Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

     

Left Nav S-B Home Register FAQ Members List S-B on Facebook Arcade WEAX Tides Buoys Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Right Nav

Left Container Right Container
 

Go Back   Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating » Striper Chat - Discuss stuff other than fishing ~ The Scuppers and Political talk » Political Threads

Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi:

 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 01-06-2011, 07:58 AM   #31
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch View Post
Isn't that the beauty of tax revenue shortfalls? There is no money to fund bloated spending. Doesn't this argue for spending cuts rather than tax increases as the method to reduce the deficit? Raising taxes will just pay for bloated spending. Parkinson's second law--expenditures always rise to meet income.
Exactly. But when liberals confront this issue, they spend 99% of their time talking about increasing revenue (tax hikes) and almost no time talking about menaingful cuts. Libs ain't about to statr saying "no" to labor unions, for example. And caving in to public labor union demands is a huge reason why most states are in dire financial shape.

As Gov Christie in NJ says, we don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. If a 30 year-old NBA star is bankrupt, his problem isn't that he doesn't make enough money. His problem is that he needs to get a grip on his spending. Politicians are in the same boat...
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 01-06-2011, 07:59 AM   #32
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
If the GOP says they'll try to reduce the deficit, and they try but Obama vetoes all legislation (for example) they wouldn't be any of those things.
If Obama vetoes all legislation, then the GOP having promised to reduce this year's budget is disconnected from reality. Why make a promise you can't keep? How did they expect to keep their promise? I know Obama will veto all legislation (just as I know this year's budget won't be lowered $100 billion). You can't promise you'll do something if there is no way that it will happen.

If they're able to lower the budget what they stated - good for them for accomplishing what they promised and let them be rewarded for that.

I don't want any legislators (Pelosi or the GOP) promising/stating anything that won't happen or they can't do. That is not party dependent - they're all the same.
PaulS is offline  
Old 01-06-2011, 08:04 AM   #33
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
If Obama vetoes all legislation, then the GOP having promised to reduce this year's budget is disconnected from reality. Why make a promise you can't keep? How did they expect to keep their promise? I know Obama will veto all legislation (just as I know this year's budget won't be lowered $100 billion). You can't promise you'll do something if there is no way that it will happen.

If they're able to lower the budget what they stated - good for them for accomplishing what they promised and let them be rewarded for that.

I don't want any legislators (Pelosi or the GOP) promising/stating anything that won't happen or they can't do. That is not party dependent - they're all the same.
Paul S, you and I are talking about 2 very different things, and I htink you know that.

You are describing a situation where a party runs on a platform, honestly tries to implement that platform, and gets blocked by the other party.

That is NOT REMOTELY analagous to what Pelosi did. She took one radical course of action (insane spending) and then AFTER THE FACT, claimed that she did the exact opposite.

(1) The GOP has made a promise. Time will tell if they can keep it, and if they don't, they should be honest about why.

(2) Pelosi is claiming that she did the opposite of what she actualy did.

You're comparing those 2 things. A child knows they are different.
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 01-06-2011, 08:09 AM   #34
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
I know Obama will veto all legislation (just as I know this year's budget won't be lowered $100 billion). You can't promise you'll do something if there is no way that it will happen.
I highly doubt that's the case. Obama still seeks to further his agenda and the interests of the American people. A stagnant government will produce none of this and could be quite disruptive.

More likely it will mean negotiation. The House isn't going to be let to run rampant, if they don't produce bi-partisan legislation it's not going to get through the Senate.

-spence
spence is offline  
Old 01-06-2011, 08:11 AM   #35
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
Since everything you say is an elaboration on one of those points, you need not bother.
I'll be more than happy to oblige, have a nice season.

-spence
spence is offline  
Old 01-06-2011, 09:02 AM   #36
UserRemoved1
Permanently Disconnected
iTrader: (-9)
 
UserRemoved1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,647
BEST picture I seen in years.



Now if they can just get the other jackbag out of there we'd be all set
UserRemoved1 is offline  
Old 01-06-2011, 09:41 AM   #37
Raven
........
iTrader: (0)
 
Raven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 22,805
Blog Entries: 1
just saw that sign in half lengthwise

prolly pay $500.00 for a replacement
Raven is offline  
Old 01-06-2011, 11:30 AM   #38
UserRemoved1
Permanently Disconnected
iTrader: (-9)
 
UserRemoved1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,647
TOILET SEATS ARE $10K

THAT IS EASILY A $50K SIGN

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raven View Post
just saw that sign in half lengthwise

prolly pay $500.00 for a replacement
UserRemoved1 is offline  
Old 01-06-2011, 11:31 AM   #39
RIJIMMY
sick of bluefish
iTrader: (1)
 
RIJIMMY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 8,672
[QUOTE=stcroixman;824441]Very true. Now they will be front and center and Pelosi won't be.

InQUOTE]

you really think Boehner is as nutty (on the right) as Pelosi is left?

making s-b.com a kinder, gentler place for all
RIJIMMY is offline  
Old 01-06-2011, 12:30 PM   #40
Fly Rod
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
Fly Rod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Gloucester Massachusetts
Posts: 2,678
Is Pelosi a liar or a lunatic?

BOTH!
Fly Rod is offline  
Old 01-06-2011, 12:42 PM   #41
fishbones
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
 
fishbones's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Easton, MA
Posts: 5,735
Liar
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	pelosio.jpg
Views:	451
Size:	76.2 KB
ID:	43525  

Conservatism is not about leaving people behind. Conservatism is about empowering people to catch up, to give them tools at their disposal that make it possible for them to access all the hope, all the promise, all the opportunity that America offers. - Marco Rubio
fishbones is offline  
Old 01-06-2011, 12:42 PM   #42
RIJIMMY
sick of bluefish
iTrader: (1)
 
RIJIMMY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 8,672
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
. Obama still seeks to further his agenda and the interests of the American people. -spence
you never cease to amuse me. Obama seeks to further the interests of SOME american people. He has been very outspoken about NOT furthering the interests of -
1. successful people who do not rely on government support
2. People making over 200K per year and even more damaging, FAMILILES making 250k per year
3. American citizens who compete for jobs with illegal aliens

He is working very hard to further the interests of those that rely on the government.

making s-b.com a kinder, gentler place for all
RIJIMMY is offline  
Old 01-06-2011, 02:18 PM   #43
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
You're comparing those 2 things. A child knows they are different.
So you think I'm comparing 2 different things and I'm a "child"?
PaulS is offline  
Old 01-06-2011, 02:22 PM   #44
RIJIMMY
sick of bluefish
iTrader: (1)
 
RIJIMMY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 8,672
Paul, hurry up, call him "classy" !

making s-b.com a kinder, gentler place for all
RIJIMMY is offline  
Old 01-06-2011, 02:32 PM   #45
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
So you think I'm comparing 2 different things and I'm a "child"?
No. I'm saying that you're comparing 2 things that are extremely different.

If I understand you correctly, you are suggesting an equivalence between...

(1) House republicans, who have been in occice 2 days, are pledging to reduce the debt.

(2) Nancy Pelosi, after increasing the debt by $5 trillion, says that debt reduction was her mantra.

The second thing is an irrefutable lie. As for the 1st thing, the GOP hasn't had time to do anything yet, so we don't know if they are being honest. In other words, there is no evidence (yet) that Boehner lied about reducing the debt. There is insurmountable evidence that Pelosi lied.

As I said, you seem to be comparing two very different things. You're comparing an obvious liar with someone who may or may not be proven to be a liar. Or did I misunderstand your post, which is quite possible?
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 01-06-2011, 03:07 PM   #46
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by RIJIMMY View Post
you never cease to amuse me. Obama seeks to further the interests of SOME american people. He has been very outspoken about NOT furthering the interests of -
1. successful people who do not rely on government support
2. People making over 200K per year and even more damaging, FAMILILES making 250k per year
3. American citizens who compete for jobs with illegal aliens

He is working very hard to further the interests of those that rely on the government.
Jim, think a little about this. I said his "agenda" and the "interests" of the people. There are little things like national defense that I think we'd all agree are important. Do you think Obama will let the Afghanistan war funding dry up because the House wants to cut some domestic program? Not likely...they'll work out a deal.

Perhaps you need to take a breather before responding to posts.

-spence
spence is offline  
Old 01-06-2011, 05:30 PM   #47
Piscator
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
Piscator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Marshfield, Ma
Posts: 2,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
I highly doubt that's the case. Obama still seeks to further his agenda and the interests of the American people.

-spence
Spence, my opinion is that it appears Obama's agenda is very different than the interests of the American people (and I’m not including the free loaders of this great country as the American people). He doesn't seem to know the interests of the American people...

"I know a taxidermy man back home. He gonna have a heart attack when he see what I brung him!"
Piscator is offline  
Old 01-06-2011, 05:47 PM   #48
The Dad Fisherman
Super Moderator
iTrader: (0)
 
The Dad Fisherman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Georgetown MA
Posts: 18,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
So you think I'm comparing 2 different things and I'm a "child"?
Yeah, I was surprised the "Condescension Police" didn't jump all over that....I've seen them bust other people's balls for less.

"If you're arguing with an idiot, make sure he isn't doing the same thing."
The Dad Fisherman is offline  
Old 01-06-2011, 06:00 PM   #49
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
I think this is true to a point, but am not sure the problem of the national debt can be solved with spending cuts alone over the next decade. This certainly seemed to be the opinion of the debt commission who know a hell of a lot more about this than I do (one would hope).

When I spoke of no money to fund bloated spending and not raising taxes to create that condition, I specifically referred to it as an argument for cutting spending rather than raising taxes as the best way to reduce the DEFICIT. As you said, most people interchange or confuse DEBT and DEFICIT. However, since you mention it, the debt certainly won't be reduced, not only over the next ten years, but ever, if the budget is constantly in deficit. The problem with raising taxes to eliminate the deficit, even if it is only an added measure in tandem with reduced spending, is, as we both agree, the incoming revenue will be spent. What's more, if not even worse, the "economy" is not a static universe. It is dynamic and reacts to taxation, usually in a negative way as taxes rise. So you may well have less income with higher taxes as the "economy" shrinks. And, by trying to "stimulate" the "economy" with an influx of government deficit spending and borrowing weakens the dollar and deflates the value of people's savings and property, which in turn, can lead to a decrease in government revenue while increasing the debt. It's a dog not only chasing its tail but eating it. The only way to stop the beast is to starve it. Put it on a crash diet of no goodies--only what is essential. The Federal Government must relinquish the mass of programs that it has, unconstitutionally IMHO, stolen from the people. Let us be more and more responsible, and let the Federales do only what the Constitution allows. Of course, that cat is out of the bag, and it may never be put back.

That being said, I do see wisdom in the Conservative idea that if the money is there it will get spent. This is as true as extra cash in your pocket or that tub of ice cream in the freezer (i.e. human nature). The key is restraint, and why I think most people don't trust either party, they're looking for responsibility which has been in short supply regardless of who's in charge of the pocket book.

-spence
Let's keep voting them out till they get the message.

Last edited by detbuch; 01-06-2011 at 06:08 PM..
detbuch is offline  
Old 01-07-2011, 08:27 AM   #50
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by RIJIMMY View Post
Paul, hurry up, call him "classy" !
you know classy, right? LOL

Last edited by PaulS; 01-07-2011 at 08:34 AM..
PaulS is offline  
Old 01-07-2011, 08:33 AM   #51
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
As I said, you seem to be comparing two very different things. You're comparing an obvious liar with someone who may or may not be proven to be a liar. Or did I misunderstand your post, which is quite possible?
what I said in previous posts is that if the Repub. don't reduce the budget this year then they'd have to be 1 of the 3 you mentioned. I also said that if they do keep their promise, so be it and let them be rewarded for keeping it. I don't think they'll do it, but we'll see. There is no difference in my mind b/t the 2 parties and I don't think many people here recognize that.
PaulS is offline  
Old 01-07-2011, 11:28 AM   #52
RIJIMMY
sick of bluefish
iTrader: (1)
 
RIJIMMY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 8,672
there are INCREDIBLE ideological differences.

making s-b.com a kinder, gentler place for all
RIJIMMY is offline  
Old 01-07-2011, 11:51 AM   #53
justplugit
Registered Grandpa
iTrader: (0)
 
justplugit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: east coast
Posts: 8,592
Quote:
Originally Posted by #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^& View Post
BEST picture I seen in years.



Now if they can just get the other jackbag out of there we'd be all set

LOL, TWO govt. employees to take down a 3 ft 2 screw sign.
Wonder what the salaries, benes, retirement and screw gun cost us?

That about says it all.

" Choose Life "
justplugit is offline  
Old 01-07-2011, 12:17 PM   #54
RIJIMMY
sick of bluefish
iTrader: (1)
 
RIJIMMY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 8,672
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
what I said in previous posts is that if the Repub. don't reduce the budget this year then they'd have to be 1 of the 3 you mentioned. I also said that if they do keep their promise, so be it and let them be rewarded for keeping it. I don't think they'll do it, but we'll see. There is no difference in my mind b/t the 2 parties and I don't think many people here recognize that.
on our way!

Washington (CNN) -- Defense Secretary Robert Gates staged a pre-emptive attack Thursday in Washington's looming budget battles, announcing cuts of $78 billion to the U.S. military and defense department, including reducing the size of the Army and Marine Corps.

In addition, Gates said the Army, Navy and Air Force had found $100 billion of savings that they would retain, allowing them to continue developing major weapons and modernizing their forces over the next five years.

"These reform efforts, followed through to completion, will make it possible to protect the U.S. military's size, reach and fighting strength despite a declining rate of growth and eventual flattening of the defense budget over the next five years," Gates said at the start of a lengthy opening statement at the Pentagon.

Under the Gates plan, the Marine Corps would slash 15,000 to 20,000 people, a 10% reduction. The Army would shrink by 27,000 active duty personnel, 4% cut, on top of an already planned reduction of 22,000 -- for a total of 49,000 fewer soldiers.

making s-b.com a kinder, gentler place for all
RIJIMMY is offline  
Old 01-07-2011, 01:04 PM   #55
JohnnyD
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
JohnnyD's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mansfield, MA
Posts: 5,238
Quote:
Originally Posted by justplugit View Post
LOL, TWO govt. employees to take down a 3 ft 2 screw sign.
Wonder what the salaries, benes, retirement and screw gun cost us?

That about says it all.
It's called a Union work. Probably had a mandatory break after the first screw came out and got hazard pay for needing to use a step ladder.
JohnnyD is offline  
Old 01-07-2011, 01:09 PM   #56
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by RIJIMMY View Post
there are INCREDIBLE ideological differences.
sorry, I thought the discussion was about their honesty.

Good for Gates. Our military budget is too large. Politicians should stop telling the military what weapon systems they need. Let the military decide what they need based on the threat and not on trying to keep $s in certain districts.
PaulS is offline  
Old 01-08-2011, 12:45 PM   #57
Chesapeake Bill
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by justplugit View Post
LOL, TWO govt. employees to take down a 3 ft 2 screw sign.
Wonder what the salaries, benes, retirement and screw gun cost us?
Seems to me there is a memorial at Arlington National Cemetery with several people putting up one small flag...sometimes good things take multiple people to make sure it is done!

I'd be happy to give you my number so I can ignore your call and you can get an idea what slashing the government employee rolls will be like...not that there isn't excess...just don't paint everyone with that brush...we don't come on here and claim that you are just saying that because you didn't get your check...
Chesapeake Bill is offline  
Old 01-08-2011, 12:57 PM   #58
Swimmer
Retired Surfer
iTrader: (0)
 
Swimmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sunset Grill
Posts: 9,511
I heard she is going to pose topless in AARP magazine. She has great hooters.

Imagine what the GD sign cost in the first place. Pity the fool who scrathes it taking it down.

Swimmer a.k.a. YO YO MA
Serial Mailbox Killer/Seal Fisherman
Swimmer is offline  
Old 01-08-2011, 05:39 PM   #59
stcroixman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Warwick
Posts: 541
She has great hooters.

I agree. She is almost 70 I think I wonder what she looked like at 30?
stcroixman is offline  
Old 01-08-2011, 06:34 PM   #60
mosholu
Mosholu
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NYC
Posts: 440
Quote:
Originally Posted by stcroixman View Post
She has great hooters.

I agree. She is almost 70 I think I wonder what she looked like at 30?
In the words of Clemenza, Keep the hooters lose the head.
mosholu is offline  
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Please use all necessary and proper safety precautions. STAY SAFE Striper Talk Forums
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com