Who's Fighting for Whom?

  • Thread starter Thread starter edwest2
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
There is simply not enough time in the day for everyone to draw conclusions from raw data, assuming they even have the capacity to do so.

I prefer sources who have little to gain from falsifying their positions.

For non-Catholic issues I like Vox Day and Steve Sailer.
 
edwest2 said:
From the White House Blog:

whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/08/12/who-s-fighting-whom

I suggest everyone begin to avoid opinions and go directly to reliable sources of information. We will get nowhere by guessing. Armed with factual information, we can gain a clearer picture of what’s going on.

God bless,
Ed
Click to expand...
Reliable information?
This is a blog post by one of Pres. Obama’s economic advisors. What do you think he’s going to say, “Sorry we’re such epic fails”?

At any rate it isn’t a news story.
 
This is an excellent example of the us vs them behavior in Washington. The Republicans and Democrats will cut off their nose to spite their face just to go against each other.
In my opinion we have a very weak government and Republicans and Democrats need to get their priorities straight. The ones harmed are the constituency, us.

So, when the Republicans are cast in a poor light because it’s made public what the Republicans do just to block anything democrate, at the expense of their constituency, it’s considered not news. That’s indicative of typical Republican blind loyalty that says, “if a Republican says I shouldn’t have a job or business because it has Democrat scent on it, then, well, I shouldn’t have a job, it’s the Democrats fault, afterall.”
 
I don’t know, Ed. I wouldn’t consider the White House Blog to be a source of raw data. I prefer the BLS, Census, or the like. And even their data has been politically tainted. I post it anyway, since that is all we really have. But the WH blog is about as reliable as the RNC blog.

I am against all spending increases, regardless of what they are for. So the political infighting over what the money is for, leaves me cold. They shouldn’t be spending it, in the first place.

They need to separate SS from the normal operating budget and make it solvent (by raising the retirement age and lowering benefits), and then they need to cut at least 40% of the remaining budget (Cato’s guidelines are a good place to start) and eliminate the deficit. If that is their starting point, then I would be willing to hear them out. Otherwise, it’s just blah, blah, blah, re-elect me because I’m nicer than the other guys. I’ve long since ceased to care about nice.
 
Odd. This is a White House blog that sends you to the Washington Post. The White House depends on the WP for its information???

The “business problem” here isn’t the precise tax rate on high earners. It’s just part of a pattern. Either the administration doesn’t “get it” or it gets it and doesn’t care. There is nothing in what this government has “done for small business” that really does anything significant for small business.

On the other hand, this government discourages small business in every way. What small businessperson knows what his healthcare costs will now be, or will be in 2013? What will interest rates be in 2013 due to all the deficit spending? What will small business taxes be? What will the cost of energy be? Will “card check” pass? Will there be a VAT tax?

A lot of uncertainties preventing any kind of meaningful planning. So businesses just “plan” to stay put and pay off debt as fast as they can while they still can.

I did have to be amused at the tax break this government seems to have given to the “semi-high earners”; those making between $170,000 and $195,000. finance.yahoo.com/news/Almost-rich-You-could-pay-cnnm-1495373115.html?x=0&mod=pf-taxes. Seems their top tax rates got lowered from 33% to 28%. Wonder what the thinking was there…if there was any thinking involved.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top