There will be no need for congress!

[hrdguera]

Originally Posted by madmax

What a wanker you are! And an unobservant one at that.
It's not about being "right". It's about discussing issues intelligently.
And if you feel you must prove that I am wrong, you may have more credibility if you actually stuck to the subject instead of crying, whining, and lashing out.
Like I said, most on here see thru your bullshit... I just find it entertaining how you squirm, bitch, and moan. There is another southern saying: Bit dog always hollers.

Now, lets see if you can drop the crybaby bit for a few posts and actually attempt some contribution in content. I know that's asking a lot, but give it a try.

I changed my mind ... Keep blocking the puck with your head!

Thankfully, you are not the arbiter of conversation and your famed "perspective" leaves a lot to be desired. If the time comes when you learn some manners on these boards then others may actually consider your opinions as substantive instead of of just more pontificating and posturing. Just a thought for you to ponder over the weekend. Now I'm off to do something constructive with the few hours of daylight left.

[madmax]

Originally Posted by hrdguera

Bla bla bla... If the time comes when you learn some manners on these boards then others may actually consider your opinions as substantive instead of of just ... bla bla bla.

You and a few of your other fringe bullshit slinging friends are not exactly all encompassing "others". Manners??? LOL The only people I don't "get along with" are those that have their panties in a bunch because their absurdities and bullshit have been exposed.

But you're still digging! That's amusing.

Any chance of some substance in the near future?
Yeah... I didn't think so.

[madmax]

In order to deflect from HG's crying... lets get back on subject.

It seems that the trillion dollar coin thing started as a joke, but now some are taking it seriously just to avoid a useless debacle.
We can't have another debt ceiling fight again - the whole thing is counterproductive. Focus on spending and the ceiling will take care of itself.

[dumbass]

Originally Posted by madmax

In order to deflect from HG's crying... lets get back on subject.

It seems that the trillion dollar coin thing started as a joke, but now some are taking it seriously just to avoid a useless debacle.
We can't have another debt ceiling fight again - the whole thing is counterproductive. Focus on spending and the ceiling will take care of itself.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...Finance&rpc=43

It was never a joke. If it wasn't being considered as a method of sidestepping congress, they wouldn't have publicly stated that they decided not to use the Trillion Dollar Coin.

Proof again that much of the banter from Max is just that .... banter. That's a polite way of saying BULLSH#T

[dumbass]

Originally Posted by madmax

Well you "obviously" have your head in the sand or trying to live up to your handle. No, that's not my opinion, dumbass. It is my opinion that some people just take what select talking heads are feeding them.
You baffle me the most because I had figured long ago that you were a smart guy... but you keep buying every little morsel of bullshit that comes your way.

The above may have made you feel better but it's devoid of substance not worthy of comment!

The prime example is right in this discussion: the Debt Ceiling has nothing to do with authorizing spending and tax levels. The Ceiling is after the fact - it simply authorizes the Federal Gov't to pay it's outstanding bills. It's like the check after a meal out. You have already ordered (spending) and you already have a certain amount of cash (revenues). The debt ceiling is just the credit card portion agreed on to pay the outstanding bill ALREADY INCURRED. And the end scenario is the same: pay it, wash dishes, or go to jail for dining-and-dashing.

I have always understood the difference between spending, taxes and the debt ceiling but to separate them as if any one of them does not directly effect the other is inaccurate and ridiculous.

Using your credit card reference, if the federal debt was held by MasterCard their card would have been put on hold a long time ago.

I asked the following specific question that you chose not to answer:

Originally Posted by dumbass Exactly!! Please name the spending cuts along with the associated dollar amount of those cuts that that offset the tax increases achieved during the Fiscal Cliff Negotiations.

No answer is an answer. It's indicative of your inability to spin it to your benefit.

Originally Posted by dumbass To give a comparison that even you might be able to understand, the DEBT CEILING is the mechanism that is intended to do just what it's name implies, It places a limit on the debt. That's so simple that even you should be able to understand that.

To which you replied with another "Copy & Paste" explanation of the debt ceiling from the progressive view point.

But since 1960 the Debt Ceiling has never been used as a gun against the head of the American economy like it is now. This is the bipolar action of Congress - set yourself up for a hostage crisis situation on circumstances of your own making.

On 01/11/13 you said:

We can't have another debt ceiling fight again - the whole thing is counterproductive. Focus on spending and the ceiling will take care of itself.

Historically Debt Ceiling increases have been rubber stamped and spending controls have not been addressed. You are extremely naive when say "Focus on spending and the ceiling will take care of itself."

"Funny" but your "perspective" is hypocritical in believe it was perfectly acceptable to use the "Fiscal Cliff" "as a gun against the head of the American" taxpayer to accomplish tax increases without restraint of spending. Conversely, you believe that it is unacceptable to use the Debt Ceiling a comparable tool to reign in spending.

Originally Posted by dumbass There was an attempt to reign in spending as recently as about a week ago. That attempt failed miserably. ERGO THE UPCOMING "DEBT CEILING" SHOULD BE RIGHTLY UTILIZED TO ACT "AS A TOOL" TO FORCE FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY

In fact that is exactly what should be done. Unless they hold a formidably "GUN" to the heads of the legislators that believe that they can spend their way to fiscal utopia, there will never be fiscally responsible policies. The Debt Ceiling can and should be that "GUN".

The House Republicans are out of step with the wishes of the American people. The majority of Americans want spending cuts and revenue increases. The House Republicans are digging in their heels against the wishes of the public

In Reference to spending, IMO the Republicans are instep with most of the people that actually pay FEDERAL INCOME TAXES".

Funny, but this highlights your misunderstanding of the debt ceiling. You can't "remove the shit". The "shit" is that restaurant bill for the feast you just gobbled down. "Removing the shit" is the equivalent of running out on your bill.

"FUNNY" but if the government didn't spend more that it takes in there would be no need to increase the Debt Ceiling. The Ceiling isn't the problem. The problem is spending more than you take in.

Simpson-Bowles has a framework for moving that discussion forward and getting our fiscal house in order.

"FUNNY" but your hero actually commissioned "Simpson-Bowles" but has chosen to ignore it because it doesn't fit his agenda to redistribute the wealth.

[madmax]

Originally Posted by dumbass

The above may have made you feel better but it's devoid of substance not worthy of comment!

It is probably more accurate than you want, hence your response. Like pgh69 pointed out, you're getting more and more "fringe" and illogical by the day.

Originally Posted by dumbass

I asked the following specific question that you chose not to answer:



No answer is an answer. It's indicative of your inability to spin it to your benefit.

There was no answer because the question was ridiculous. Proposals fro spending cuts were all over the news. You are asking the equivalent of "who won the election?" Rerally? Go look it up yourself. This is from the WH so I'm sure it's a nefarious source to you. Debunk it as you see fit. However, most of us find it strange that Boehner and his cronies did not take the lead in proposing spending cuts... some say to avoid any blame for specific austerity measures.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/...tting-spending

Originally Posted by dumbass

To which you replied with another "Copy & Paste" explanation of the debt ceiling from the progressive view point.

Yeah, I copied and pasted... I use references because they are more articulate than I can slap together in 2 minutes.

It figures you would say "from the progressive viewpoint"... because it is really just factual on the mechanics of it. This really just unmasks (yet again) your lack of a viewpoint without an ultra-conservative bent.

Originally Posted by dumbass

On 01/11/13 you said:



Historically Debt Ceiling increases have been rubber stamped and spending controls have not been addressed. You are extremely naive when say "Focus on spending and the ceiling will take care of itself."

"Funny" but your "perspective" is hypocritical in believe it was perfectly acceptable to use the "Fiscal Cliff" "as a gun against the head of the American" taxpayer to accomplish tax increases without restraint of spending. Conversely, you believe that it is unacceptable to use the Debt Ceiling a comparable tool to reign in spending.

What is really naive is to try to solve a problem without addressing the root cause. Quit filling your fat face with filet mignon if all you can afford is hamburger. Quit basing your diet on your credit card limit.

Originally Posted by dumbass

In fact that is exactly what should be done. Unless they hold a formidably "GUN" to the heads of the legislators that believe that they can spend their way to fiscal utopia, there will never be fiscally responsible policies. The Debt Ceiling can and should be that "GUN".

Like I said, it's bipolar - Congress would be holding the gun to their own head. They have already done the damage and then get upset with themselves the next year.
They need to be responsible during the spending. Not by defaulting on the obligations they already made.

Originally Posted by dumbass

In Reference to spending, IMO the Republicans are instep with most of the people that actually pay FEDERAL INCOME TAXES".

Hmmm.... so the guy working for $10/hr that pays no income tax (but pays payroll taxes and other taxes) has no right as a citizen to be involved in this debate? Many of us don't pay corporate taxes but sure feel we have rights in the discussion of how we set corporate taxes.

Originally Posted by dumbass

"FUNNY" but your hero actually commissioned "Simpson-Bowles" but has chosen to ignore it because it doesn't fit his agenda to redistribute the wealth.

Teddy Roosevelt did not commission Simpson-Bowles...
"redistribute wealth???? Bringing tax levels back to 1998 levels for those makinh over $250K a year is hardly a "socialist plot". But I should expect this from the conspiracy theory nuts... you know, the one's that gobbled up DeSouza's books and film.

[dumbass]

Originally Posted by madmax

It is probably more accurate than you want, hence your response. Like pgh69 pointed out, you're getting more and more "fringe" and illogical by the day.

The question was and I quote "Originally Posted by dumbass Exactly!! Please name the spending cuts along with the associated dollar amount of those cuts that that offset the tax increases achieved during the Fiscal Cliff Negotiations.

To which you responded:

There was no answer because the question was ridiculous. Proposals fro spending cuts were all over the news. You are asking the equivalent of "who won the election?" Rerally? Go look it up yourself. This is from the WH so I'm sure it's a nefarious source to you. Debunk it as you see fit. However, most of us find it strange that Boehner and his cronies did not take the lead in proposing spending cuts... some say to avoid any blame for specific austerity measures.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/...tting-spending

Your reference is from 2011. The "Fiscal Cliff" negotiations took place in December 2012 and a day or two into January 2013. It's not nefarious, it's irrelevant, you're just making noise.

What is really naive is to try to solve a problem without addressing the root cause. Quit filling your fat face with filet mignon if all you can afford is hamburger. Quit basing your diet on your credit card limit.

Whatever that's supposed to mean?????

Teddy Roosevelt did not commission Simpson-Bowles...
"redistribute wealth???? Bringing tax levels back to 1998 levels for those makinh over $250K a year is hardly a "socialist plot". But I should expect this from the conspiracy theory nuts... you know, the one's that gobbled up DeSouza's books and film.

From Teddy Roosevelt, to Simpson-Bowles, to 1998 tax levels, to a "socialist plot, to conspiracy nuts, to DeSouza all in one paragraph. Just a little disjointed wouldn't you say. Sounds like your ADD is out of control again. Did you take your Ritalin today.

[FormerRepub]

Originally Posted by dumbass

The question was and I quote "Originally Posted by dumbass Exactly!! Please name the spending cuts along with the associated dollar amount of those cuts that that offset the tax increases achieved during the Fiscal Cliff Negotiations.

Nits can be picked both ways.

Taxes were not increased by the fiscal cliff deal.

Taxes increased on Jan 1, 2013 as the result of previous tax cut laws expiring.

The fiscal cliff debate was about which taxes were going to be cut, not which were going to be increasd.



It is a nit to say the fiscal cliff deal didn't increase any taxes, only cut them, but it is a pretty important nit.

[diamondlady]

Originally Posted by FormerRepub

It is a nit to say the fiscal cliff deal didn't increase any taxes, only cut them, but it is a pretty important nit.

I think what Dumbass was asking is what spending cuts were made?

[madmax]

Originally Posted by diamondlady

I think what Dumbass was asking is what spending cuts were made?

He was given the proposals but sidestepped the issue. Why didn't Boehner s***est cuts? Because it was set up as a blame game.

Cuts were proposed. It's up to Congress to enact the cuts.