Writing on the wall - Common sense reigns inside the Beltway

[Old Bookaroo]

Jim in Idaho:

You wrote "We maintain tax rules that charge a lower rate, by a wide margin, for people who invest, at the expense of people who do real work for their livelihood. We maintain a tax code that charges Social Security taxes on most working people on 100% of their income, while allowing the wealthy to pay on a small percentage of theirs."

I could not agree with you more that both these situations are very wrong!

I don't agree with "I can see why you 'progressives' would be really happy." Nope. Neither of the items you list are progressive. They are regressive.

So - here's an idea for the HollyDaze Season. How about Americans looking for common ground? You've listed two things we can agree on. What can you and I - working together - do to change something we agree needs to be changed?

Good luck to all,

~ The Old Bookaroo

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Dave44]

Jim in Idaho:

You wrote "We maintain tax rules that charge a lower rate, by a wide margin, for people who invest, at the expense of people who do real work for their livelihood. We maintain a tax code that charges Social Security taxes on most working people on 100% of their income, while allowing the wealthy to pay on a small percentage of theirs."

I could not agree with you more that both these situations are very wrong!

I don't agree with "I can see why you 'progressives' would be really happy." Nope. Neither of the items you list are progressive. They are regressive.

So - here's an idea for the HollyDaze Season. How about Americans looking for common ground? You've listed two things we can agree on. What can you and I - working together - do to change something we agree needs to be changed?

Good luck to all,

~ The Old Bookaroo

The problem is progressives feel that even regression is OK as long as change is the goal. The left is under some kind of psychosis and their thinking is illogical. Hard to agree with a bunch of crazies. Lolll

 

[NHBandit]

I used to like McCain. I think he's crazy. Seriously

 

[olroy70]

Dave44:

Somebody's toast. Another dispatch from the front in the Uncivil War:

Peter King Takes on Rand Paul, Ted Cruz With New Anti-Tea Party PAC

Seeking to unify anti-tea party forces, Rep. Peter King today will form a new political action committee, "American Leadership PAC," to promote an alternative to staunch conservative Republicans such as Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and Sen. Rand Paul, R-K.Y., he told ABC News in an interview.

"I want to create a presence for those like myself who feel Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are out of touch with the American people," King, R-N.Y, said. "This is highlighted by the government shutdown, which was one of the worst political disasters we've ever had."

...

Peter King Takes on Rand Paul, Ted Cruz With New Anti-Tea Party PAC

Good luck to all,

~ The Old Bookaroo

The worst was electing a socialist!!!!!!!!!

 

[Old Bookaroo]

Dave44:

No surprise you whiffed on Post #21. Too much Moxie on the ball.

Good luck to all,

~ The Old Bookaroo

 

[Old Bookaroo]

olroy70:

Hasn't happened yet. Isn't likely to happen anytime soon.

Although Sarah Palin - the Tea Party darling - did manage to introduce socialism to Alaska.

Good luck to all,

~ The Old Bookaroo

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Dave44:

Somebody's toast. Another dispatch from the front in the Uncivil War:

Peter King Takes on Rand Paul, Ted Cruz With New Anti-Tea Party PAC

Seeking to unify anti-tea party forces, Rep. Peter King today will form a new political action committee, "American Leadership PAC," to promote an alternative to staunch conservative Republicans such as Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and Sen. Rand Paul, R-K.Y., he told ABC News in an interview.

"I want to create a presence for those like myself who feel Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are out of touch with the American people," King, R-N.Y, said. "This is highlighted by the government shutdown, which was one of the worst political disasters we've ever had."

...

Peter King Takes on Rand Paul, Ted Cruz With New Anti-Tea Party PAC

Good luck to all,

~ The Old Bookaroo

Pardon us if we don't run out into the streets singing Kings praises.

He is a strong supporter of the Patriot Act and is Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee as well as supporting the spying on American citizens by NSA....

Homeland Security is nothing more than a private army and does not hold our rights and freedoms in high reguard...


Thanks but NO thanks....

We will NOT go quietly into the night!

 

[Limitool]

"The proposed change is projected to save the government $6 billion, but Ayotte said it “pays for more federal spending on the backs of our active duty and military retirees.”... GM employees / retires / and GM corporate leaders got MORE than the savings from veterans. And I bet there's more veterans than GM employees / retirees. And the ripple affect be damned. That's how free enterprise works or is suppose to work. I'm sure that Obamacare alone will be enough to bring the Dems back to earth and stay there for a long time hopefully soon. First the mid-terms and then the W.H.

 

[Old Bookaroo]

Limitool:

Some data on the GM bailout. Would the US economy be in terrible shape if GM and then Ford (because it counts on the same suppliers used by GM) had gone out of business? Absolutely.

Was the money well spent? Considering that, in the end, there was probably no net cost to the American taxpayers - absolutely.

[h=1]Even Losing $10B on GM Bailout, Taxpayers See TARP Profit[/h]By Robert Longley
December 18, 2013

While taxpayers lost about $10 billion on the General Motors bailout, they will realize an overall profit of nearly $11 billion from the Troubled Assets Reinvestment Program (TARP), according to Treasury Secretary Jacob J. Lew.

As the TARP program winds down, Lew announced on December 9 that the government had sold the last of its shares of G.M. stock, purchased in 2008 as part of the great auto industry bailout.

In closing the bailout books, the government sold the taxpayers' $49.5 billion worth of G.M. stock - which once represented a 60% share of the automaker - for $39 billion, resulting in a net loss of about $10.5 billion.
But according to Sec. Lew, the loss was not all bad news and that the most important goals of the auto industry bailout had been achieved.

"The President understood that inaction could have cost the broader economy more than one million jobs, billions in lost personal savings, and significantly reduced economic production," he said in a press release. "As a result of his efforts, which built on those of the previous administration, more than 370,000 new auto jobs have been created, and all three U.S. automakers are profitable, competitive, and growing."

Under President George W. Bush, G.M. received $13.4 billion in short-term financing through the TARP program. The Obama administration later provided another $6 billion in capital loans as G.M. finalized its restructuring plan.

And a TARP Profit to Boot

The government's $49.5 billion in G.M. stock was just part of a total TARP investment of $421.8 billion, which included the purchase of $170 billion worth of AIG stock.

The government and taxpayers realized a $23 billion profit from the AIG bailout when the final shares were sold in 2008.
To date, according to Sec. Lew, the Treasure has recovered a total of $432.7 billion on its $421.8 billion total TARP investment for a profit to taxpayers of about $11 billion.

"Treasury will continue to wind down the remaining investments in a manner that balances maximizing the taxpayer's return on investments with the speed of our exit," said Lew.

Even Losing $10B on GM Bailout, Taxpayers See TARP Profit

As U.S. Economy Guide Kimberly Amadeo points out, the auto industry contributes 3.6 percent, or $500 billion annually to total U.S. GDP output and provides 850,000 jobs in auto manufacturing, plus another 1.8 million jobs in auto dealerships. In final analysis, the cost to taxpayers of the bailout must be weighed against the general positive impact of jobs saved and the auto industry's contribution to the ultimate recovery of the economy.

Auto Industry Bailout Cost to Taxpayers: Report

More detailed information on the auto industry bailout(s):
Auto Industry

Good luck to all,

~ The Old Bookaroo

 

[Limitool]

What is Federal Govt. doing in the auto business period. What business is it of there's? Why do GM employee's get a bailout and the local lumberyard doesn't? I know it's all about money brought in by taxes and the money funneled into special interests. It is none of their business.... it's called free enterprise. If you need money go to a bank if you got the credit.

 

[Dave44]

What is Federal Govt. doing in the auto business period. What business is it of there's? Why do GM employee's get a bailout and the local lumberyard doesn't? I know it's all about money brought in by taxes and the money funneled into special interests. It is none of their business.... it's called free enterprise. If you need money go to a bank if you got the credit.

Also a great point. I hear the progressives state how great tarp and all of the bailouts were,, how they saved the world, strengthened bad business models and kept the unions in the green.

But most of that drivel is spin,, and conjecture, they justify and make excuses as needed, and set up straw men to knock down,, but since the free market wasn't allowed to take it to the end, there is know way to know for sure.

The only true part is it kept bad business practices and unions strong.

 

[Native Floridian]

You may be right, NF. It will be sad if you are. From the tea party members I have talked to, all they wanted was an end to deficit spending, a sound currency, the financial laws and rules written to benefit the greatest number. So, their party is over, if you're correct. And what do we, as a country gain? we kicked the can down the road again, for others to deal with. We maintain tax rules that charge a lower rate, by a wide margin, for people who invest, at the expense of people who do real work for their livelihood. We maintain a tax code that charges Social Security taxes on most working people on 100% of their income, while allowing the wealthy to pay on a small percentage of theirs. And, the list goes on and on. I can see why you "progressives" would be really happy.
Jim

I agree, the tea party as it was envisioned was a good thing. Home rule, fiscal responsibility, less government. Just what our forefathers set out for us. But, in practice the tea party is a dangerous movement. Misguided. When I post that they want to burn it down, that's exactly what they want to do. They have their followers believing there will be no apocalyptic financial consequence to causing the U. S. Government to default. Instead of being the practitioners of good government, a force that people could support, they will go down in history as the worst legislators this country has ever seen.

We all want the same thing. Unfortunately there are no do overs. We need to work together to make this work. Two concepts not in the tea party play book.

 

[Dave44]

Dave44:

No surprise you whiffed on Post #21. Too much Moxie on the ball.

Good luck to all,

~ The Old Bookaroo

21 was your post, no? You may be suffering dementia. Good luck.

 

[Jim in Idaho]

I agree, the tea party as it was envisioned was a good thing. Home rule, fiscal responsibility, less government. Just what our forefathers set out for us. But, in practice the tea party is a dangerous movement. Misguided. When I post that they want to burn it down, that's exactly what they want to do. They have their followers believing there will be no apocalyptic financial consequence to causing the U. S. Government to default. Instead of being the practitioners of good government, a force that people could support, they will go down in history as the worst legislators this country has ever seen.

We all want the same thing. Unfortunately there are no do overs. We need to work together to make this work. Two concepts not in the tea party play book.

So, you're telling me, with a straight face, that continuing to go the way we're going isn't going to burn it down? I have asked many people to give me just one logical scenario that will get us out of this mess without a huge decline in our fortunes...just one...and not one person has been able to do it. Please be the first. You obviously think that stopping the unlimited deficit spending, as the tea party suggests, isn't the answer, so step up. Inquiring minds want to know.
Jim

 

[Old Bookaroo]

Dave44:

I happen to think unions are more of a positive than a negative.

The benefits of TARP are not conjecture. Both GM and Ford are still in business. GM would have been gone without Federal government help. That's a fact. Since the taxpayers didn't spend anything on TARP across the board - yes, it's a good thing. Started by President Bush, of course. Not just progressives understand the benefits of government doing its job.

We don't have a free market in the US of A. Far too much corporate welfare for that to be the case. You don't think the Federal government should pick winners and losers? Why do the oil and gas producers get such huge benefits? Big farms? Wal*Mart? The NFL? The Dallas Cowboys? The roster goes on and on and on...

Good luck to all,

~ The Old Bookaroo

 

[Old Bookaroo]

Dave44:

Insults about drugs and mental illness won't help you make your case.

Good luck to all,

~ The Old Bookaroo

 

[Dave44]

I agree, the tea party as it was envisioned was a good thing. Home rule, fiscal responsibility, less government. Just what our forefathers set out for us. But, in practice the tea party is a dangerous movement. Misguided. When I post that they want to burn it down, that's exactly what they want to do. They have their followers believing there will be no apocalyptic financial consequence to causing the U. S. Government to default. Instead of being the practitioners of good government, a force that people could support, they will go down in history as the worst legislators this country has ever seen.

We all want the same thing. Unfortunately there are no do overs. We need to work together to make this work. Two concepts not in the tea party play book.

Too bad your delusions are so deep. It would do you well to look at something other than the "little red book". Your circle of friends are hypnotized by progressives. And any semblance to the truth escapes them.

 

[Dave44]

Dave44:

I happen to think unions are more of a positive than a negative.

The benefits of TARP are not conjecture. Both GM and Ford are still in business. GM would have been gone without Federal government help. That's a fact. Since the taxpayers didn't spend anything on TARP across the board - yes, it's a good thing. Started by President Bush, of course. Not just progressives understand the benefits of government doing its job.

We don't have a free market in the US of A. Far too much corporate welfare for that to be the case. You don't think the Federal government should pick winners and losers? Why do the oil and gas producers get such huge benefits? Big farms? Wal*Mart? The NFL? The Dallas Cowboys? The roster goes on and on and on...

Good luck to all,

~ The Old Bookaroo

You are still spit balling,, show me proof. Oh yeah, since it didn't happen you can't. You hope that that by sheer willpower you can make it so, it is the delusion all the progressives labor under.

Are you keeping count of all of the posts you have been way off base with so far? Your opinions are not lending credence to your self ascribed intellectualism.
Good Luck!

 

[Limitool]

The number one problem / holdback of fixing the deficit from any point of view is that NOBODY alive wants to feel the pain. This includes Govt. and its citizens alike. Those that are on "assistance" don't want to loose it and a Govt. that doesn't want to totally lose clout with their base who now receives it. We're gonna feel it soon because our elected officials are now so far removed from the basic concept of our constitution that probably sooner rather than later we're going to have to "start over" and it will hurt horribly. Let free enterprise work... Period.

 

[Native Floridian]

So, you're telling me, with a straight face, that continuing to go the way we're going isn't going to burn it down? I have asked many people to give me just one logical scenario that will get us out of this mess without a huge decline in our fortunes...just one...and not one person has been able to do it. Please be the first. You obviously think that stopping the unlimited deficit spending, as the tea party suggests, isn't the answer, so step up. Inquiring minds want to know.
Jim

Jim you put words in my mouth and make assumptions based on generalizations. Like assuming because i believe the tea party is a wrong headed movement I must not agree with anything they say or do. When in reality, my beef with them is in their execution, not their motive. And their complete diversion from their original course.

Three things need to happen for us to reduce our debt. We need to reduce spending. Smart cuts, not scorched earth. Second, we need to raise the income tax rate. We fought two wars on a credit card. That really hurts us now. During WW 2 the top tax rate in this country was 91%. Today it is about 39%. Lastly, we need the economy to stay positive. A positive economy will eventually bail us out.