Kentucky wants the US to go to hell

[lookout123]

Damn straight. You don't seem to realize that I don't hold dems or reps to different standards. You have to know where money is coming from before you can spend it. It seems reasonable to me.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by lookout123

Damn straight. You don't seem to realize that I don't hold dems or reps to different standards. You have to know where money is coming from before you can spend it. It seems reasonable to me.

What if it's an urgent emergency, and there will be devastating consequences if action is not taken right away?

[lookout123]

If they have enough time to get together and decide how much money should be spent on something those really smart, ethical people we elect should also be able to figure out where it is coming from.

[classicman]

Sorry Tommy - no diversion - not every single subject that comes up can or should be blamed on W. nor have a lesson learned from Viet Nam. Stay on topic or just copy & paste your drivel in a thread of your own.

Here I'll make it easy for you . . .
85%of all problems/WMD/liar/neocon/extremist/Mission Accomplished/deficits don't matter....

Just copy and paste that and save us all some time repeatedly rereading the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over.

[lookout123]

1) Identify a need
2) Find way to fix need
3) Find way to pay for fix
4) Put plan into action

Seems pretty straightforward to me.

[SamIam]

You are absolutely right, Lookout. I'm sure Congress will soon pass legislation to that effect... Right.

Meanwhile, Bunning has bowed to BI-partisan pressure and will allow a vote on the measure this evening. At least his grandstanding proved that the rest of the Senate is able to agree on something.

[lookout123]

Originally Posted by SamIam

You are absolutely right, Lookout. I'm sure Congress will soon pass legislation to that effect... Right.

Meanwhile, Bunning has bowed to BI-partisan pressure and will allow a vote on the measure this evening. At least his grandstanding proved that the rest of the Senate is able to agree on something.

Attitudes like that are part of the problem. The process is so consistently done incorrectly some people think it is ok. I don't know Bunning and I doubt his motivation is altruistic and I'm sure he is worthy of scorn for a number of reasons but actually trying to ensure things are done in the right order shouldn't be one of them.

[spudcon]

My understanding is the unemployment payments would be coming from stimulus money. How does giving unemployed people more money stimulate them to find a job, or create jobs. It's just more of the same old same old. Spend money we don't have, raise taxes to get the money, high taxes cause job losses, spend more money we don't have. This guy is retiring, We should encourage the rest of them to do the same.

Originally Posted by spudcon

My understanding is the unemployment payments would be coming from stimulus money. How does giving unemployed people more money stimulate them to find a job, or create jobs. It's just more of the same old same old. Spend money we don't have, raise taxes to get the money, high taxes cause job losses, spend more money we don't have. This guy is retiring, We should encourage the rest of them to do the same.

Another one who doesnt understand that the recovery act or "stimulus money" was not just about jobs.

One third of the funds was in the form of middle class and business tax cuts, one third in the form of extended social services to those in need (UI extension, COBRA increase, and extension, SNAP, etc) and one third in grants/contracts for projects to create jobs.

The need for UI extensions was greater than anticipated which resulted in the current funding issue, which was why the intent was to pass a temporary 30 day extension,so those receiving UI wont lose those benefits until it could be addressed longer term through reallocation of recovery act funds for fy 10 or included in the jobs bill currently under consideration in the Senate.

As to the notion that "high taxes causes job loss", the 01 and 03 tax cuts that cost over $1trillion did not produce jobs, as promised. "Trickle down" economics has never worked.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by spudcon

00. How does giving unemployed people more money stimulate them to find a job, or create jobs. It's just more of the same old same old...

If they don't have money, they can't buy things like (for example)food and clothing. If they can't by food and clothing, food and clothing stores go out of busines or lay off employees, and those people can't buy... etc. Providing unemployment benefits keeps money moving through the economy.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

If they don't have money, they can't buy things like (for example)food and clothing. If they can't by food and clothing, food and clothing stores go out of busines or lay off employees, and those people can't buy... etc. Providing unemployment benefits keeps money moving through the economy.

I know! let's just print more money. That way it can keep it moving through the economy![rhodesiaisreadywhenyouare]

[TheMercenary]

Should be interesting and see where the pork is buried in the bill.

[classicman]

Jim Bunning: Why I took a stand
‘If the Senate cannot find $10 billion to pay for a measure we all support, we will never pay for anything.’

I have been serving for nearly 24 years in Washington. I have taken thousands of votes in relation to spending the taxpayers' money. I have cast some bad votes during my tenure, and I wish I could have some of them back. For too long, both Republicans and Democrats have treated the taxpayers' money as a slush fund that does not ever end. At some point, the madness has to stop.

Over a month ago, Democrats passed and President Obama signed into law the "Pay-Go" legislation. It calls on Congress to pay for bills by not adding to our debt. It sounds like a common sense tool that would rein in government spending. Unfortunately, Pay-Go is a paper tiger. It has no teeth. I did not vote for the Democrats' Pay-Go legislation because I knew it was just a political dog-and-pony show to get some good press after some political setbacks. Since the Pay-Go rule was enacted, the national debt has gone up $244,992,297,448.11 (as of Wednesday, that is).

Last week, Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., asked to pass a 30-day extensions bill for unemployment insurance and other federal programs. Earlier in February, those extensions were included in a broader bipartisan bill that was paid for but did not meet Sen. Reid's approval, and he nixed the deal. When I saw the Democrats in Congress were going to vote on the extensions bill without paying for it and not following their own Pay-Go rules, I said enough is enough.

Many people asked me, "Why now?" My answer is, "Why not now?" Why can't a non-controversial measure in the Senate that would help those in need be paid for? If the Senate cannot find $10 billion to pay for a measure we all support, we will never pay for anything.

America is under a mountain of debt. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said in a hearing last month that the United States' debt is unsustainable. We are on the verge of a tipping point where America's debt will bring down our economy, and more people will join the unemployment lines. That is why I used my right as a United States Senator and objected.

After four legislative days of impasse, I reached a supposed deal with Majority Leader Reid to have an up-or-down vote on a pay-for amendment that would fully fund the legislation and not add to the debt. Only minutes before the vote, Democrats used a parliamentary maneuver to set aside my amendment and not vote on the actual substance of it. Only in Washington could this happen. The Democrats did not want to vote on my amendment because they knew they were in the wrong and ignored their own rules. Hypocrisy again rules the day in Washington.

I know many Americans sit around their kitchen table and make the tough decisions. It is time for the politicians in Washington to do the same.

Link

Bunning's self-congratulatory pat on the back?

This is a guy who voted for two huge tax cuts that were not paid for (at a cost of over $1trillion)....the huge Medicare RX reform bill that was not paid for (at a cost of $400 billion)....Iraq war funding for six years that was not paid for (at a cost of approx. $750 billion) just to name a few of his contributions to the deficits/debt.

Oh..and his remark that the earlier, larger UI extension bill that Reid blocked was paid for is not quite accurate.

[SamIam]

Even if you think the government needs a plan to get its house in order, why on earth is Bunning making a stand on this issue? It's political poison--even the Republican base knows people who are out of work. It's terrible economic policy--suddenly cutting off the taps would have nasty knock-on effects on the economy. And while it's a lot of money, it's one of the few government programs that pretty much unequivocally improve the net welfare of the American people. If Bunning wants to hold up something, how about finding some useless.

I find Bunning a hypocrit of the first degree. Since he is not up for election, he can do almost anything he wants to. Show up naked for Senate sessions or wander around with a lantern looking for an honest Republican.

It he had done this and put his own re-election on the line, he would get a kind of grudging admiration for me. But when he was still a viable Senator instead of a lame duck, we never heard a whisper from him about fixing the deposit. And if Democrats are the party of tax and spend, Republicans have shown themselves to be the party of spend and spend.