McConnell: No real deficit deal until Obama is gone

[8537]

whoa...need to ask you to clarify...

But my take is this...

No reason to EVER increase tax on coke but not ALL soft drink makers.

So increase the tax on soft drink makers by 1.00 a can and I guerantee you, soft drink will increase by 1 dollar a can.

Oh, I disagree. If you increase the tax on all soft drinks by a dollar you'll see the consumer and the producer split the expense, while consumers seek out obvious substitutes - orange juice, water etc....if Coke and Pepsi could both increase their margins by $1.00 without affecting demand for their product they would do so.

I disagree.

It is their compettition with each other and the other soda manufacturers that keeps the prices in check.....water is an alternative...a free alternative...yet people buy soda for a buck fifty a can

it has been found that people buy based on want ....yes, they comparitive shop, but in the end, they the product.

but if you increase the price of soda, people will buy less soda. if the price of soda increases, the demand for *something* must go down - and the basic law of demand says that the first order item to lose demand would be soda. The opportunity cost of buying soda increased.

There are many products that are sold at 4 and 5 times the cost to manufacture.....but people want them so they pay for them.

Sure, but the ability to sell an item well above its marginal cost is a measure of elasticity and market imperfections.

If all soda was taxed a dollar a can...there would be a slight slow down in sales..and then people will get used to it and buy again.

"if all yachts were taxed at 10%, there would be a slight down in yacht sales...then people will get used to it and buy again". That's not what happened 15 years ago.

"if all cigarettes (lord knows THEY are demand inelastic) were taxed an extra dollar, there would be a slight down in cigarette sale then people would get used to it and buy again". But every time cigarette taxes are increased, the quantity demand declines.

If an industry was imperfect enough that it could raise its price by a larger percentage than said cost hike would negatively impact sales, it would do so.

 

[AmericanFirst]

After years of discussions and months of negotiations, I have little question that as long as this president is in the Oval Office, a real solution is probably unattainable,"

Just wow.

That's amazing.

His ass really needs a recall.

He is right. Obamaturd's a@@ needs a recall.

 

[Sallow]

After years of discussions and months of negotiations, I have little question that as long as this president is in the Oval Office, a real solution is probably unattainable,"

Just wow.

That's amazing.

His ass really needs a recall.

He is right. Obamaturd's a@@ needs a recall.

Feel free.

Impeaching a third Democratic American president will work wonders in another civil war.

Which is exactly what conservatives want.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Oh, I disagree. If you increase the tax on all soft drinks by a dollar you'll see the consumer and the producer split the expense, while consumers seek out obvious substitutes - orange juice, water etc....if Coke and Pepsi could both increase their margins by $1.00 without affecting demand for their product they would do so.

I disagree.

It is their compettition with each other and the other soda manufacturers that keeps the prices in check.....water is an alternative...a free alternative...yet people buy soda for a buck fifty a can

it has been found that people buy based on want ....yes, they comparitive shop, but in the end, they the product.

but if you increase the price of soda, people will buy less soda. if the price of soda increases, the demand for *something* must go down - and the basic law of demand says that the first order item to lose demand would be soda. The opportunity cost of buying soda increased.

There are many products that are sold at 4 and 5 times the cost to manufacture.....but people want them so they pay for them.

Sure, but the ability to sell an item well above its marginal cost is a measure of elasticity and market imperfections.

If all soda was taxed a dollar a can...there would be a slight slow down in sales..and then people will get used to it and buy again.

"if all yachts were taxed at 10%, there would be a slight down in yacht sales...then people will get used to it and buy again". That's not what happened 15 years ago.

"if all cigarettes (lord knows THEY are demand inelastic) were taxed an extra dollar, there would be a slight down in cigarette sale then people would get used to it and buy again". But every time cigarette taxes are increased, the quantity demand declines.

If an industry was imperfect enough that it could raise its price by a larger percentage than said cost hike would negatively impact sales, it would do so.

What happened to the Social Security Trust Fund?

 

[AmericanFirst]

Wow, sounds good to me... Maybe the GOP really wants to do meaningful cuts, that would be a nice change.

President Obama currently has medicaid, medicare, and social security cuts on the table. Meanwhile, the GOP won't even close tax loopholes or cut the defense budget. And you think they want to do meaningful cuts?

Proves one thing, liberals are hipocrits. They cry that the republicans want to cut those very same programs you claim the idiot in charge has on the table. Idiots.

 

[EriktheRed]

I thought the Boner's speech earlier was the most pathetic example of buck-passing by a GOoPer, but this proposal ranks pretty high up there, too.

It's pretty fuckin' obvious that McConnell and the Speaker are scared of possibly taking the blame for what happens after August 2.

 

[8537]

I disagree.

It is their compettition with each other and the other soda manufacturers that keeps the prices in check.....water is an alternative...a free alternative...yet people buy soda for a buck fifty a can

it has been found that people buy based on want ....yes, they comparitive shop, but in the end, they the product.

but if you increase the price of soda, people will buy less soda. if the price of soda increases, the demand for *something* must go down - and the basic law of demand says that the first order item to lose demand would be soda. The opportunity cost of buying soda increased.



Sure, but the ability to sell an item well above its marginal cost is a measure of elasticity and market imperfections.

If all soda was taxed a dollar a can...there would be a slight slow down in sales..and then people will get used to it and buy again.

"if all yachts were taxed at 10%, there would be a slight down in yacht sales...then people will get used to it and buy again". That's not what happened 15 years ago.

"if all cigarettes (lord knows THEY are demand inelastic) were taxed an extra dollar, there would be a slight down in cigarette sale then people would get used to it and buy again". But every time cigarette taxes are increased, the quantity demand declines.

If an industry was imperfect enough that it could raise its price by a larger percentage than said cost hike would negatively impact sales, it would do so.

What happened to the Social Security Trust Fund?

It grew to its current sum of about 2.6 Trillion US dollars. In 2010 it grew by 68.6 billion dollars.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

but if you increase the price of soda, people will buy less soda. if the price of soda increases, the demand for *something* must go down - and the basic law of demand says that the first order item to lose demand would be soda. The opportunity cost of buying soda increased.



Sure, but the ability to sell an item well above its marginal cost is a measure of elasticity and market imperfections.



"if all yachts were taxed at 10%, there would be a slight down in yacht sales...then people will get used to it and buy again". That's not what happened 15 years ago.

"if all cigarettes (lord knows THEY are demand inelastic) were taxed an extra dollar, there would be a slight down in cigarette sale then people would get used to it and buy again". But every time cigarette taxes are increased, the quantity demand declines.

If an industry was imperfect enough that it could raise its price by a larger percentage than said cost hike would negatively impact sales, it would do so.

What happened to the Social Security Trust Fund?

It grew to its current sum of about 2.6 Trillion US dollars. In 2010 it grew by 68.6 billion dollars.

LOL. No Really. Obama sounded like the receptionist at Bernie Madoff's old firm.

Where's our money?

If we could withdraw it , we would

 

[Mustang]

I thought the Boner's speech earlier was the most pathetic example of buck-passing by a GOoPer, but this proposal ranks pretty high up there, too.

It's pretty fuckin' obvious that McConnell and the Speaker are scared of possibly taking the blame for what happens after August 2.

Is a tar and feather response too passé?

 

[8537]

What happened to the Social Security Trust Fund?

It grew to its current sum of about 2.6 Trillion US dollars. In 2010 it grew by 68.6 billion dollars.

LOL. No Really. Obama sounded like the receptionist at Bernie Madoff's old firm.

Where's our money?

If we could withdraw it , we would

Well of course we can't all withdraw it. It's loaned out for other uses - kinda like at a bank. When the other folks repay their loan, you can get your money (or, when Congress decided they don't want to honor all of the debts to SS, which is the far more likely scenario).

You don't think the bank keeps Frank's money in a little can in the back, do ya?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It grew to its current sum of about 2.6 Trillion US dollars. In 2010 it grew by 68.6 billion dollars.

LOL. No Really. Obama sounded like the receptionist at Bernie Madoff's old firm.

Where's our money?

If we could withdraw it , we would

Well of course we can't all withdraw it. It's loaned out for other uses - kinda like at a bank. When the other folks repay their loan, you can get your money (or, when Congress decided they don't want to honor all of the debts to SS, which is the far more likely scenario).

You don't think the bank keeps Frank's money in a little can in the back, do ya?

So, there's nothing in the Trust Fund. This must have been what the Bernie Madoff investors felt like when they started asking for their money.

 

[EriktheRed]

I thought the Boner's speech earlier was the most pathetic example of buck-passing by a GOoPer, but this proposal ranks pretty high up there, too.

It's pretty fuckin' obvious that McConnell and the Speaker are scared of possibly taking the blame for what happens after August 2.

Is a tar and feather response too passé?

Naaaah, but how nice it would be if it were televised. Wonder how Faux News would spin it...

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It grew to its current sum of about 2.6 Trillion US dollars. In 2010 it grew by 68.6 billion dollars.

LOL. No Really. Obama sounded like the receptionist at Bernie Madoff's old firm.

Where's our money?

If we could withdraw it , we would

Well of course we can't all withdraw it. It's loaned out for other uses - kinda like at a bank. When the other folks repay their loan, you can get your money (or, when Congress decided they don't want to honor all of the debts to SS, which is the far more likely scenario).

You don't think the bank keeps Frank's money in a little can in the back, do ya?

Stop Reading Krugman!

Write this down: a Ponzi Scheme is when the only way they can pay off old investors is with new money.

They're not liquidating "assets" in the "trust fund" they can only pay by raising new money.

Ponzi

 

[Sallow]

LOL. No Really. Obama sounded like the receptionist at Bernie Madoff's old firm.

Where's our money?

If we could withdraw it , we would

Well of course we can't all withdraw it. It's loaned out for other uses - kinda like at a bank. When the other folks repay their loan, you can get your money (or, when Congress decided they don't want to honor all of the debts to SS, which is the far more likely scenario).

You don't think the bank keeps Frank's money in a little can in the back, do ya?

Stop Reading Krugman!

Write this down: a Ponzi Scheme is when the only way they can pay off old investors is with new money.

They're not liquidating "assets" in the "trust fund" they can only pay by raising new money.

Ponzi

You were a big fan of Bernie Madoff weren't ya..

I did some IT work in his office..I thought I saw you there!

 

[rdean]

If this was only a replay of the budget battle of '95 and '96, and the Republicans were the only ones who were going to reap what they sowed, I wouldn't really care one bit. But this is just completely irresponsible on McConnell's part because this is going to be one big mess, and a lot of people are going to suffer.

Obama thinks its funny.

The mystical and magical insight that some conservatives seem to think they have into Obama's mind and his private thoughts is undoubtedly proof that they're mentally ill (in the clinical sense of the word).

What else could it be? Republicans don't live in this world. They live in a world where evolution doesn't exist. The first people were somehow "shimmered" into being by a magical god exactly as we are now in spite of all the geological, genetic and biological evidence.

As long as they see gay as a choice they don't have to admit being rotten bigots.

Neither one of their economic policies are based in data or study. Merely right wing "gut feelings".

They see education as liberal brainwashing.

And in their reality, with out taxes, without education, they just assume America will lead in science and technology.

Even though they believe science is a "faith" and technology is "really hard", they insist America will still "lead".

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Well of course we can't all withdraw it. It's loaned out for other uses - kinda like at a bank. When the other folks repay their loan, you can get your money (or, when Congress decided they don't want to honor all of the debts to SS, which is the far more likely scenario).

You don't think the bank keeps Frank's money in a little can in the back, do ya?

Stop Reading Krugman!

Write this down: a Ponzi Scheme is when the only way they can pay off old investors is with new money.

They're not liquidating "assets" in the "trust fund" they can only pay by raising new money.

Ponzi

You were a big fan of Bernie Madoff weren't ya..

I did some IT work in his office..I thought I saw you there!

No, but I'm still amazed my old Boss never put a dime in with Madoff, he never trusted him from the get go.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

If this was only a replay of the budget battle of '95 and '96, and the Republicans were the only ones who were going to reap what they sowed, I wouldn't really care one bit. But this is just completely irresponsible on McConnell's part because this is going to be one big mess, and a lot of people are going to suffer.

Obama thinks its funny.

The mystical and magical insight that some conservatives seem to think they have into Obama's mind and his private thoughts is undoubtedly proof that they're mentally ill (in the clinical sense of the word).

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVonk_OqEUU]YouTube - ‪Obama Jokes at Jobs Council 'Shovel-Ready Was Not as Shovel-Ready as We Expected' - President Obama‬‏[/ame]

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Obama thinks its funny.

The mystical and magical insight that some conservatives seem to think they have into Obama's mind and his private thoughts is undoubtedly proof that they're mentally ill (in the clinical sense of the word).

What else could it be? Republicans don't live in this world. They live in a world where evolution doesn't exist. The first people were somehow "shimmered" into being by a magical god exactly as we are now in spite of all the geological, genetic and biological evidence.

As long as they see gay as a choice they don't have to admit being rotten bigots.

Neither one of their economic policies are based in data or study. Merely right wing "gut feelings".

They see education as liberal brainwashing.

And in their reality, with out taxes, without education, they just assume America will lead in science and technology.

Even though they believe science is a "faith" and technology is "really hard", they insist America will still "lead".

What the hell does evolution have to do with $14,000,000,000,000 in debt?

 

[DontBeStupid]

It grew to its current sum of about 2.6 Trillion US dollars. In 2010 it grew by 68.6 billion dollars.

LOL. No Really. Obama sounded like the receptionist at Bernie Madoff's old firm.

Where's our money?

If we could withdraw it , we would

Well of course we can't all withdraw it. It's loaned out for other uses - kinda like at a bank. When the other folks repay their loan, you can get your money (or, when Congress decided they don't want to honor all of the debts to SS, which is the far more likely scenario).

You don't think the bank keeps Frank's money in a little can in the back, do ya?

I get the impression he absolutely thinks that.

 

[8537]

LOL. No Really. Obama sounded like the receptionist at Bernie Madoff's old firm.

Where's our money?

If we could withdraw it , we would

Well of course we can't all withdraw it. It's loaned out for other uses - kinda like at a bank. When the other folks repay their loan, you can get your money (or, when Congress decided they don't want to honor all of the debts to SS, which is the far more likely scenario).

You don't think the bank keeps Frank's money in a little can in the back, do ya?

So, there's nothing in the Trust Fund. This must have been what the Bernie Madoff investors felt like when they started asking for their money.

Yes, there's nothing in the Trust Fund...in the same sense that there's nothing in your savings account, nothing in your CD and nothing in any money market funds you hold.