• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2011: Of Weiners, Boehners, Santorum, and Teabags

Status
Not open for further replies.
mckmas8808 said:
He knows this too. I think he does it for political reasons. I think he wants to be viewed as the guy trying to work with the other party, whereas the GOP couldn't care less.

His rhetoric alone shows he honestly believes republicans will work with him if he just gives them 60%+ of what they want. We've seen this game played since Jan 09, there's no reason to believe it won't continue tonight. Much of the reports coming out thus far suggest he's going to call for a host of policies republicans have supporter in the past. So of course when they reject every single one he'll campaign around the country complaining about it.
 
mckmas8808 said:
What are you talking about? I didn't say that. I'm okay with your moving towards a mileage tax (I have ZERO idea how this would work by the way) if the vehicles on the road created the need. If we were losing so much tax money for roads because that many people started driving electric cars and trucks (what a great country we'd be then), then change the system to what you are stating.

But I just want enough vehicles on the road to cause that problem first. My only problem with it is what if people stop by electrics and hybrid because of this?

Collecting a mileage tax is easy. Odometer readings. Just like for insurance.

Why would people stop buying hybrids and electrics....? Its not like gas is ever going to get cheaper.



speculawyer said:
Your understanding of the matter qualifies you to be a Fox news host.

I demand an apology before reading the rest of your post.


Evlar said:
Road use tax is impractical and disadvantageous. You would need to take account of not just weight and distance traveled but the relative cost-per-person of maintaining the particular road you happen to be driving on. This is excessively burdensome on people who happen to live on expensive-to-maintain-yet-lightly-used thoroughfares.
.

No, its very easy.

You set up tiers, like with electricity.

Under 2,000lbs
2001-3,000
3,001-4000
etc etc

Each tier gets charged at a slightly different rate per mile. Obviously, higher as you go up.

End of year (or monthly, or every 6 months, doesnt matter) you get your odometer checked.

10,000 miles at the tier 2 price of 5 cents a mile = your bill.

(Made up numbers).

Super easy. The more you drive, the more you pay. The heavier your vehicle, the more you pay.

I dont understand the rest of your point. Yes, roads are for trade. Thats why we need to discourage private driving. Every car on the road = a delay for commerce. Congestion kills productivity.


mckmas8808 said:
How the hell is a $40,000 for the rich? 3 years later and that car can be bought for $22,000 and also by someone in the middle class.


If you're arguing that someone who can drop $40,000 on a car is not rich, then you sir, are a fox news host.

Yes, the car will eventually be resold. $22,000 isnt exactly cheap either, and that person doesnt get a tax credit. They also get a battery that isnt as good.

Heres my problem with the current tax incentive:

Demand for electric cars exceeds supply.

If we have 1,000 electric cars, and 5,000 people on the waiting list....why the fuck are we giving them $7,5000?

Lets assume for a second we drop the incentive, and the waiting list goes to 2,500. Guess what, the car is still sold out.



TacticalFox88 said:
Whatever happened to that mandate that Car Manufacturers had to BY LAW make cars with excellent gas mileage or face sanctions by the Feds? Or something akin to that?


CAFE standards, they exist and continue to go up ever so slightly. Dont confuse the CAFE mileage with EPA mileage and neither with what you get in the real world.

Also note its a fleet average, not a minimum. You can sell a 10mpg car as long as you have a 50mpg to offset it.
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
RustyNails said:
This is the new reality. Best analogy I can come up with (bear with me): think of a lazy bull in a farm that won't plough the field. Now it's the farmer's job to whip that bull and force it into action. Yes, GOP is a mindless, immovable bovine creature. If the seeds aren't planted, the people aren't gonna blame the bull. They're gonna blame the farmer.

Pretty sure eznark can come up with a better farm analogy.


I like this analogy. And within it, shouldn't a 3rd party (not the govt version) look at the situation and realize that the farmer needs a new bull that's not lazy instead of replacing the farmer?
 
mckmas8808 said:
I like this analogy. And within it, shouldn't a 3rd party (not the govt version) look at the situation and realize that the farmer needs a new bull that's not lazy instead of replacing the farmer?

We need someone to say fuck this shit and buy a tractor.
 
mckmas8808 said:
I like this analogy. And within it, shouldn't a 3rd party (not the govt version) look at the situation and realize that the farmer needs a new bull that's not lazy instead of replacing the farmer?
The bull was working with previous farmers. As soon as the new farmer stepped in, it stopped working. So, the farmer sucks!
 

mj1108

Member
mckmas8808 said:
Either way the GOP has no responsibility here it seems to help create jobs. Oh how convenient. It's 100% completely on Obama to create jobs in America. Ugh! Sometimes I hate the media.

I guess they forget that in 2010 the GOP ran on JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS and so far has done nothing but make sure jobs can't be created.
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Doc Holliday said:
Well it's not working for him. The economy still sucks, and his base is disheartened.

Me and you probably agree on what he should offer in the package. I'd be happy with a 2 year half a trillion package personally.
 

Gr1mLock

Passing metallic gas
mckmas8808 said:
He knows this too. I think he does it for political reasons. I think he wants to be viewed as the guy trying to work with the other party, whereas the GOP couldn't care less.

I don't think i even know what the 'correct' approach to governing from his current political position is anymore. I feel for the guy.
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Cantor Nixes President Obama’s Infrastructure Bank Idea
Brian Beutler | September 8, 2011, 2:16PM



Eric-Cantor-2011-14-cropped-proto-custom_2.jpg





House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) is striking a gentler tone ahead of President Obama's Thursday jobs speech, and highlighting the areas he says Republicans can work with the administration to grow the economy -- unemployment insurance, payroll taxes, and infrastructure. But the devil is in the details, and there are still significant differences between the parties' approaches.

"I'm wary of the suggestion of an infrastructure bank," House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) told reporters at a roundtable lunch hosted by the Christian Science Monitor. "I am one who agrees with the notion that an infrastructure bank is almost like creating a Fanny and Freddie for roads and bridges."

That's President Obama's favored infrastructure spending idea -- to loan both private and public dollars to states and municipalities to speed up new and existing building projects, and to lure private investment with the promise of returns from tolls and other fees. Cantor's counter offer is to nix the requirement that states "set aside 10 percent of federal surface transportation funds for transportation museums, education, and preservation would allow states to devote these monies to high-priority infrastructure projects, without adding to the deficit."

These are pretty different ideas, though they could meet similar ends in some circumstances. The infrastructure bank wouldn't require canceling some projects (mainly for bikers and pedestrians) to fund different ones, and would fund projects that meet high bang-for-the-buck, and environmental standards.

Jared Bernstein -- an economist at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and Vice President Joe Biden's former top economic adviser -- told TPM, "the [infrastructure] bank has real advantages in terms of rigorous cost benefit analysis in choosing projects that this idea doesn't sound like it would.... but 10 percent isn't a lot and this kind of flexibility can be a useful thing I would just want to know what kind of criteria the project choice involves. Because the last thing we want to do is waste these scarce resources."

The new tone may mask underlying differences, but they still exist

#################


Hmmmm.......so is Cantor already turning down some of the ideas before they are even officially announced? Or is this inside baseball/politics? Either way I like the idea of an infrastructure bank.
 
mckmas8808 said:
Cantor Nixes President Obama’s Infrastructure Bank Idea
Brian Beutler | September 8, 2011, 2:16PM



Eric-Cantor-2011-14-cropped-proto-custom_2.jpg





House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) is striking a gentler tone ahead of President Obama's Thursday jobs speech, and highlighting the areas he says Republicans can work with the administration to grow the economy -- unemployment insurance, payroll taxes, and infrastructure. But the devil is in the details, and there are still significant differences between the parties' approaches.

"I'm wary of the suggestion of an infrastructure bank," House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) told reporters at a roundtable lunch hosted by the Christian Science Monitor. "I am one who agrees with the notion that an infrastructure bank is almost like creating a Fanny and Freddie for roads and bridges."

That's President Obama's favored infrastructure spending idea -- to loan both private and public dollars to states and municipalities to speed up new and existing building projects, and to lure private investment with the promise of returns from tolls and other fees. Cantor's counter offer is to nix the requirement that states "set aside 10 percent of federal surface transportation funds for transportation museums, education, and preservation would allow states to devote these monies to high-priority infrastructure projects, without adding to the deficit."

These are pretty different ideas, though they could meet similar ends in some circumstances. The infrastructure bank wouldn't require canceling some projects (mainly for bikers and pedestrians) to fund different ones, and would fund projects that meet high bang-for-the-buck, and environmental standards.

Jared Bernstein -- an economist at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and Vice President Joe Biden's former top economic adviser -- told TPM, "the [infrastructure] bank has real advantages in terms of rigorous cost benefit analysis in choosing projects that this idea doesn't sound like it would.... but 10 percent isn't a lot and this kind of flexibility can be a useful thing I would just want to know what kind of criteria the project choice involves. Because the last thing we want to do is waste these scarce resources."

The new tone may mask underlying differences, but they still exist

#################


Hmmmm.......so is Cantor already turning down some of the ideas before they are even officially announced? Or is this inside baseball/politics? Either way I like the idea of an infrastructure bank.

Cantor doesn't like it? Well Obama just crossed that off his list.
 

GhaleonEB

Member
mckmas8808 said:
Hmmmm.......so is Cantor already turning down some of the ideas before they are even officially announced? Or is this inside baseball/politics? Either way I like the idea of an infrastructure bank.
You can print out this handy guide to the way elected Republicans process things, and reference it when reading articles like that. Might be worth printing out and taping next to your monitor.

Q1: Is Obama proposing it?

A1: If yes, the GOP will oppose it. If no, see next question.

Q2: Will it help the economy?

A: If yes, the GOP will oppose it. If not, and the answer to Q1 is also no, the GOP might support it.​

I can build a quick flowchart if it will help.
 
GhaleonEB said:
You can print out this handy guide to the way elected Republicans process things, and reference it when reading articles like that. Might be worth printing out and taping next to your monitor.

Q1: Is Obama proposing it?

A1: If yes, the GOP will oppose it. If no, see next question.

Q2: Will it help the economy?

A: If yes, the GOP will oppose it. If not, and the answer to Q1 is also no, the GOP might support it.​

I can build a quick flowchart if it will help.

I'd like to add

Q3: Is GOP opposing it?

A3: If yes then Obama will do away with proposition.
 
ClovingSteam said:
They supported it before they were against it and now that they're against it Obama isn't supporting it.
Cantor overplays his clout anyway. Boehner calls the real shots in the house. We'll see what they say after the speech.
mckmas8808 said:
This I didn't know. WTF!
Yep. Nebraska's Chuck Hagel came up with it 4, 5 years ago.

Edit: Actually it was a bipartisan idea. Frank Dodd and Chuck Hagel were it's co-sponsors. That's even better, imo.

Edit 2: Livestream is active
 

Puddles

Banned
Anyone know anything about this:

Cantor's counter offer is to nix the requirement that states "set aside 10 percent of federal surface transportation funds for transportation museums, education, and preservation would allow states to devote these monies to high-priority infrastructure projects, without adding to the deficit."

I don't think we really need transportation museums right now, but what is covered by "education and preservation"?
 
Puddles said:
Anyone know anything about this:

I don't think we really need transportation museums right now, but what is covered by "education and preservation"?

Its Cantor, so whatever he says, is a lie.


"The pot of money he’s proposing to eliminate is called Transportation Enhancements, and the primary way the federal government supports active transportation. Republicans have been using the “10 percent” figure to drum up indignation over the “misuse” of transportation funds, but it’s important to note that Transportation Enhancements make up 10 percent of the surface transportation program, which is less than a quarter of the entire federal aid highway program. Enhancements actually make up about two percent of all federal highway aid."

http://dc.streetsblog.org/2011/09/0...promise-is-just-another-ploy-to-kill-bikeped/


Its the "lets kill any form of transportation that doesnt require oil" line



Also, from the fire thread....
http://g.co/maps/unh9s

This is whats wrong with america.
 

GhaleonEB

Member
scorcho said:
could you? i'm getting stuck on the first question.
brb

Looks like Obama is proposing a bill that is 1) full paid for, 2) bursting with popular policies and 3) will be sent directly to Congress to die.

At least he's on the right track. Would have been nice to have this around this time last year.
 

Particle Physicist

between a quark and a baryon
mckmas8808 said:
Cantor Nixes President Obama’s Infrastructure Bank Idea
Brian Beutler | September 8, 2011, 2:16PM

#################


Hmmmm.......so is Cantor already turning down some of the ideas before they are even officially announced? Or is this inside baseball/politics? Either way I like the idea of an infrastructure bank.



http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/09/08/obama.jobs.plan/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

Republicans, however, sounded like they had their minds made up already. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said Thursday morning it will be another attempt at failed stimulus policies.

"The definition of insanity, Albert Einstein once famously put it, is to do the same thing over and over again and expect a different result," McConnell, R-Kentucky, said on the Senate floor. "Frankly, I can't think of a better description of anyone who thinks the solution to the problem is another stimulus. The first stimulus didn't do it. Why would another?"

Republicans are already coming out against the plan... before it has even been unveiled.
 

Puddles

Banned
I'm just wondering how critical that 10% is. If cutting that is the only way to get the GOP on board with some ideas that could do some real good, it might be a decent trade-off.

Also, why the hell is no one hammering home the point that after the stimulus was enacted, monthly job losses dramatically decreased?

"The stimulus didn't succeed in keeping unemployment below 8%" doesn't mean "the stimulus didn't work at all." To my knowledge, Obama hasn't even tried to make this distinction.
 
Before the jobs speech starts, does anyone know anything about the new FDA dietary supplement labeling act? I've been hearing a lot about it today and don't really get why there's so much opposition to it...
 
Puddles said:
I'm just wondering how critical that 10% is. If cutting that is the only way to get the GOP on board with some ideas that could do some real good, it might be a decent trade-off.

12% of all trips in this country are done on foot or bike.

2% of funding is for foot and bike.

They want to make it zero. Thats not right.
 

diddles

Banned
quadriplegicjon said:
Republicans are already coming out against the plan... before it has even been unveiled.

do you give every new Gameloft game that comes out a chance? do you read previews for it, and try the demo, and check the reviews to see if it's maybe finally a good game this time?

nope, you know it's from Gameloft, and you know it's gonna be a turd, so you don't even waste your time.
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Puddles said:
I'm just wondering how critical that 10% is. If cutting that is the only way to get the GOP on board with some ideas that could do some real good, it might be a decent trade-off.

Also, why the hell is no one hammering home the point that after the stimulus was enacted, monthly job losses dramatically decreased?

"The stimulus didn't succeed in keeping unemployment below 8%" doesn't mean "the stimulus didn't work at all." To my knowledge, Obama hasn't even tried to make this distinction.


Dude the main point is that it's only 2% of the overall federal transportation budget. But it's funding is very very important. Obama shouldn't give it up.
 

Puddles

Banned
jamesinclair said:
12% of all trips in this country are done on foot or bike.

2% of funding is for foot and bike.

They want to make it zero. Thats not right.

So that portion that they're claiming is mandated to be set aside for stuff like transportation museums also maintains sidewalks and bike paths?
 

Tamanon

Banned
JABEE said:
They were speculating about issuing a warning? They said it had to do with DC and NYC.

God, I can't even imagine how much they're having to sift through with the opening of the memorial on Sunday.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom