Results 1 to 25 of 25
  1. #1
    OPM and Moderator Chuck Hamrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 5th, 2005
    Location
    Park City Utah
    Posts
    16,646
    Quote Attributed to Warren Buffett.
    Sent by a friend:

    Quote Attributed to Warren Buffett.
    "I could end the deficit in 5 minutes," he told Becky Quick. "You just pass a law that says that anytime there is a deficit of more than 3% GDP, all sitting members of Congress are ineligible for re-election."


    Any word on the budget talks, I haven't look at the news all day!

  2. #2
    ...and a Pirate's heart. Convergence's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 24th, 2005
    Posts
    6,918
    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck Hamrick View Post
    Any word on the budget talks, I haven't look at the news all day!
    Supposed to vote within the hour...
    Salty kisses, Sandy toes, and a Pirate's heart...

  3. #3
    Moderator bibby's Avatar
    Join Date
    November 6th, 2007
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Posts
    2,315
    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck Hamrick View Post
    Sent by a friend:

    Quote Attributed to Warren Buffett.
    "I could end the deficit in 5 minutes," he told Becky Quick. "You just pass a law that says that anytime there is a deficit of more than 3% GDP, all sitting members of Congress are ineligible for re-election."


    Any word on the budget talks, I haven't look at the news all day!
    It would take decent and honest people who truly loved this country to pass this type of legislation.

    These lawmakers are receiving welfare from the taxpayer. They get paid well and have excellent benefits and all they do is sit on their ass.

  4. #4
    OPM and Moderator Chuck Hamrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 5th, 2005
    Location
    Park City Utah
    Posts
    16,646
    I wouldn't say that until you walk a mile in their shoes. Just like saying that all salesmen are lazy, sleazy, greedy bastards try taking a sales job. I do agree that the general perception is that politicians don't do anything but that is the responsibility of the electorate. I have been trying to impress on my teenagers the importance of voting, my 19 year old did not in the last election because he didn't understand the issues. I told him that he didn't care about the issues so I don't want to hear any *****ing about taxes, insurance and lack of financial aid.

  5. Thanks From:

  6. #5
    Moderator bibby's Avatar
    Join Date
    November 6th, 2007
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Posts
    2,315
    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck Hamrick View Post
    I wouldn't say that until you walk a mile in their shoes. Just like saying that all salesmen are lazy, sleazy, greedy bastards try taking a sales job. I do agree that the general perception is that politicians don't do anything but that is the responsibility of the electorate. I have been trying to impress on my teenagers the importance of voting, my 19 year old did not in the last election because he didn't understand the issues. I told him that he didn't care about the issues so I don't want to hear any *****ing about taxes, insurance and lack of financial aid.
    Good points. I'm sure you know by now but it passed the house.

  7. #6
    Super Dawg Member Phil Kaufman aka AffiliateHound's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 22nd, 2007
    Location
    West Covina, CA
    Posts
    8,443
    This is meant as a statement on economics, not a political statement:

    The bill that just passed the house and that will pass the Senate and be signed by the President, though avoiding massive default by raising the debt ceiling, will be devastating to the economy, and result in years of continued economic havoc. Massive cuts to government spending will cause decreased economic activity, decreased job creation, decreased economic stimuli, and the refusal to raise taxes to necessary levels (from 14% of GDP - the lowest in 40 years) are the exact opposite actions needed to stimulate the economy and bring about recovery.

    For a fabulous discussion of this, see this op-ed from Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman: The President Surrenders

    On another note, is was absolutely fabulous to see Cong. Gabrielle Giffords return to the House for the first time since being shot this past January. (Even though she voted for the bill.)
    Since June 10, 2012 a vegan aarf but still writing the Hound Dawg Sports Blog
    "If you don't have time to do it right, when will you have time to do it over?" -John Wooden;
    "Raj, there’s no place for truth on the internet." -Howard Wolowitz[/SIZE]

  8. #7
    OPM and Moderator Chuck Hamrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 5th, 2005
    Location
    Park City Utah
    Posts
    16,646
    So if this passes the Senate is it still supposed to be vetoed by the president?

  9. #8
    Moderator bibby's Avatar
    Join Date
    November 6th, 2007
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Posts
    2,315
    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck Hamrick View Post
    So if this passes the Senate is it still supposed to be vetoed by the president?
    We all know that's not going to happen . Well the Dems voted 92-91 agaisnt the measure which is a bad sign for the Pres.

  10. #9
    Super Dawg Member Phil Kaufman aka AffiliateHound's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 22nd, 2007
    Location
    West Covina, CA
    Posts
    8,443
    It's the President's "compromise" plan - he will sign it.
    Since June 10, 2012 a vegan aarf but still writing the Hound Dawg Sports Blog
    "If you don't have time to do it right, when will you have time to do it over?" -John Wooden;
    "Raj, there’s no place for truth on the internet." -Howard Wolowitz[/SIZE]

  11. #10
    OPM and Moderator Chuck Hamrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 5th, 2005
    Location
    Park City Utah
    Posts
    16,646
    I have been out for the last week and need to catchup on the politics. Last I heard he was against anything.

    AffiliateHound I get your stance but personally feel there has to be some restraint. Was interesting on my trip to Oregon to see that all gas states have attendants, first I have seen that since the 70's. Makes for a bunch of low paying jobs but they are honorable and puts food on the table. I doubt we every look at things that way again as a nation but was nice to see.

    Here's another political can of worms for a slow Monday. What do you think about the states that are requiring drug tests for welfare recipients? A social issue or a budget reduction method?

  12. #11
    ...and a Pirate's heart. Convergence's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 24th, 2005
    Posts
    6,918
    Pretty much agree with the Hound...

    This bill calls for cutting TWO TRILLION over TEN YEARS and allows the government to SPEND TWO+ TRILLION by the end of NEXT year. How's that living within your means?

    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck Hamrick View Post
    Here's another political can of worms for a slow Monday. What do you think about the states that are requiring drug tests for welfare recipients? A social issue or a budget reduction method?
    Ha! That's a silly idea - and just wrong, IMhO. You don't have to take a drug test to be a U.S. Citizen. Shouldn't have to take one to receive benefits that belong to US citizens. I'd prefer the State of Colorado not pay any funds to illegal aliens - which they are doing. This includes medical benefits AND even unemployment.

    There are many people in this country receiving various forms of welfare. I would say the vast majority are not stoners...
    Salty kisses, Sandy toes, and a Pirate's heart...

  13. #12
    ABW Ambassador writerguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 17th, 2005
    Location
    Springfield, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    3,248
    Quote Originally Posted by Convergence View Post
    Pretty much agree with the Hound...

    This bill calls for cutting TWO TRILLION over TEN YEARS and allows the government to SPEND TWO+ TRILLION by the end of NEXT year. How's that living within your means? ...
    I always find bills of any sort that call for something to be done over 10 years very odd, almost amusing in an ironic sort of way.

    Has the U.S. Congress and/or White House EVER done anything over a 10 year time span? Given the fact that there'll be, what, 2 presidential elections and several elections for the House and Senate during that 10 years -- why on earth do these people keep passing legislation with 10 years in view?

    I mean, I understand the philosophical underpinnings of laws that address 10 years or more -- but from a practical standpoint, seems to me it would be very easy to write entirely new and contradictory laws between now and then.

    Gary

    P.S. Oh, hey, don't misunderstand me. I'm all for compromise and getting something done that'll resolve the debt ceiling issue without default -- which this legislation at least does. Just saying that in general I really don't get it when the monkeys in the House/Senate/White House work so hard to pass ANY laws that look at 10 year time frames.
    Last edited by writerguy; August 1st, 2011 at 08:42 PM. Reason: Edited to add P.S.
    Generate more fake news.

  14. #13
    Moderator bibby's Avatar
    Join Date
    November 6th, 2007
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Posts
    2,315
    Quote Originally Posted by Convergence View Post
    Pretty much agree with the Hound...

    This bill calls for cutting TWO TRILLION over TEN YEARS and allows the government to SPEND TWO+ TRILLION by the end of NEXT year. How's that living within your means?



    Ha! That's a silly idea - and just wrong, IMhO. You don't have to take a drug test to be a U.S. Citizen. Shouldn't have to take one to receive benefits that belong to US citizens. I'd prefer the State of Colorado not pay any funds to illegal aliens - which they are doing. This includes medical benefits AND even unemployment.

    There are many people in this country receiving various forms of welfare. I would say the vast majority are not stoners...
    I agree!

  15. #14
    Super Dawg Member Phil Kaufman aka AffiliateHound's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 22nd, 2007
    Location
    West Covina, CA
    Posts
    8,443
    There are two elements to the issue of drug-testing of welfare recipients:

    1. The basic purpose is partially related to saving money, but is rather part of the broad, right-wing philosophy to deny any and all types of governmental benefits to the poor, disadvantaged, disabled, and elderly, by any means possible; and

    2. There has developed over the past three decades a billion-dollar industry based on the drug sub-culture and the misnamed "war on drugs". As in all wars, there are war profiteers, and some of the worst exploiters of this war are the drug-testing companies that have successfully lobbied to impose drug-testing in industry after industry, to their economic gain. An offshoot of Big Pharma, politicians in Washington and across the county have received untold contributions from these companies, to garner their votes to impose drug testing when ever and where ever possible.

    Just look at what recently happened in Florida. Gov. Rick Scott (who was in the drug-testing business before being elected gov and who turned over his businesses to his wife after his election), recently, by Executive Order, imposed mandatory drug testing on large number of state employees, despite a previous federal court ruling that struck down as unconstitutional a prior and less restrictive drug testing requirement for Florida state employees. If the new "Order" is followed, Mrs. Scott will make millions.
    Since June 10, 2012 a vegan aarf but still writing the Hound Dawg Sports Blog
    "If you don't have time to do it right, when will you have time to do it over?" -John Wooden;
    "Raj, there’s no place for truth on the internet." -Howard Wolowitz[/SIZE]

  16. #15
    Super Dawg Member Phil Kaufman aka AffiliateHound's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 22nd, 2007
    Location
    West Covina, CA
    Posts
    8,443
    Quote Originally Posted by writerguy View Post
    I always find bills of any sort that call for something to be done over 10 years very odd, almost amusing in an ironic sort of way.

    Has the U.S. Congress and/or White House EVER done anything over a 10 year time span? Given the fact that there'll be, what, 2 presidential elections and several elections for the House and Senate during that 10 years -- why on earth do these people keep passing legislation with 10 years in view?

    I mean, I understand the philosophical underpinnings of laws that address 10 years or more -- but from a practical standpoint, seems to me it would be very easy to write entirely new and contradictory laws between now and then.

    Gary

    P.S. Oh, hey, don't misunderstand me. I'm all for compromise and getting something done that'll resolve the debt ceiling issue without default -- which this legislation at least does. Just saying that in general I really don't get it when the monkeys in the House/Senate/White House work so hard to pass ANY laws that look at 10 year time frames.
    Since the 112th Congress was seated in January, the House of Representatives has dedicated itself to undoing EVERYTHING the 111th Congress accomplished. It is naive to believe that as the majority in each house changes and as the Presidency is held by different parties, that significant changes will not be made to today's sell-out legislation.
    Since June 10, 2012 a vegan aarf but still writing the Hound Dawg Sports Blog
    "If you don't have time to do it right, when will you have time to do it over?" -John Wooden;
    "Raj, there’s no place for truth on the internet." -Howard Wolowitz[/SIZE]

  17. #16
    ...and a Pirate's heart. Convergence's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 24th, 2005
    Posts
    6,918
    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck Hamrick View Post
    Any word on the budget talks, I haven't look at the news all day!
    Senate passes budget deal...
    Salty kisses, Sandy toes, and a Pirate's heart...

  18. #17
    OPM and Moderator Chuck Hamrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 5th, 2005
    Location
    Park City Utah
    Posts
    16,646
    Well we are stuck with it so can move on. Will they fight about now?

  19. #18
    ...and a Pirate's heart. Convergence's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 24th, 2005
    Posts
    6,918
    President still needs to sign it - he will.

    Reading the "deal" - there will be plenty of opportunities for them to fight over it for the next year. There are time frames in place where certain things have to happen before more money is released. All the of the debt limit increase is not available to the government at one time.

    Guess they can start fighting about sales tax now...
    Salty kisses, Sandy toes, and a Pirate's heart...

  20. #19
    OPM and Moderator Chuck Hamrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 5th, 2005
    Location
    Park City Utah
    Posts
    16,646
    I have a simple solution to the budget issue. Let the Congress add all the pork barrel then tell your Treasury Secretary to not pay it.

  21. #20
    Super Dawg Member Phil Kaufman aka AffiliateHound's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 22nd, 2007
    Location
    West Covina, CA
    Posts
    8,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck Hamrick View Post
    I have a simple solution to the budget issue. Let the Congress add all the pork barrel then tell your Treasury Secretary to not pay it.
    Except: “The validity of the public debt ... shall not be questioned.” 14th Amendment to the US Constitution.

    My take on this, from July 30 (preceding post was my solution to our economic situation).

    [I never linked my political blog before, but we never had a political thread like this before, or is it all just economics? Paul Krugman would say it's all economics, Kathleen Reardon would say its all politics, and Henry clay would negotiate a real compromise, unlike what just happened in Washington.]
    Since June 10, 2012 a vegan aarf but still writing the Hound Dawg Sports Blog
    "If you don't have time to do it right, when will you have time to do it over?" -John Wooden;
    "Raj, there’s no place for truth on the internet." -Howard Wolowitz[/SIZE]

  22. #21
    OPM and Moderator Chuck Hamrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 5th, 2005
    Location
    Park City Utah
    Posts
    16,646
    Something in a budget is not a debt. Or by passing a budget does Congress make it a law?

    I opened this economic/political discussion to test the waters. If it goes into a political bashing thread it gets closed.

  23. #22
    Super Dawg Member Phil Kaufman aka AffiliateHound's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 22nd, 2007
    Location
    West Covina, CA
    Posts
    8,443
    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck Hamrick View Post
    Something in a budget is not a debt. Or by passing a budget does Congress make it a law?
    A governmental entity's budget authorizes expenditures that may have already been made or will be made in the future. Once a governmental expenditure is made, it is a debt until paid off, and at least as far as the Federal government is concerned, payment in satisfaction of that debt is required under the 14th amendment. That is the "Law of the Land" and trumps Congressional action such as the Second Liberty Bond Act of 1917 that established the debt ceiling.
    Since June 10, 2012 a vegan aarf but still writing the Hound Dawg Sports Blog
    "If you don't have time to do it right, when will you have time to do it over?" -John Wooden;
    "Raj, there’s no place for truth on the internet." -Howard Wolowitz[/SIZE]

  24. Thanks From:

  25. #23
    ABW Ambassador I.M.O.G.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    February 19th, 2011
    Location
    Rootstown, OH
    Posts
    1,096
    Affiliate Hound, thanks for the Paul Krugman link, good read on the issue.
    Matt Bidinger
    Online Community Engagement

  26. #24
    OPM and Moderator Chuck Hamrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 5th, 2005
    Location
    Park City Utah
    Posts
    16,646
    Damn there goes my simplistic solution to the federal debt crisis, should have taken that constitutional law class after all. It was a tongue in cheek comment.

  27. #25
    ABW Ambassador purplebear's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 18th, 2005
    Posts
    3,960
    Kinda hesitate to mention this cos might derail into a political bashing thread lol but since you brought up Warren Buffet I just read an article the other day about him having done an article in the NY Timea

    Anyway, was about his comments about taxing the wealthier individuals more. He answered back all those who have made the argument against it. He said how they paid so much less in taxes percentage wise to the average guy or gal (gal was my words) Stated that yeap, those who were wealthy.....would still be wealthy if they were paying more in taxes.

    Can't remember word for word what he said and don't want to be disrespectful to what he did say. So.... went and found it online: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/op...rich.html?_r=1

    This is the last thing he said in the article: "My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress. It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice. "

    If ya want to take the time to just forget about your political opinions and read the article, is pretty interesting since is coming from a very wealthy individual. He got my respect, that's for sure. lol

    If posting this is too political or gonna cos problems, please feel free to delete it. Don't have a problem with that. Only thought of this after reading his name in the original post.

  28. Thanks From:

  29. Newsletter Signup

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. Warren or Loren? (GEICO commercial)
    By Rhea in forum Virtual Family and Off-Topic
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: September 12th, 2007, 06:10 PM
  2. Warren Buffett @ auction on eBay
    By Merchant Consultant Team in forum Virtual Family and Off-Topic
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: July 9th, 2004, 12:05 PM
  3. Amazon - Buffett, Starbucks, etc
    By victorcab in forum Midnight Cafe'
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: November 2nd, 2003, 08:11 AM
  4. quote
    By in forum Midnight Cafe'
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: July 29th, 2002, 08:33 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •