I am a Indy but like obama

Let me remind you fine gentlemen and ladies that many of the people who make up the TEA Party also protested Bush's spending, his attempt at amnesty, and his nomination of Harriet Miers. You'll have to ask the mainstream media why they didn't cover events so thoroughly. Admittedly the outrage was less but it was there as I remember being in the middle of it. Now it has exploded into a movement and it exploded before Obama did anything. It was directed at the government in general, congress in particular, and was a warning to the new president to be moderate. We know what happened to the "moderate" new president and his handlers in the congress and senate. The TEA party people (according to the NYT consists of republicans, democrats, and independents) are now actively angry at Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and any republican that forgets their oath of office to "preserve the Constitution". Originally Posted by john_galt

So this was happening under Bush and you meana liberal network like MSNBC didn't cover it? Were there massive parades on Washington with people carry nasty racist signs about BUSH? I don't care what report you read, but everyone knows 99.9% of TEA party were far right wng republicans and very few if any voted for Obama anyways. No one has yet to give me one good reason why they are protesting- Obama has not raised any of there taxes. Do they want less govt??? Heck the govt got larger under Bush!!!! When the TEA party starts coming up with solutions then I will take them seriously, but any Republican that aligns themselve with the TEA party will regret it- because the media is exposing them as this anti-govt- hateful and from many of their signs racist group. The media has done an excellent job of painting this group pretty much as the Klan without robes. now there are some TEA party radio talk show host- one in my city who has blasted both Republicans and Democrats and who doesn't want the TEA arty aligned with the Republicans but he is a rare case- he believes all from Washington must go Dems and Republicans, but the majority of TEA party are right wing republicans.

I think people are realizing that raising the debt ceiling from $8.5 trillion to $14 trillion in one year will ultimately mean more taxes.

I think people are realizing that the CBO scored the healthcare bill on the first 10 years of revenue, and first 6 years of expenses....leading one to the logical conclusion that this thing will be out of budget in only its 11th year.

I think people know that cap and trade has passed the house...and could go to the senate any day.

Bottom line, it is very plain that we are running up debt at an unprecedented rate...and the punch line at the end (after the budget commission comes back with its findings) is going to be that we need to increase taxes. Average Americans are seeing that...and they are mad. Its that simple. BTW, they are mad at the Republican senators from Maine, who helped pass ARRA. They are mad at any Republican who is wobbly on repealing healthcare. They are running candidates against republicans (J.D. Hayworth is opposing John McCain). It is a very unique phenomenon, a popular uprising in which no political party is safe. At the April 15 D.C event, no Republican lawmakers were actually invited.

LaCrew I agree with most of your point except GM bailout- had he led GM go bankrupt do you know how many other industries would have been affected??? Let's get real- would you be brave enough to stand in front of a GM plant in Detroit and tell all the workers the hell with you- your asses need to go bankrupt? Had GM failed the Unemployment rate would have skyrocketed and like I said various other industries that supplies materials and other parts to GM would have had to close doors or have massive lay offs- I don't understand your logic, but hey that's how the republicans think these days. Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

Excuse me, didn't GM go bankrupt anyway. So what did he prevent, they could have entered into the same bankrupy situation as they did without the government take over.

So had McCain been elected, we'd have full employment and the Dow would be at 15,000?
Don't believe that tax cuts would have fixed anything. I work with a lot of contractors. Cuts in the income tax rates won't make up for the lack of work to bid on.
Business decisions should not be based on income taxes. Business should make decisions on the ability to make money, not save taxes, although taxes are a part of that mix.
The economy was tanking before the election and McCain, if elected, would have been under intense pressure to do something about job creation or stem the job losses. Originally Posted by KCJoe

A lot of those Bush tax cuts were on buisnesses not income tax, there are many taxes a business has to pay, even if you considered that all income tax as the owner of several buisnesses I can tell you that when I have to pay more in tax I am less inclined to spend money on expansion and without expansion there is no need to hire additional employees.

I interested to hear which of the Bush tax cuts affected business.

If your taxes were cut to zero. Would you expand if you had no market to sell your product?

I can see not hiring employees because of the cost that comes with each one. That's why businesses are trying to do more with fewer employees. Why productivity is up. Employees are working harder with less pay because they fear for their jobs. Health care reform was supposed to help with one of the biggest costs of hiring. The ever increasing cost of providing insurance for them. I hope it works out.

"The ever increasing cost of providing insurance for them. I hope it works out."

It did this how, by penalizing a company for not having insurance, please tell me when it became a company's responsibility to provide ensurance, its that the new definition of benefits. Health insurance, paid vacation sick days etc. are benefits, there purpose was to entice employees to leave other companies for employment with them. They were a method of retaining employee's, this administration and you fellow progressive's have created this aborted rational that it is the responsibility of business to provide employees insurance, I would like to see how you arrived at this belief, and the argument that its the right thing to do does not hold water. The fact of the matter is this. Employees have choices, they do not have to accept a job at a job that does not have benefits. Thats how capitalism works, see either the company will decide to provide benefits and therefore attract employees or it will not and will suffer the effects on the bottom line because of low employee numbers which may eventually kill the company. Benefits should not be treated as you do as an inalienable right. One final thing, not all companies are corperations, some are DBA's, SP's. In these cases savings in income tax matters do directly affect the capital a business has to operate with and expand. In these instances all of the money earned by the company is treated as personal income. You liberals/Progressives are so caught up in anti big business and class warefare, you fail to see the impact that decisions make across the spectrum.

"Health care reform was supposed to help with one of the biggest costs of hiring."

I'm stunned.

It cut $200 Billion from Medicare advantage...At&t wrote down $1 Billion, Caterpillar, 3M...remember that?

Here is a study which predicts a loss of 1.6 million jobs as a result of the employer mandate (put out by a small business advocacy group, so they ought to know what's best for them):

http://www.nfib.com/newsroom/newsroom-item/cmsid/48480/

Exactly how is this bill going to eliminate the cost of hiring? (Hint: Its a loaded question, since the answer can only be that employers drop their current plans and rely on the Public Option)

I said "I hope reform helps with the cost of providing health insurance to employees". I didn't say it has. Only time will tell. The current system is clearly unsustainable. My former employer went from providing family coverage, to only single coverage to making the employee pay it all. The cost just got completely unaffordable.

Those companies that took a write down did because they lost a government subsidy. Why does the government need to help profitable companies add to their bottom line? 1.6 million jobs over five years is a lot, but smaller than the 3.6 million lost in the last year.

Educate me on the Bush business tax cuts that were not related to income taxes.

Presuming your employer is not exceptionally small, they will now have to pay a penalty to continue to not insure you...I suspect it will make the company reluctant to hire new employees.

I'm not here to argue the merits of the Medicare Advantage write-down...just pointing out that is was yanked away as part of the healthcare bill...definitely has not helped reduce the cost of hiring.

I've never said anything about Bush business tax cuts...and this thread was started about Obama.

Exactly how is the healthcare bill going to eliminate the cost of hiring? (Hint: Its a loaded question, since the answer can only be that employers drop their current plans and rely on the Public Option)

I said "I hope reform helps with the cost of providing health insurance to employees". I didn't say it has. Only time will tell. The current system is clearly unsustainable. My former employer went from providing family coverage, to only single coverage to making the employee pay it all. The cost just got completely unaffordable.

Those companies that took a write down did because they lost a government subsidy. Why does the government need to help profitable companies add to their bottom line? 1.6 million jobs over five years is a lot, but smaller than the 3.6 million lost in the last year.

Educate me on the Bush business tax cuts that were not related to income taxes. Originally Posted by KCJoe

Check out the 2004 coperate tax cuts bill signed by Bush. But the reality is that a large percentage of businesses are retail businesses. The more money the general public has to spend the more money retailers will make, this in turn leads to expansion and job growth. When you eliminate tax breaks that put extra money into the pockets of john q citizen in an economy where money is already tight and many small businesses are barely holding on you are going to put the final nail in the coffin of many small buisinesses. But hey thats okay right, because you going to make them rich bastards pay right.

"but everyone knows 99.9% of TEA party were far right wng republicans and very few if any voted for Obama anyways. "

Where is your documentation to prove this. How do you know this is fact, because its a got reaction or because someone else in the lib party stated it. If anyone on this board that does not agree with Barry makes such a broad statement there feet is held to the fire, so its only fair that everyone has to play by the same game.

"No one has yet to give me one good reason why they are protesting- Obama has not raised any of there taxes. Do they want less govt??? Heck the govt got larger under Bush!!!! When the TEA party starts coming up with solutions then I will take them seriously, but any Republican that aligns themselve with the TEA party will regret it- because the media is exposing them as this anti-govt- hateful and from many of their signs racist group. The media has done an excellent job of painting this group pretty much as the Klan without robes. now there are some TEA party radio talk show host- one in my city who has blasted both Republicans and Democrats and who doesn't want the TEA arty aligned with the Republicans but he is a rare case- he believes all from Washington must go Dems and Republicans, but the majority of TEA party are right wing republicans."

You are a broken record, show proof of what you are bloviating. Its all assumption and personal opinion. You cannot defend one statement you have made. Your like a fart, all noise and no substance.

So this was happening under Bush and you meana liberal network like MSNBC didn't cover it? Were there massive parades on Washington with people carry nasty racist signs about BUSH? I don't care what report you read, but everyone knows 99.9% of TEA party were far right wng republicans and very few if any voted for Obama anyways. No one has yet to give me one good reason why they are protesting- Obama has not raised any of there taxes. Do they want less govt??? Heck the govt got larger under Bush!!!! When the TEA party starts coming up with solutions then I will take them seriously, but any Republican that aligns themselve with the TEA party will regret it- because the media is exposing them as this anti-govt- hateful and from many of their signs racist group. The media has done an excellent job of painting this group pretty much as the Klan without robes. now there are some TEA party radio talk show host- one in my city who has blasted both Republicans and Democrats and who doesn't want the TEA arty aligned with the Republicans but he is a rare case- he believes all from Washington must go Dems and Republicans, but the majority of TEA party are right wing republicans. Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

You say the same unsubstantiated BS over and over again. Bottom line is this, the liberals represent about 30 percent of the voting public and the minority vote is included in that. So a large number of independents and conservatives had to by into the rock star and vote for him, so as much as you would like to take the credit for that, the reality is that some of the tea party members you are attacking are the same crossover vote who your pushing away. You ask why they are protesting Obama, its simple, he represents the government, whom should they protest if they wish to protest the intrusion of government into private enterprise, Simon Crowl, they protest him the same way you protest Bush. So quit fucking whinning about it. So once again, you have a lot or statements in this post, back them up, if you cant then stop saying them. Your right, the liberal biased media has done a great job of demonizing the organization, of course they always do that to the things that scare them the most. So either provide sources for the statements you have made or just admit your a fart, a lot of noise but no substance.

Rasmussen polls of people who self identify as tea party members paint a picture of a group with a wide variety of political views and affiliations, including Democrat. I have a close friend who went to the event in Topeka. He's not a racist. I am really interested to know why you would characterize him this way. What proof? Its not ok to oppose the president because he's black?

Anybody says anything about at&t again & I am going to scream they are some greedy bastard & I know first hand. if they weren't union run they'd fire everyone & move all the reps over seas. people who have been their 10 20 years now pay at least 300 deductable.