Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
CyberKen

CNN Joins Tea Party: Delay ACA for 1 Year !

191 posts in this topic

It's called Eye Candy.

It's called the 90's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's called the 90's.

Now everybody is using Google Chrome. It wins all of the page rendering speed tests.

It has built - in Flash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

snapback.pngCyberKen, on 26 October 2013 - 10:47 AM, said:

The poor however are getting poorer.

1,000 posts later, and CyberKen eventually writes a single sentence that I can agree with.

It's probably the first sign of the apocalypse.

So, then, You are against ObamaScare because of the coersion.

And, you are against the Redistribution of Wealth because it doesn't work.

I'd say you are making progress in the Right direction....

...because with all the Americans now getting checks from the Government...along with Child Tax Credit Refunds...and food stamps (what do they call them...oh yeah..Triple Dippers)...and they are STILL getting poorer....

ANd...can you please explain what Religion has to do with Positive Thought Process?

It matters little what one's IQ is Tiggs...and I am probably correct in guessing that yours is very high...but Yota has the final say on all this Positive talk stuff:

Do or do not...there is no try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, then, You are against ObamaScare because of the coersion.

And, you are against the Redistribution of Wealth because it doesn't work.

I'd say you are making progress in the Right direction....

I'm strongly for social safety nets. That's about as far away from the right wing as it's possible to be.

...because with all the Americans now getting checks from the Government...along with Child Tax Credit Refunds...and food stamps (what do they call them...oh yeah..Triple Dippers)...and they are STILL getting poorer....

And they'll continue to do so, as long as the government continues to cut spending in a weak economy.

ANd...can you please explain what Religion has to do with Positive Thought Process?

Your absolute belief in it's ability to do the impossible.

It doesn't matter how positive your thinking is - you're still not going to levitate the Pentagon.

It matters little what one's IQ is Tiggs...and I am probably correct in guessing that yours is very high...but Yota has the final say on all this Positive talk stuff:

Do or do not...there is no try.

Yoda's just a puppet, who's scriptwriter has outcomes confused with events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm strongly for social safety nets. That's about as far away from the right wing as it's possible to be.

I am not against social safety nets...but there has to be a limit.

And they'll continue to do so, as long as the government continues to cut spending in a weak economy.

I know you are not dillusional...so...how does that sentence make any sense at all given that this administration has increased spending more than all of the other Presidents combined? We are not cutting spending...you must be talking about the Sequester...that's like saying, Ok, I won't buy a Latte on Mondays anymore...see how I'm cutting spending?

Your absolute belief in it's ability to do the impossible.

It doesn't matter how positive your thinking is - you're still not going to levitate the Pentagon.

Tiggs, you are missing the point. Please let me explain:

No matter how strongly I believe that I can fly, I know that I will hit the ground like a sack of cement if I spread my arms and jump off of my roof. But, I CAN fly. The question then becomes: How? That opens up an avenue for thought process...example: maybe I can make wings like a bird...Fail. maybe I can make a suit that is aerodynamically sound...Bingo!

But if I say that I CAN'T fly. The question then becomes...well...there isn't any question...the thought process stops right there.

So then, If someone is unemployed and the bills are piling up...EX: Okay, there are no jobs ...maybe I CAN start my own business. The question then becomes: How, doing what? Again, the avenue for thought process opens up. Maybe I can sell my services as a Leaf Raker and rake peoples yards. Yeah, I CAN do that. How, do I get customers, how much do I charge? Maybe I will just ask that lady down the street with the big yard and all the leaves piling up. Hi lady, would you like to hire me to rake your yard? Fifty dollars? Great...I'll start right now.

But...if one says, I CAN'T find a job. Maybe I can start a business. No, I can't do that. THought process stops and that's it. Another government check is written.

That isn't blind belief in religion or anything else...it is however belief in the power of positive thinking.

Here is the last point: Whenever anyone asks me, can you fix this or do that? My response is always: We have men and women living in a box...22,000 miles out in space. We can fix a broken pipe. Or whatever it is....we CAN. Remember that ALWAYS the question that follows CAN is how? And that opens up thought process. ALWAYS the question that follows CAN'T is...if any question does...Why not? The only thing that question does is empower an unlimited number of excuses.

Yoda's just a puppet, who's scriptwriter has outcomes confused with events.

THose of us who think positively find positive inspiration everywhere.

Edited by joc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From afield it looks like Senator Cruz is making himself the darling of maybe twenty percent of the electorate (about the same portion as supported Nixon at the bitter end) and scaring the Jesus out of the remaining eighty percent. Assuming only halve of that second group vote they will win the next election readily.

Of course in politics weeks can be the equivalent of years, and Obamacare may reverse that. I would say then that it behooves Republicans to distance themselves from Cruz as much as possible unless they are in one of those safely Cruz districts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not against social safety nets...but there has to be a limit.

My limit is the poverty line.

I know you are not dillusional...so...how does that sentence make any sense at all given that this administration has increased spending more than all of the other Presidents combined? We are not cutting spending...you must be talking about the Sequester...that's like saying, Ok, I won't buy a Latte on Mondays anymore...see how I'm cutting spending?

These are the raw figures:

Year.     Income.        Spending.     Income - Spending aka Deficit
2000     2,025,191     1,788,950     236,241     
2001     1,991,082     1,862,846     128,236     
2002     1,853,136     2,010,894     -157,758     
2003     1,782,314     2,159,899     -377,585     
2004     1,880,114     2,292,841     -412,727     
2005     2,153,611     2,471,957     -318,346     
2006     2,406,869     2,655,050     -248,181     
2007     2,567,985     2,728,686     -160,701     
2008     2,523,991     2,982,544     -458,553     
2009     2,104,989     3,517,677     -1,412,688     
2010     2,162,706     3,457,079     -1,294,373     
2011     2,303,466     3,603,059     -1,299,593
2012     2,450,164     3,537,127     -1,086,963
2013e.  2,712,045     3,684,947     -972,902
2014e.  3,033,618     3,777,807     -744,189
2015e.  3,331,685     3,908,157     -576,472    
2016e.  3,561,451     4,089,836     -528,385
2017e.  3,760,542     4,247,448     -486,906
2018e.  3,973,974     4,449,240     -475,266

The budgets are set a year in advance. Clinton's budgets are 2000-2001, Bush's budget are 2002-2009, Obama's budgets are 2010 onwards.

First things first. You'll notice income falling off a cliff in 2009. You'll also notice that spending has actually been fairly flat ever since.

In real terms, however - taking inflation and population growth into account, spending per person has actually declined.

Tiggs, you are missing the point.

I'm really not. I totally understand the principle of positive thinking, and the idea that you won't achieve anything if you just give up.

What I'm telling you is that sometimes positive thinking isn't enough to overcome the physical restrictions of current reality. No-one is going to be levitating the Pentagon, any time soon. There's a definite lack of amputees growing back limbs via the power of positive thought, also.

In terms of everyone becoming wealthy - it's currently structurally impossible, due to limited resources - and that if resources weren't limited, then the entire concept of money would be more or less moot, anyway.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From afield it looks like Senator Cruz is making himself the darling of maybe twenty percent of the electorate (about the same portion as supported Nixon at the bitter end) and scaring the Jesus out of the remaining eighty percent. Assuming only halve of that second group vote they will win the next election readily.

Of course in politics weeks can be the equivalent of years, and Obamacare may reverse that. I would say then that it behooves Republicans to distance themselves from Cruz as much as possible unless they are in one of those safely Cruz districts.

Yes, Senator Ted Cruz IS the darling of the Tea Party.

The 8 Minute Standing Ovation confirmed that. :tu:

The D's are flipping like crazy.

CNN Dana Bash tweeted: Senior democrat source tells me to expect every democrat senator running in 2014 to back a proposal

to delay ObamaCare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First things first. You'll notice income falling off a cliff in 2009. You'll also notice that spending has actually been fairly flat ever since.

I wouldn’t call that falling off the cliff. We took a hit which I must admit that I am surprised it was that little but we have already recouped those loses for now. But I must point out that this is revenue (taxes). Even though people lost their jobs, they still had to pay taxes. And the way to look at the budget is by each Congress. I.e. the period between 2007-2009 is the 110th Congress (Democrat controlled), 2009-2011 = 111th (Democrat controlled), 2011-2013 = 112th (Republican controlled), etc. During the Clinton and Bush Administrations, we had the rare run of Republican controlled Houses and the deficit remained as small as possible. 2009 was the first year we didn’t really have a budget because the President refused to sign one. This amounted to starting an avalanche (unrestricted spending). Since the 2010 midterms, the House could not control it. This is by design. The President knows very well how to collapse the system. And who believes those estimates? If the President is demanding to raise the debt ceiling, that estimate should be going up. And if the size of the workforce is shrinking, income is going to go down as well. Spending may be relatively flat but the debt keeps going up as the deficit keeps accumulating. That is because the government is spending more than it has. These are the facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn’t call that falling off the cliff. We took a hit which I must admit that I am surprised it was that little but we have already recouped those loses for now. But I must point out that this is revenue (taxes). Even though people lost their jobs, they still had to pay taxes. And the way to look at the budget is by each Congress. I.e. the period between 2007-2009 is the 110th Congress (Democrat controlled), 2009-2011 = 111th (Democrat controlled), 2011-2013 = 112th (Republican controlled), etc. During the Clinton and Bush Administrations, we had the rare run of Republican controlled Houses and the deficit remained as small as possible. 2009 was the first year we didn’t really have a budget because the President refused to sign one. This amounted to starting an avalanche (unrestricted spending). Since the 2010 midterms, the House could not control it. This is by design. The President knows very well how to collapse the system. And who believes those estimates? If the President is demanding to raise the debt ceiling, that estimate should be going up. And if the size of the workforce is shrinking, income is going to go down as well. Spending may be relatively flat but the debt keeps going up as the deficit keeps accumulating. That is because the government is spending more than it has. These are the facts.

As usual - there are so many factual inaccuracies in almost everything you write, that I'd spend an entire day correcting them.

The debt ceiling relates to the deficit, not the level of spending. Congress could cut spending by half a trillion and still need to raise the debt limit.

The issue is not spending. The actual current spending levels are well under the numbers predicted by the Bush administration. The issue is that income levels, which usually increase year on year are still below 2007 levels and have yet to recover.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As usual - there are so many factual inaccuracies in almost everything you write, that I'd spend an entire day correcting them.

The debt ceiling relates to the deficit, not the level of spending. Congress could cut spending by half a trillion and still need to raise the debt limit.

The issue is not spending. The actual current spending levels are well under the numbers predicted by the Bush administration. The issue is that income levels, which usually increase year on year are still below 2007 levels and have yet to recover.

The 2% Sequester cuts across the board appear to helping us out a lot.

Lets cut Another 2% across the board and just see what happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 2% Sequester cuts across the board appear to helping us out a lot.

Lets cut Another 2% across the board and just see what happens.

How about you go and ask a family on foodstamps this Friday what they think about cuts to government spending?

Edited by Tiggs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As usual - there are so many factual inaccuracies in almost everything you write, that I'd spend an entire day correcting them.

As usual, you just don’t understand. You’ve quaffed the koolaid for far too long. Please, by all means, correct me.

The debt ceiling relates to the deficit, not the level of spending. Congress could cut spending by half a trillion and still need to raise the debt limit.

The debt ceiling relates to the deficit. It also relates to the debt. It also relates to spending. Actually, Congress would need to cut spending by at least $1 trillion but that still doesn’t mean that the ceiling has to be raised. The debt ceiling is just a number. It reflects a promise by our government not to spend more than that limit. Since we haven’t had a budget in 5 years, it’s more of a joke to promise not to spend more. Increasing the debt ceiling will just encourage more spending. This is a death spiral. It takes effort to stop a train wreck. We need to be stingy on the debt ceiling while the wreckage is more manageable.

The issue is not spending. The actual current spending levels are well under the numbers predicted by the Bush administration. The issue is that income levels, which usually increase year on year are still below 2007 levels and have yet to recover.

This may be true but then our spending must be at the same level. It’s that simple. So what must be done to keep spending under revenue? That is the job of government. It’s job is not to pass out dole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about you go and ask a family on foodstamps this Friday what they think about cuts to government spending?

So who’s holding America hostage now? Exploiting the plight of those in need. I think that Obama should answer that directly. I think that every member in the Administration and Congress should make good on the difference from their own pocket. This is the very reason that a nation should never be a welfare state. Do you understand?!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about you go and ask a family on foodstamps this Friday what they think about cuts to government spending?

The 1st Sequester worked out really well. Obama promised - Armageddon -. We all weathered the 2% cut no probelm.

The entire Obama Administration ran around like Chicken Little : The Sky is falling !

Lets do another 2%. What's the worst that could happen?

If we did do Sequester 2.0 then how far would the deficit fall in 2014 and 2015.

Under $400 Billion ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So who's holding America hostage now? Exploiting the plight of those in need. I think that Obama should answer that directly. I think that every member in the Administration and Congress should make good on the difference from their own pocket. This is the very reason that a nation should never be a welfare state. Do you understand?!

That is the exact reason why the number of conservatives is growing in all 50 states.

- The American people are appalled by the Full Fledged Embrace of the Welfare State. - :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As usual, you just don't understand. You've quaffed the koolaid for far too long. Please, by all means, correct me.

The debt ceiling relates to the deficit. It also relates to the debt. It also relates to spending. Actually, Congress would need to cut spending by at least $1 trillion but that still doesn't mean that the ceiling has to be raised. The debt ceiling is just a number. It reflects a promise by our government not to spend more than that limit. Since we haven't had a budget in 5 years, it's more of a joke to promise not to spend more. Increasing the debt ceiling will just encourage more spending. This is a death spiral. It takes effort to stop a train wreck. We need to be stingy on the debt ceiling while the wreckage is more manageable.

Again. Deficit is the gap between income and spending. The debt ceiling is the total amount of deficit that's allowed to accumulate. Therefore, overall spending can drop - but as long as it's more than income, then the debt ceiling will continue to climb.

Basic Math. Do try and catch up, please.

This may be true but then our spending must be at the same level. It's that simple. So what must be done to keep spending under revenue? That is the job of government. It's job is not to pass out dole.

It's job is whatever the people decide it to be, within the framework of the Constitution.

Spending during a recession should always outpace income and vice versa during a boom. Any short-term balanced budget is subject to collapse during the first War or major disaster.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So who's holding America hostage now? Exploiting the plight of those in need. I think that Obama should answer that directly. I think that every member in the Administration and Congress should make good on the difference from their own pocket. This is the very reason that a nation should never be a welfare state. Do you understand?!

It's obvious that one of us doesn't.

I don't recall the Senate threatening to stop the government functioning if the SNAP benefits weren't extended. Perhaps you could provide a link?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again. Deficit is the gap between income and spending. The debt ceiling is the total amount of deficit that's allowed to accumulate. Therefore, overall spending can drop - but as long as it's more than income, then the debt ceiling will continue to climb.

Basic Math. Do try and catch up, please.

It's job is whatever the people decide it to be, within the framework of the Constitution.

Spending during a recession should always outpace income and vice versa during a boom. Any short-term balanced budget is subject to collapse during the first War or major disaster.

Don't forget the other side of the equation: Gross Debt to GDP Ratio

The USA GDP is not standing still. Q2 2013 $16.6 Trillion and......rising.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 1st Sequester worked out really well. Obama promised - Armageddon -. We all weathered the 2% cut no probelm.

Who is this "we" of whom you speak? Certainly not those benefitting from the Head Start program, or Meals on Wheels program, etc.

A blind cut across all government divisions will have greater impact on some functions than others.

Don't forget the other side of the equation: Gross Debt to GDP Ratio

The USA GDP is not standing still. Q2 2013 $16.6 Trillion and......rising.

It's almost as if GDP and income were linked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who is this "we" of whom you speak? Certainly not those benefitting from the Head Start program, or Meals on Wheels program, etc.

A blind cut across all government divisions will have greater impact on some functions than others.

It's almost as if GDP and income were linked.

Yes, GROW the Private Sector not the U.S. Government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, GROW the Private Sector not the U.S. Government.

Did someone suggest shrinking the private sector?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did someone suggest shrinking the private sector?

Yes, the Obama Administration the throwing an ungodly amount of Rules and Regulations at small businesses.

Want USA GDP growth? Stop attacking small business across the nation.

The U.S. Government needs to get out of the way and cut - another- 2% in spending.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the Obama Administration the throwing an ungodly amount of Rules and Regulations at small businesses.

Which regulations have passed through a Republican controlled house which do that, exactly?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again. Deficit is the gap between income and spending.

Correct.

The debt ceiling is the total amount of deficit that's allowed to accumulate.

Correct. That’s also called the Debt.

Therefore, overall spending can drop - but as long as it's more than income, then the debt ceiling will continue to climb.

That’s why it is only a number. It doesn’t mean anything anymore. The debt ceiling meant that the government should stop spending at that point. But it doesn’t stop them from doing so.

Basic Math. Do try and catch up, please.

You need to do the math. This is the math of fiscal responsibility, not status quo. Where do you see the end of raising the Debt Ceiling? You do understand that the higher it goes the less valuable our money becomes? Who is that helping?

It's job is whatever the people decide it to be, within the framework of the Constitution.

Well, I put it to you that it has gone outside the framework of the Constitution. This is a Republic, not a Democracy. The wishes of the people are indeed followed but they are tempered by law and the Constitution. The ever increasing Debt does not form a more perfect union. It undermines it. It does not establish justice. It breeds corruption. It does not insure domestic tranquility. It expands poverty and creates civil disorder. And it does not secure the blessing of liberty. It enslaves ourselves and our posterity.

Spending during a recession should always outpace income and vice versa during a boom.

No! That is wrong. Keynesian Economics leads to QE and that leads to devaluation of the dollar and inflation. Keynesian is a symptom of the Federal Reserve and Fractional Banking. This may work well in a Fascist, Marxist, or even a Socialist market system but not very well in a Capitalist Free Market. Keynesian was developed in the time of the Depression, just as Communism came about from the civil unrest of the industrial period in the Monarchies of Europe. It is a theoretical knee-jerk reaction to down times. Communism died after some 80 years. Keynesian should die out as well.

Any short-term balanced budget is subject to collapse during the first War or major disaster.

And *THAT* is the reason the government should never be involved with social programs. In bad times, it cannot sustain support to the needy and in turn, causes more suffering. This is where Faith-Based Charities need to be involved. I can see the government setting aside a few hundred billion for these charities to tap into. But it should be up to the people to freely give of their time and money to help others and not be coerced by the government. No, not everybody will give but so what. That’s none of your business who gives and who doesn’t

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.