John Boehner 'Dictatorship' Is Letting Time Run Out To Avert 'Fiscal Cliff'

[blackhawk]

And this happens every time a Democrat gets the Presidency. Conservatives immediately go insane. This time they went even more insane then usual.
Well they did got eight years worth of insanity from liberals and there B.B.S. of which many still suffer from to this day.

What are you even talking about?

Sorry B.D.S. something you should recognize given you and pretty much ever liberal known either has suffered from or continue to I see selective memory is one of it's many side effects.

 

[Staidhup]

Harry Reid and company personify the very reason we are where we are today. They still do not comprehend the implications of their actions, their only concern is preserving their illusions of grandeur at the expense of current and future generations.

 

[eflatminor]

Look, I am trying to keep the discussion on the topic at hand. We do need careful and measured reform but republicans have given entitlement reform a bad name for a long time to come by disingenuously making it about deficit reform and then refusing to expose their own sacred cows to cuts or the wealthy to tax hikes. If you care about entitlement reform then attack it directly not in this tangential fashion where you want working Americans to work five more years but think it's too much to ask the rich to chip in some more.

Here's the rub. The rich could chip in EVERYTHING...as in 100% of their income and you wouldn't come close to paying for all these entitlements. Not even close.

Then, when you consider the rich already chip in more than any other nation (and more than they ever have here in America), you begin to see the futility of your argument. Taxing the rich more will not raise the revenues to pay for entitlements. Not by a long shot. The fact is, it will most likely result in less revenue for whatever spending is on tap.

And please, don't give us this "wealth distribution" crap. You should be smart enough to know that wealth is not some finite pile from which we all must draw. Just because someone is rich doesn't mean someone else has to be poor. Further, America does NOT have the largest so called wealth gap. Lastly, only America's so called "poor" are considered rich by world standards...in the 84th percentile of worldwide wealth if I remember the statistic correctly. And when you look at what America's poor owns in way of assets, it's mind boggling.

Bottom line, Republicans fighting for deficit reduction is a good thing, regardless of how they've contributed to it in the past. The Dem plan of taking us beyond $20 trillion in debt is immoral. There is no reason those yet to be born should be burdened with the debt of our largess.

Immoral is saying that the rich should not be taxed more and then turning around and saying that the poor should work harder, work longer and expect less and less.

My goodness man, you talk like the money we work for doesn't belong to us in the first place! And you talk about our "poor" like they're actually poor...when they're not!

Further, you continue to overlook that raising tax rates on the rich will not likely result in any more revenues. How is that going to help the so called poor?

The people should be hungrier, sicker, and totally give up on the idea of social mobility but god forbid the only people to see income growth in thirty years be somehow held responsible for this mess.

Nobody is hungry in America. The last Census data proved that irrefutably. You talk about the poor in America like they are totally dependent on hand outs from others. That's just sad, and untrue. All Americans THRIVED from before the founding of the country well into the 20th century WITHOUT any income tax and without any redistribution of income. More poor became middle class and more middle class became rich than at any other time in history...but that wasn't good enough? All of a sudden it's immoral not take even more money from those that have earned it? That's insane.

You cannot sidestep the debt. There is NO WAY we can continue these entitlements on revenue that can be generated from US taxpayers. They debt will fall on those yet to be born and it will crush them as that kind of debt has in every society in history. We thrived without all that spending in the past, we can again.

 

[Sallow]

Here's the rub. The rich could chip in EVERYTHING...as in 100% of their income and you wouldn't come close to paying for all these entitlements. Not even close.

Then, when you consider the rich already chip in more than any other nation (and more than they ever have here in America), you begin to see the futility of your argument. Taxing the rich more will not raise the revenues to pay for entitlements. Not by a long shot. The fact is, it will most likely result in less revenue for whatever spending is on tap.

And please, don't give us this "wealth distribution" crap. You should be smart enough to know that wealth is not some finite pile from which we all must draw. Just because someone is rich doesn't mean someone else has to be poor. Further, America does NOT have the largest so called wealth gap. Lastly, only America's so called "poor" are considered rich by world standards...in the 84th percentile of worldwide wealth if I remember the statistic correctly. And when you look at what America's poor owns in way of assets, it's mind boggling.

Bottom line, Republicans fighting for deficit reduction is a good thing, regardless of how they've contributed to it in the past. The Dem plan of taking us beyond $20 trillion in debt is immoral. There is no reason those yet to be born should be burdened with the debt of our largess.

What nonsense.

Countries With the Most Billionaires

I realize details are not your thing, but your link states that America has the most billionaires, which is true. That does not mean America has the largest so called "wealth gap", because we don't.

Yeah..we do.

You've got 480 people controlling around 40% of the country's wealth. Not only that, you've got the very same people with no restrictions on how much money they can spend on elections. They actually write many of our laws. The attack on Iraq was basically launched in the board rooms of big oil and the palaces of Saudi Royalty.

It's an incredibly bad situation.

 

[SniperFire]

We stand to spend a lot more than that per wealthy household if we keep the tax cuts for the wealthy and it doesn't even feed anyone that is hungry and yet for some reason you love that.

Again, you are nothing but empty rhetoric, which gets destroyed.

You destroyed nothing, if spending money on poor households is wrong then it should be more wrong to spend it on households that are prosperous.

Pathetic, as usual. You have been destroyed.

Go shit on a cruiser or something.

 

[eflatminor]

We stand to spend a lot more than that per wealthy household if we keep the tax cuts for the wealthy and it doesn't even feed anyone that is hungry and yet for some reason you love that.

Again, you are nothing but empty rhetoric, which gets destroyed.

You destroyed nothing, if spending money on poor households is wrong then it should be more wrong to spend it on households that are prosperous.

Oh my God, you are hopeless. We don't SPEND anything on prosperous households, we TAKE from them. The top 20% of earners basically foot the entire government bill for everyone else. It takes a special kind of crazy to call that kind of theft spending.

 

[Sallow]

And this happens every time a Democrat gets the Presidency. Conservatives immediately go insane. This time they went even more insane then usual.
Well they did got eight years worth of insanity from liberals and there B.B.S. of which many still suffer from to this day.

What are you even talking about?

Sorry B.D.S. something you should recognize given you and pretty much ever liberal known either has suffered from or continue to I see selective memory is one of it's many side effects.

There is no "derangement" syndrome.

There was nothing like the "Tea party movement" when Bush won on the liberal side of the scale.

The Tea Parrty, The Neo Cons and the Birchers were direct conservative meltdowns as a result of a Democrat winning the white house.

Conservatives feel power is a birth right.

 

[eflatminor]

What nonsense.

Countries With the Most Billionaires

I realize details are not your thing, but your link states that America has the most billionaires, which is true. That does not mean America has the largest so called "wealth gap", because we don't.

Yeah..we do.

No, we don't. Singapore and Hong Kong have far greater so called 'wealth gaps' than America. That's a fact whether you like it or not.

Interestingly, those countries with the largest wealth gaps also happen to be among the most prosperous. There is NOTHING bad about a wealth gap. It is a sign of prosperity for the country as a whole. The fact America's poor are considered rich among world standings is further proof of that.

By your reasoning, if we see a fat man standing next to a skinny man, it must mean the fat guy took the skinny guy's food. It's preposterous on it's face.

 

[Sallow]

Again, you are nothing but empty rhetoric, which gets destroyed.

You destroyed nothing, if spending money on poor households is wrong then it should be more wrong to spend it on households that are prosperous.

Oh my God, you are hopeless. We don't SPEND anything on prosperous households, we TAKE from them. The top 20% of earners basically foot the entire government bill for everyone else. It takes a special kind of crazy to call that kind of theft spending.

Bullshit.

Drive through any rich neighborhood in the country and drive through improvished ones.

You find that the roads in the rich areas are in much better shape. And that's just the roads.

 

[AmericanFirst]

John Boehner 'Dictatorship' Is Letting Time Run Out To Avert 'Fiscal Cliff'

WASHINGTON -- Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid accused the House of Representatives Thursday of being a "dictatorship" -- albeit an extremely poor one.

Reid (D-Nev.) took to the Senate floor to declare his frustration with the other chamber as the deadline to deal with the so-called fiscal cliff rapidly approaches.

Reid argued that House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) could easily end the standoff and avert the across-the-board tax hike in 2013 simply by bringing up legislation the Senate has already passed to preserve the Bush-era tax cuts for income under $250,000, covering 98 percent of taxpayers.

But Reid charged that Boehner won't do that because he only caters to members of his own party and will only bring up legislation supported by a majority of Republicans.

"The American people I don't think understand the House of Representatives is operating without the House of Representatives," Reid said. "It's being operated by a dictatorship of the speaker, not allowing the vast majority of the House of Representatives to get what they want."

"If the 250 were brought up, it would pass overwhelmingly," Reid said, referring to the cut-off for income tax cuts. He also noted that Democrats in the House and enough Republicans would vote for it.

"What goes on in this country shouldn't be decided by 'the majority,' it should be decided by the whole House of Representatives," Reid said.

Reid is an idiot. He is the one who has not done his job and then blames the house republicans. Smart people see through his lies, I know where that leaves you, idiot.

 

[SniperFire]

You destroyed nothing, if spending money on poor households is wrong then it should be more wrong to spend it on households that are prosperous.

Oh my God, you are hopeless. We don't SPEND anything on prosperous households, we TAKE from them. The top 20% of earners basically foot the entire government bill for everyone else. It takes a special kind of crazy to call that kind of theft spending.

Bullshit.

Drive through any rich neighborhood in the country and drive through improvished ones.

You find that the roads in the rich areas are in much better shape. And that's just the roads.

Both fundings paid for by taking for the same 20%, moron.

 

[eflatminor]

You destroyed nothing, if spending money on poor households is wrong then it should be more wrong to spend it on households that are prosperous.

Oh my God, you are hopeless. We don't SPEND anything on prosperous households, we TAKE from them. The top 20% of earners basically foot the entire government bill for everyone else. It takes a special kind of crazy to call that kind of theft spending.

Bullshit.

Drive through any rich neighborhood in the country and drive through improvished ones.

You find that the roads in the rich areas are in much better shape. And that's just the roads.

And this little rant of yours is supposed to support the idea that we "spend" taxpayer money on the rich? The rich paid for those roads!

 

[Sallow]

I realize details are not your thing, but your link states that America has the most billionaires, which is true. That does not mean America has the largest so called "wealth gap", because we don't.

Yeah..we do.

No, we don't. Singapore and Hong Kong have far greater so called 'wealth gaps' than America. That's a fact whether you like it or not.

Interestingly, those countries with the largest wealth gaps also happen to be among the most prosperous. There is NOTHING bad about a wealth gap. It is a sign of prosperity for the country as a whole. The fact America's poor are considered rich among world standings is further proof of that.

By your reasoning, if we see a fat man standing next to a skinny man, it must mean the fat guy took the skinny guy's food. It's preposterous on it's face.

I've been to Hong Kong. Before and after the Chinese took over. You won't find the same sort of luxury in Hong Kong you find in New York. I've also been all over Europe. The homeless in this country are in worse shape then the homeless in either China or Europe.

And wealth gaps are what causes revolution.

 

[AmericanFirst]

What are you even talking about?

Sorry B.D.S. something you should recognize given you and pretty much ever liberal known either has suffered from or continue to I see selective memory is one of it's many side effects.

There is no "derangement" syndrome.

There was nothing like the "Tea party movement" when Bush won on the liberal side of the scale.

The Tea Parrty, The Neo Cons and the Birchers were direct conservative meltdowns as a result of a Democrat winning the white house.

Conservatives feel power is a birth right.

No, we would just like a potus who is qualified and follows the US Constitution. Unlike you fools.

 

[SniperFire]

Oh my God, you are hopeless. We don't SPEND anything on prosperous households, we TAKE from them. The top 20% of earners basically foot the entire government bill for everyone else. It takes a special kind of crazy to call that kind of theft spending.

Bullshit.

Drive through any rich neighborhood in the country and drive through improvished ones.

You find that the roads in the rich areas are in much better shape. And that's just the roads.

And this little rant of yours is supposed to support the idea that we "spend" taxpayer money on the rich? The rich paid for those roads!

He has a hard time swallowing the truth.

LOL

 

[SniperFire]

Yeah..we do.

No, we don't. Singapore and Hong Kong have far greater so called 'wealth gaps' than America. That's a fact whether you like it or not.

Interestingly, those countries with the largest wealth gaps also happen to be among the most prosperous. There is NOTHING bad about a wealth gap. It is a sign of prosperity for the country as a whole. The fact America's poor are considered rich among world standings is further proof of that.

By your reasoning, if we see a fat man standing next to a skinny man, it must mean the fat guy took the skinny guy's food. It's preposterous on it's face.

I've been to Hong Kong. Before and after the Chinese took over. You won't find the same sort of luxury in Hong Kong you find in New York. I've also been all over Europe. The homeless in this country are in worse shape then the homeless in either China or Europe.

And wealth gaps are what causes revolution.

No, real need causes revolution.

Our 'poor' suffer from obesity.

 

[Sallow]

Oh my God, you are hopeless. We don't SPEND anything on prosperous households, we TAKE from them. The top 20% of earners basically foot the entire government bill for everyone else. It takes a special kind of crazy to call that kind of theft spending.

Bullshit.

Drive through any rich neighborhood in the country and drive through improvished ones.

You find that the roads in the rich areas are in much better shape. And that's just the roads.

And this little rant of yours is supposed to support the idea that we "spend" taxpayer money on the rich? The rich paid for those roads!

No.

We all pay for their roads.

And..surprise surprise..we pay for their salaries too.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9S2daN0Kn8]Mitt Romney bragging about getting government money in 2002 - YouTube[/ame]
Bachmann family farm benefits from subsidies | StarTribune.com

Those are two of your people, right?

Who complain incessantly about government spending..

Right?

 

[Sallow]

Bullshit.

Drive through any rich neighborhood in the country and drive through improvished ones.

You find that the roads in the rich areas are in much better shape. And that's just the roads.

And this little rant of yours is supposed to support the idea that we "spend" taxpayer money on the rich? The rich paid for those roads!

He has a hard time swallowing the truth.

LOL

Oh reliable SniperFag.

Never a thread goes by with out him offering his vulgar homosexual services.

 

[SniperFire]

Bullshit.

Drive through any rich neighborhood in the country and drive through improvished ones.

You find that the roads in the rich areas are in much better shape. And that's just the roads.

And this little rant of yours is supposed to support the idea that we "spend" taxpayer money on the rich? The rich paid for those roads!

No.

We all pay for their roads.

And..surprise surprise..we pay for their salaries too.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9S2daN0Kn8]Mitt Romney bragging about getting government money in 2002 - YouTube[/ame]
Bachmann family farm benefits from subsidies | StarTribune.com

Those are two of your people, right?

Who complain incessantly about government spending..

Right?

LOL

Right.

You have been destroyed.

 

[Sallow]

Sorry B.D.S. something you should recognize given you and pretty much ever liberal known either has suffered from or continue to I see selective memory is one of it's many side effects.

There is no "derangement" syndrome.

There was nothing like the "Tea party movement" when Bush won on the liberal side of the scale.

The Tea Parrty, The Neo Cons and the Birchers were direct conservative meltdowns as a result of a Democrat winning the white house.

Conservatives feel power is a birth right.

No, we would just like a potus who is qualified and follows the US Constitution. Unlike you fools.

No..you want to undo popular elections.

Because you feel power is a birthright.

No Republican or Conservative President has ever been impeached.