The Debt Ceiling

[mustafabey]

Our leaders( i use the term loosely) are like a bunch of 1950's kids playing a great game of chicken. Who will swerve of the road first. Hardcore Tea Party types want no raises to the debt ceiling. Moderate Republicans seem willing to compromise, as long as no taxes are raised on the wealthy. Jobs will suffer if they enact this tax. Seems a good part of the deficit dates back to Bush tax cuts and two unpaid for wars,not that Obama hasn't done his share of spending like a sailor in port after 6 months at sea. Democrats can offer no plan of substance that engages reality.So its scare tactics. No one wants the blame. Obama owns the economy now,especially since his administration hasn't created jobs. So the dems try to blame the GOP with the whole mess, should we default. Seniors will starve,federal workers will not get paid,veterans benefits will lapse. Excuse me,veterans benefits! The guys that protected the freedom ya'll talk about so much. Seniors! People who paid a large portion of their income into trust ya'll raid frequently. Either way you look at it,it sucks for the average American. Really its all about 2012. These politicians must be raking in a fortune if they want to hold or take the power.Of course the American people, who these idiots always quote, are too busy dealing with Kim Kardashian,Justin Whathisface,reality TV and Big macs to even know there is a crisis. But what gets me the most is the fact that no matter which scenario of defaut you choose to look at, way down on the bottom of the list is pay for active duty troops. Jesus H.Christ on a friggin' crutch, these politicians are insane. I pledge that come 2012, I will vote for NO incumbent,be it president or county supervisor. I will vote for no member of the democratic or republican parties, and if necessary I will write in Mickey Mouse or some other well qualified cartoon character. God wouldn't it be awesome if Mickey won!

[Chreees]

I agree with you, Mustafa. Madness is upon us, and the only thing we can do about it is vote, but vote for neither of the twisted parties. Instead vote for the little guy who hopefully won't have his own agenda and will actually do what's right for America. I've said it before and I'll say it again- this two-party system is what's killing America. Do away with it or have some independents rise and there you will see true change. But, I'm afraid that even the independents will have their own agenda and will screw us over as well. Corporations being allowed to pour money into politicians' campaigns and lobbyists twisting arms is what sways them (politicians) and gives them their agenda. Prevent this, and they are better focused on the well-being of the American people.

I'm voting Independent or writing in a name. Won't you please do the same? You will if you care about the future of your country.

[Rani]

Yep, yep. Bunch of blithering idiots on both sides. Although I think they may have just overplayed it this time - finally. They've managed to piss off both senior and veterans and just about everybody in between. A recent poll placed the majority of the blame on the Republicans 78%, but they weren't much happier with either the White House or the Democrats.

Here's the thing nobody seems to get. EVERYBODY wants the deficit reduced. EVERYBODY thinks Washington DC pretty much spends like drunken sailors on shore leave. EVERYBODY believes a stop needs to be put to it. Where the philosophy differs is where cuts should be made. Republicans want to leave their pet projects untouched while pillaging entitlements. Democrats want to keep entitlements intact, but aren't willing to cut enough elsewhere. And the truth is we can't have it both ways.

I firmly believe so-called entitlements should be in place. American tax money should be going to support American citizens. The TRILLIONS we pour into the international community needs to stop. If you actually go and read the federal budget for 2011, [u]every single department from agriculture to defense[/u] has millions and millions dedication to international projects. It's online, do a search and check for yourself. For example, did you know the Dept. of Agriculture is paying for a cotton farm in Brazil? What possible reason could they possibly give to justify finding that over the integrity of Social Security? Or small business development?

People get so wrapped up in the potential of raising taxes that they fail to realize that incorporated businesses file their own taxes completely separate from the owners personal taxes. A personal tax increase does absolute nothing to the business taxes, and doesn't hinder hiring. Yes, yes, I know all about SP businesses, but they rarely hire anyone except the kids during the Christmas rush season. Incorporation is a tool specifically created to create separation between the owners finances and the businesses. That's how owners walk away with their personal fortunes intact for God's sake! But the GOP wants to cut Medicare before raising taxes on the wealthy? On their PERSONAL wealth? Come on, how stupid is that?

Social Security should provably be addressed as the life expectancy extends, but not by reducing the dollar amounts. Hey! Live more years you're going to need more money, not less! Duh! Or were they planning on killing them off by reducing their ability to live?

I think a new poll should be held. "If you came across a terrorist with a bomb headed for the Congressional building and knew for a fact only politicians would be harmed, would you let them go?"

I'm betting the number of "yes" votes must might scare them into getting a clue.

'Rani

[TheScotsman]

[quote name='Rani' timestamp='1311271585' post='516786']
Yep, yep. Bunch of blithering idiots on both sides. Although I think they may have just overplayed it this time - finally. They've managed to piss off both senior and veterans and just about everybody in between. A recent poll placed the majority of the blame on the Republicans 78%, but they weren't much happier with either the White House or the Democrats.

Here's the thing nobody seems to get. EVERYBODY wants the deficit reduced. EVERYBODY thinks Washington DC pretty much spends like drunken sailors on shore leave. EVERYBODY believes a stop needs to be put to it. Where the philosophy differs is where cuts should be made. Republicans want to leave their pet projects untouched while pillaging entitlements. Democrats want to keep entitlements intact, but aren't willing to cut enough elsewhere. And the truth is we can't have it both ways.

I firmly believe so-called entitlements should be in place. American tax money should be going to support American citizens. The TRILLIONS we pour into the international community needs to stop. If you actually go and read the federal budget for 2011, [u]every single department from agriculture to defense[/u] has millions and millions dedication to international projects. It's online, do a search and check for yourself. For example, did you know the Dept. of Agriculture is paying for a cotton farm in Brazil? What possible reason could they possibly give to justify finding that over the integrity of Social Security? Or small business development?

People get so wrapped up in the potential of raising taxes that they fail to realize that incorporated businesses file their own taxes completely separate from the owners personal taxes. A personal tax increase does absolute nothing to the business taxes, and doesn't hinder hiring. Yes, yes, I know all about SP businesses, but they rarely hire anyone except the kids during the Christmas rush season. Incorporation is a tool specifically created to create separation between the owners finances and the businesses. That's how owners walk away with their personal fortunes intact for God's sake! But the GOP wants to cut Medicare before raising taxes on the wealthy? On their PERSONAL wealth? Come on, how stupid is that?

Social Security should provably be addressed as the life expectancy extends, but not by reducing the dollar amounts. Hey! Live more years you're going to need more money, not less! Duh! Or were they planning on killing them off by reducing their ability to live?

I think a new poll should be held. "If you came across a terrorist with a bomb headed for the Congressional building and knew for a fact only politicians would be harmed, would you let them go?"

I'm betting the number of "yes" votes must might scare them into getting a clue.

'Rani
[/quote]

You are missing the boat on taxes.
MOST small businesses are LLC's and the business income is files as a personal income. Just why is it the liberals can' seem to get that fact through their propaganda filled heads?

[Rani]

[quote name='TheScotsman' timestamp='1311300550' post='516851']
[quote name='Rani' timestamp='1311271585' post='516786']
Yep, yep. Bunch of blithering idiots on both sides. Although I think they may have just overplayed it this time - finally. They've managed to piss off both senior and veterans and just about everybody in between. A recent poll placed the majority of the blame on the Republicans 78%, but they weren't much happier with either the White House or the Democrats.

Here's the thing nobody seems to get. EVERYBODY wants the deficit reduced. EVERYBODY thinks Washington DC pretty much spends like drunken sailors on shore leave. EVERYBODY believes a stop needs to be put to it. Where the philosophy differs is where cuts should be made. Republicans want to leave their pet projects untouched while pillaging entitlements. Democrats want to keep entitlements intact, but aren't willing to cut enough elsewhere. And the truth is we can't have it both ways.

I firmly believe so-called entitlements should be in place. American tax money should be going to support American citizens. The TRILLIONS we pour into the international community needs to stop. If you actually go and read the federal budget for 2011, [u]every single department from agriculture to defense[/u] has millions and millions dedication to international projects. It's online, do a search and check for yourself. For example, did you know the Dept. of Agriculture is paying for a cotton farm in Brazil? What possible reason could they possibly give to justify finding that over the integrity of Social Security? Or small business development?

People get so wrapped up in the potential of raising taxes that they fail to realize that incorporated businesses file their own taxes completely separate from the owners personal taxes. A personal tax increase does absolute nothing to the business taxes, and doesn't hinder hiring. Yes, yes, I know all about SP businesses, but they rarely hire anyone except the kids during the Christmas rush season. Incorporation is a tool specifically created to create separation between the owners finances and the businesses. That's how owners walk away with their personal fortunes intact for God's sake! But the GOP wants to cut Medicare before raising taxes on the wealthy? On their PERSONAL wealth? Come on, how stupid is that?

Social Security should provably be addressed as the life expectancy extends, but not by reducing the dollar amounts. Hey! Live more years you're going to need more money, not less! Duh! Or were they planning on killing them off by reducing their ability to live?

I think a new poll should be held. "If you came across a terrorist with a bomb headed for the Congressional building and knew for a fact only politicians would be harmed, would you let them go?"

I'm betting the number of "yes" votes must might scare them into getting a clue.

'Rani
[/quote]

You are missing the boat on taxes.
MOST small businesses are LLC's and the business income is files as a personal income. Just why is it the liberals can' seem to get that fact through their propaganda filled heads?
[/quote]

Uh, I've owned TWO small businesses, am currently working on another one, and have been heavily involved in the tax filings for every business I ever worked for. It is NOT common to file the business taxes as personal. I challenge. Even calling it an LLC proves the challenge. Limited Liability Corporation. It becomes an entity in the eyes of the law subject to it's own responsibilities and isolates the owners. That's it's entire purpose.

'Rani

[TheScotsman]

[quote name='Rani' timestamp='1311306219' post='516856']
[quote name='TheScotsman' timestamp='1311300550' post='516851']
[quote name='Rani' timestamp='1311271585' post='516786']
Yep, yep. Bunch of blithering idiots on both sides. Although I think they may have just overplayed it this time - finally. They've managed to piss off both senior and veterans and just about everybody in between. A recent poll placed the majority of the blame on the Republicans 78%, but they weren't much happier with either the White House or the Democrats.

Here's the thing nobody seems to get. EVERYBODY wants the deficit reduced. EVERYBODY thinks Washington DC pretty much spends like drunken sailors on shore leave. EVERYBODY believes a stop needs to be put to it. Where the philosophy differs is where cuts should be made. Republicans want to leave their pet projects untouched while pillaging entitlements. Democrats want to keep entitlements intact, but aren't willing to cut enough elsewhere. And the truth is we can't have it both ways.

I firmly believe so-called entitlements should be in place. American tax money should be going to support American citizens. The TRILLIONS we pour into the international community needs to stop. If you actually go and read the federal budget for 2011, [u]every single department from agriculture to defense[/u] has millions and millions dedication to international projects. It's online, do a search and check for yourself. For example, did you know the Dept. of Agriculture is paying for a cotton farm in Brazil? What possible reason could they possibly give to justify finding that over the integrity of Social Security? Or small business development?

People get so wrapped up in the potential of raising taxes that they fail to realize that incorporated businesses file their own taxes completely separate from the owners personal taxes. A personal tax increase does absolute nothing to the business taxes, and doesn't hinder hiring. Yes, yes, I know all about SP businesses, but they rarely hire anyone except the kids during the Christmas rush season. Incorporation is a tool specifically created to create separation between the owners finances and the businesses. That's how owners walk away with their personal fortunes intact for God's sake! But the GOP wants to cut Medicare before raising taxes on the wealthy? On their PERSONAL wealth? Come on, how stupid is that?

Social Security should provably be addressed as the life expectancy extends, but not by reducing the dollar amounts. Hey! Live more years you're going to need more money, not less! Duh! Or were they planning on killing them off by reducing their ability to live?

I think a new poll should be held. "If you came across a terrorist with a bomb headed for the Congressional building and knew for a fact only politicians would be harmed, would you let them go?"

I'm betting the number of "yes" votes must might scare them into getting a clue.

'Rani
[/quote]

You are missing the boat on taxes.
MOST small businesses are LLC's and the business income is files as a personal income. Just why is it the liberals can' seem to get that fact through their propaganda filled heads?
[/quote]

Uh, I've owned TWO small businesses, am currently working on another one, and have been heavily involved in the tax filings for every business I ever worked for. It is NOT common to file the business taxes as personal. I challenge. Even calling it an LLC proves the challenge. Limited Liability Corporation. It becomes an entity in the eyes of the law subject to it's own responsibilities and isolates the owners. That's it's entire purpose.

'Rani
[/quote]


Bahahahahah..


must not have made any money at it then.

[Rani]

[quote name='TheScotsman' timestamp='1311355295' post='516907']
[quote name='Rani' timestamp='1311306219' post='516856']
[quote name='TheScotsman' timestamp='1311300550' post='516851']
[quote name='Rani' timestamp='1311271585' post='516786']
Yep, yep. Bunch of blithering idiots on both sides. Although I think they may have just overplayed it this time - finally. They've managed to piss off both senior and veterans and just about everybody in between. A recent poll placed the majority of the blame on the Republicans 78%, but they weren't much happier with either the White House or the Democrats.

Here's the thing nobody seems to get. EVERYBODY wants the deficit reduced. EVERYBODY thinks Washington DC pretty much spends like drunken sailors on shore leave. EVERYBODY believes a stop needs to be put to it. Where the philosophy differs is where cuts should be made. Republicans want to leave their pet projects untouched while pillaging entitlements. Democrats want to keep entitlements intact, but aren't willing to cut enough elsewhere. And the truth is we can't have it both ways.

I firmly believe so-called entitlements should be in place. American tax money should be going to support American citizens. The TRILLIONS we pour into the international community needs to stop. If you actually go and read the federal budget for 2011, [u]every single department from agriculture to defense[/u] has millions and millions dedication to international projects. It's online, do a search and check for yourself. For example, did you know the Dept. of Agriculture is paying for a cotton farm in Brazil? What possible reason could they possibly give to justify finding that over the integrity of Social Security? Or small business development?

People get so wrapped up in the potential of raising taxes that they fail to realize that incorporated businesses file their own taxes completely separate from the owners personal taxes. A personal tax increase does absolute nothing to the business taxes, and doesn't hinder hiring. Yes, yes, I know all about SP businesses, but they rarely hire anyone except the kids during the Christmas rush season. Incorporation is a tool specifically created to create separation between the owners finances and the businesses. That's how owners walk away with their personal fortunes intact for God's sake! But the GOP wants to cut Medicare before raising taxes on the wealthy? On their PERSONAL wealth? Come on, how stupid is that?

Social Security should provably be addressed as the life expectancy extends, but not by reducing the dollar amounts. Hey! Live more years you're going to need more money, not less! Duh! Or were they planning on killing them off by reducing their ability to live?

I think a new poll should be held. "If you came across a terrorist with a bomb headed for the Congressional building and knew for a fact only politicians would be harmed, would you let them go?"

I'm betting the number of "yes" votes must might scare them into getting a clue.

'Rani
[/quote]

You are missing the boat on taxes.
MOST small businesses are LLC's and the business income is files as a personal income. Just why is it the liberals can' seem to get that fact through their propaganda filled heads?
[/quote]

Uh, I've owned TWO small businesses, am currently working on another one, and have been heavily involved in the tax filings for every business I ever worked for. It is NOT common to file the business taxes as personal. I challenge. Even calling it an LLC proves the challenge. Limited Liability Corporation. It becomes an entity in the eyes of the law subject to it's own responsibilities and isolates the owners. That's it's entire purpose.

'Rani
[/quote]


Bahahahahah..


must not have made any money at it then.
[/quote]

LOL, you'd think huh? Actually one was with a now ex and I walked away. Worth every dime to get my freedom for the....... Never mind. He actually went bankrupt a few years later. The second, I just never really got into. Never truly worked it because of some family stuff going on at the same time. Kinda just never ramped it up into what I would call a "real" business. Still worked the tax breaks But it wasn't really my thing and my heart wasn't in it. My ePublishing buiness though...... That THAT haas my heart and soul, and I'm loving every day working on it.

Seriously though I like to double check my information always, so I called a tax accountant I know who specializes in small business and he tells me that if someone filing as a LLC (in which profits are added to personal income tax as total income), if they're filing correctly then no, a personal tax increase would not effect the business because of the way the money flows. All deductions for the business are consolidated before remaining value is added to personal income. So it's actually beneficial to have a lot of deductions from the business - like new hires, etc., before adding the income to the personal income. So I'm still calling bullshit on the GOP.

'Rani

[Rani]

Here's an interesting article on the debt ceiling. It's one of the few to actually explain whar it is, and where the deficit is really about and whar's owed to who.

[url="http://news.yahoo.com/latest-developments-debt-ceiling-standoff-220639090.html"]http://news.yahoo.com/latest-developments-debt-ceiling-standoff-220639090.html[/url]

'Rani

[TheScotsman]

[quote name='Rani' timestamp='1311868653' post='517480']
Here's an interesting article on the debt ceiling. It's one of the few to actually explain whar it is, and where the deficit is really about and whar's owed to who.

[url="http://news.yahoo.com/latest-developments-debt-ceiling-standoff-220639090.html"]http://news.yahoo.co...-220639090.html[/url]

'Rani
[/quote]



debt ceiling is irrelevant at this point.

No matter what the baffoons in washington do, they are merely stroking their own... er,... well, you get the idea.


The only sure thing is that no matter what happens in that 3-ring circus, the nation is going to get bumped to a credit worthiness equal to Slovenia.
It is the simple fact that irregardless of the fools and their self-created crisis they are "solving" we can't ever actually pay our bills, period, end of story, bring on the singing fat ladies, stick a fork in us- we are done.

A nation of sheep run by inept dumbasses

[TheScotsman]

At this point, it seems the only sticking point is dingy-Harry and the senate not even allowing debate on anything with a balanced budget amendment proposal.

Gotta ask yourself just exactly what do the dems think is wrong with forcing the gov't to live in a balanced budget? How can anyone support a party that refuses to even consider keeping their spending in black ink?

Some conservative radio host (Don't remember who) said it best ----- Washington DC-Hollywood for ugly people. They sure are living up to it on every possible level.

[Rani]

[quote name='TheScotsman' timestamp='1312065125' post='517864']
At this point, it seems the only sticking point is dingy-Harry and the senate not even allowing debate on anything with a balanced budget amendment proposal.

Gotta ask yourself just exactly what do the dems think is wrong with forcing the gov't to live in a balanced budget? How can anyone support a party that refuses to even consider keeping their spending in black ink?

Some conservative radio host (Don't remember who) said it best ----- Washington DC-Hollywood for ugly people. They sure are living up to it on every possible level.
[/quote]

i honestly believe we have reached the point where the two-party system is killing us. There is simply too much power consolidated in the two of them. It's all rhetoric, grandstanding smoke and mirrors. And none of us should be surprised. They're all lawyers. Law degrees all over the freakin' place. And lawyers are never about truth - they've been trained for years to deal only with what they can get away with and what they can prevent from being proven. Ever meet one you could trust to be honest? Me either and yet we all keep electing these damn scum sucking lawyers. No wonder the flippin' country is in such a mess.

Republicans want to cut spending and want to cut it all from entitlements while continuing to send money to overseas corporations and governments who contribute mega-bucks to their campaigns.. Democrats want to hang onto entitlements but not because American money should be given back to the American people for their benefit, but because they think the "look we're on the side of the poor downtrodden" will gain them another round in Washington. There are more poor than there are wealthy in this country and the Democrat's are using them to garner votes. Nothing more. Nobody much doubts anymore they're all out for themselves and their own agendas so they can keep a personal score-card of wins and losses, just like every single lawyer in the country. Neither party gives a rats ass about your small business, or the elderly or anything else. Only themselves.

I believe the way to shake them up is to vote against both big parties. Vote independent, peace and freedom, green party, whatever. Hell maybe we need to start a nation wide campaign to elect Mushrat on a write in vote right here from our little forum. He knows how to drop a hammer on somebody so they feel it. Once the "big two" start losing seats to people not aligned with the "party line" the power blockage on both sides will start to crumble. They all need a little "holy shit I'm on my own here" moment. No more wheeling and dealing within their own parties and backing each other to pull the wool over our eyes. Until we break up the consolidated power in the two major parties, the American people and it's home grown business are all going to keep getting screwed. Without a single drink let alone dinner.

'Rani

[Hellz]

Time for a Hellz rant. But let me start off by saying, to clear and confusion and give you a standpoint of where I am comming from, I am a strong believer in conservative financial ideals. Inwhich I believe the tea party people have the very right idea on things. America has been raised on these ideals, and has been slowly switched over the years onto different thinking and ideals, inwhich we have seen a decline in the economy. Mind you, the economy has always had it's ups and downs, it is a cycle. It's just how drastic the economic up/down turn is within it's cycles. I do not think Obama has helped one bit, besides squandering taxpayer dollars. And america has pretty much turned into a two party system because many individuals indentify with one or the other. Yes you have alot of smaller parties trying to get involved, but they usually do not make it anywhere because mainstream america does not indentify with ideas the parties represent, which is why it will probably never happen. The only way I see it happening in the near future was if the tea party people broke off and rallied under thier own banner instead of borrowing the republican banner to gain more recognition and support. Inwhich I believe they could do, and pose a threat to both republican and democrat parties. But again, Not enough of america would pay attention to such things and most candidates would likely get passed by. In the scenario that we did enter a 3 party system? Something as drastic as say.. republicans, democrats and *shiver* the green party? The system would collapse, Nothing would get done, ever. As these last mid term elections came and went you did see a change in america. As we have a hard left president running things, and he surrounded himself with like minded people of course, we have seen a portion of america wake up, and fight for what they want. Which happend to give birth to the tea party. Mind you, this was just midterms, so you can imagine what the presidential election will hold if it keeps the steam. Either we will see a break away party from the republicans as the true "tea party" (Although i doubt they will actually call themselves that) or an total transofrmation of the republican party. I'm leaning more latter happening rather than the former. It's just simpler over-all, but still has a stigma attached to it. And as far as the tax break for big corperations and wealthy people goes. Does it not make sense to people why they get tax breaks? First of all these people are business owners, Like all business owners they are in it to makes money. For some ungodly reason there are people out there who have a problem with these people and all the moeny they make. Fact is: They are the ones that pay your bills at the end of the week when you collect your check. The tax breaks they get provided allow them to either pay you more, or hire new people on, thus creating more jobs, and creating more wealth to spread around. Everyone can not be equal in this society, it just will not work. It is not the nature of capitalism. Which brings me to another, short point. The corperate bailouts. Honestly, this was completely unnescessary. a capitlaist society is like a growing, evolving forest. Corperations like GM where like a huge tree, that was rotting and starting to fall down. Now think, In a forest what happens when a big tree falls down? Alot of things take it's place to fill the gap. Sure, It's bare for a little while, but it ALWAYS happens. Effectively the government came in and held this tree up in hopes it'll start growing again. Wrong move. While they gave corperations a little fertilizer and some tie-downs to stabalise them, They are still withering. And will eventually rot further and fall over. Why mess with the natural order of things? Fear, That's why they do it. And that's what the whole situation going on in the government boils down to right now, Everyone has thier beliefs. They all fear that if the other person get thier way, that it will no longer go thier way. Thus enhancing personal agendas, if they have one. I also do not know if any of you have been following the situation with our new governer here in wiscosconsin and the whole teacher union also. But that's a whole nother interesting can of worms to get into. But pretty neat subject none the less.

I think that I am pretty much done for the moment. Oh, And look on youtube for the exchange Ron paul had with the secretary of treasury. Anyone can sure appreciate Ron pauls logic. I know I do.

Also Rani, I do not think it is fair to make a generalization about laywers like that. Saying all laywers lie is like saying all black people will steal your car. Which we all know, Is not true.

[judgeposer]

[quote name='Rani' timestamp='1312073982' post='517877']
i honestly believe we have reached the point where the two-party system is killing us. There is simply too much power consolidated in the two of them. It's all rhetoric, grandstanding smoke and mirrors. And none of us should be surprised. They're all lawyers. Law degrees all over the freakin' place. And lawyers are never about truth - they've been trained for years to deal only with what they can get away with and what they can prevent from being proven. Ever meet one you could trust to be honest? Me either and yet we all keep electing these damn scum sucking lawyers. No wonder the flippin' country is in such a mess.

Republicans want to cut spending and want to cut it all from entitlements while continuing to send money to overseas corporations and governments who contribute mega-bucks to their campaigns.. Democrats want to hang onto entitlements but not because American money should be given back to the American people for their benefit, but because they think the "look we're on the side of the poor downtrodden" will gain them another round in Washington. There are more poor than there are wealthy in this country and the Democrat's are using them to garner votes. Nothing more. Nobody much doubts anymore they're all out for themselves and their own agendas so they can keep a personal score-card of wins and losses, just like every single lawyer in the country. Neither party gives a rats ass about your small business, or the elderly or anything else. Only themselves.

I believe the way to shake them up is to vote against both big parties. Vote independent, peace and freedom, green party, whatever. Hell maybe we need to start a nation wide campaign to elect Mushrat on a write in vote right here from our little forum. He knows how to drop a hammer on somebody so they feel it. Once the "big two" start losing seats to people not aligned with the "party line" the power blockage on both sides will start to crumble. They all need a little "holy shit I'm on my own here" moment. No more wheeling and dealing within their own parties and backing each other to pull the wool over our eyes. Until we break up the consolidated power in the two major parties, the American people and it's home grown business are all going to keep getting screwed. Without a single drink let alone dinner.

'Rani
[/quote]

I think the issue of the debt ceiling is the latest in a series of debates that our country has engaged in of late that has at its core the question about the proper role and size of government. I also think it's hackneyed to say that our country or our government is broken. I happen to agree with Charles Krauthammer's latest piece, [url="http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/273017/debt-ceiling-divide-charles-krauthammer"]The Debt-Ceiling Divide[/url]. To summarize, Krauthammer believes that a war of ideologies is taking place--between expansive government liberals/Democrats against limited government conservatives/Republicans. On this issue, and which I say as a self-identifying Conservative, the Tea Party contingent of the Republican party is wrong; they're playing a game of principle when we clearly require a pragmatic solution. Also, I'm sympathetic to Krauthammer's argument that in doing so, they're operating on a self-destructive, if not counter-constitutional path.

As an aside, I'm also sympathetic to Rani's criticism of the legal profession, as a lawyer myself. I don't, however, believe the blame for this county's predicament rests at the feet of the bar. Law school trains in the ways of advocacy, fashioning an argument and championing it towards the end of serving your client, whether that be the "people," in the case of a government attorney, or a specific person (including corporate persons), in the case of a private practitioner. One of the greatest fictions of the legal profession, and perhaps even conventional wisdom is that practicing law has something to do with "truth," as Rani seems to expose. I don't believe truth has anything to do with it; I would go even further and argue that truth [i]cannot[/i] have anything to do with it. In representing clients, lawyers assume a legal and ethical responsibility to represent and advocate for that client. With the exception of not being allowed to engage in perjurious practices, lawyers have no obligation to search for truth, or ensure its vindication. For example, in a criminal trial, the public is under the mistaken impression that it has something to do with achieving or enforcing justice, which certainly has a relationship close to truth, in the sense we're speaking about here. Lawyers, for their part, have not taken the time to explain how this is not the case. What actually takes place is a process that attempts to ensure that a defendant is not wrongly convicted. Not that that always works out that way. Although I haven't done research to prove this claim, I would agree that most elected officials are, by education, lawyers. I think also that politics is a natural professional fit for the personality type and skill set possessed by most lawyers, which to me goes a long way explaining why most politicians are lawyers. So, while it is true that most politicians might be lawyers (and for reasons their education, training, and work highlight), most lawyers are not politicians. Lawyer-Politicians, I would also venture to guess, count for very few of the total lawyers out there.

To return the the thread's subject - what we're experiencing in this latest debate on the debt ceiling is really the latest incarnation of the divide that separates this country over the proper role of government; fiscal "conservatives" on one side, playing chicken with the (in this case) practically-minded liberals/Democrats. The debate, as I see it, is far from nefarious, but has the capacity to be as, if not more, destructive.

[Rani]

[quote name='judgeposer' timestamp='1312168558' post='518031']
[quote name='Rani' timestamp='1312073982' post='517877']
i honestly believe we have reached the point where the two-party system is killing us. There is simply too much power consolidated in the two of them. It's all rhetoric, grandstanding smoke and mirrors. And none of us should be surprised. They're all lawyers. Law degrees all over the freakin' place. And lawyers are never about truth - they've been trained for years to deal only with what they can get away with and what they can prevent from being proven. Ever meet one you could trust to be honest? Me either and yet we all keep electing these damn scum sucking lawyers. No wonder the flippin' country is in such a mess.

Republicans want to cut spending and want to cut it all from entitlements while continuing to send money to overseas corporations and governments who contribute mega-bucks to their campaigns.. Democrats want to hang onto entitlements but not because American money should be given back to the American people for their benefit, but because they think the "look we're on the side of the poor downtrodden" will gain them another round in Washington. There are more poor than there are wealthy in this country and the Democrat's are using them to garner votes. Nothing more. Nobody much doubts anymore they're all out for themselves and their own agendas so they can keep a personal score-card of wins and losses, just like every single lawyer in the country. Neither party gives a rats ass about your small business, or the elderly or anything else. Only themselves.

I believe the way to shake them up is to vote against both big parties. Vote independent, peace and freedom, green party, whatever. Hell maybe we need to start a nation wide campaign to elect Mushrat on a write in vote right here from our little forum. He knows how to drop a hammer on somebody so they feel it. Once the "big two" start losing seats to people not aligned with the "party line" the power blockage on both sides will start to crumble. They all need a little "holy shit I'm on my own here" moment. No more wheeling and dealing within their own parties and backing each other to pull the wool over our eyes. Until we break up the consolidated power in the two major parties, the American people and it's home grown business are all going to keep getting screwed. Without a single drink let alone dinner.

'Rani
[/quote]

I think the issue of the debt ceiling is the latest in a series of debates that our country has engaged in of late that has at its core the question about the proper role and size of government. I also think it's hackneyed to say that our country or our government is broken. I happen to agree with Charles Krauthammer's latest piece, [url="http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/273017/debt-ceiling-divide-charles-krauthammer"]The Debt-Ceiling Divide[/url]. To summarize, Krauthammer believes that a war of ideologies is taking place--between expansive government liberals/Democrats against limited government conservatives/Republicans. On this issue, and which I say as a self-identifying Conservative, the Tea Party contingent of the Republican party is wrong; they're playing a game of principle when we clearly require a pragmatic solution. Also, I'm sympathetic to Krauthammer's argument that in doing so, they're operating on a self-destructive, if not counter-constitutional path.

As an aside, I'm also sympathetic to Rani's criticism of the legal profession, as a lawyer myself. I don't, however, believe the blame for this county's predicament rests at the feet of the bar. Law school trains in the ways of advocacy, fashioning an argument and championing it towards the end of serving your client, whether that be the "people," in the case of a government attorney, or a specific person (including corporate persons), in the case of a private practitioner. One of the greatest fictions of the legal profession, and perhaps even conventional wisdom is that practicing law has something to do with "truth," as Rani seems to expose. I don't believe truth has anything to do with it; I would go even further and argue that truth [i]cannot[/i] have anything to do with it. In representing clients, lawyers assume a legal and ethical responsibility to represent and advocate for that client. With the exception of not being allowed to engage in perjurious practices, lawyers have no obligation to search for truth, or ensure its vindication. For example, in a criminal trial, the public is under the mistaken impression that it has something to do with achieving or enforcing justice, which certainly has a relationship close to truth, in the sense we're speaking about here. Lawyers, for their part, have not taken the time to explain how this is not the case. What actually takes place is a process that attempts to ensure that a defendant is not wrongly convicted. Not that that always works out that way. Although I haven't done research to prove this claim, I would agree that most elected officials are, by education, lawyers. I think also that politics is a natural professional fit for the personality type and skill set possessed by most lawyers, which to me goes a long way explaining why most politicians are lawyers. So, while it is true that most politicians might be lawyers (and for reasons their education, training, and work highlight), most lawyers are not politicians. Lawyer-Politicians, I would also venture to guess, count for very few of the total lawyers out there.

To return the the thread's subject - what we're experiencing in this latest debate on the debt ceiling is really the latest incarnation of the divide that separates this country over the proper role of government; fiscal "conservatives" on one side, playing chicken with the (in this case) practically-minded liberals/Democrats. The debate, as I see it, is far from nefarious, but has the capacity to be as, if not more, destructive.
[/quote]

I actually tried to address a better clarification on the lawyer issue earlier and never got around to posting it, but you did it better than I ever could have. It's not that I believe lawyers are inherently bad, or evil, or liars. It's that law is a structure if you will. And the purpose of lawyers is to operate within and to a great extent serve that structure. In a perfect world that structure would be exactly aligned with morality, but morality is a spiritual issue and the law is a structure for civilization. To be a lawyer means you have to shift to a different perspective. The Casey Anthony verdict is a perfect example. Morally, even the jury has come out to say they did not think she was innocent, but the letter of the law required that she be declared not guilty. That law versus morality stance changes it's operator's method of thinking. It has to. Otherwise you're less likely to succeed as a lawyer in today's over legislated civilization.

I do think that this change is perspective is part of the problem. There is a win/lose "within the structure" mentality. I don't believe that mentality best serves the more spiritual sense of morality that most American's firmly believe our nation is supposed to espouse. It has also been a side effect that legislation is now so convoluted with "legalese" that the public which it's supposed to be serving can no longer understand it and tend to allow legislation go forward without their voices ever being heard. Go to either the Senate or House website and read a bill start to finish. Any bill. I won't wait around because you're going to be at it for hours if not days in the case of something like the Health Care Reform. How can Average Joe American possibly understand that and know what impact the law will actually have on him or his business? That leaves us at the mercy of the lobbying action by the authors and sponsors of the bills and it's opponents. Without having even a vague clue whether or not they're telling the truth? Boehner certainly wanted his bill to pass instead of Reid's and vice versa. Which is why our representation needs to return into the control of the common man who is practical, public service minded, and not invested mentally or professionally in serving the structure of law. We do that with term limits and dramatically reducing the financial benefits of becoming a politician.

The $174,000 a junior congressperson receives is like military salary. We pay much more above and beyond that amount. In the case of the military basic clothing, combat weaponry, housing and food are added onto the basic salary. In the case of a politician we pay for their postage, their websites, their travel to and from their districts, their gym membership, health insurance, retirement, and so on and so on and so on. Any business person could tell you a decent benefit package will add one-third to the salary costs of every employee. An amazing benefit package like they've voted themselves? I'm sure it's much, much more. And on top of that they're in charge of their own salary increases. Try running that one by YOUR boss anytime soon and see how he feels about it.

In the midst of these ideologies, I hear over and over on public forums that we need to quit cutting the throats of our own people and cut out wars, foreign aid, benefits to illegal aliens, etc., instead of social security and other entitlements. Yet the Democrats claim to fight for the middle class and refuse to offer up alternate cost cutting measures that protect entitlements. If you've ever taken even a passing glance at the Federal budget, (yes it's available online)j, you'd be amazed at the discretionary money being shoveled out by every single department into international hands instead of our own people. It's many, many, MANY billions. Republicans on the other hand insist on keeping revenue low through tax breaks and want to slash entitlements while also leaving international spending untouched. Neither side is seeing the point constantly being heard in public outcry. Yes cut spending absolutely, but quit cutting it from the our own citizens. And quit enabling global business concerns that shift our economy to their shores. They protect the future and livelihoods of their people, why can't our government take care of our own? That I honestly think is the biggest part of the problem. They don't have the common sense to support American citizens and business first and they're not listening to the public outcry closely enough to see that while we may agree on cuts to spending, we have been yelling for those cuts to be against foreign obligations first.

'Rani

[Rani]

Dan Lacy is a business adviser who works to help small businesses grow. But he has some interesting thoughts on government as it may relate to the debt ceiling among other things. Here's his blog's home page address. Rest you can navigate from there.

[url="http://www.yellowpages.com/business/site?link=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dynastybuilder.com"]http://www.yellowpages.com/business/site?link=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dynastybuilder.com[/url]

'Rani

[TheScotsman]

Hmmm... seems to me when they were debating the debt ceiling debacle Peter barns asked the guy in charge of nobama's financial plans if there was a risk of loosing our AAA credit rating.

Geithner said there was "no chance" of it.


[i]Peter Barnes “Is there a risk that the United States could lose its AAA credit rating? Yes or no?”[/i]

[i] [/i][b][i]Geithner’s response: “No risk of that.”[/i][/b]

[i] [/i][i]“No risk?” Barnes asked.[/i]

[i] [/i][i]“[b]No risk[/b],” Geithner said.[/i]




Yet again geithner proves himself to be an outstanding moron in a city full of morons. Hell, everyone with an IQ higher than a soggy ramen noodle knew we were getting hosed if the cuts in the deal didn't amount to $4,500,000,000,000.00 (crap is that allot of zeros) in firm real cuts, not simply cutting the projected increase, and not putting it off on an unconstitutional "super congress" committee.




Well, better [u]hope[/u] you don't have any adjustable rate loans, or a big balance on that plastic, because that rate is going to [u]change[/u] up in the very near future. Add 12K or so to a 75K mortgage, 3.5K to that new pirus on a 6 year note. Third Way says a half percent interest increase will kill 640,000 jobs first year.





I see your hope and change... maybe next time ask what the change will be, it's not like they didn't tell us right out front.

[Chreees]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CB5gwNlCg1g[url="http://www.youtube.com/user/RonPaul2008dotcom#p/u/0/BdI2l6CXBwk"]
[/url]

[Rani]

[quote name='TheScotsman' timestamp='1312609222' post='518961']
Hmmm... seems to me when they were debating the debt ceiling debacle Peter barns asked the guy in charge of nobama's financial plans if there was a risk of loosing our AAA credit rating.

Geithner said there was "no chance" of it.


[i]Peter Barnes "Is there a risk that the United States could lose its AAA credit rating? Yes or no?"[/i]

[i] [/i][b][i]Geithner's response: "No risk of that."[/i][/b]

[i] [/i][i]"No risk?" Barnes asked.[/i]

[i] [/i][i]"[b]No risk[/b]," Geithner said.[/i]




Yet again geithner proves himself to be an outstanding moron in a city full of morons. Hell, everyone with an IQ higher than a soggy ramen noodle knew we were getting hosed if the cuts in the deal didn't amount to $4,500,000,000,000.00 (crap is that allot of zeros) in firm real cuts, not simply cutting the projected increase, and not putting it off on an unconstitutional "super congress" committee.




Well, better [u]hope[/u] you don't have any adjustable rate loans, or a big balance on that plastic, because that rate is going to [u]change[/u] up in the very near future. Add 12K or so to a 75K mortgage, 3.5K to that new pirus on a 6 year note. Third Way says a half percent interest increase will kill 640,000 jobs first year.





I see your hope and change... maybe next time ask what the change will be, it's not like they didn't tell us right out front.



[/quote]

From what I hear from my friends in banking, the reason for the downgrade was the fact that our Congress pretty much played chicken through the whole thing. They ALL behaved with complete disregard for the financial stability of our economy, and acted like children, knowing full well they'd reach some kind of agreement at the 11th hour and figuring they could get away with it. Apparently the rest of the world thinks otherwise. Meanwhile they're all on a months vacation. Worthless assholes, every damned one of them.

'Rani

[TheScotsman]

[quote name='Rani' timestamp='1312816480' post='519234']
[quote name='TheScotsman' timestamp='1312609222' post='518961']
Hmmm... seems to me when they were debating the debt ceiling debacle Peter barns asked the guy in charge of nobama's financial plans if there was a risk of loosing our AAA credit rating.

Geithner said there was "no chance" of it.


[i]Peter Barnes "Is there a risk that the United States could lose its AAA credit rating? Yes or no?"[/i]

[i] [/i][b][i]Geithner's response: "No risk of that."[/i][/b]

[i] [/i][i]"No risk?" Barnes asked.[/i]

[i] [/i][i]"[b]No risk[/b]," Geithner said.[/i]




Yet again geithner proves himself to be an outstanding moron in a city full of morons. Hell, everyone with an IQ higher than a soggy ramen noodle knew we were getting hosed if the cuts in the deal didn't amount to $4,500,000,000,000.00 (crap is that allot of zeros) in firm real cuts, not simply cutting the projected increase, and not putting it off on an unconstitutional "super congress" committee.




Well, better [u]hope[/u] you don't have any adjustable rate loans, or a big balance on that plastic, because that rate is going to [u]change[/u] up in the very near future. Add 12K or so to a 75K mortgage, 3.5K to that new pirus on a 6 year note. Third Way says a half percent interest increase will kill 640,000 jobs first year.





I see your hope and change... maybe next time ask what the change will be, it's not like they didn't tell us right out front.



[/quote]

From what I hear from my friends in banking, the reason for the downgrade was the fact that our Congress pretty much played chicken through the whole thing. They ALL behaved with complete disregard for the financial stability of our economy, and acted like children, knowing full well they'd reach some kind of agreement at the 11th hour and figuring they could get away with it. Apparently the rest of the world thinks otherwise. Meanwhile they're all on a months vacation. Worthless assholes, every damned one of them.

'Rani
[/quote]



They are wrong in their analysis of the downgrade. It's really not hard to figure out the logic, after all S&P has had people trying to explain it to anyone that will listen. Surprisingly the liberal-biased media isn't covering any of the interviews/meetings. Gee, go figure.

S&P Managing Director John Chambers said the credit rating downgrade stemmed not only from runaway U.S. deficits and national debt, but also the expectation that America’s debt burden will grow heavier in the future. In particular, Chambers pointed to Washington’s inability to overcome political obstacles and enact aggressive fiscal reforms.

Moodys says their AAA rating will only hold if the USA gets a hold on the debt/GDP ratio. It's not about the piss-ants fighting in congress --- It's about a nation that can't quit pissing money away on stupid programs and entitlements. Even though the media/dems are trying to blame the tea party, and the gridlock - that is simply not a true fact.