We may all live in a great big global community, but in my Blog, it's my world.
Obama and GOP compromise on tax cuts
Published on December 8, 2010 By terpfan1980 In Politics

Liberals are returning to their whining ways as they cry that President Obama is giving away the farm in negotiations with the GOP when it comes to extending the "Bush" tax cuts.  Apparently they forgot some of the lessons that Obama taught everyone after he was elected... something about {them, as in the GOP at the time} not being given the keys any more because they had proven they were not competetent to drive.  What the liberal Democrats seem to be missing is that the last election was a message that the "American People" (i.e., the citizens of the USA) didn't like the direction the liberals had tried to take the country in and they instead voted to throw the bums out and instead put more conservative (especially fiscally conservative) representatives into office.

President Obama NEGOTIATED a COMPROMISE with the GOP on these tax cuts and an extension of unemployment benefits.  To be fair, this was pretty much the first time the President actually really tried to negotiate with the GOP.  Others may disagree, and I welcome them to point to some realistic examples of such prior compromise, but regardless it is actually the first time I recall seeing him really try to negotiate and work with the other side to come to a policy that is relatively fair to everyone.  One where either side got some of what they wanted, but neither side got everything they wanted, and in the end the best interests of the entire country seemed to take precedence.

I hope this compromise is the first of many.  Generally speaking I think the country runs best when there isn't a clear majority, or at least when the majority is the big group of moderates rather than whack jobs at either end of the spectrum.  I hope we see much more of these sorts of compromises where the best interests of the country and all citizens are put ahead of the party faithful and the special interest groups that try to dominate party politics.


Comments
on Dec 09, 2010

IN Virginia, the legislature is in session for 45-60 days a year.  The country would run much better if congress followed that example.

As far as the "negotiating", the republicans better learn how to say "NO" and mean it if they expect to get re-elected.  155 weeks of "unemployment" is not unemployment.  It is welfare.

on Dec 28, 2010

155 weeks of "unemployment" is not unemployment. It is welfare.

You should look at the law instead of listening to the pundits.  The compromise does not allow the 99ers as they are called to get another extension. It allows others who became unemployed more recently to get extensions when their state benefits run out. For some that may be as much as 99 weeks but there is nothing in the new law giving anyone more than 99 weeks of compensation.

on Jan 03, 2011

Smoothseas

155 weeks of "unemployment" is not unemployment. It is welfare.
You should look at the law instead of listening to the pundits.  The compromise does not allow the 99ers as they are called to get another extension. It allows others who became unemployed more recently to get extensions when their state benefits run out. For some that may be as much as 99 weeks but there is nothing in the new law giving anyone more than 99 weeks of compensation.

I did - it allows the 98 weekers to get it.  98 weeks plus 13 months means 155 weeks.

on Jan 04, 2011

I did - it allows the 98 weekers to get it. 98 weeks plus 13 months means 155 weeks.

It does nothing of the sort.  It simply renews the Federal Extended Benefits Program that was put in place earlier to extend state benefits. So once again read the bill and you will see nobody gets additional compensation beyond 99 weeks.

on Jan 05, 2011

It does nothing of the sort. It simply renews the Federal Extended Benefits Program that was put in place earlier to extend state benefits. So once again read the bill and you will see nobody gets additional compensation beyond 99 weeks.

 

Well dang if I sound confused ... but ... what is the purpose of the bill if nobody gets the additional welfare benefits? Could it just be another carrot without substance to make the people think there are some handouts here for them? I think not!

 

When I was on unemployment, they made my life as miserable as possible; and consequently, I got a job pronto like … any job!

 

on Jan 05, 2011

what is the purpose of the bill if nobody gets the additional welfare benefits?

Some people do get the benefits, just not those who already got them last time around which means not the so called 99ers.

 

As to taking any job. Tell me what you would do in this situation? If taking a job at WalMart affords you a little income, however no health insurance, and makes you ineligible to continue COBRA from your prior employer; and lets say maybe you have a family member with a medical condition.

What would you do then? Would you be self righteous or do what was best for your family?

 

What is truly funny is that in your own self righteousness you maybe didn't realize that if you are not unfortunate to be unemployed or fortunate enough to making over 250k annually that ultimately you are the one left to pick up the tab for this one.

What hypocrisy, saying the liberals are whining because those who make above 250k get to keep their tax cut but then whine about those who are currently unemployed getting a little piece of the pie. And what is worse is complaining about parts of a bill in which you don't even know the details.

on Jan 05, 2011

if you are not unfortunate to be unemployed or fortunate enough to making over 250k annually that ultimately you are the one left to pick up the tab for this one.

Hum, I say a big portion of the income range effectively pay zero federal tax at the end of the year and some even make a little. What tab are they picking up?

http://money.cnn.com/2009/09/30/pf/taxes/who_pays_taxes/index.htm

How much income redistribution does it take to make one happy?

on Jan 05, 2011

Hum, I say a big portion of the income range effectively pay zero federal tax at the end of the year and some even make a little. What tab are they picking up?

Obviously none, but that was not my point. You can either accept the compromise as a whole or not at all. I'm in the group paying the tab. I am fortunately not unemployed and unfortunately do not make above 250k annually.  So should I criticize the fortunate or the unfortunate for the fact that I end up paying the difference? I can either blame neither or both or the politicians? Or I can be as blind as the sheep that graze at the extremes of the political spectrum.

on Apr 30, 2011

Smoothseas
As to taking any job. Tell me what you would do in this situation? If taking a job at WalMart affords you a little income, however no health insurance, and makes you ineligible to continue COBRA from your prior employer; and lets say maybe you have a family member with a medical condition.
What would you do then? Would you be self righteous or do what was best for your family?

I do not know very much about the bill ... was why I was asking. Anyway, I asked one question and made one statement about my own bad experience with unemployment …??? Where in the world did you perceive my self-righteousness? The state made my life miserable with daily job searches and a slew of paperwork. I was required to appear in person often to be admonished and belittled by some crumb crunching state zombie.
 
And before you do more speculating, I am a nuclear engineer by trade and yes I worked as a cashier in a crazy place called a “Farm Store” here in Florida. I did it because it was the only way to prevent me from throttling one of them and I did not have any other easy way out besides panhandling.
 
As for your stated predicament, I am not qualified to answer. I would never allow this to happen to me or I would find a workaround. I do not know much about COBRA having maintained my own insurance and I do not know if WalMart insures their workers or not, the points are moot. Besides that, I would always elect to do whatever it took to care for my family … wouldn’t you? I must have missed something somewhere … my hypocrisy, you got me there too I am afraid???

on Apr 30, 2011

Just as an addendum, my husband died earlier this year from a brain aneurism after suffering for many years on dialysis (there were 10 good years after the transplants though and it was quick and presumed painless) and I am considered 100% disabled, so be careful with this self-righteous stuff.
 
Mostly, I would like to see some accountability, especially from the government but also from the recipients of the benefits (all of them). I do not really believe in freebees and any capitalist will tell you that nothing is really free. The poor are actually a voting block where the Democrats pretend to help them and they just keep voting the same old Democrats back into power, for more carrots I suppose. And the only ones who actually get anything out of the deal are the politicians as the poor keep getting poorer and the slums keep getting larger? One hell of a way to grow the ranks of the poor and it makes no sense to me, go figure. And all the while, we bicker over who gets how much and why they should get it or not which is not the real problem at all.

Just as an afterthought … I can just see Osama bin Laden trudging around the mountains where goats fear to travel while on dialysis, get real. Sorry, it just came to me???

Meta
Views
» 635
Comments
» 10
Category
Sponsored Links