Your morning jolt: About the debt-ceiling crisis and unemployment checks
Five paragraphs into a piece on Georgia’s preparations for a drought of federal funds – if debt-ceiling talks in Washington collapse – Blake Aued of the Athens Banner-Herald has this calamitous line:
If the debt ceiling is not raised, unemployment checks could stop immediately….
But you can unwad that underwear. Brian Robinson, spokesman for Gov. Nathan Deal and the source cited for the above information, says it’s not going to happen.
“We’ve been given no reason to believe there will be funding disruptions. This is not a government shutdown,” Robinson said this morning. “We don’t think unemployment checks will stop immediately.”
Robinson said that the point he was trying to make is that programs that are jointly funded by federal and state governments – Medicaid and PeachCare, for instance – could be carried by the state for an extra two weeks in an emergency.
But unemployment checks, while administered by the state Department of Labor, are completely funded through the federal government.
“If there was a dramatic decline in federal funding available, we would have to wait for the Obama Administration to prioritize the bills and decide what to pay,” Robinson said. “We see no reason to believe that there’s any scenario where people would not get their unemployment checks.”
Last week, the state Department of Labor issued unemployment checks to 181,665 people for a total of $47.5 million, according to department spokesman Sam Hall.
***
In an interview with Rob Johnson on WGST (640AM) this morning, U.S. Rep. Tom Price, R-Roswell, strongly hinted that he’ll vote for the revised debt-ceiling/deficit reduction package pitched by House Speaker John Boehner – if he can be assured that House Republicans will be allowed to vote on a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced federal budget on Friday.
“Companioned with a balance budget amendment,” Price said, “That’s a reasonable course of action at this time.” The congressman, of course, added that the Boehner package doesn’t include as many budget cuts that he’d ideally like to see.
***
As many have suspected, the Atlanta Public Schools system may not be alone. From the Detroit Free Press:
One out of three public school educators report pressure from bosses, parents or others to change grades, and nearly 30% say pressure to cheat on standardized tests is a problem at their school, according to a voluntary Free Press survey of Michigan educators.
At schools that don’t meet federal standards, the tension is higher: About 50% say pressure to change grades is an issue, and 46% say pressure to cheat on the tests is a problem.
Some cave in — about 8% say they changed grades within the last school year, and at least 8% admit to some form of cheating to improve a student’s standardized test score.
***
From down in south Georgia, Sid Cottingham points one and all to this heart-breaking piece in the New York Times:
An image of the peach is on the official state quarter and its license plates. In Atlanta, where a giant peach drops from a downtown building each New Year’s Eve, a driver can get lost among all the streets with variations on the name Peachtree.
But here is the harsh truth: South Carolina has shipped out more than twice as many peaches as Georgia so far this summer. And it has been that way for years.
It gets worse. At the end of July, the University of Georgia will officially close its peach program. The head peach horticulturist left the job a couple of years ago. When budgets tightened recently, university officials decided to simply eliminate the position altogether. (Programs for blueberries and vegetables had to go, too.)
- By Jim Galloway, Political Insider
For instant updates, follow me on Twitter, or connect with me on Facebook.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
90 comments Add your comment
Brenda
July 28th, 2011
9:49 am
Can we please get the butt ugly peach license plates revoked?
Sylvia
July 28th, 2011
9:52 am
“Last week, the state Department of Labor issued unemployment checks to 181,665 people for a total of $47.5 million, according to department spokesman Sam Hall.”
This makes me sick.
MiltonMan
July 28th, 2011
9:57 am
The left-wing NYT needs to be more worried about why people are leaving the crappy, over-taxed, uber-liberal state of New York in droves and less worried about how many peaches are being grown.
xdog
July 28th, 2011
10:11 am
Way to go veering off, MiltonMan. Do you often have trouble staying on any kind of point?
luangtom
July 28th, 2011
10:11 am
I find it appallng that people in every level of government and media use the scare tactics of witholding of benefit checks as a means to push for passage of their favorite version of budget and deficit bills. The President, himself, used Social Security and military pay as a reason to vote for his version of proposed legislation. There are means in place to avoid that and they just happen to neglect telling the public that fact. Why? Do they really feel we are a nation of sheep and will blindly follow them to slaughter?
It is about time for all in Washington DC to get down to business and act like responsible representatives of their constituents and to act as a leader as President and not a celebrity-seeeking buffoon with no grasp of reality.
jconservative
July 28th, 2011
10:22 am
“It is about time for all in Washington DC to get down to business and act like responsible representatives of their constituents and to act as a leader as President and not a celebrity-seeeking buffoon with no grasp of reality.”
We have been waiting for “all in Washington DC to get down to business and act like responsible representatives of their constituents” since 1789. Wonder how much longer we will need to wait?
We have been waiting for a presidential leader since Harry Truman. Looking at the likely Democratic nominee and the crowd of Republican hopefuls, looks like we will continue to wait for a spell.
RetiredSoldier
July 28th, 2011
10:38 am
jcon-
You may well be correct. It’s to bad a Feingold or some other democrat doesn’t challenge Obama. I have found when a candidate isn’t challenged it is not a good thing.
Hazel
July 28th, 2011
10:41 am
“act like responsible representatives of their constituents”
Alas, I think they are.
td
July 28th, 2011
10:43 am
The problem is the members in Congress are doing what their constituents are wanting them to do. We have about 40% of this country that wants small government, tax cuts and less regulation. We have another 40% that wants more government involvement (Larger safety net), more taxes and more regulation. We have the other 20% of the country that wants government involvement but they can not make up their mind how much, they do not know if taxes are to high or to low and they want regulation on what they want regulation on.
We are getting a government that looks very much like we are as a society.
Centrist
July 28th, 2011
10:46 am
The reason that Democrats use scare tactics concerning Social Security, Medicare, unemployment checks, etc. is that it WORKS.
Saving the nation from future economic problems is not part of their agenda when they can buy votes in the short term.
Republicans have their own forms of hyperbole – but it is aimed at social issues.
Such tactics are all about getting campaign contributions and re-elections.
cs
July 28th, 2011
10:49 am
let me see if i get this…… goober Price wants a balanced budget ammendment yet is unwilling right now to raise taxes just to lower deficits? praises himself and the house for approving a 638 billion war mongering budget and is now throwing a kiddy tantrum with his other playmates over a debt celing? Talk about wanting your cake and eating it to
td
July 28th, 2011
10:55 am
cs
July 28th, 2011
10:49 am
What is the primary responsibility of the Federal government? Is it to provide for the defense or to provide for the lazy?
RetiredSoldier
July 28th, 2011
10:56 am
cs-
I just have to chuckle when liberals continue to be critical of republicans about “war” issues. Your guy is president and has been for 2.5 years. Want the wars to stop? Fine. Obama is the commander in chief. What has Obama done?
1. Followed the Bush plan in Iraq
2. Surged troops in Afgan, 3x the number Bush had there.
3. Started a new war.
4. Kept Gitmo opem.
5. Kept military tribunals.
Not satisfied about war issues? Take it up with the White House.
Brenda
July 28th, 2011
11:00 am
have to agree with Retired Soldier. Mr. Obama’s assurances to end the wars was they key reason I voted for him. I am very disappointed in the lack of results.
RetiredSoldier
July 28th, 2011
11:01 am
cs-
While we are on the war topic, where are all those anti-war protesters that we saw every night on the news when Bush was president? I guess wars are acceptable when democrats are president with the far left. At least during Vietnam the anti-war protesters were consistent. They protested when Johnson and Nixon were president.
Chairman Mao
July 28th, 2011
11:04 am
You know who ships the most peaches? Communist China, that’s who. You know who ships the most peaches in the U.S.? Looney lefties from California. And if you don’t think Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Community Reinvestment Act aren’t to blame, then you haven’t been paying attention to the wise words of MiltonMan.
td
July 28th, 2011
11:05 am
RetiredSoldier
July 28th, 2011
11:01 am
That is because the anti war protesters are just as disingenuous about war as NOW is about supporting women. Only if they are liberals.
RetiredSoldier
July 28th, 2011
11:11 am
I agree, women’s groups like NOW or EMILY’s List only care if you are liberal. They aren’t about women, just about liberal women.
Centrist
July 28th, 2011
11:13 am
Gotta love the folks who are for raising taxes during a recession with very high unemployment. Of course, they mean OTHER people’s taxes. The “wealthy” is defined as those who make more than I ever expect to make. Never mind that if business taxes are increased (including small businesses where most jobs reside), taxes won’t be much of problem for many since jobs will disappear. Eating might be a problem because the economy tanks so far that freebie government benefits may dry up. Such folks advocating tax increases in these poor economic times might learn the hard way that there is no free lunch – but they will take many of the rest of us down with them.
Brenda
July 28th, 2011
11:15 am
And now Retired Soldier has fallen off the tracks. Didn’t take too long did it?
dixiesdemons
July 28th, 2011
11:16 am
It seems like the House should be able to pass their bill. The Senate will not pass it. The Pres would veto it. Why does J Bo keep playing theses games. He has been in Congress over 20 years just like Reid . Why won’t they get out of the way and retire ?
Real Athens
July 28th, 2011
11:18 am
Same poop. Different day.
RetiredSoldier
July 28th, 2011
11:22 am
Brenda-
Is what I said about those two organizations incorrect? If so please point it out and I’ll be happy to say I am wrong.
mum
July 28th, 2011
11:23 am
To say liberals are using scare tactics because Obama couldn’t guarantee SS checks going out is a bit over top considering Michelle Bachmann stated yesterday that we should pay the interest on the debt, then the military. She has always said don’t raise the debt ceiling but pay the interest, then prioritize from there. If that’s the thinking, who goes 3rd, 4th, 5th, and who does without each month to be sure the first 2 get paid?
RetiredSoldier
July 28th, 2011
11:26 am
dixie-
Please point out the senate bill. Never mind, there isn’t one. Then please point out the President’s bill (plan). Never mind, there isn’t one. The House passed one bill and is about to pass a second one today, yet the House is the problem. Have I got that right Dixie?
BRW
July 28th, 2011
11:33 am
“wise words” — “MiltonMan” is a serious oxymoron…..and the person that said it is a serious moron….
td
July 28th, 2011
11:35 am
mum
July 28th, 2011
11:23 am
I think I heard last night that you could pay the Debt, military, Social security, Medicare, Medicaid, VA with the revenues that are currently coming in. All non essential Federal workers would have to be laid off. I think we should start with all the congressional aids and white house staffers and make the President and Congress sit down and do their job.
GaBlue
July 28th, 2011
11:37 am
I just have to chuckle when “conservatives” continue to be critical of our current President for being too liberal. This guy has been president for 2.5 years. Fine. What has Obama done about the wars Bush started?
1. Followed the Bush plan in Iraq
2. Surged troops in Afgan, 3x the number Bush had there.
3. Started a new war.
4. Kept Gitmo opem.
5. Kept military tribunals.
In addition, he has continued to enable the Wall Street crooks that tanked our economy, signed the extension of the Bush tax cuts that failed to create jobs as argued, agreed to a watered-down version of promised health-care reform to please the GOP whiners in Congress until it’s a barely recognizable shadow of its intent, refused to prosecute the war criminals of the past decade, and totally blew the chance he had to make real changes during the brief Dem supermajority.
Not satisfied with your President? Wah, wah, frigging wah.
RetiredSoldier
July 28th, 2011
11:42 am
GaBlue-
Since you and I are on a roll let’s continue.
1. Failed to keep unemployment at 8% or less.
Your turn
mum
July 28th, 2011
11:44 am
td, sounds like a plan. But who decides who’s “non-essential”? I would also take away all communication devices, and have a court reporter taking notes just to keep them honest. We hear about these plans but nobody yet know exactly what they plan to cut or keep, so we only have the red meat they throw out every few hours. At $170,000 per year + free healthcare, you’d think they would do their jobs but obviously it’s all about staying in Washington for another 2 or 6 years living off the taxpayer.
mum
July 28th, 2011
11:45 am
GABlue, you should also add that he put the first 2 wars into the budget so you could finally see the actual costs.
RetiredSoldier
July 28th, 2011
11:47 am
GaBlue-
“totally blew the chance he had to make real changes during the brief Dem supermajority.”
Guess the Obama administration wasn’t “shovel ready” hahaha
RetiredSoldier
July 28th, 2011
11:48 am
Budget? what budget? oh the budget the senate won’t vote on.
CW
July 28th, 2011
11:56 am
The lst 2 years of Clinton Admin we were reducing the defcit, stopped issuing new debt (T-bills) and the economy was doing fine under the “heavy tax burden.” Bush II cuts taxes, starts 2 wars (one of which had nothing to do with defending the US, although it was sold as such), loses $7-8 billion in Iraq, and promptly reverses the progress toward reducing our deficit. Analysis shows that Bush admin accounts for 50% of the deficit and Obama about 10%, yet its the Democrats that are irresponsible. This train crash over the debt ceiling was forewarned by several Republicans, but no one thought they would sacrifice the US economy on the altar of no tax increases. The argumant that raising taxes on those making more than $250,000 would hurt the economy is specious; the refusal to close loopholes and subsidies is hypocrtitical. It is very clear that the Republicans plan to kill the economy, perhaps kill some of the poor (collateral benefit) and win the presidential election in 2012. Republicans have done a very good job of creating the problem and then blaming the other guys. Dilbert would be proud.
yuzeyurbrane
July 28th, 2011
12:02 pm
Centrist, beware of getting what you wish for. You may soon find out that what are “scare tactics” for one are simply the facts for another. When it starts crimping your 40 something lifestyle, I look forward to hearing your tune then.
mum
July 28th, 2011
12:03 pm
This budget
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy12/pdf/BUDGET-2012-BUD.pdf
clean up your yard
July 28th, 2011
12:06 pm
RetiredSoldier Obama is not the one that lied us into Iraq- an illegal war. Getting into the briar patch is a lot easier than getting us out.
clean up your yard
July 28th, 2011
12:07 pm
Republicans invented “scare tactics”. It has worked for decades on southerbners. See Karl Rove and Dick Cheney.
A Conservative Voice
July 28th, 2011
12:09 pm
August 2nd is an arbitrary date……do not, I repeat “Do Not” raise the debt ceiling. It will only encourage more spending of money we don’t have. Cut all non-essential government departments…..I’d start with the USDepartment Of Education for it is the most useless of the useless govt. agencies. Cut all foreign aid (why are we giving foreign countries money we have to borrow?) Shut all national parks, they are not essential. Tell those with government issued vehicles to park them and not to drive them again until further notice and stop all payments to the 536 idiots who can’t work in a bi-partisan way to find a solution to our debt problem. Tell all other govt. agencies to immediately cut 50% of their costs, whatever it takes. Immediately institute a 1% National Sales Tax to insure that all, I repeat all people living in this country share in the pain. Tough measures, but we have to do something now, not later.
RetiredSoldier
July 28th, 2011
12:11 pm
CW-
You forgot to point out the Congress was republican.
What analysis are you regering to?
Let’s say truth is how you posted it. Where is the senate bill? There is none. Where is the Preident’s bill (plam). There is none. All Obama seems concerned with is any deal has to go past next years election.
RetiredSoldier
July 28th, 2011
12:17 pm
clean up your yard-
Bush lied? I assume you mean WMD’s. Bush didn’t lie, he was wrong. Bush along with every intelligence agency in the world. Also in that list would be Kerry, Ms. Clinton and a host of others.
Don’t forget Sadam used WMD’s during his war w/ Iran and on the Kurds.
Illgeal war? Use use that term easily I’m sure. What court found this war illegal? And if illegal why hasn’t Obama pulled our troops out in 2 and a half years?
Cobbian
July 28th, 2011
12:19 pm
There are few businesses that run without credit. How do those who favor a balanced budget amendment hope to deal with wars, disasters, and economic downturns? There really are things the government does that do not bend well to economic cycles. Our first presidents all took out loans to cover expenses and then dealt with taxing – mostly the wealthy – to pay for the loans.
We need to raise taxes. It is the Bush tax cuts that have contributed the most to the deficit we are trying to fund – the tax cuts cost more than the justified and unjustified wars proclaimed by Bush. And don’t give me the guff about jobs. If tax cuts create jobs, where are they? Where are the jobs that should be here with the Bush tax cuts still in place?
clean up your yard
July 28th, 2011
12:20 pm
You guys just loved the Bush years and the wars, taking care of wall street, failure to enforce regulations, with tax cuts all around so the wars would be put on the credit card and would not be paid for. And now because it is a black Dem in the WH you suddenly have found financial religion and so let’s balance the budget on the backs of the poor and elderly . BUT by god we will never raise a tax on the wealthy .The Republican party has never cared one whit for the poor and working man- never. They only care about starting wars, large military budgets and taking care of big business and the wealthiest among us. And the least of us? Forget about it. Jesus would be so proud.
DannyX
July 28th, 2011
12:20 pm
“Gotta love the folks who are for raising taxes during a recession with very high unemployment.”
You mean the strong majority of Americans, including 73% of all independents?
When are you extremists going to realize you are part of a small minority on this issue?
GaBlue
July 28th, 2011
12:20 pm
mum: “GABlue, you should also add that he put the first 2 wars into the budget so you could finally see the actual costs.”
Oh, I DO appreciate that very much! I just have not seen degree of actual change that would justify the level “conservative” whining we hear. First they criticize him for being “marxist” and shoving things down their throats, (heh)… then they throw out the “gotcha” stuff about how he didn’t really change anything. They don’t realize how silly they sound.
clean up your yard
July 28th, 2011
12:22 pm
RetiredSoldier BUsh lied and Cheney and his whole cabinet. Bush and Cheney should have been impeached and removed from power.
the original and still the best John Galt
July 28th, 2011
12:22 pm
Don’t worry, the dole checks, including those to big corporations, are going to keep right on coming. The trouble is, they will keep right on buying less and less.
Isis5761
July 28th, 2011
12:23 pm
Let’s see if I understand. Mr. Obama becomes President on the brink of another great depression when the Republicans controlled the House and Senate. He had to make tough choices to prevent the financial collapse of the US. It involved propping up the banks, auto industry, many states and even local government. This added to the deficit left to him by the former President. So to prevent tax increases for the rich, destroy collective bargaining (labor rights)and create a hardship for social security and medicare recipients you’ll destroy our financial markets? How responsible is that? Let’s focus on the real issue and where we’re really headed as a country.
clean up your yard
July 28th, 2011
12:25 pm
RetiredSoldier A mind is a terrible thing to waste. Use yours sometime- it really works. Stop listening to Beck and Limbaugh and Boortz and all the other hate mongerers. I give them all the credit in the world for bringing our political discourse to the point that it has now reached.
mum
July 28th, 2011
12:28 pm
Conservative Voice: You do realize that this debt ceiling thing is for money that’s already been spent, just like using a credit card. You either pay your monthly payment on time or they raise your rate of suspend your credit. an Amex. Shut the national parks and let them return to their natural state? Dissolve the DOE and then who decides who and what our children are taught? If you cut 50% of government (whateverit takes likely will mean workers as well) so you then you up the unemployment rate. Foreign aid is a flea flicker compared to how much the military spends, not to mention the healthcare costs. Don’t know where you live but I thought everyone pays sales tax?
clean up your yard
July 28th, 2011
12:30 pm
A Conservative Voice You appear to be a complete nitwit.
CW
July 28th, 2011
12:30 pm
Dear Retired Soldier,
Analysis is from The Guardian. Not sure what your point is re bills: Senate was waiting for the party of 6; the issue was tax cuts and Republicans made it clear, none, zero, nada, end of debate and now the confrontation.
Re Iraq and available intelligence: there were two sources of intelligence available to Bush and his vulcans: State Dept intelligence stated there were no WMDs, they were ignored, and the UN weapons inspectors, who found no WMDs, and requested repeatedly for US intelligence on where US said WMDs were, but US refused and called tham liars.
US is not a member of ICC, so the issue of legality has not been tested. Certainly a war of choice under false pretenses, possibly illegal based on no attack on US by Iraq and failure to get UN approval (Blair insisted upon a second UN vote that never took place) so there was no UN sanction for Iraq war. Only one of the above is required for a legal war, and neither existed. Obama has not left precipitously because he trying to get out in a responsible way — he does not like the war, but is trying to do the right for US and Iraq.
td
July 28th, 2011
12:31 pm
CW
July 28th, 2011
11:56 am
Straight off the Huffington post. Let us re write history. First: Who was in charge of Congress when Clinton balanced the budget? Newt, maybe we should rethink electing him President. Go read the DICK Morris book on how Clinton took Newts plan, claimed it as his own and had the main stream media write the narrative.
This war cost is a partial myth. They are counting the pay of the troops and normal maintenance in the cost. Our military is still going to have to train and use munitions no matter if we are at war or on a base. The real cost is us nation building the countries and that is caused by you liberals. Most neocons are from the old school that says if you go to war then you beat them down enough so that they lose the will to fight and then you leave with the military and you let someone like the UN come in and rebuild the nation.
The Snark
July 28th, 2011
12:32 pm
The President had completely wound down our combat operations in Iraq and has approved a drawdown on a strict timetable, over objections from some in the armed forces, from Afghanistan. It looks to me like he is keeping his promise to extricate us from those wars, albeit more slowly than many would like.
clean up your yard
July 28th, 2011
12:33 pm
Bush came into the WH with invading Iraq on his agenda- even after Britain told him that there were no wmds. Cheney was the point man and lied us into the war with their scare tactics- remember the mushroom cloud comments from Rumsfield, Rice, and the rest??
dixiesdemons
July 28th, 2011
12:35 pm
@ RetiredSoldier
Bills start in the house and then go to the Senate and then to the Pres for a signature. The Pres doesn’t write plans ( bills) he tells the Congress what his bottom line is and where he may compromise on. ( he still has the Constitutional Authority to use…. .. what’s that thing called ???? oh yeah … the VETO ) It can been insightful and entertaining to express our opinions on these blogs. It is not our responsibility to write and pass legislation that benefits the greater good and keeps our country safe and sound. It is is J Bo’s because he is the Speaker of the House. The Tea Party Terrorists did not cause the problems we are faced with. I think they may be able to force a solution that will turn out good in the long run. In the mean time J Bo is wasting time , playing games pushing legislation that has no support outside of the GOP and conservative talk shows. when the government can’t pay its bills , we all end up suffering. I JUST HOPE THE CUTS START IN J_BO’s &THE TEA PARTY DISTRICTS FIRST. Welcome to class warfare.
clean up your yard
July 28th, 2011
12:38 pm
td Dick Morris- Dick Morris??? Why would ANYONE read anything that liar has to say. He has made a living sucking up to Faux news with his lies. We are still trying to bail out of the mess that your Bush left us in. Clinton left him a surplus- he quickly turned it into a deficit. Read facts much??? By the way- the wealthiest among us that you repubs want to keep in money so they will hire the unemployed- guess what- they have no intention of hiring the unemployed.
GaBlue
July 28th, 2011
12:38 pm
Retired Soldier,
I’m sorry, Sir. I know loyalty is part of your make-up, and I respect that, but BUSH LIED about many things.
Furthermore, when it was required of him to tell exactly what he knew about the attacks of 9/11, (like everyone else had done), and he was unable to stall or deflect that duty any longer, he refused to do so until his demands were met: NO swearing to tell the truth, NO transcript, NO reporters, Cheney by his side at all times (and a pack of Hawaiin Punch juice boxes w/a plate of Chips Ahoy). If he didn’t LIE and didn’t do anything wrong, why all the secrets? I’ll tell you why: HE LIED. Bless your heart.
td
July 28th, 2011
12:39 pm
A Conservative Voice
July 28th, 2011
12:09 pm
I agree with you on everything except the 1% national sales tax. I do not want any more doors opened up to the government to get their hands on any more money. I can assure you that the 1% would be 2, 5, 10 within 10 years. Look at the history of the VAT’s in Europe and go back and look at how the liberals promised us to begin with that the income tax was only 5% and was being set up for only the rich.
clean up your yard
July 28th, 2011
12:42 pm
Taxes pay for the country that you enjoy clem. You do understand that right?
Centrist
July 28th, 2011
12:46 pm
If a strong majority of Americans wanted tax increases, they would not have elected the Taxed Enough Already (TEA) party members with a Republican majority in the U.S. House. THAT poll speaks volumes and is MUCH more representative than the leftist pushpolls DannyX touts.
td
July 28th, 2011
12:47 pm
clean up your yard
July 28th, 2011
12:20 pm
“And the least of us? Forget about it. Jesus would be so proud.”
Why is it my responsibility to take care of you? Did you have the opportunity to get an education? What choices have you made that would make you not able to take care of yourself and your family?
clean up your yard
July 28th, 2011
12:47 pm
Like that makes any sense.
clean up your yard
July 28th, 2011
12:49 pm
Your greedy attitude is the perfect poster child for a big reason why we have become what we are.
mum
July 28th, 2011
12:50 pm
Centrist, the problem is that those same TEA people don’t want anyone to touch the government programs that they enjoy, paid for by taxes. You can’t have it both ways.
CW
July 28th, 2011
12:54 pm
Dear td,
Regardless of Congressional control during Clinton Admin, taxes were higher than they are now, the economy was strong and the deficit falling. I assume you would view that positively. That reality is contrary to the assertions made by Republicans now about the harm “higher” taxes would do to the economy. Re the cost of war: You are suggesting that the number of soldiers did not increase (tell that to the National Guards and Reserves) and that munitions would be used at comparable levels in peace time as in war. Maybe a Rebublican dream, but the costs of war and the costs during peace are not comparable. Not to mention the pain and suffering to our soldiers and families (some soldier have had 4-5 tours — that is cruel and inhumane), and the hundres of thousands of Iraq civilians killed. Yeah, I guess they are about the same in war and peace.
td
July 28th, 2011
12:57 pm
Isis5761
July 28th, 2011
12:23 pm
The Dems controlled the hose of reps since 2006. I am glad to see you are educated enough to think that a President (any President) has the ability to force a world wide recession.
“destroy collective bargaining (labor rights)”
Why is it a Presidents job to protect collective barginning? This is the government intervention that has caused a great deal of the messes we are in now.
“create a hardship for social security”
Bush tried to protect Social Security for future generations but the Dems refused to allow individuals to invest 5% of their money.
clean up your yard
July 28th, 2011
1:09 pm
td The goal of Bush and repubs is to replace social security with individual investments- AND you know it. The original plan was to get the snout under the tent
and then replace SS- also replace education with private schools. ANYTHING to prop up big business and take care of the wealthy.
Jerandious
July 28th, 2011
1:12 pm
“If the debt ceiling is not raised, unemployment checks could stop immediately….”
That might be the best thing that could happen. It would motivate so many loafers and goldbricks to go back to work. Right now, depending on what state one lives in, they can get welfare benefits for up to 36 months (thanks to Obama) while they sit at home and watch TV. What a country!
RetiredSoldier
July 28th, 2011
1:13 pm
Clean up your yard-
You are entitled to your opinion. You are not entitled to your own facts. Don’t you hate when facts get in the way of your opinion?
A Conservative Voice
July 28th, 2011
1:13 pm
@mum
July 28th, 2011
12:28 pm
Conservative Voice: You do realize that this debt ceiling thing is for money that’s already been spent, just like using a credit card. You either pay your monthly payment on time or they raise your rate of suspend your credit. an Amex. Shut the national parks and let them return to their natural state? Dissolve the DOE and then who decides who and what our children are taught? If you cut 50% of government (whateverit takes likely will mean workers as well) so you then you up the unemployment rate. Foreign aid is a flea flicker compared to how much the military spends, not to mention the healthcare costs. Don’t know where you live but I thought everyone pays sales tax?
One by one -
Debt Ceiling – Yes, I do know that…..if we can’t borrow, we shouldn’t spend
National Parks – Should be closed until we can afford to re-open. Mostly people we don’t have to pay
USDOE – All they do is create useless regulations – States Rights is the answer to this one.
Agencies cut 50% – That’s right, it means people, sorry, we can’t afford to pay unemployment benefits at this time
Foreign aid – this is a non-essential expenditure, don’t care how much it is
National Sales Tax – You were so quick to criticize you didn’t read it correctly. Are you a product of the APS?
A Conservative Voice
July 28th, 2011
1:18 pm
@clean up your yard
July 28th, 2011
12:30 pm
A Conservative Voice You appear to be a complete nitwit.
Thank you very much for the compliment
and right back at you.
Have you put your plan on the table?
RetiredSoldier
July 28th, 2011
1:18 pm
dixie-
You need to go back to PS101 if you believe that. Why is Reid proposing a senate bill that hasn’t come to a vote yet?
td
July 28th, 2011
1:18 pm
clean up your yard
July 28th, 2011
12:49 pm
I pay taxes and do not have a problem with paying my fair share to pay for the roads, police and fire protection, the education of my children and for the military to protect my family. I pay into a social security system (that I know I will never see my investment) and pay into medicare.
I do have a major problem with paying for people that choose to not be productive citizens. I went through the 1-12 and learned enough to get me accepted to a college. I choice to not do drugs or drink or have unprotected sex so that I could pay my way through college. I worked a great deal of unpleasant jobs to pay for college and took several dead end jobs after college to establish a work history. Now those sacrifices I choose to make are paying off and I pay my fair share to my county, state and country. My total tax rate (after deductions for these taxes are around 30%). I live a meager life. Bought a house within my means, just bought the first brand new car in my life, limit myself to eating out to one to two times per month and put away 10% of a salary for retirement.
Why should I pay more now to take care of people that have not made any sacrifices and choose to not get educated and wanted to party instead of getting any work experience? If you want to call that greedy then so be it but I call it making wise choices and preparing for the future. Again why should I want to pay for people that choose not to make wise choices?
A Conservative Voice
July 28th, 2011
1:20 pm
@td
July 28th, 2011
12:39 pm
A Conservative Voice
July 28th, 2011
12:09 pm
I agree with you on everything except the 1% national sales tax. I do not want any more doors opened up to the government to get their hands on any more money. I can assure you that the 1% would be 2, 5, 10 within 10 years. Look at the history of the VAT’s in Europe and go back and look at how the liberals promised us to begin with that the income tax was only 5% and was being set up for only the rich.
Yeah, there would probably have to be a time limit put on it -word it to say it will be cancelled when a BBA is adopted.
td
July 28th, 2011
1:30 pm
CW
July 28th, 2011
12:54 pm
Taxes were 4% higher on the top 5% under Clinton. CNN did a story last week that stated if they were restored then it would mean an additional $81 billion per year. I think I heard yesterday that we are borrowing $4 billion per day. How is this really going to help balance a budget much less pay off a $15 trillion debt.
The top 5% ($250,000 and over) already pay 40% of all taxes while the bottom 48% pay nothing. If you raise taxes on them then they will be paying 50% of all federal taxes. How much is enough? Why can not the bottom 48% have a little skin in the game?
CW
July 28th, 2011
1:38 pm
Dear td,
The idea was a combination of budget cuts and tax increases to reduce the deficit, not by taxes alone. Budget cuts would include stopping 2 wars, reducing the Defense budget, cutting entitlement programs (an assumption since I have not seen any specifics re what was on the table) among many areas to be cut. While the top 5% pay 40% of the taxes, no one mentions how much wealth they control. I cannot address the top 5%, but I believe the top 10% control 80% of the wealth. One might suggest that the top 5% are getting off easy.
RetiredSoldier
July 28th, 2011
1:42 pm
CW-
What difference is it how much wealth someone controls? Unless they got it by illegal means it is not my, yours or the governments business how much wealth someone has. Last time I checked this is still America.
clean up your yard
July 28th, 2011
1:43 pm
td Thank you for bringing into focus the thoughts of so many on your side. Who gives you the right o diminish a whole group of peope that have lost their jobs? How dare you protray them as somehow lesser than you and the other good little repubs just because they have lost their jobs. You better remember that there but for the grace of God go you. How dare you protray all of those that get SSI, food stamps or other assistance as shiftless, worthless or watch tv all day. There is this air of superiority that precedes those of you on the right and you love to point fingers at those that you feel so superior to. The poor, unemployed, black and brown, immigrants, democrats, anyone that disagrees with your beliefs that you should get your way; because you are entitled and masters of the universe. You are in afor a rude awakening one day. You are not nearly as smart as you think and you are certainly no important to God than that poor unemployed painter on the corner holding a sign. Cast the beam out of your own eye and then you can more clearly see to pull the beam out of your brother’s eye.
clean up your yard
July 28th, 2011
1:45 pm
RetiredSoldier The wealthy have not paid their fair share for over 10 years. it is past time for them to do so. We cannot allow these cuts to be paid for alone by the poor and elderly.
CW
July 28th, 2011
1:49 pm
Dear Retire Soldier,
The idea, admittedly not a direct correlation, is that the more wealth you have the more income you have and the more taxes you pay, so if one group owns 80% of the country and pays 40% of the taxes, one can make a plausible argument that they are paying roughly 50% of what they should be paying. To say that 5% pay 40% of the taxes lacks context, it is a misleading argument.
mum
July 28th, 2011
2:18 pm
ConservativeVoice, I can read very well thanks. Where I went to school, they actually taught us to read at a very early age, and our tests were not multiple choice. This has been a lively discussion, so no need for insults!
Now, back to the discussion. How do you think 1% in addition to the state tax might go over given the no new taxes/revenues pledges?
td
July 28th, 2011
2:37 pm
clean up your yard
July 28th, 2011
1:43 pm
Talk about reading into something that is not even there. Please show me where I “diminished” the unemployed? I know what it is like to to be unemployed. I know what it is like to have to work a job way below my job skills level and at 1/3 my previous wages. But guess what, I took the job and got two more part time jobs until I could get a better job.
Now as far as the racist bull. I am married to a legal Asian immigrant, so please go somewhere else with that one. I know plenty of black and brown people that have made great choices in their lives and are doing very well and are prepared in case bad times hit.
“You are not nearly as smart as you think”
I know I am not smart and strive everyday to learn more and more. I do know that I have worked hard, sacrificed and made pretty good choices. I also know that I was smart enough to listen to my parents, family, pastors and teachers to send me in the right direction. As far as taking care of the poor, I think the bible says that is the churches job and that is where it should be at. Government should get out of this business because they can not tell them the truths they need to hear.
clean up your yard
July 28th, 2011
2:47 pm
Why should I pay more now to take care of people that have not made any sacrifices and choose to not get educated and wanted to party instead of getting any work experience?
I do have a major problem with paying for people that choose to not be productive citizens.
I believe those were two comments. Among others before
td
July 28th, 2011
3:02 pm
clean up your yard
July 28th, 2011
2:47 pm
And were those comments attended for the unemployed like you said they were?
Can you answer those questions? Why should I have to pay more now to take care of people that are unwilling (not the ones that can not) to take care of themselves or have made poor choices of not getting an educations, taking drugs, becoming a drunk or having children when they can not afford to take care of them?
A Conservative Voice
July 28th, 2011
3:41 pm
@mum
July 28th, 2011
2:18 pm
ConservativeVoice, I can read very well thanks. Where I went to school, they actually taught us to read at a very early age, and our tests were not multiple choice. This has been a lively discussion, so no need for insults!
Now, back to the discussion. How do you think 1% in addition to the state tax might go over given the no new taxes/revenues pledges?
ummmmmm……I don’t know…..I didn’t say anything about a state tax
Immediately institute a 1% National Sales Tax
Teddy Roosevelt
July 28th, 2011
6:58 pm
Well Isis5761, when he came into office the Democrats controlled both houses, but don’t let facts get in the way of your argument.
Teddy Roosevelt
July 28th, 2011
7:00 pm
Mum maybe it would be a good idea for you to decide what your children should and shouldn’t be taught. Instead of one centralized department deciding a standardized learning regimen, why doesn’t the local PTA or school board decide what will be taught in their schools?
July 29th, 2011
12:03 pm
clean up your yard <- Has far too much time on his hands, and is much too bitter as well.
Methinks the sir doth protest too much.
Hide-n-seek
July 29th, 2011
12:11 pm
“But unemployment checks, while administered by the state Department of Labor, are completely funded through the federal government.” REALLY??????? As a Georgia employer who has been paying unemployment taxes, I would like to know where my money has been going.