Support NeoGAF

[Plinko]

THE REPUBLICAN ALTERNATIVE IS HERE WOOOOOOOOOOO

The bill from the Republican Study Committee would fully repeal the 2010 law and replace it with an expansion of health savings accounts, medical liability reform and the elimination of restrictions on purchasing insurance across state lines.​

IT DOESN'T DO ANYTHING WOOOOOOOOOOO

Wait--you mean they're proposing something that would screw over the poor, help the rich, and do nothing to lower health care costs? Are you sure?

Also, how do you folks respond to those who say until liberals sell their homes, cars, etc., and give the proceeds to the poor they don't have any standing to tell the rich that they should pay more in taxes?

"When you get back to reality we can have a reasonable conversation about the issue at hand. My guess is that isn't going to happen very soon."

 

[Link]

How the fuck did the ED Show make a comeback on weekdays? :/

It was popular and Hardball aired twice anyway.

 

[Karakand]

Does anyone have a list of the crazy tax writeoffs that the top earners/corporations use to get around paying their taxes?

There are many, but here are 2 that grind my gears: Section 179 and net operating loss carrying.

The latter is particularly ridiculous because it turns current year losses into an asset for tax purposes. It's not my problem if your business lost a lot of money, and that shouldn't matter for the tax purposes of years that have already concluded, or have yet to occur.

 

[Black Mamba]

The new Washington Post/ABC News poll on the debt ceiling tells us something remarkable: Among Republicans who believe that not raising the debt ceiling would cause serious harm to the economy, a majority of them wants Congress not to raise it anyway. By contrast, voters overall see it in the opposite way.

This is a complicated one, but it’s worth it. The new WaPo poll asks two questions on the debt limit. It finds that 46 percent of Americans want Congress to raise the debt limit “so the government can keep paying its bills and obligations,” while 43 percent want Congress “not to raise the debt limit and let the government default on paying its bills and obligations.”

That’s roughly an even split; the debt limit tends to poll that way.

Meanwhile, the poll also finds that 73 percent think not raising the debt limit would “cause serious harm to the U.S. economy,” versus only 22 percent who say it wouldn’t. How to explain the divergence? It turns out it’s largely driven by Republicans.
I asked the Post polling team for a breakdown. Here’s the upshot:

* Republicans are far more likely to oppose raising the debt limit than anyone else; they say don’t raise it by 61-25. By contrast, Dems say raise it by 62-31, and independents split by 48-46 on raising versus not raising it.

* Republicans, however, also believe overwhelmingly that not raising it would cause serious economic harm — by 66-27. (Dems and indys tilt the same way.)

* How to square that? Simple: Among Republicans who believe not raising it would cause serious economic harm, a majority say don’t raise it by 53-32.

By contrast, among Americans overall who say not raising it would cause serious harm, they tilt in favor of raising it by 54-35. Independents who say not raising it would cause serious harm also tilt in favor by 58-36.

And there it is: Republicans want Congress not to raise the debt ceiling, even if it would cause widespread economic harm.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...risis-its-because-republican-voters-want-one/

ugh..

 

[smokeandmirrors]

#teaparty and #obamacare were both the top trending things in my area (philly) earlier today. I can only assume they happen to be related? I just noticed on the app on my phone, so I didn't delve deeper.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...risis-its-because-republican-voters-want-one/

ugh..

I want to say I'm surprised but I'm not. These fucking people would rather see the country go up in flames than do anything that may help Obama out.

 

[B-Dubs]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...risis-its-because-republican-voters-want-one/

ugh..

I think we really are dealing with morons now. Of all the shit that's happened that's desensitized me, this I never expected. How do people that know better STILL THINK THIS WAY?

 

[Link]

I think we really are dealing with morons now. Of all the shit that's happened that's desensitized me, this I never expected. How do people that know better STILL THINK THIS WAY?

Not morons; domestic terrorists.

 

[Black Mamba]

Have fun with this one, gentlemen and ladies.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=680805 Gop congressman claims he's "stuck" earning $172k in arguing against letting his staff get obamacare subsidies.


And yeah, I agree with Link. Domestic Terrorists. This isn't about them just being stupid. This is about them wanting to hurt people to get their way. The stupid part is they don't realize they'll hurt themselves most of all. So they're both.

 

[empty vessel]

Also, how do you folks respond to those who say until liberals sell their homes, cars, etc., and give the proceeds to the poor they don't have any standing to tell the rich that they should pay more in taxes?

As an American citizen, you have a vote. That's all the standing you need. Oh yeah, also tell the person to fuck off.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...risis-its-because-republican-voters-want-one/

ugh..

That doesn't surprise me. Republicans are radicals who want to rip apart the fabric of society.

That said, I think the poll assumes a lot within its questions. Nevertheless, those are the questions that Republicans answered, so their desire to cause chaos and harm to Americans is very clear. But, then, I didn't need a poll to tell me that, either.

 

[Oblivion]

DailyKos article about Obamacare misinformation
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/...information-Disinformation-and-Blinding-Panic

I'm seeing this very often at work, and in general conversations with friends. It highlights how bad the White House is at communication, but moreso highlights the FUD campaign from the far right. It's very easy to confuse people on a subject they're already confused about; most people don't understand health insurance, in general. And therein lies the biggest problem for Obamacare. I'm not concerned about Ted Cruz and the defund folks, I'm concerned about the nonsense being spread to regular Americans. The best way to kill the ACA is to ensure young people don't sign up.

Related to that. Chuck Todd says don't expect him and his fellow members of the so-called liberal media to be useful:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/...dd-Pointing-out-Republican-lies-isn-t-his-job

Wasn't this clown actually admired by poligaf at one point?

 

[zero_suit]

Related to that. Chuck Todd says don't expect him and his fellow members of the so-called liberal media to be useful:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/...dd-Pointing-out-Republican-lies-isn-t-his-job

Wasn't this clown actually admired by poligaf at one point?

That was before he became a talking head.

 

[Oblivion]

Also, how do you folks respond to those who say until liberals sell their homes, cars, etc., and give the proceeds to the poor they don't have any standing to tell the rich that they should pay more in taxes?

I didn't realize liberals were advocating rich people to sell their homes, cars, etc. and give the proceeds to the poor.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Related to that. Chuck Todd says don't expect him and his fellow members of the so-called liberal media to be useful:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/...dd-Pointing-out-Republican-lies-isn-t-his-job

Wasn't this clown actually admired by poligaf at one point?

He kept Obama fans calm with numbers in 2007/2008.

 

[Plinko]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...risis-its-because-republican-voters-want-one/

ugh..

I'm really not understanding this Obama hate by the GOP. Is it just racism or are we finally at the point where no matter what a democrat president does, the GOP will pout and try to stop it?

 

[zero_suit]

I'm really not understanding this Obama hate by the GOP. Is it just racism or are we finally at the point where no matter what a democrat president does, the GOP will pout and try to stop it?

Both?

 

[B-Dubs]

I'm really not understanding this Obama hate by the GOP. Is it just racism or are we finally at the point where no matter what a democrat president does, the GOP will pout and try to stop it?

A bit of both probably. The fact is in the campaigns the GOP has built him up as a straight up monster and as a result there can be no compromise.

 

[empty vessel]

Forgot to comment on this part of the article: "By contrast, Dems say raise it by 62-31."

62-31.

31% of Democrats oppose raising the debt limit. That's pathetic.

 

[Black Mamba]

Forgot to comment on this part of the article: "By contrast, Dems say raise it by 62-31."

62-31.

31% of Democrats oppose raising the debt limit. That's pathetic.

I'm wondering if that's because the strategically think it would destroy the GOP in the 2014 election or because they're also idiots.

 

[B-Dubs]

I'm wondering if that's because the strategically think it would destroy the GOP in the 2014 election or because they're also idiots.

Probably some sort of mix of the two. Why we even have a debt ceiling is beyond me, it is one of the most (if not the most) asinine thing that we go through. Fuck it, we deserve this fight every few months. We do, we really do because if we had any brains in our heads we'd have gotten rid of it ages ago. No let me retract that, we never would have created it in the first place.

 

[Link]

Forgot to comment on this part of the article: "By contrast, Dems say raise it by 62-31."

62-31.

31% of Democrats oppose raising the debt limit. That's pathetic.

I'm guessing a good portion of those don't really understand what the debt limit is.

 

[The Librarian]

As someone who isn't really that well versed in health care law and issues (my own fault), can someone explain what this means in terms of what proposals they bring up and why they think they will work (or why they won't in practice? or will?). For dummies? For I am dumb.

Sure! I'll shall link you this blog post I came across.

The Republican Study Committee has a 'replace' plan

The law’s opponents have claimed it costs too much, will result in rationing, and limit freedom. Today, a group of House conservatives presented their version of a replacement plan, endorsed by the Republican Study Committee. In short, it throws poor Americans under the bus.

The centerpiece of the plan is a universal, standard tax deduction of health insurance premiums, up to $7,500 for an individual and $20,000 for a family. This would level a playing field that is uneven today.

Today, only insurance purchased through work is tax deductible. People who don’t get insurance through their jobs don’t get a deduction.

There are two problems with the House plan though. The first is that it will obviously cost a lot of money. How much is not clear, but it won’t be insignificant. How will that be paid for? The second is that a tax deduction is much more valuable to someone who makes a lot of money than someone who makes little. But people with large incomes aren’t the ones who need help affording coverage. It’s those at the lower end of the socioeconomic spectrum who need the most assistance. Because of their low marginal tax rates, a tax deduction is of very little help.

Sick Americans would receive very little help under the plan too. One of the ways the ACA helps the sick is by eliminating the ability of insurers to refuse to cover them (guaranteed issue) or to charge them more for being ill (community rating). The House plan weakens the guaranteed issue protection by extending it only to those who have continuous coverage. If you dropped (or were forced out) of prior coverage, you may not be able to get back in the market.

For sick Americans, it replaces the ACA’s protections with a high risk pool in which premiums are capped at 200% of what healthy people pay in the rest of the market. To help offset the cost, the proposal sets aside $25 billion over 10 years. Still, sick people will pay very high premiums. If they become poor due to loss of work from their illness, they still have to pay those high premiums, or go uninsured.

The plan includes a number of provisions that would encourage and expand the use of health savings accounts (HSAs). These are personal accounts that can be used to buy health care services or pay cost-sharing tax free. Again, the favorable tax treatment is of very little value to low income Americans. Moreover, low income Americans don’t have a lot of money to put aside for their future health care use. HSAs might be a helpful step. But they alone won’t help everyone.​

More at link.

 

[platypotamus]

You just made the Mars Rover team sad.

NASA's funding is so bad they can't even use a better image format?!?

 

[ridethepiggy]

#Clownshoes

Senate Republicans and the Chamber of Commerce are urging House Republicans to back off their threats of a government shutdown or debt default if President Barack Obama doesn't agree to defund or delay Obamacare.

The calls intensified on Wednesday after House GOP leaders said they would move forward with a continuing resolution that defunds Obamacare at the potential risk of a government shutdown at the end of the month if Democrats refuse to blink. The White House has threatened to veto a bill that defunds Obamacare and Senate Democratic leaders say it's a nonstarter.

"I don't think shutting down the government is going to be productive," Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) said Wednesday during an appearance on CNN. "I think we should make every effort we can to make sure we stop this law but I don't believe they should shut down the government to do so. And I don't think that is a strategy that is good for America."
The Chamber of Commerce wrote a open letter to the House, in reference to the GOP's stopgap funding bill, urging lawmakers not to risk a shutdown -- or worse, a default on the national debt when the government reaches its borrowing limit in mid-October -- warning of the economic harm that could result.

"It is not in the best interest of the U.S. business community or the American people to risk even a brief government shutdown that might trigger disruptive consequences or raise new policy uncertainties washing over the U.S. economy," wrote R. Bruce Josten, a top lobbyist at the Chamber. "Likewise, the U.S. Chamber respectfully urges the House of Representatives to raise the debt ceiling in a timely manner and thus eliminate any question of threat to the full faith and credit of the United States government."

House Republican leaders didn't want a confrontation over Obamacare but were coerced into it by conservative lawmakers who refused to support their original stopgap measure to lock in low spending levels without the threat of a shutdown. Other Senate Republicans expressed similar concerns about risking a shutdown.

"I just think we know how this movie ends," Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told TPM on Tuesday afternoon. "I don't see us being able, in the Senate, to successfully carry the day. There are only 45 of us here. I don't see the president, at the end of the day, agreeing to defund Obamacare. I just don't see him agreeing to defund his signature issue. They had a campaign on it. I don't think he's going to say, 'well, now, everything I said all those years -- forget it, I'm willing to let it go.' I just don't see that being a good tactical choice."

Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) also called on Republicans to come up with a plan for "repealing or defunding Obamacare that did not involve a potential shutdown of government. That's not going to be well-received by the American people, were it to occur."

House leaders are aiming to pass the stopgap continuing resolution legislation by the end of this week. Senate Democrats are likely to strip out the provision defunding Obamacare. After that, it's anybody's guess how the debate will play out. If a deal can't be reached, the lights will go out on Sept. 30 at midnight.

#CLOWNSHOES!

 

[bonercop]

Forgot to comment on this part of the article: "By contrast, Dems say raise it by 62-31."

62-31.

31% of Democrats oppose raising the debt limit. That's pathetic.

I'm wondering if that's because the strategically think it would destroy the GOP in the 2014 election or because they're also idiots.

Probably some sort of mix of the two. Why we even have a debt ceiling is beyond me, it is one of the most (if not the most) asinine thing that we go through. Fuck it, we deserve this fight every few months. We do, we really do because if we had any brains in our heads we'd have gotten rid of it ages ago. No let me retract that, we never would have created it in the first place.

guys, If the general public payed as much attention to politics as political junkies do, 90% of the nonsense dominating mainstream political discourse right now would be resolved.

You all know that "raising the debt ceiling" is just a formality, but to most people it's a scary phrase associated with a problem(SPENDING!!!!!) authority figures constantly crow about.

 

[Fenderputty]

I'm guessing a good portion of those don't really understand what the debt limit is.

Bingo!!

 

[Aaron Strife]

The Chamber of Commerce is a bunch of short-sighted idiots. The Republicans could shut down the government for a prolonged period of time as well as going over the debt limit, and they'd still contribute to their campaigns because hur dur tax cuts.

 

[ivysaur12]

Sure! I'll shall link you this blog post I came across.

The Republican Study Committee has a 'replace' plan

The law’s opponents have claimed it costs too much, will result in rationing, and limit freedom. Today, a group of House conservatives presented their version of a replacement plan, endorsed by the Republican Study Committee. In short, it throws poor Americans under the bus.

The centerpiece of the plan is a universal, standard tax deduction of health insurance premiums, up to $7,500 for an individual and $20,000 for a family. This would level a playing field that is uneven today.

Today, only insurance purchased through work is tax deductible. People who don’t get insurance through their jobs don’t get a deduction.

There are two problems with the House plan though. The first is that it will obviously cost a lot of money. How much is not clear, but it won’t be insignificant. How will that be paid for? The second is that a tax deduction is much more valuable to someone who makes a lot of money than someone who makes little. But people with large incomes aren’t the ones who need help affording coverage. It’s those at the lower end of the socioeconomic spectrum who need the most assistance. Because of their low marginal tax rates, a tax deduction is of very little help.

Sick Americans would receive very little help under the plan too. One of the ways the ACA helps the sick is by eliminating the ability of insurers to refuse to cover them (guaranteed issue) or to charge them more for being ill (community rating). The House plan weakens the guaranteed issue protection by extending it only to those who have continuous coverage. If you dropped (or were forced out) of prior coverage, you may not be able to get back in the market.

For sick Americans, it replaces the ACA’s protections with a high risk pool in which premiums are capped at 200% of what healthy people pay in the rest of the market. To help offset the cost, the proposal sets aside $25 billion over 10 years. Still, sick people will pay very high premiums. If they become poor due to loss of work from their illness, they still have to pay those high premiums, or go uninsured.

The plan includes a number of provisions that would encourage and expand the use of health savings accounts (HSAs). These are personal accounts that can be used to buy health care services or pay cost-sharing tax free. Again, the favorable tax treatment is of very little value to low income Americans. Moreover, low income Americans don’t have a lot of money to put aside for their future health care use. HSAs might be a helpful step. But they alone won’t help everyone.​

More at link.

As my girl Amy Schumer might say, Thanks Sisterfriend!

 

[Oblivion]

Has anyone ever thought of the idea that maybe we could call the debt ceiling something else that wouldn't sound as confusing?

 

[ISOM]

The Chamber of Commerce is a bunch of short-sighted idiots. The Republicans could shut down the government for a prolonged period of time as well as going over the debt limit, and they'd still contribute to their campaigns because hur dur tax cuts.

You just described most people who vote republican.

 

[PhoenixDark]

The Chamber of Commerce is a bunch of short-sighted idiots. The Republicans could shut down the government for a prolonged period of time as well as going over the debt limit, and they'd still contribute to their campaigns because hur dur tax cuts.

Eh, some republicans act a fool every September/October. The other 10 months of the year they work to line corporate business pockets with cash. I'd say it's not a bad relationship.

 

[GhaleonEB]

The Chamber of Commerce is a bunch of short-sighted idiots. The Republicans could shut down the government for a prolonged period of time as well as going over the debt limit, and they'd still contribute to their campaigns because hur dur tax cuts.

I think they see it as a short-term inconvenience in exchange for long-term support for their preferred tax, business and social policies.

 

[Snake]

I think it's really nice of the GOP to be actively working towards improving the President's approval ratings and setting the narrative in his favor. Obama's been having a tough few months and this staggering generosity on the Republicans' part has warmed my heart.

Contrary to those voicing pessimism on a theoretical govt shutdown and/or default, I have no doubt that the public will overwhelmingly respond negatively towards the Republican Party for any such outcome. People don't understand these issues in the abstract or in a way that can be accurately reflected by polling hypotheticals, but when they actually get hit by reality they'll understand it loud and clear. Add to this that even the most sniveling of beltway pundits know exactly where the blame lies here, and you've got a nightmare for Republicans in elected positions throughout the country. A government shutdown would potentially be enough to deliver the House to the Democrats, while a default would damage the Republicans' credibility with business interests so thoroughly that they would have to carry out a new re-branding to purge the Tea Party stink from the GOP in its entirely. The latter case would require an unthinkable level of stupidity that even the modern GOP hasn't shown itself to possess.

If either happens for even a brief period of time it's going to be such a striking victory for the Democrats that I can't believe the GOP leadership would allow it. Personally I'm hoping Boehner just caves and avoids harming the economy, even if doing so would benefit my partisan instincts.

 

[B-Dubs]

Has anyone ever thought of the idea that maybe we could call the debt ceiling something else that wouldn't sound as confusing?

I'd normally agree with that, but it's such a convoluted thing that there is no simple name for it. If anything we should get rid of it the first chance we get.

The Chamber of Commerce is a bunch of short-sighted idiots. The Republicans could shut down the government for a prolonged period of time as well as going over the debt limit, and they'd still contribute to their campaigns because hur dur tax cuts.

What else is new?

 

[PhoenixDark]

I think it's really nice of the GOP to be actively working towards improving the President's approval ratings and setting the narrative in his favor. Obama's been having a tough few months and this staggering generosity on the Republicans' part has warmed my heart.

Contrary to those voicing pessimism on a theoretical govt shutdown and/or default, I have no doubt that the public will overwhelmingly respond negatively towards the Republican Party for any such outcome. People don't understand these issues in the abstract or in a way that can be accurately reflected by polling hypotheticals, but when they actually get hit by reality they'll understand it loud and clear. Add to this that even the most sniveling of beltway pundits know exactly where the blame lies here, and you've got a nightmare for Republicans in elected positions throughout the country. A government shutdown would potentially be enough to deliver the House to the Democrats, while a default would damage the Republicans' credibility with business interests so thoroughly that they would have to carry out a new re-branding to purge the Tea Party stink from the GOP in its entirely. The latter case would require an unthinkable level of stupidity that even the modern GOP hasn't shown itself to possess.

If either happens for even a brief period of time it's going to be such a striking victory for the Democrats that I can't believe the GOP leadership would allow it. Personally I'm hoping Boehner just caves and avoids harming the economy, even if doing so would benefit my partisan instincts.

Boehner has assured K and Wall Street that he won't allow a default, which IMO settles the issue.

It seems to me that House leadership has finally found a way to appease House members while not actually achieving anything: pass the hot potato to Cruz and Lee in the senate, then let them put their money where their mouth is. They've been talking shit for months now, and I'm sure Boehner is looking forward to seeing them fail with the CR. Multiple senate republicans are on record against a government shut down, meaning Cruz and Lee will fail hard, at which point the CR will return to the House and be passed by democrats+20 republicans. I expect the debt ceiling to resolve similarly.

At the very worst, the government might shut down for a day as the House drags its feet. I'm not worried about that.

 

[thepotatoman]

I bet HSA expansion and medical liability reform could actually be passed bipartisanly if it was a good idea and they fought hard only for that, but they'll not even offer it unless they take down the whole ACA. If Obama wants to get off his ass and do something good for the country that might possibly get passed the house, maybe something like that is where he should wage his fight, call the republicans out, and say lets do this.

Is there something wrong with liability reform? It always sounded like something that was needed to me. Maybe it's not a huge issue, but man there has to be something for the Democrats to push for that Republicans would look foolish not to support. Something where worse comes to worse, Republicans look bad, and at best gets passed and actually changes the country for the better, even slightly.

Or is Obama just going to hide in a corner and play political defense, constantly afraid of how any aggressive political stance is going to be used against him.

 

[thepotatoman]

Probably some sort of mix of the two. Why we even have a debt ceiling is beyond me, it is one of the most (if not the most) asinine thing that we go through. Fuck it, we deserve this fight every few months. We do, we really do because if we had any brains in our heads we'd have gotten rid of it ages ago. No let me retract that, we never would have created it in the first place.

Problem: We might borrow so much money that we can't find enough lenders to pay off the debts that are coming due. This will lead to a huge loss in confidence in America, which in turn will hurt our financials, which in turn will hurt our economy.

Solution: We force ourselves to not take anymore money from lenders which means we can't pay off the debts that are coming due. This will lead to a huge loss in confidence in America, which in turn will hurt our financials, which in turn will hurt our economy.

It really is possibly the dumbest thing in our government.

 

[PhoenixDark]

I bet HSA expansion and medical liability reform could actually be passed bipartisanly if it was a good idea and they fought hard only for that, but they'll not even offer it unless they take down the whole ACA. If Obama wants to get off his ass and do something good for the country that might possibly get passed the house, maybe something like that is where he should wage his fight, call the republicans out, and say lets do this.

Is there something wrong with liability reform? It always sounded like something that was needed to me. Maybe it's not a huge issue, but man there has to be something for the Democrats to push for that Republicans would look foolish not to support. Something where worse comes to worse, Republicans look bad, and at best gets passed and actually changes the country for the better, even slightly.

Or is Obama just going to hide in a corner and play political defense, constantly afraid of how any aggressive political stance is going to be used against him.

Trial lawyer lobbyists ensure democrats won't do anything serious about medical liability.

I agree about Obama's disappearing act, but it seems like focusing on the economy would be a better idea. Tax credits/cuts for small businesses come to mind.

 

[B-Dubs]

Problem: We might borrow so much money that we can't find enough lenders to pay off the debts that are coming due. This will lead to a huge loss in confidence in America, which in turn will hurt our financials, which in turn will hurt our economy.

Solution: We force ourselves to not take anymore money from lenders which means we can't pay off the debts that are coming due. This will lead to a huge loss in confidence in America, which in turn will hurt our financials, which in turn will hurt our economy and everyone else's.

It really is possibly the dumbest thing in our government.

I fixed that slightly for you.

You are right about it being the stupidest shit we do.

 

[Oblivion]

I'd normally agree with that, but it's such a convoluted thing that there is no simple name for it. If anything we should get rid of it the first chance we get.

Oh most definitely. It's one of the stupidest laws we have. Though, in fairness, it really was one stupid piece of legislation that wasn't really a problem until we got the worst congress since the Civl War.


Question: I know not raising the debt ceiling will be catastrophic, but assuming that happens, would any rich people come out unscathed?

 

[thepotatoman]

Trial lawyer lobbyists ensure democrats won't do anything serious about medical liability.

I agree about Obama's disappearing act, but it seems like focusing on the economy would be a better idea. Tax credits/cuts for small businesses come to mind.

If that's the only reason, I guess that's the solemn reminder we sometimes need to remember that Democrats are also shills working for special interests. And why the lesser of two evils are still evil.

And I feel like tax credits/cuts for small business owners is just democrats turning republican instead of actual bipartisanship. Liberals are extremely tired of supply side economics and don't want any more of it.

I fixed that slightly for you.

You are right about it being the stupidest shit we do.

Eh, who care's about everyone else. If they don't like it they should just get their own economy.

 

[Karakand]

Question: I know not raising the debt ceiling will be catastrophic, but assuming that happens, would any rich people come out unscathed?

Sure (well relatively speaking), I don't really know why you'd think otherwise?

 

[pigeon]

Is there something wrong with liability reform? It always sounded like something that was needed to me.

Primarily, the problem is that it's completely ineffective.

Texas has had a $250,000 liability cap on malpractice for ten years now with no statistical impact on health care costs. Even if we were able to eliminate 100% of all medical liability spending (that's lawyers, insurance, unnecessary medicine, the whole shebang), we'd cut health care costs by 2.4%. Of course, completely eliminating medical liability spending is impossible (and also a terrible idea), so the benefit we'd get would be somewhat smaller:

http://theincidentaleconomist.com/wordpress/meme-busting-tort-reform-cost-control-2/

Or is Obama just going to hide in a corner and play political defense, constantly afraid of how any aggressive political stance is going to be used against him.

You know we passed Obamacare, right? And it's going to roll out in October and be fully accessible by January? What benefit, exactly, do we get from appearing ready to compromise now? If Obamacare's successful (overwhelmingly likely), we should negotiate at that point, with a stronger position. If Obamacare's unsuccessful, we should negotiate at that point so that we can repeal the parts of it that aren't working!

I agree about Obama's disappearing act, but it seems like focusing on the economy would be a better idea. Tax credits/cuts for small businesses come to mind.

There you go again.

http://www.americanjobsact.com/

 

[Oblivion]

Sure (well relatively speaking), I don't really know why you'd think otherwise?

Because rich people getting hurt is pretty much the only incentive Republicans have not to pull shit like this.

 

[Oblivion]

This is what Republicans find funny:

GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham joked on Tuesday that the inescapable fact that shutting down the government will not stop Obamacare was merely a "technical" detail that doesn't interest Republicans bent on a shutdown. [...]

"That's a technical thing," Graham (R-S.C.) quipped when a HuffPost reporter asked if he or anybody in the Senate had told the backers of a shutdown that they can't actually block Obamacare by shutting down the government.

And this dude:

John Whitbeck, 10th District Republican Committee chairman, kicked off the festivities by telling a joke about how the head of the Jewish religion presented the pope with a long, elaborate document that the Jewish leader said was a bill for the last supper.

And his damage control:

“At yesterday's rally, I told a joke,” Whitbeck told the Times-Mirror Wednesday. “I did not tell an anti-Semitic joke. I told a joke I heard from a priest at a church service.”

 

[ridethepiggy]

So the guy i was talking to ealier who said liberals are hypocrites for not selling all of their possessions and giving away the proceeds while codemning conservatives for refusing to raise taxes on the rich admitted we businesses should be allowed to have the net operating loss mentioned on the previous page since without it businesses would have to close shop if they had a bad year and taxed the same rate. Dude is a libertarian at heart and basically admits we should subsidize businesses regardless of how big or small they are. Much prefer to stand for subsidizing the poor than the rich.

 

[Oblivion]

So the guy i was talking to ealier who said liberals are hypocrites for not selling all of their possessions and giving away the proceeds while codemning conservatives for refusing to raise taxes on the rich admitted we businesses should be allowed to have the net operating loss mentioned on the previous page since without it businesses would have to close shop if they had a bad year and taxed the same rate. Dude is a libertarian at heart and basically admits we should subsidize businesses regardless of how big or small they are. Much prefer to stand for subsidizing the poor than the rich.

In other words, the job creators need tax payer money to create the jobs that they keep saying we need the job creators for.

 

[ridethepiggy]

In other words, the job creators need tax payer money to create the jobs that they keep saying we need the job creators for.

Yep. I'm being schooled apparently on the difference between tax write offs and subsidies. Apparently letting companies have wrote offs like the one Karakand mentioned, write offs that big corporations get when it comes to giving a huge benefit package to an outgoing CEO isn't a subsidy but there to strengthen our businesses. Providing food stamps, UI, and medicaid though is a subsidy. Smh.

 

[Avon Barksdale]

If anyone is worried that New Yorkers may accidentally vote for a Republican in the mayoral election, need not worry.

WNBC/Wall Street Journal/Marist poll:

de Blasio 65
Llota 28

de Blasio is getting 25% of the Republican vote. :jnc

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/loca...ill-de-Blasio-Joe-Lhota-Marist-224126211.html

 

[B-Dubs]

If anyone is worried that New Yorkers may accidentally vote for a Republican in the mayoral election, need not worry.

WNBC/Wall Street Journal/Marist poll:

de Blasio 65
Llota 28

de Blasio is getting 25% of the Republican vote. :jnc

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/loca...ill-de-Blasio-Joe-Lhota-Marist-224126211.html

De Blasio is like the unstoppable Juggernaut, he is going to steam roll Lhota. I have never seen anyone this charismatic in NYC politics before. Also smart. Dude's the whole package. He's going to get more Republicans to vote for him than will vote for Lhota.

 

[PhoenixDark]

There you go again.

http://www.americanjobsact.com/

Guess you missed my point about an "Obama jobs bill" not being able to pass, and why it would make sense for Obama (perhaps through Biden) to go directly to senate republicans in negotiations.