PDA

View Full Version : Ture colours #2.... the GOP's new rules



Qtec
01-09-2011, 06:14 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">New House Rules May Hamstring Deficit Reduction

WASHINGTON - January 5 - Statement of U.S. PIRG Tax and Budget Reform Advocate Nicole Tichon on the new rules package to be considered today in the U.S. House of Representatives, specifically the provisions around the budget.

"While the new Congressional leadership's focus on federal budget deficits is admirable, ‘<span style='font-size: 11pt'>cut-go' provisions that exempt special interest carve-outs and corporate tax loopholes</span> from the accounting process will only handcuff the ability of Congress to seriously tackle the budget problem.

"Further, the <span style='font-size: 14pt'>specific provisions barring discussion</span> of wasteful handouts through the tax code -- handouts that were fought for and won by armies of narrow interest lobbyists -- remove from consideration a significant number of solutions that have broad public support.

Under the proposed rules:

* <u>Attempts to shut down off-shore tax havens <span style='font-size: 14pt'>cannot be considered</span> in discussions of deficit reduction. </u>These havens cost taxpayers an estimated $100 billion per year and go to those who benefit from access to American markets, workforce, security and infrastructure but pay little or nothing as they ship profits overseas.

* <u>Tax expenditures that flow to BP, Exxon and others in the oil and gas industry <span style='font-size: 14pt'>are off the table.</span></u> These tax breaks provide unnecessary incentives as they largely underwrite activities the companies would willingly do on their own.

* Ill-advised loopholes carved out of the tax code that let multi-millionaire hedge fund managers pay dramatically reduced tax rates - far less than the average American - <span style='font-size: 17pt'>are exempt from discussions on solving our deficit problem.</span> This loophole has been criticized across the political spectrum from Paul Krugman to Pete Peterson.

"The proposed new rules have the dangerous potential to undo recent bipartisan progress, including recommendations of the Fiscal Commission to close a number of tax loopholes. Some of the few moments of bipartisan agreement in recent memory can be attributed to the need to end special interest influence and reform the tax code. These rules may in fact thwart the rising awareness that wasteful spending through the tax code is no different than wasteful spending through the appropriations process.

"Closing ill-advised tax loopholes, ending special interest carve-outs and corporate tax breaks do not equate to tax increases. Turning a blind eye to this type of waste and forbidding these common sense reforms has the potential to undermine any serious steps toward a sustainable federal budget.

"We urge the House to reject these provisions."
</div></div>

In just a few days, they have gone back on every promise they have made over the last 2 years.
link (http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2011/01/05-2)

Q...2 years of promises...2 days to break all of them...who would have thought.....?

LWW
01-09-2011, 06:51 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Q...2 years of promises...2 days to break all of them...who would have thought.....? </div></div>

So let's review.

Some of their actions are things the democrooks were doing ... I don't like it now or the. You OTOH loved it when the democrooks didn't but hate it now.

Do I have that right?

LWW

eg8r
01-09-2011, 08:46 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Attempts to shut down off-shore tax havens cannot be considered in discussions of deficit reduction. These havens cost taxpayers an estimated $100 billion per year and go to those who benefit from access to American markets, workforce, security and infrastructure but pay little or nothing as they ship profits overseas. </div></div> Why stop here and not go all the way in reforming tax law? This estimation is a guess and unless you can give an example of a time when the government guessed on money and was correct maybe we could believe this one.

Dems only want to stop some things and not just clean everything up. They pick and choose what they think will impact the other group the most and go after it full swing instead of trying to do the right thing.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
01-09-2011, 10:30 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">New House Rules May Hamstring Deficit Reduction

WASHINGTON - January 5 - Statement of U.S. PIRG Tax and Budget Reform Advocate Nicole Tichon on the new rules package to be considered today in the U.S. House of Representatives, specifically the provisions around the budget.

"While the new Congressional leadership's focus on federal budget deficits is admirable, ‘<span style='font-size: 11pt'>cut-go' provisions that exempt special interest carve-outs and corporate tax loopholes</span> from the accounting process will only handcuff the ability of Congress to seriously tackle the budget problem.

"Further, the <span style='font-size: 14pt'>specific provisions barring discussion</span> of wasteful handouts through the tax code -- handouts that were fought for and won by armies of narrow interest lobbyists -- remove from consideration a significant number of solutions that have broad public support.

Under the proposed rules:

* <u>Attempts to shut down off-shore tax havens <span style='font-size: 14pt'>cannot be considered</span> in discussions of deficit reduction. </u>These havens cost taxpayers an estimated $100 billion per year and go to those who benefit from access to American markets, workforce, security and infrastructure but pay little or nothing as they ship profits overseas.

* <u>Tax expenditures that flow to BP, Exxon and others in the oil and gas industry <span style='font-size: 14pt'>are off the table.</span></u> These tax breaks provide unnecessary incentives as they largely underwrite activities the companies would willingly do on their own.

* Ill-advised loopholes carved out of the tax code that let multi-millionaire hedge fund managers pay dramatically reduced tax rates - far less than the average American - <span style='font-size: 17pt'>are exempt from discussions on solving our deficit problem.</span> This loophole has been criticized across the political spectrum from Paul Krugman to Pete Peterson.

"The proposed new rules have the dangerous potential to undo recent bipartisan progress, including recommendations of the Fiscal Commission to close a number of tax loopholes. Some of the few moments of bipartisan agreement in recent memory can be attributed to the need to end special interest influence and reform the tax code. These rules may in fact thwart the rising awareness that wasteful spending through the tax code is no different than wasteful spending through the appropriations process.

"Closing ill-advised tax loopholes, ending special interest carve-outs and corporate tax breaks do not equate to tax increases. Turning a blind eye to this type of waste and forbidding these common sense reforms has the potential to undermine any serious steps toward a sustainable federal budget.

"We urge the House to reject these provisions."
</div></div>

In just a few days, they have gone back on every promise they have made over the last 2 years.
link (http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2011/01/05-2)

Q...2 years of promises...2 days to break all of them...who would have thought.....? </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...who would have thought.....? </div></div>

You, Stretch, Hondo, Wolf, Sid, Moblsv, Naz, just to name a few of us, lol. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

Qtec
01-09-2011, 09:10 PM
As usual you missed the point.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"While the new Congressional leadership's focus on federal budget deficits is admirable, <span style='font-size: 20pt'>‘cut-go' provisions that exempt special interest carve-outs and corporate tax loopholes from the accounting process</span> </div></div>

They are all for cutting the deficit they say but don't touch our masters. They have made promises and have dropped them all.



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"Further, the specific provisions <span style='font-size: 20pt'>barring discussion</span> </div></div>



Example.

link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVmtsErHBbs)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Under the proposed rules:

* Attempts to shut down off-shore tax havens <span style='font-size: 14pt'>cannot be considered</span> in discussions of deficit reduction </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Tax expenditures that flow to BP, Exxon and others in the oil and gas industry are <span style='font-size: 17pt'>off the table.</span> </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ill-advised loopholes carved out of the tax code that let multi-millionaire hedge fund managers pay dramatically reduced tax rates - far less than the average American - <span style='font-size: 20pt'>are exempt from discussions on solving our deficit problem </span></div></div>



<u>If all these things and defence spending is off the table,</u> where are the cuts going to come from?


Who is going to pay/suffer?

Q

eg8r
01-10-2011, 08:14 AM
You never have a point so I picked what I wanted to talk about.

eg8r

Qtec
01-10-2011, 08:28 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You never have a point so I picked what I wanted to talk about.

eg8r </div></div>

..........and?

I laid out my point for you and you seem to have ignored it.

It only took 48 hours for the GOP to show its true face, ie totally the opposite of the one it presents at elections.


Q

Stretch
01-10-2011, 08:38 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You never have a point so I picked what I wanted to talk about.

eg8r </div></div>

..........and?

I laid out my point for you and you seem to have ignored it.

It only took 48 hours for the GOP to show its true face, ie totally the opposite of the one it presents at elections.


Q </div></div>

No surprises there. St.

Qtec
01-10-2011, 09:03 AM
Facts get in the way of preconceived idea's St. Better to ignore them. Pretend they don't exist.

Q...stick around St..sanity is in short supply around here. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

eg8r
01-10-2011, 09:41 AM
Again, you have no point and you act hypocritically doing it.

eg8r

Sev
01-13-2011, 08:23 PM
Its almost pathological.

Qtec
01-14-2011, 12:36 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Again, you have no point and you act hypocritically doing it.

eg8r </div></div>

Let me put it this way.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Naturally, Republicans have seized this opportunity to reinvent themselves as the party of fiscal responsibility. That angers Democrats -- especially since Republicans won't say what specific spending they want to cut. But their decision not to reveal any detail on specific cuts is a great political strategy.

Take, for example, Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) who appeared on CNBC's Squawk Box Friday morning. Anchor Joe Kernen asked Corker for some specifics on what he would cut. Here's what he said (full clip below):

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>Corker: I think all spending needs to be on the table.

Kernen: Everything's on the table?

<u>Everything. Everything.</u></span> </div></div>

I gave you a list of what is now <u>OFF the table</u>, here (http://billiardsdigest.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=331583#Post331583)

ie they are a bunch of hypocritical lying BSDs and it only took them 48 hrs to prove it.

Get it now?

Q

pooltchr
01-14-2011, 06:06 AM
So you are arguing that Dems are upset that Reps haven't been specific enough in where they want to make spending cuts. Of course, you ignore the fact that the Dems didn't even pass a budget last year to show where they were spending money.

If we didn't know what would be spent where, it becomes difficult to recommend specific budget cuts.

Steve

Qtec
01-14-2011, 06:20 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 17pt'>So you are arguing that Dems are upset that Reps haven't been specific enough in where they want to make spending cuts.</span>

Steve </div></div>

No.

What I'm saying, and I think I was quite clear on this, is this is they are are bunch of hypocritical liars but you still defend them!

They broke all their promises in 48 hours and all you can do is attack the Dems?. They lied to you and all you can do is defend them?



You give them a pass because you have swallowed the vitriol spewed by the right and the Left are now demons. You believe the Beck etc $hit. Too sad.

Q

pooltchr
01-14-2011, 06:28 AM
Sorry. I guess I misunderstood this part of your post

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

That angers Democrats -- especially since Republicans won't say what specific spending they want to cut.

Q </div></div>

Anyway, I'm not defending the Reps. And if they don't cut spendinng, I will be all over them, just as I was when Bush was in office.

I'm just pointing out that they had nothing to base any decisions on, since the Dems decided that actually passing a budget would have hurt them politically.

Steve

Sev
01-14-2011, 06:31 AM
I am all for the house not passing a budget or any extensions.
Shut er down.

LWW
01-14-2011, 06:32 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Facts get in the way of preconceived idea's St. Better to ignore them. Pretend they don't exist.

Q...stick around St..sanity is in short supply around here. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif </div></div>

That one deserves to live.

LWW

Sev
01-14-2011, 06:34 AM
I was admiring that one myself.

The chief loon should be popping in anytime now.