The Cellar
Page 5 of 54 1234 5 678910111215 Last »
Show 60 post(s) from this thread on one page

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)
-   Politics (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=5)
-   -   Congress has lost its mind... (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=5891)

sugarpop 07-13-2009 10:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce (Post 581007)
They're rewriting history with bullshit assumptions and you're buying into it.
Yeparoo. Don'tcha just hate that? Too bad there are books and news clips etc. proving what really happened.

TheMercenary 07-13-2009 10:10 AM
I doubt you can point to the millions of jobs saved but I can certainly point to the millions lost since he took office. Bad luck for him but it happened on his watch and he promised to fix it by providing us with hundreds of thousands of jobs, so did the Demoncrats in Congress. So far, nada.

sugarpop 07-13-2009 10:17 AM
I have seen people say they were beginning to start up projects. They have even had articles in the local paper about the stimulus money.

I wish more money had been focused on infrastructure and jobs too. But I am still willing to give him more time, because everyone always said it would not be immediate. If, after this year, the unemployment rate is still rising, I will start bitching with you, OK? We can march on Washington if you want. ;)

Happy Monkey 07-13-2009 11:18 AM
Here is the infrastructure allocation so far.

Happy Monkey 07-13-2009 03:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meet the Press
SEN. McCAIN: And this is--if I know Washington, this is the beginning of a pretty involved and detailed story. And I, I don't have enough information, but I think a lot more's to come on this.

MR. GREGORY: Should there be an investigation, do you think?

SEN. McCAIN: I don't know if--first of all, I'd like to know the facts of the case before there should be an, "an investigation."

MR. GREGORY: Mm-hmm.

SEN. McCAIN: How long did, did the director of the CIA know about this program and when did he terminate it? And all of these things are going to, are probably going to be heavily discussed in the weeks ahead.
I'd like to know the facts... By magic!

TheMercenary 07-17-2009 06:05 AM
Well it looks like Congress and all it spending may have finally reached a brink. At least someone is looking at the numbers. CBO say Demoncratic spending is unsustainable.

Quote:
Under current law, the federal budget is on an unsustainable path, because federal debt will continue to grow much faster than the economy over the long run. Although great uncertainty surrounds long-term fiscal projections, rising costs for health care and the aging of the population will cause federal spending to increase rapidly under any plausible scenario for current law. Unless revenues increase just as rapidly, the rise in spending will produce growing budget deficits. Large budget deficits would reduce national saving, leading to more borrowing from abroad and less domestic investment, which in turn would depress economic growth in the United States. Over time, accumulating debt would cause substantial harm to the economy. The following chart shows our projection of federal debt relative to GDP under the two scenarios we modeled.
http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=328

TheMercenary 07-25-2009 08:21 PM
Well at least some Congress men still have a sense of their priorities.

Sen. Dodd (D) may snub lobbyists, but not their cash

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090726/D99LQR1O4.html

TheMercenary 07-31-2009 10:23 PM
Keeping an eye on the bills in congress and how much they are costing us.

http://www.washingtonwatch.com/

http://www.washingtonwatch.com/blog/...nding-tracker/

Redux 07-31-2009 11:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 585394)
Keeping an eye on the bills in congress and how much they are costing us.

http://www.washingtonwatch.com/

http://www.washingtonwatch.com/blog/...nding-tracker/
Washington Watch is affiliated with the conservative/libertarian CATO Institute.
WashingtonWatch.com does not report the many benefits that may be provided by government regulation and spending, made possible by taxation. Proposals that “cost” the average American may benefit you, your community, your loved ones, or your employer.

WashingtonWatch.com does not report the budgetary consequences of legislation. A proposal that “saves” money may drive the national debt higher because it reduces taxes without reducing spending. One that “costs” may reduce the national debt because it includes more taxes than spending.
When you rely on a partisan service, you generally get a partisan perspective...which is fine, if that is what you want....but dont attempt to pass it off as a site w/o a political agenda.

If you want to keep an eye on Congress and want a non-partisan perspective, use non-partisan sources, like Thomas, the official Congressional site and read the CRS bill summaries and the CBO cost estimates that are included or use GovTrack, another good non-partisan source.

Keeping an eye on Congress is good....doing it with an open mind (is "not reporting the benefits that may be provided"....open-minded or objective?), rather than a predisposed agenda, is better.

TheMercenary 08-01-2009 03:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redux (Post 585403)
If you want to keep an eye on Congress and want a non-partisan perspective, use non-partisan sources, like Thomas, the official Congressional site and read the CRS bill summaries and the CBO cost estimates that are included or use GovTrack, another good non-partisan source.
You mean like the AARP?

Redux 08-01-2009 08:27 AM
I really didnt expect you to acknowledge that the the analysis of legislation by WashingtonWatch.com is as partisan and biased as any you will find.

I listed the others for those who are more open-minded.

richlevy 08-01-2009 08:56 AM
Thanks Redux. I like the CBO. They had the guts to tell GWB what tax cuts combined with war spending would do. I trust them to be equally annoying to Obama and I've already seen our loyal opposition here refer to their estimates.

I'd relegate washingtonwatch and the AARP both to the spin cycle. Both have an agenda, although at least the AARP has a defined constituency whose interests they do look out for, mostly, while trying to sell them insurance.

Redux 08-01-2009 09:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by richlevy (Post 585437)
....I'd relegate washingtonwatch and the AARP both to the spin cycle. Both have an agenda, although at least the AARP has a defined constituency whose interests they do look out for, mostly, while trying to sell them insurance.
Absolutely...there are few political sites that are without some spin.

I think its fair to say that the AARP doesnt hide or misrepresent what they are and for whom they advocate....as opposed to most of Merc's op eds and sites.

TheMercenary 08-02-2009 08:10 AM
More evidence of a bloated expensive government without "transparency":

Federal Agencies Diverted Earmark Money

Quote:
By RON NIXON and ASHLEY SOUTHALL
Published: July 31, 2009
WASHINGTON — Thirteen federal agencies took nearly half a billion dollars off the top of Congressional earmarks for administrative expenses in 2008, nearly 3 percent of the total amount that members of Congress had directed to pet projects in federal spending bills.


The Defense Department led the way with nearly $240 million deducted from earmarks. Several agencies, including the Education and Housing and Urban Development Departments, did not withhold any money to process and provide oversight of earmarks.

The findings, summarized in a report from the White House Office of Management and Budget, provide the first governmentwide look at how much federal agencies keep from earmarked money.

The report was done at the request of Senator Ben Nelson, Democrat of Nebraska, who said he first learned of the practice three years ago when the recipient of an earmark he had requested notified him that it had not gotten the full amount.

“This is an issue of transparency,” Mr. Nelson said. “Some of these agencies are clearly taking money without any authority, and they should not have these off-budget expense accounts.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/01/us..._r=2&th&emc=th

TheMercenary 08-02-2009 08:25 AM
HEY! The Congress can just treat this like they did for Cash for Clunkers! Dump more taxpayer dollars into it because you know, "It's to big to fail."

Prolonged Aid to Unemployed Is Running Out

Quote:
Over the coming months, as many as 1.5 million jobless Americans will exhaust their unemployment insurance benefits, ending what for some has been a last bulwark against foreclosures and destitution.

Because of emergency extensions already enacted by Congress, laid-off workers in nearly half the states can collect benefits for up to 79 weeks, the longest period since the unemployment insurance program was created in the 1930s. But unemployment in this recession has proved to be especially tenacious, and a wave of job-seekers is using up even this prolonged aid.

Tens of thousands of workers have already used up their benefits, and the numbers are expected to soar in the months to come, reaching half a million by the end of September and 1.5 million by the end of the year, according to new projections by the National Employment Law Project, a private research group.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/02/us/02unemploy.html?hp


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:22 AM.
Page 5 of 54 1234 5 678910111215 Last »
Show 60 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.