Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Obama...........where's the CHANGE?! Extend the Bush cuts two more years? So how do we make this lost revenue up?

Sad.

by cutting spending?....like every other family & organization has done since the recession started...

Republicans control one house. Deficits no longer matter.

kalm wrote:Republicans control one house. Deficits no longer matter.

Dems had 2-4 yrs to address deficits. Not the Republicans fault dems have no balls. Dem adminstration = epic fail. Where have you gone, Harry Truman & Bill Clinton?...

kalm wrote:Republicans control one house. Deficits no longer matter.

Oh for fuck's sake. How can you POSSIBLY say that with a straight face after deficits built up over the last two years?

It's not REVENUE if it's never collected. Period. This concept that donks are doing us all some sort of fucking favor by allowing us to keep our own goddamned money is ludicrous and exhibit A for whats wrong with this country.

AZGrizFan wrote:

kalm wrote:Republicans control one house. Deficits no longer matter.

Oh for ****'s sake. How can you POSSIBLY say that with a straight face after deficits built up over the last two years?

It's not REVENUE if it's never collected. Period. This concept that donks are doing us all some sort of **** favor by allowing us to keep our own goddamned money is ludicrous and exhibit A for whats wrong with this country.

Tax cuts are all that matter.

kalm wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
Oh for ****'s sake. How can you POSSIBLY say that with a straight face after deficits built up over the last two years?

It's not REVENUE if it's never collected. Period. This concept that donks are doing us all some sort of **** favor by allowing us to keep our own goddamned money is ludicrous and exhibit A for whats wrong with this country.

Tax cuts are all that matter.

Hey, Nostradumbass, i've said many, many times I'd be in favor of tax HIKES if they had the balls to cut spending $3 for every $1 in new tax revenue they took. But they won't, and you know it. Given THAT scenario, I'll keep my own goddamned money, thank you very much.

AZGrizFan wrote:

kalm wrote:
Tax cuts are all that matter.

Hey, Nostradumbass, i've said many, many times I'd be in favor of tax HIKES if they had the balls to cut spending $3 for every $1 in new tax revenue they took. But they won't, and you know it. Given THAT scenario, I'll keep my own goddamned money, thank you very much.

That's MR. Nostradumbass to you.

AZGrizFan wrote:

kalm wrote:
Tax cuts are all that matter.

Hey, Nostradumbass, i've said many, many times I'd be in favor of tax HIKES if they had the balls to cut spending $3 for every $1 in new tax revenue they took. But they won't, and you know it. Given THAT scenario, I'll keep my own goddamned money, thank you very much.

Like health care, for example - if you cut Medicare and tax so-called cadillac plans, then you can afford universal coverage. Unfortunately you then piss off the AARP and UAW, so once again Obama failed when he had the chance to enact real change...

AZGrizFan wrote:

kalm wrote:
Tax cuts are all that matter.

Hey, Nostradumbass, i've said many, many times I'd be in favor of tax HIKES if they had the balls to cut spending $3 for every $1 in new tax revenue they took. But they won't, and you know it. Given THAT scenario, I'll keep my own goddamned money, thank you very much.

+1

Rob Iola wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
Hey, Nostradumbass, i've said many, many times I'd be in favor of tax HIKES if they had the balls to cut spending $3 for every $1 in new tax revenue they took. But they won't, and you know it. Given THAT scenario, I'll keep my own goddamned money, thank you very much.

Like health care, for example - if you cut Medicare and tax so-called cadillac plans, then you can afford universal coverage. Unfortunately you then piss off the AARP and UAW, so once again Obama failed when he had the chance to enact real change...

nailed it....

catamount man wrote:Obama...........where's the CHANGE?! Extend the Bush cuts two more years? So how do we make this lost revenue up?

Sad.

That's my money, your money, Appaholic's money, etc. they want to take. It's not their money. Cut spending first and then we can talk about giving them more of our money.

And if you are feeling guilty about receiving the benefits of the continued lower tax rates please feel free to send in a voluntary check.

There are two ways for you to make a contribution to reduce the debt:

* You can make a contribution online either by credit card, checking or savings account at Pay.gov
* You can write a check payable to the Bureau of the Public Debt, and in the memo section, notate that it's a Gift to reduce the Debt Held by the Public. Mail your check to:

Attn Dept G
Bureau of the Public Debt
P. O. Box 2188
Parkersburg, WV 26106-2188

Please post a picture of your canceled check or credit card receipt so we know you made your donation.

I'm just wingin' it here, but when we have a financial shortfall at our house we either postpone some spending or cut something out. Then again we have a pretty solid budget that we follow and know where our money goes, but again that's probably just crazy talk.

ASUG8 wrote:I'm just wingin' it here, but when we have a financial shortfall at our house we either postpone some spending or cut something out. Then again we have a pretty solid budget that we follow and know where our money goes, but again that's probably just crazy talk.

Quit making sense, G8.....

I don't like the deal, but WTF is up with reducing the Social Security payout?!? Boys, retiring to a Caribbean island is looking more attractive every day.

Appaholic wrote:

ASUG8 wrote:I'm just wingin' it here, but when we have a financial shortfall at our house we either postpone some spending or cut something out. Then again we have a pretty solid budget that we follow and know where our money goes, but again that's probably just crazy talk.

Quit making sense, G8.....

So you tell the wife she needs to cut back on the trips to Nordstroms, and she comes back with getting rid of the NFL Network...

When people start voluntarily giving up their government services I'll be on board.

HI54UNI wrote:

catamount man wrote:Obama...........where's the CHANGE?! Extend the Bush cuts two more years? So how do we make this lost revenue up?

Sad.

That's my money, your money, Appaholic's money, etc. they want to take. It's not their money. Cut spending first and then we can talk about giving them more of our money.

And if you are feeling guilty about receiving the benefits of the continued lower tax rates please feel free to send in a voluntary check.

There are two ways for you to make a contribution to reduce the debt:

* You can make a contribution online either by credit card, checking or savings account at Pay.gov
* You can write a check payable to the Bureau of the Public Debt, and in the memo section, notate that it's a Gift to reduce the Debt Held by the Public. Mail your check to:

Attn Dept G
Bureau of the Public Debt
P. O. Box 2188
Parkersburg, WV 26106-2188

Please post a picture of your canceled check or credit card receipt so we know you made your donation.

Parkersburg, WV!! The lingering pork-barrel legacy of the late Sen. Robert F. Byrd!!

kalm wrote:

Appaholic wrote:
Quit making sense, G8.....

So you tell the wife she needs to cut back on the trips to Nordstroms, and she comes back with getting rid of the NFL Network...

When people start voluntarily giving up their government services I'll be on board.

Gladly. Let's start with Dept of Education. Then we can move to Dept of Homeland Security. Next will be HUD. I'll gladly eliminate those services to help with deficits.

What services, Kalm? The vast majority of middle-income Americans don't qualify for the services we fund. Governments are responsible for infrastructure, protection & the like....services ALL Americans can enjoy & are due based upon the compact of taxation. However, why should I fund a Dept of Education in Billings, MT when I don't have kids going there & it doesn't benefit my community. Why do we have a Dept of Homeland Security when we fail to control our southern border, but handcuff local municipalities with regrd to enforcing federal immigration laws?

Appaholic wrote:by cutting spending?....like every other family & organization has done since the recession started...

kalm wrote:

Appaholic wrote:
Quit making sense, G8.....

So you tell the wife she needs to cut back on the trips to Nordstroms, and she comes back with getting rid of the NFL Network...

When people start voluntarily giving up their government services I'll be on board.

The only government agency I have any dealings with on a year to year basis is the IRS and I hereby, at your suggestion, gladly give up those "services".

it aint hard to cut government services. just ask colorado springs

Appaholic wrote:

kalm wrote:
So you tell the wife she needs to cut back on the trips to Nordstroms, and she comes back with getting rid of the NFL Network...

When people start voluntarily giving up their government services I'll be on board.

Gladly. Let's start with Dept of Education. Then we can move to Dept of Homeland Security. Next will be HUD. I'll gladly eliminate those services to help with deficits.

What services, Kalm? The vast majority of middle-income Americans don't qualify for the services we fund. Governments are responsible for infrastructure, protection & the like....services ALL Americans can enjoy & are due based upon the compact of taxation. However, why should I fund a Dept of Education in Billings, MT when I don't have kids going there & it doesn't benefit my community. Why do we have a Dept of Homeland Security when we fail to control our southern border, but handcuff local municipalities with regrd to enforcing federal immigration laws?

Court system, USDA, EPA. I get your argument, and sure there's inefficiencies to be cut, but even us modern day Daniel Boone's aren't nearly as self reliant as we would like to think.

Appaholic wrote:

kalm wrote:
So you tell the wife she needs to cut back on the trips to Nordstroms, and she comes back with getting rid of the NFL Network...

When people start voluntarily giving up their government services I'll be on board.

Gladly. Let's start with Dept of Education. Then we can move to Dept of Homeland Security. Next will be HUD. I'll gladly eliminate those services to help with deficits.

What services, Kalm? The vast majority of middle-income Americans don't qualify for the services we fund. Governments are responsible for infrastructure, protection & the like....services ALL Americans can enjoy & are due based upon the compact of taxation. However, why should I fund a Dept of Education in Billings, MT when I don't have kids going there & it doesn't benefit my community. Why do we have a Dept of Homeland Security when we fail to control our southern border, but handcuff local municipalities with regrd to enforcing federal immigration laws?

Do that while we're pulling out of two unnecessary wars and cutting our 700+ military bases abroad in half and we're almost there.

houndawg wrote:

Appaholic wrote:
Gladly. Let's start with Dept of Education. Then we can move to Dept of Homeland Security. Next will be HUD. I'll gladly eliminate those services to help with deficits.

What services, Kalm? The vast majority of middle-income Americans don't qualify for the services we fund. Governments are responsible for infrastructure, protection & the like....services ALL Americans can enjoy & are due based upon the compact of taxation. However, why should I fund a Dept of Education in Billings, MT when I don't have kids going there & it doesn't benefit my community. Why do we have a Dept of Homeland Security when we fail to control our southern border, but handcuff local municipalities with regrd to enforcing federal immigration laws?

Do that while we're pulling out of two unnecessary wars and cutting our 700+ military bases abroad in half and we're almost there.

Raise the SSA retirement age, scale back Medicare, cut the ethanol subsidy, cut aid to half the foreign countries we support (starting with Egypt)...

kalm wrote:

Appaholic wrote:
Gladly. Let's start with Dept of Education. Then we can move to Dept of Homeland Security. Next will be HUD. I'll gladly eliminate those services to help with deficits.

What services, Kalm? The vast majority of middle-income Americans don't qualify for the services we fund. Governments are responsible for infrastructure, protection & the like....services ALL Americans can enjoy & are due based upon the compact of taxation. However, why should I fund a Dept of Education in Billings, MT when I don't have kids going there & it doesn't benefit my community. Why do we have a Dept of Homeland Security when we fail to control our southern border, but handcuff local municipalities with regrd to enforcing federal immigration laws?

Court system, USDA, EPA. I get your argument, and sure there's inefficiencies to be cut, but even us modern day Daniel Boone's aren't nearly as self reliant as we would like to think.

WOW! Thanks Kalm....that's the 1st time I've ever heard a donk agree that ineffeciencies need to be cut....the first step to solving a problem is admitting there is one...