"
Don Joe

Saint Paul, MN

#56 Dec 13, 2012
La Santa Muerte wrote:
<quoted text>
LMAO! What "point"?
Your first paragraph is a bunch of senseless drivel. People work 80-100 hours a week and can't afford food and shelter? Tell you what - show me the last time an American starved to death.
...
From :

http://feedingamerica.org/hunger-in-america/h...

In 2011, 50.1 million Americans lived in food insecure households, 33.5 million adults and 16.7 million children.
In 2011, 14.9 percent of households (17.9 million households) were food insecure.
In 2011, 5.7 percent of households (6.8 million households) experienced very low food security.
In 2011, households with children reported food insecurity at a significantly higher rate than those without children, 20.6 percent compared to 12.2percent.
In 2011, households that had higher rates of food insecurity than the national average included households with children (20.6 percent), especially households with children headed by single women (36.8 percent) or single men (24.9 percent), Black non-Hispanic households (25.1 percent) and Hispanic households (26.2 percent).
In 2011, 8.8 percent of seniors living alone (1 million households) were food insecure.
Food insecurity exists in every county in America, ranging from a low of 5 percent in Steele County, ND to a high of 37 percent in Holmes County, MS.v
SHOISE

Montgomery, TX

#57 Dec 13, 2012
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>Why should I have to pay taxes to a government that only represents the 1%?
Well.. then... pus bag, if you don't like it.. move to Cuba.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#58 Dec 14, 2012
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
From :
http://feedingamerica.org/hunger-in-america/h...
In 2011, 50.1 million Americans lived in food insecure households, 33.5 million adults and 16.7 million children.
In 2011, 14.9 percent of households (17.9 million households) were food insecure.
In 2011, 5.7 percent of households (6.8 million households) experienced very low food security.
In 2011, households with children reported food insecurity at a significantly higher rate than those without children, 20.6 percent compared to 12.2percent.
In 2011, households that had higher rates of food insecurity than the national average included households with children (20.6 percent), especially households with children headed by single women (36.8 percent) or single men (24.9 percent), Black non-Hispanic households (25.1 percent) and Hispanic households (26.2 percent).
In 2011, 8.8 percent of seniors living alone (1 million households) were food insecure.
Food insecurity exists in every county in America, ranging from a low of 5 percent in Steele County, ND to a high of 37 percent in Holmes County, MS.v
Food insecurity? Please.

No one is starving to death in America because of a lack of food.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
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.

2012 Presidential Election Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 4 min BlueFlag 1,657,365
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 5 hr loose cannon 243,090
News Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say (Jul '10) 19 hr Patriot AKA Bozo 37,507
News Trump's repeated claim that he won a 'landslide... (Nov '16) 20 hr TmCln 8,788
News Palin: Democrats spreading misinformation and lies (Sep '08) Tue Palmermomma 11
News In Political Ads, Christian Left Mounts Sermoni... (Jul '09) Tue Faith In GAWD 2
News Ron Paul on the Verge of Going Third Party? (Jan '08) Dec 9 was auch immer 29,315
More from around the web