traveler52
Active Member
Republicans: PayGo!
Democrats: Fuck you!
Repuglicant's - EAT SHIT, FUCK OFF, DIE!!
DEMS. - FOUGHT FOR UNEMPLOYMENT, REPUGS SAID NO.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Republicans: PayGo!
Democrats: Fuck you!
We're selling our federal oil to companies like BP for 12 to 16 cents on the dollar while other countries in comparable situations are getting 40 to 70 cents on the dollar. Even our states like Alaska are getting 50 cents on the dollar for their oil. I fail to see the good in that.
Okay. It'd do a lot more for the nation than taxing the shit out of everything, which does nothing but raise prices for the consumer, until the consumer won't pay any more and the business folds.The Republicans only got fiscal responsibility religion when they were no longer the majority and no longer could dictate where the money was spent. Now that the Democrats can do what the Republicans could do for a decade, suddenly the Republicans are born again deficit hawks.
I say pay for the the UE extension, and a few other things, by doubling the royalties on oil drilling on federal lands and waters.
Brilliant. Pay for unemployment benefits by creating more unemployed.
Then why don't we just give our oil away, to create jobs? Not to mention all our other resources...
You serve your masters well, and you will be rewarded.Republicans: PayGo!
Democrats: Fuck you!
Repuglicant's - EAT SHIT, FUCK OFF, DIE!!
DEMS. - FOUGHT FOR UNEMPLOYMENT, REPUGS SAID NO.
The same thing can be said of the democrats. Two years ago, 0bama was a deficit hawk, until he came into office and spent twice as much as the tax income in a single year.
Royalties are contracts. The constitution forbids your idea.
Royalties are also set by auction. Even if it did pass constitutional muster, it would permanently depress the money the government could get out of any future auctions.
That is nonsensical. Period. The idea that we are permanently locked into the royalty rates we currently charge for is breathtakingly stupid.
The same thing can be said of the democrats. Two years ago, 0bama was a deficit hawk, until he came into office and spent twice as much as the tax income in a single year.
Royalties are contracts. The constitution forbids your idea.
Royalties are also set by auction. Even if it did pass constitutional muster, it would permanently depress the money the government could get out of any future auctions.
That is nonsensical. Period. The idea that we are permanently locked into the royalty rates we currently charge for is breathtakingly stupid.
The royalty rates are set in a contract established at the time of the auction of rights. The constitution forbids legislative interference in contract, which is what you are proposing.
If it did pass muster, which is doubtful, there is the issue of the oil companies have been the victim of a bait and switch maneuver. Any future contracts will have the fact they have been burnt priced in. This kind of thing is what so impoverishes South American and Africa. A company makes a deal, the government reneges on the deal, so the next deal that gets made has to recognize that one of the parties has a history of fraud and double dealing. Present gains never recoup future losses by the governments who do this.
What you are proposing isn't just a crime, it is stupid.
Okay. It'd do a lot more for the nation than taxing the shit out of everything, which does nothing but raise prices for the consumer, until the consumer won't pay any more and the business folds.Brilliant. Pay for unemployment benefits by creating more unemployed.
Then why don't we just give our oil away, to create jobs? Not to mention all our other resources...
That is nonsensical. Period. The idea that we are permanently locked into the royalty rates we currently charge for is breathtakingly stupid.
The royalty rates are set in a contract established at the time of the auction of rights. The constitution forbids legislative interference in contract, which is what you are proposing.
If it did pass muster, which is doubtful, there is the issue of the oil companies have been the victim of a bait and switch maneuver. Any future contracts will have the fact they have been burnt priced in. This kind of thing is what so impoverishes South American and Africa. A company makes a deal, the government reneges on the deal, so the next deal that gets made has to recognize that one of the parties has a history of fraud and double dealing. Present gains never recoup future losses by the governments who do this.
What you are proposing isn't just a crime, it is stupid.
Why are the oil companies willing to pay other countries 2 3 4 or 5 times as much as they pay us? In royalties.
Why do some of our states get several times as much as the federal government gets, in royalties?
Why do you want to give away our oil, which, btw, we eventually buy back, RETAIL, in the open market?
Coming from you, that's absolutely meaningless.Okay. It'd do a lot more for the nation than taxing the shit out of everything, which does nothing but raise prices for the consumer, until the consumer won't pay any more and the business folds.Then why don't we just give our oil away, to create jobs? Not to mention all our other resources...
Okay, so you're retarded. You have my sympathies.
Yep, I was working for the Forest Service when we were subsidizing the timber companies. Bad then, bad now to be doing the same for the oil corperation.
The same thing can be said of the democrats. Two years ago, 0bama was a deficit hawk, until he came into office and spent twice as much as the tax income in a single year.
Royalties are contracts. The constitution forbids your idea.
Royalties are also set by auction. Even if it did pass constitutional muster, it would permanently depress the money the government could get out of any future auctions.
Republicans let PAYGO expire because they couldn't do their tax cuts and Medicare part D, aka budget busters, under PAYGO rules. The deficits created by both of those, plus the ongoing cost of the Iraq war, comprise a major portion of what is called Obama's deficit.
I propose that we do make the unemployment compesation deficit neutral. In the time of 'Nam, Johnson instituted a wartime surcharge on income tax. That is a precident. Given that the wage earners are out of work because of the actions of the people that have the highest incomes, figure out a surcharge that would cover the unemployment compensation and put it into effect.
None of those affected will be making any appearances at the local food bank, while all too many that used to give to those banks, are now needing their assistance.
Republicans want to pay for unemployment extension without adding to the national debt and Democrats say screw you....
I guess we know who is really responsible for our debt growing to the size it is.... What's wrong with Democrats? And why can't the US government live by a budget like Obama is telling the US citizens to live by.... Once again more hypocrisy....
Democrats, are you not embarrassed by your leaders yet????? The same thing that is happening to Illinois is happening to the Federal Government and most of you Democrats either don't give a shit or are just to stupid to understand. Sad....
Dems refuse compromise to extend unemployment benefits | Washington Examiner
Republicans want to pay for unemployment extension without adding to the national debt and Democrats say screw you....
I guess we know who is really responsible for our debt growing to the size it is.... What's wrong with Democrats? And why can't the US government live by a budget like Obama is telling the US citizens to live by.... Once again more hypocrisy....
Democrats, are you not embarrassed by your leaders yet????? The same thing that is happening to Illinois is happening to the Federal Government and most of you Democrats either don't give a shit or are just to stupid to understand. Sad....
Dems refuse compromise to extend unemployment benefits | Washington Examiner
Republicans want to pay for unemployment extension without adding to the national debt and Democrats say screw you....
I guess we know who is really responsible for our debt growing to the size it is.... What's wrong with Democrats? And why can't the US government live by a budget like Obama is telling the US citizens to live by.... Once again more hypocrisy....
Democrats, are you not embarrassed by your leaders yet????? The same thing that is happening to Illinois is happening to the Federal Government and most of you Democrats either don't give a shit or are just to stupid to understand. Sad....
Dems refuse compromise to extend unemployment benefits | Washington Examiner
When is the GOP going to start paying for our invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan? And since WHEN did the GOP start caring about paying for things?