|
Given the deep/deepening recession, do you think it was wise
|
|
Topic Started: Nov 30 2013, 10:46 PM (3,489 Views)
|
|
Sea Dog
|
Dec 1 2013, 04:24 AM
Post #21
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 13,849
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #46
- Joined:
- Apr 17, 2008
|
Two million HD TVs, 1/12 million tablets sold on Black Friday. Wish there had been a recession like this when I was a boy!
|
|
|
| |
|
Berton
|
Dec 2 2013, 11:11 PM
Post #22
|
- Posts:
- 55,592
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #238
- Joined:
- May 26, 2012
|
- Mountainrivers
- Dec 1 2013, 12:53 AM
- Pat
- Dec 1 2013, 12:31 AM
- colo_crawdad
- Dec 1 2013, 12:15 AM
Given the need of 30 million people, according to yo, Pat, the answer is YES.
OK. Then your priority match the president's. I think working towards and spending political capital on passing a living wage bill would have done far greater good in the country. A president only has so much political capital and when first sworn in, that was when a similar all out effort would have in my opinion, resulted in a living wage for American workers. I would have followed up in priority a set of tax reforms and trade reforms designed to stimulate the economy. My guess is that the vast majority would have favored those the polices a opposed to just the opposite in support for the healthcare reform. Five years in, we would in my opinion be hitting on all cylinders had wages, jobs and taxes been addressed.
Here's why your proposal wouldn't work, Pat. "President Obama has called for an increase in the national rate, mentioning it in his most recent State of the Union address and recently signing on to a proposal from congressional Democrats to set a $10.10 hourly rate. But congressional Republicans have opposed any increase, saying it would hurt employers and curtail job growth." Even $10.10/hour isn't a living wage. What tax and trade reforms would you have presented to the congress, and since reps won't vote for anything Obama proposes, how would you implement them? He could have done it when he had a majority in both houses the first 2 years. Just like he passed Obamacare.
|
|
|
| |
|
Mountainrivers
|
Dec 2 2013, 11:27 PM
Post #23
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 33,547
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- Mar 24, 2008
|
- Berton
- Dec 2 2013, 11:11 PM
- Mountainrivers
- Dec 1 2013, 12:53 AM
- Pat
- Dec 1 2013, 12:31 AM
- colo_crawdad
- Dec 1 2013, 12:15 AM
Given the need of 30 million people, according to yo, Pat, the answer is YES.
OK. Then your priority match the president's. I think working towards and spending political capital on passing a living wage bill would have done far greater good in the country. A president only has so much political capital and when first sworn in, that was when a similar all out effort would have in my opinion, resulted in a living wage for American workers. I would have followed up in priority a set of tax reforms and trade reforms designed to stimulate the economy. My guess is that the vast majority would have favored those the polices a opposed to just the opposite in support for the healthcare reform. Five years in, we would in my opinion be hitting on all cylinders had wages, jobs and taxes been addressed.
Here's why your proposal wouldn't work, Pat. "President Obama has called for an increase in the national rate, mentioning it in his most recent State of the Union address and recently signing on to a proposal from congressional Democrats to set a $10.10 hourly rate. But congressional Republicans have opposed any increase, saying it would hurt employers and curtail job growth." Even $10.10/hour isn't a living wage. What tax and trade reforms would you have presented to the congress, and since reps won't vote for anything Obama proposes, how would you implement them?
He could have done it when he had a majority in both houses the first 2 years. Just like he passed Obamacare. So you say. Provide evidence that he could have passed it.
|
|
|
| |
|
colo_crawdad
|
Dec 2 2013, 11:52 PM
Post #24
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 39,310
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #4
- Joined:
- Feb 16, 2008
|
- Mountainrivers
- Dec 2 2013, 11:27 PM
- Berton
- Dec 2 2013, 11:11 PM
- Mountainrivers
- Dec 1 2013, 12:53 AM
- Pat
- Dec 1 2013, 12:31 AM
- colo_crawdad
- Dec 1 2013, 12:15 AM
Given the need of 30 million people, according to yo, Pat, the answer is YES.
OK. Then your priority match the president's. I think working towards and spending political capital on passing a living wage bill would have done far greater good in the country. A president only has so much political capital and when first sworn in, that was when a similar all out effort would have in my opinion, resulted in a living wage for American workers. I would have followed up in priority a set of tax reforms and trade reforms designed to stimulate the economy. My guess is that the vast majority would have favored those the polices a opposed to just the opposite in support for the healthcare reform. Five years in, we would in my opinion be hitting on all cylinders had wages, jobs and taxes been addressed.
Here's why your proposal wouldn't work, Pat. "President Obama has called for an increase in the national rate, mentioning it in his most recent State of the Union address and recently signing on to a proposal from congressional Democrats to set a $10.10 hourly rate. But congressional Republicans have opposed any increase, saying it would hurt employers and curtail job growth." Even $10.10/hour isn't a living wage. What tax and trade reforms would you have presented to the congress, and since reps won't vote for anything Obama proposes, how would you implement them?
He could have done it when he had a majority in both houses the first 2 years. Just like he passed Obamacare.
So you say. Provide evidence that he could have passed it. While you are discussing this do not forget the right wing's statements of intent to filibuster any such bills.
|
|
|
| |
|
Berton
|
Dec 3 2013, 03:17 AM
Post #25
|
- Posts:
- 55,592
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #238
- Joined:
- May 26, 2012
|
- Mountainrivers
- Dec 2 2013, 11:27 PM
- Berton
- Dec 2 2013, 11:11 PM
- Mountainrivers
- Dec 1 2013, 12:53 AM
- Pat
- Dec 1 2013, 12:31 AM
- colo_crawdad
- Dec 1 2013, 12:15 AM
Given the need of 30 million people, according to yo, Pat, the answer is YES.
OK. Then your priority match the president's. I think working towards and spending political capital on passing a living wage bill would have done far greater good in the country. A president only has so much political capital and when first sworn in, that was when a similar all out effort would have in my opinion, resulted in a living wage for American workers. I would have followed up in priority a set of tax reforms and trade reforms designed to stimulate the economy. My guess is that the vast majority would have favored those the polices a opposed to just the opposite in support for the healthcare reform. Five years in, we would in my opinion be hitting on all cylinders had wages, jobs and taxes been addressed.
Here's why your proposal wouldn't work, Pat. "President Obama has called for an increase in the national rate, mentioning it in his most recent State of the Union address and recently signing on to a proposal from congressional Democrats to set a $10.10 hourly rate. But congressional Republicans have opposed any increase, saying it would hurt employers and curtail job growth." Even $10.10/hour isn't a living wage. What tax and trade reforms would you have presented to the congress, and since reps won't vote for anything Obama proposes, how would you implement them?
He could have done it when he had a majority in both houses the first 2 years. Just like he passed Obamacare.
So you say. Provide evidence that he could have passed it.
He got Obamacare passed without one Republican vote. If he did it for Obamacare then he could have done it for any thing he wanted passed.
|
|
|
| |
|
Mountainrivers
|
Dec 3 2013, 03:22 AM
Post #26
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 33,547
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- Mar 24, 2008
|
- Berton
- Dec 3 2013, 03:17 AM
- Mountainrivers
- Dec 2 2013, 11:27 PM
- Berton
- Dec 2 2013, 11:11 PM
- Mountainrivers
- Dec 1 2013, 12:53 AM
- Pat
- Dec 1 2013, 12:31 AM
- colo_crawdad
- Dec 1 2013, 12:15 AM
Given the need of 30 million people, according to yo, Pat, the answer is YES.
OK. Then your priority match the president's. I think working towards and spending political capital on passing a living wage bill would have done far greater good in the country. A president only has so much political capital and when first sworn in, that was when a similar all out effort would have in my opinion, resulted in a living wage for American workers. I would have followed up in priority a set of tax reforms and trade reforms designed to stimulate the economy. My guess is that the vast majority would have favored those the polices a opposed to just the opposite in support for the healthcare reform. Five years in, we would in my opinion be hitting on all cylinders had wages, jobs and taxes been addressed.
Here's why your proposal wouldn't work, Pat. "President Obama has called for an increase in the national rate, mentioning it in his most recent State of the Union address and recently signing on to a proposal from congressional Democrats to set a $10.10 hourly rate. But congressional Republicans have opposed any increase, saying it would hurt employers and curtail job growth." Even $10.10/hour isn't a living wage. What tax and trade reforms would you have presented to the congress, and since reps won't vote for anything Obama proposes, how would you implement them?
He could have done it when he had a majority in both houses the first 2 years. Just like he passed Obamacare.
So you say. Provide evidence that he could have passed it.
He got Obamacare passed without one Republican vote. If he did it for Obamacare then he could have done it for any thing he wanted passed. That's just BS. If he could have gotten universal, single payer, he would have. He couldn't. Unlike the reps, dems don't walk in lockstep with the clowns that have enough money to fool the rubes like you.
|
|
|
| |
|
Berton
|
Dec 3 2013, 03:23 AM
Post #27
|
- Posts:
- 55,592
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #238
- Joined:
- May 26, 2012
|
More name calling and insults. Still making my point for me. Thank you again.
|
|
|
| |
|
Mountainrivers
|
Dec 3 2013, 03:25 AM
Post #28
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 33,547
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- Mar 24, 2008
|
- Berton
- Dec 3 2013, 03:23 AM
More name calling and insults. Still making my point for me. Thank you again.
You earn them all.
|
|
|
| |
|
Berton
|
Dec 3 2013, 03:26 AM
Post #29
|
- Posts:
- 55,592
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #238
- Joined:
- May 26, 2012
|
That Pat is another example why this board is dying. Nothing but name calling and insults going on by childish liberals.
|
|
|
| |
|
Mountainrivers
|
Dec 3 2013, 03:34 AM
Post #30
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 33,547
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- Mar 24, 2008
|
- Berton
- Dec 3 2013, 03:26 AM
That Pat is another example why this board is dying. Nothing but name calling and insults going on by childish liberals.
Your ulterior motive is showing in your insistence on the board dying, when it isn't. The board is sometimes busy and sometimes it's not. That's the way it is.
|
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|