Congress at work: $1 billion an hour

[Dphins4me]

The earmarks were, what, a percent or two or the whole package?

  So we make it extremely huge & then say its only a small percentage of the total cost?      Is this the way you run your household finances?  Sure one purchase may only be $50.  10 single purchases of $50 adds up to a nice tidy sum.

I'm not sure that qualifies as "full of". Unless succeeded by "it" and preceded by "you're".

Mature.
 

[Dphins4me]

"8000-9000 earmarks" = ~2% of the budget. 

Don't really care about the percentage of the budget.  Wasteful spending is still wasteful spending & money we do not have.

And apparently, he does think that this is money spent wisely. 

Like I said.  He believes any money spent by Wash. is money spent wisely.

He promised to get rid of programs that don't work, and streamline those that do; along these lines, he's already made cuts to the Medicare Advantage plan.

Why do you think that is?  Could it be because he has something else in mind to replace it?   Cut funding to what is already there to garner support for his plan..  Very logical move.

You do know they are looking into taxing your company funded health plans now, don't you?

BTW, you have still never responded to my question about how would you feel if the Gov. decided to remove 15% of your retirement for the people who did not have the advantage of a company matched 401K.  Ever going to?

Again, if you want to level a charge against him for not eliminating earmarks, that's your right.  But he never campaigned to "eliminate earmarks" and "veto earmarked spending."  That was McCain's rallying cry, not Obama's... and Obama made it a point to oppose that kind of attitude during the campaign (see: "hatchet vs. scalpel" statement).

  He choose his words like a politicians.   Still where is any earmark reform?

For anyone who thinks this is Anti-Dem.  I know that ~40% of the earmarks are reportedly coming from Rep.  This is about wasteful Gov. spending that you people seem to only care about what percentage it is of the bill.

I do not spend $200 dollars on something simply because I spent $20,000 on something else.  Damn is it that difficult to understand wasteful is still wasteful.

[bsmooth]

For anyone who thinks this is Anti-Dem.  I know that ~40% of the earmarks are reportedly coming from Rep.  This is about wasteful Gov. spending that you people seem to only care about what percentage it is of the bill.

I do not spend $200 dollars on something simply because I spent $20,000 on something else.  Damn is it that difficult to understand wasteful is still wasteful.

Maybe your rantings would come across as less partisan if you had been as relentlessly vocal during any two month period of the last administration as you have been during the first two months of this one.

[Dphins4me]

Maybe your rantings would come across as less partisan if you had been as relentlessly vocal during any two month period of the last administration as you have been during the first two months of this one.

  So once again.  Its not about the topic.  Its about the messenger? 

I didn't come around this website that often during that last admin maybe one reason.

[Spider-Dan]

Don't really care about the percentage of the budget.  Wasteful spending is still wasteful spending & money we do not have.

If 90% of the complaining is about 2% of the content, that gives you a pretty good idea as to the validity of the complaints.

If you want to attack the bill, try attacking the 98% of it that is not earmarks.  This would be as opposed to attacking an $800B stimulus bill for $20M in ATV trails.

Like I said.  He believes any money spent by Wash. is money spent wisely.

...which is why he made cuts to Medicare?

BTW, you have still never responded to my question about how would you feel if the Gov. decided to remove 15% of your retirement for the people who did not have the advantage of a company matched 401K.  Ever going to?

Wasn't planning on it; your hypothetical situation is so unrealistic that it's not worth discussing.  Any such change that Obama makes will be applied to future earnings, not existing assets; to pretend otherwise is dishonest to the point of absurdity.  Why not just ask me, "If the Gov. comes and confiscates your second car and gives it to a person that doesn't have one, would you like that?"  It's about equally likely to happen.

I do not spend $200 dollars on something simply because I spent $20,000 on something else.  Damn is it that difficult to understand wasteful is still wasteful.

Then try attacking the large majority of the bill instead of the tiny footnotes.  It's like you are watching Batman (the one with Keaton and Nicholson) and complaining that Billy Dee Williams' dialog ruined the movie.

[Dphins4me]

If 90% of the complaining is about 2% of the content, that gives you a pretty good idea as to the validity of the complaints.

If you want to attack the bill, try attacking the 98% of it that is not earmarks.  This would be as opposed to attacking an $800B stimulus bill for $20M in ATV trails.

  You start with the small stuff.   You will be amazed at how quickly the total price comes down once you remove all the 10 million here, the 15 million here.

...which is why he made cuts to Medicare?

  There is no other reason for why he cut Medicare?  Take away older people medical coverage helps him garner support for his universal HC coverage would be one off the top of my head.  Old people are scared more than young people & there are more old people.

Wasn't planning on it; your hypothetical situation is so unrealistic that it's not worth discussing.

  Probably just as unrealistic as the Gov owning banks was just a year ago.   Probably just as unrealistic as the Dow losing 50% off its all time high was just a year ago.  Probably just as unrealistic as a black man becoming Pres. 40 Yrs ago.   I'm not saying they will.  I was just asking "what if"  Would that be enough for you to say what they are doing

From what I gather Argentina is doing it.  Are we so different anymore?

  Any such change that Obama makes will be applied to future earnings, not existing assets; to pretend otherwise is dishonest to the point of absurdity.  Why not just ask me, "If the Gov. comes and confiscates your second car and gives it to a person that doesn't have one, would you like that?"  It's about equally likely to happen.

Ok.  Basically the same concept.   What if?   Also, are you cool with them taxing your HC benefits?

Then try attacking the large majority of the bill instead of the tiny footnotes.  It's like you are watching Batman (the one with Keaton and Nicholson) and complaining that Billy Dee Williams' dialog ruined the movie.

  Again, you start with the small stuff.    Get the useless spending out of the way.

[bsmooth]

  So once again.  Its not about the topic.  Its about the messenger? 

I didn't come around this website that often during that last admin maybe one reason.

Are you that naive? Of course the message is effected by the motives of the messenger bearing it, it is called spin.

[YoFuggedaboutit]

President Obama is going to address the $165 million in bonuses that AIG executives are being paid. 

[bsmooth]

President Obama is going to address the $165 million in bonuses that AIG executives are being paid. 

He needs to tell them that they will not get bonuses paid from taxpayer monies and if they want to sue they will be taking on the whole government.

[Dphins4me]

Are you that naive? Of course the message is effected by the motives of the messenger bearing it, it is called spin.

  Still address the message

When you go after the messenger instead of the message then it implies what they are saying is valid, so you discredit the source, since you cannot discredit the message.

Is that naive?

[Dphins4me]

President Obama is going to address the $165 million in bonuses that AIG executives are being paid. 

  I bet they are scared.   Obama probably thinks they did not get enough.    Kinda like when Congress goes after the Oil Companies.    Laughing together on the way to the meetings & laughing together on the way out.

AIG: Yea, the America people really think you are coming after us. 

Obama: Don't forget to give that money to my friends.

AIG: Oh we will.  BAH

[Spider-Dan]

  You start with the small stuff.   You will be amazed at how quickly the total price comes down once you remove all the 10 million here, the 15 million here.

WTF?  You start with the small stuff?

I don't think I would be "amazed" at how quickly the total price comes down.  I think it would go down no more than 2%!

When your car isn't running, do you start by cleaning the floor mats?

There is no other reason for why he cut Medicare?  Take away older people medical coverage helps him garner support for his universal HC coverage would be one off the top of my head.  Old people are scared more than young people & there are more old people.

So if I understand you correctly:

- making cuts is a ploy to gain support for gov't expansion
- not making cuts is shameful backpedaling on campaign promises

Yep, all bases are covered.

Probably just as unrealistic as the Gov owning banks was just a year ago.   Probably just as unrealistic as the Dow losing 50% off its all time high was just a year ago.

Pick up a history book.  Turn to the 1930s.

Probably just as unrealistic as a black man becoming Pres. 40 Yrs ago.

Did you really mean to include this item in a list of catastrophically horrible events that no one would have foreseen?

[Dphins4me]

He needs to tell them that they will not get bonuses paid from taxpayer monies and if they want to sue they will be taking on the whole government.

 They have already been told they are to big to fail.  He kinda has no leg to stand on.

[Dphins4me]

WTF?  You start with the small stuff?

I don't think I would be "amazed" at how quickly the total price comes down.  I think it would go down no more than 2%!

Still a penny saved is a penny earn. 

When your car isn't running, do you start by cleaning the floor mats?

  If the car is dirty.  Sure.  Removing the floor mats & cleaning them is a place to start.

So if I understand you correctly:

- making cuts is a ploy to gain support for gov't expansion
- not making cuts is shameful backpedaling on campaign promises

Yep, all bases are covered.

  Do you not admit it is ironic that he choose to cut Medicare, when he is trying to instill his own HC plan?

Pick up a history book.  Turn to the 1930s.

Nothing to comeback with I see.

Did you really mean to include this item in a list of catastrophically horrible events that no one would have foreseen?

  Just another example of a event that not even a half century ago ( Probably less ) was thought to be unrealistic.   In time everything can be realistic.  In time America could become a dictator ship.

Still not addressed my original question.  Why are you so afraid to address it? 

[Spider-Dan]

Still a penny saved is a penny earn. 

How about going after the actual substance of the "problem," instead of dancing around the frills?

When you can't mount a substantial argument against the meat of the bill, it makes you appear to be nitpicking.

Do you not admit it is ironic that he choose to cut Medicare, when he is trying to instill his own HC plan?

Nope.  There's no guarantee that the healthcare plan will even get passed.  Even if it doesn't, Medicare still needs reform.

Nothing to comeback with I see.

So I'm guessing you didn't actually take that advice on the history book thing.

On July 8, 1932, the Dow closed at 41.22.  This was 89% off of its all-time high (at the time) of 381.17.

But yeah, no one would ever believe that we could lose 50%.  No way.  Unpossible.

In time everything can be realistic.  In time America could become a dictator ship.

Still not addressed my original question.  Why are you so afraid to address it?

Since you seem to desperately want this effectively meaningless answer, here you go:

In a crazy, imaginary world where maybe America becomes a dictatorship, or aliens arrive and give us all bionic infrared eyes, or Zombie Reagan rises from the dead and wins a third term, sure, I would be unhappy about the gov't confiscating my 401k to redistribute to the poor, or to flying monkeys, or to our multi-limbed dolphin overlords.