|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531
Hall of Famer
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531 |
I have to say. I was/am very impressed. I think it was very fair and bi-partisan.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,843
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,843 |
I didn't watch it, so I can't comment.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 402
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 402 |
So far it's a lot of big talk....doubtful on if government will be able to follow through
No earmarks? really, I doubt it
Lots of money being spent, where are the cuts?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,316
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,316 |
agree..pretty impressed...obviously democratic leaning but challenging both sides to give up the bs
I'm coming home, I'm coming home, tell the world I'm coming home
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,480
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,480 |
I was REALLY happy to hear they are going to (try) and get rid of the No Child Left Behind crap. That is so useless it isn't even funny. First thing I can agree with Obama on.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 809
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 809 |
i was impressed by the ability of many from both parties to put differences aside and sit next to each other... kudos to both sides
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/captainphil/browns bills sig 5.jpg) When it gets cold and snows and the wind blows, you gotta be able to run the ball. - TR
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,843
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,843 |
Quote:
i was impressed by the ability of many from both parties to put differences aside and sit next to each other... kudos to both sides
That's what you took from it? I guess I'm glad I didn't watch it. Apparently it wasn't the State of the Union address, it was date night?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 402
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 402 |
Quote:
Quote:
i was impressed by the ability of many from both parties to put differences aside and sit next to each other... kudos to both sides
That's what you took from it? I guess I'm glad I didn't watch it. Apparently it wasn't the State of the Union address, it was date night?
He touched on a lot of different topics
I thought the rebuild of trains in the US was interesting, but would be costly
Innovative Technology, to keep pace with other countries
The end of the Iraq War
He'll veto any and all bills that has an earmark in it
A government budget freeze
Funding Education, how to get the best education for the youth of the US
Talked about both parties coming together...seemed like the theme of the SOTU
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,480
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,480 |
It was really odd because there was none of the spontaneous applause breaking out as when the sides are in their own area. I took from it: - he want's to yank tax subsidies from the oil companies. That'll help with gas prices  - wants to get rid of no child left behind  - wants to work on infrastructure (power, data, transportation) - wants to consolidate redundant gov't areas Started playing poker about 1/2 way through and watching the Buckeyes on-line as I got pretty bored with it. Pretty bland.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,480
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,480 |
Quote:
He'll veto any and all bills that has an earmark in it
I got a chuckle out of that. So we aren't going to pass any more bills while he's in office  There is no possible way that he can do that as EVERY bill has an earmark.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,126
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,126 |
Actions will speak louder than words. Let's see him:
-simplify the tax code
-veto a bill with earmarks
-actually cut spending significantly
I'm not holding my breath. He can give a good speech (thats how he got elected), but tomorrow he'll go back to politics as usual.
It's supposed to be hard! If it wasn't hard, everyone would do it. The hard... is what makes it great!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,843
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,843 |
Quote:
Quote:
He'll veto any and all bills that has an earmark in it
I got a chuckle out of that. So we aren't going to pass any more bills while he's in office There is no possible way that he can do that as EVERY bill has an earmark.
Exactly.
Not knocking O here - it's just politics as usual.
Big speech coming up? Give me some great things to say. Tomorrow it'll be news, and we can get back to screwing everyone again and they won't catch on for a few months. Then we can give a new speech saying what we'll do, and it'll suffice for a while as we continue to screw the few tax paying citizens even more.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,480
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,480 |
Quote:
Actions will speak louder than words. Let's see him:
-simplify the tax code
-veto a bill with earmarks
-actually cut spending significantly
I'm not holding my breath. He can give a good speech (thats how he got elected), but tomorrow he'll go back to politics as usual.
Forgot about the simplify tax code - depends on what he means by that, but I'm ALL for it if done right. I have a feeling his simplification will be to stick it to "the rich". Now if he means everyone pays 20% on anything made over 50k or a national sales tax I'm 100% on board. Not that there is any possible way that would happen, but I can dream.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,480
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,480 |
Harry Reid is lovin' the no earmark talk. If Obama actually follows through with it I will gain a lot of respect for him. It is the kind of step that is needed to get the gov't going in the right direction IMO. LinkReid dismisses Obama's call for ban on earmarks AP – Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., speaks to reporters after the weekly caucus luncheons on Capitol … ABC News ANDREW TAYLOR, The Associated Press – Tue Jan 25, 6:13 pm ET WASHINGTON – Barack Obama's top ally in the Senate Tuesday brusquely rejected the president's call for a ban on the practice of stuffing home state projects known as earmarks into spending bills. Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said the president "has enough power already" and that Obama's reported embrace Tuesday night of an earmark ban promoted by Republicans is just a "lot of pretty talk." Reid made his remarks at a news conference in which he otherwise praised Obama in advance of Tuesday's State of the Union address. Reid is a skilled practitioner of earmarking, in which lawmakers direct projects like new roads, grants to local police departments and community development grants to their states and congressional districts. Obama has frequently said he opposes earmarks but he has repeatedly accepted them in larger spending bills. The earmark ban has been driven chiefly by House Speaker John Boehner, who vows not to send Obama any spending bills containing them. Opponents of earmarks say they too often divert money from worthy projects into wasteful ones. An explosion of earmarking under GOP control of Congress in the late 1990s and early 2000s sparked a "pay to play" culture in which lobbyists and business executives seeking earmarks lubricate the system with campaign contributions. The earmark ban is one of the few areas where Obama and tea party activists are in agreement, but Reid said the idea unfairly "takes power away from the legislative branch of government. And I think that's the wrong thing to do."
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,543 |
I would be all for simplifying the tax code as well, as long as we do away with the idea that the income tax system should be an extension of the welfare system.
I would eliminate the earned income tax credit and take that money and turn it into grants to support education and child care for lower income people. We're not going to support you forever, but we'll help you help yourself make it.
I would eliminate tax deductions except for personal deductions. Spend your money on whatever you want, but we're not going to subsidize your purchases with a tax break.
I would eliminate corporate taxes as income is taxes on the personal level as dividends on the income taxes of the owners of the corporation. I would allow, and encourage companies to set up rainy day funds to help cope with tough times, but would not do anything special to give them any kind of financial incentive. This would eliminate much of the lobbying in DC, as corporate interests lobbying for tax breaks always seem to dominate politics. No incentives for corporations, and no taxes. Corporate taxes are merely passed on to consumers anyway.
Unfortunately, for a politician, "simplifying the tax code" often means anything but simplification.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 798
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 798 |
Quote:
Forgot about the simplify tax code - depends on what he means by that, but I'm ALL for it if done right. I have a feeling his simplification will be to stick it to "the rich". Now if he means everyone pays 20% on anything made over 50k or a national sales tax I'm 100% on board. Not that there is any possible way that would happen, but I can dream.
One proposal from the debt commission was particularly interesting. It proposed eliminating all credits and deductions (on paper), lowering rates to the amount it would take to match the already determined spending level, then adding back each credit and deduction that the majority wanted to keep, while raising the rates to offset the "spending" of any tax credits.
The debt commission estimated that current tax expenditures represented about $1.1 trillion (I assume per year). I was shocked that it was that high.
http://www.fiscalcommission.gov/sites/fi...th12_1_2010.pdf
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531 |
I wish "reckless spending" wasn't lumped together with "wise investing" when it comes to political arguments.
Investing in green energy, communication technology, education and transportation is wise investing that will pay itself back in the future and create jobs.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 798
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 798 |
Also, I am a bit biased, but the parts of the speech when he talked about strengthening our education system as well as our basic research in this country resonated with me. Basic research usually delivers the basic ideas or prototypes that private business can adapt into marketable products. Examples from the 1900's: computers, wireless technology and the Internet were all byproducts of federal funding for things like NASA, Bell Labs, and defense agencies. Many of the most seminal findings in medicine and biotech have come out of NIH funded basic research.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,543 |
Perhaps, but wise investing has to fit into an overall responsible budget.
It seems like decades ..... and decades ........ and decades .......... and decades ........ since we've had a responsible budget.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,531 |
Quote:
Perhaps, but wise investing has to fit into an overall responsible budget.
It seems like decades ..... and decades ........ and decades .......... and decades ........ since we've had a responsible budget.
Yes. But you can't be like the Dolans are with the Indians, for example.
If there's investments that will reap HUGE rewards in the future (see: solar roadways) then they should be done without hesitation because they will create jobs and pay themselves back.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,126
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,126 |
When has a politician ever done "wise investing"? In this case, investment is just another word for wreckless spending.
It's supposed to be hard! If it wasn't hard, everyone would do it. The hard... is what makes it great!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,880
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,880 |
Quote:
So far it's a lot of big talk....doubtful on if government will be able to follow through
No earmarks? really, I doubt it
Lots of money being spent, where are the cuts?
Where was this talk two years ago? I think get his ass kicked in the past election has made him change his tune. Clinton did move towards the center after the 94 election. Hopefully Obama learned his lesson and follows through.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,632
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,632 |
j/c
It was a nice speech. But at the end of the day little will happen.
Funding for research will hit bumps like "Stem Cell" research did. The right to lifers will never allow that to be funded. Big oil will fight tooth and nail to keep any "feasible" clean energy research from happening.
And we are going to pour money into education when half the country doesn't even want to provide affordable health care to kids with pre-existing conditions? Give me a break. Education, or at least College Education is one of the biggest money pits in this country.
These schools are making assloads of money to dispense information and for certifying that a student was able to grasp that information at a basic level of comprehension. Then the student gets to spend years repaying the grossly over charged fees back with interest....
Until we have a better system the very poor, working poor and lower middle class will always be at a significant disadvantage when it comes to education.
This is also the only major country I know of where the color of your skin often dictates the quality of your basic education. Way to much social inequality to fix with tax breaks...
He actually hit the nail on the head when he said countries like China don't have to negotiate policies in public forums. If they want a road they build it, if the want everyone to go to school... they go.
What really blew my mind was CNN letting the Tea Party respond to the speech like they're a legit government entity. Then the rep babbled like an idiot and all I could do was watch gapped mouthed while thinking she represents the majority of mental midgets in this country...
I'm getting to the point where I think this country is screwed up beyond fixing.
Until we rein in the power of Big Business, limit the influence of special interest and get on the ONE Nation, One People page together... nothing will change.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,632
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,632 |
And another thing that bugs me, considering the way the GOP has fought and ridiculed Obama(our first BLACK President), to see him move beyond the center and buddy up to the GOP brought one thought to mind... Uncle Tom. Yep, he's the GOPs new whipping boy. They never budge on anything and now he'll give them what they want to save face and gain political points in the polls. All the while he distances himself from his base. Excellent re-election plan that is!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,543 |
Quote:
Funding for research will hit bumps like "Stem Cell" research did. The right to lifers will never allow that to be funded.
Umm .... which President first approved federal funding for stem cell research into existing lines?
Oh yeah, that was President Bush.
Then research showed that both adult stem cells, and those obtained from amniotic fluid and the placenta are just as valuable for research.
So .... with this in mnd ... what did President Obama do via executive order when he took office? He removed all restrains on embryonic stem cell research. No federal funds are going to go to the other, potentially more promising research .... but we're gonne use those embryos.
Again, a short sighted approach that is more of a political "look at me, I'm not a pro life person" rather than using the lines that were already available to be used, as well as funding research into adult stem cells, and those obtained from sources that do not end a life.
As far as college goes .... well hell ... if we're gonna treat college as a right, then why not roll it all into our public education system? Yep .... send kids to school for another 4 years and have them get a college degree, while they live at home, and are on their parents insurance.
Look, there are a lot of great ideas floating around ..... and almost every one of them costs money. We're bankrupt. We are currently spending between $1.5 and $2 trillions each year MORE than we collect in taxes. We have to make some decisions as far as how we manage that equation, because if we don't try to get it under control now, we'll have educated kids and grandkids who own nothing ....because the country will have been sold lock, stock, and barrel to finance all of these lofty, and expensive, programs.
Can you afford for your taxes to go up by $20,000 per year to pay for these programs? I sure can't. If we leave it for future generations, the bill just gets bigger and bigger and bigger ..... and since there are fewer children being born, future generations look to be smaller ... so the per share amount increases even more.
You want to talk about whackos? Whacko is spending trillions of dollars we don't have, and will never have, without conscience and without care about how it will cripple future generations ..... and worse yet, doing so in the name of compassion.
There are some things we can do to try and help people in extreme circumstances ..... but government cannot be mom and dad to the adult children who never grew up. Unfortunately, that's exactly what is happening to many people today. Government is mom and dad ..... and government provides for them .... and without government they would be lost. Frankly, that disgusts me, because government is "helping" people stay children ... mature in body, but children in mind, morality, and spirit.
That's not the path I would want my kids to go down.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 998
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 998 |
I hope you really believe this.
Wise words spoken by sages
From SkyTel to BlackBerry pagers
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,480
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,480 |
Quote:
And another thing that bugs me, considering the way the GOP has fought and ridiculed Obama(our first BLACK President), to see him move beyond the center and buddy up to the GOP brought one thought to mind... Uncle Tom. Yep, he's the GOPs new whipping boy. They never budge on anything and now he'll give them what they want to save face and gain political points in the polls. All the while he distances himself from his base. Excellent re-election plan that is!
Why do you need to bring race into this?
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 798
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 798 |
Quote:
What really blew my mind was CNN letting the Tea Party respond to the speech like they're a legit government entity. Then the rep babbled like an idiot and all I could do was watch gapped mouthed while thinking she represents the majority of mental midgets in this country...
I don't have a problem with her given the forum to respond. I do think she grossly misrepresented a lot of things. She talked about the last three years of deficits as if they happened in a vacuum. She also said that when he took office, "we wondered if he would cut spending, reduce the deficit, and implement real job creating policies." First, the depths of the second worst economic downturn in the last 100 years is absolutely not the time to implement austerity. Second, there is nothing any government could have done to make businesses hire in such an uncertain climate.
To me, part of her response was almost like a response that you might hear from a pundit rather than a serious voice. She ignored that half the deficits were driven by plummeting tax revenues as the economy ground to a halt. Or that the bailout has been almost entirely paid back. Or that the stimulus didn't represent a huge growth in government; most of it was tax credits like the Making Work Pay credit to put more money in our hands as well as transfers to keep afloat existing necessary government entities and non-profits who depend on government grants in times of extreme economic peril (school systems, transportation agencies, companies responsible for function of the power grid, etc.). Add on top of it that the stimulus is extremely short term in nature; most of the money is spent today and will not be recurring (unless we dip into another recession).
Another quote: "We need to start making things again in this country, and we can do that by reducing the tax and regulatory burden on job-creators. America will have the highest corporate tax rate in the world. Think about that. Look no further to see why jobs are moving overseas."
To an extent, I agree with her here. This can't be the only answer though, because places like China and India have almost zero regulations and pay workers pennies on the dollar. We need to diversify our economic base into new industries that we are better equipped to do than they are. Biotech and alternative energy are two places where we have a good start, and we need to continue to invest in basic research in these areas.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/01/25/sotu.response.bachmann/index.html?hpt=C1
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 284
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 284 |
Quote:
"We need to start making things again in this country, and we can do that by reducing the tax and regulatory burden on job-creators. America will have the highest corporate tax rate in the world. Think about that. Look no further to see why jobs are moving overseas."
Honest question: what exactly is meant when someone refers to corporate tax rates? I ask because I've tried to figure it out and can't find a straight answer, and my knowledge of the tax code as it relates to corporations is fairly slim.
I do recall reading a GAO report from a few years back that found 75% of corporations paid no federal income tax between 1998 and 2005, which is part of the reason why I'm interested in the topic. But then, I don't know if corporations pay taxes on things other than income, thus my question.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,073
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,073 |
Quote:
It was really odd because there was none of the spontaneous applause breaking out as when the sides are in their own area.
I took from it:
- he want's to yank tax subsidies from the oil companies. That'll help with gas prices
- wants to get rid of no child left behind
- wants to work on infrastructure (power, data, transportation)
- wants to consolidate redundant gov't areas
Started playing poker about 1/2 way through and watching the Buckeyes on-line as I got pretty bored with it. Pretty bland.
It was a relatively long speech but That's what I got out of it as well.
I got a kick out of his story on Salmon. In fresh water, it's overseen by one agency, in salt water, it's overseen by another agency.. He made a joke after that, but I don't remember it. I do remember that I lauged.. So did everyone else in the joint.
He made reference to the many agencies that handle the same thing and asked why that was.
He's right I think.. It would go a long way to cut down the number of redundant agencies.. Isn't that one of the things that those against big government want? I know that's what I want.
Anyway, what he was talking about was overhauling the federal government. Man, it's needed that for a long time. Let's see if both sides of the isle can get together to get it done.
I gotta say this, if Obama would have taken this approach at the outset, we'd be better off today.. Working WITH those that oppose you is better than fighting about it.. Nothing comes of it.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,543 |
Corporate tax is paid on profits.
Things like equipment depreciation, amortized investments, and other things can factor into reducing profits on the bottom line.
In a down economy, when companies have a number of write offs and lowered sales/profits anyway, they could easily get into a position where they pay zero taxes.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
didn't watch, only read the transcript (hate watching those things)
anyway, lots of good in there with no earmarks, sacrifices to meet budget demands, etc. hopefully, it was his plan and not just rhetoric. will give him the benefit of the doubt on it though.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
I wish "reckless spending" wasn't lumped together with "wise investing" when it comes to political arguments.
Investing in green energy, communication technology, education and transportation is wise investing that will pay itself back in the future and create jobs.
it's a very fine line.
for instance, investing in green energy can be good. however, funding research projects that many scientists have already determined are destined to fail or companies that are already headed toward bankruptcy help noone. creating reasonable regulations for companies and helping subsidize some of the bigger research projects (with stipulations that research centers are in USA) are good places to start there.
someone also mentioned "big oil" is against "green energy" this is pretty laughable at this point. the biggest beneficiaries of "green energy" will be these "big oil" companies. They are ENERGY companies, not oil companies. They will not be left behind if the energy source switches.
communication technology - even during the recession, communication companies did not suffer much. we have such an insatiable hunger right now for more and faster communication technology that the gov't doesn't need to subsidize this industry.
education - I'm a firm believer that the best way to allow more class movement is to have the possibility of a good education for all. you should have to work hard, it shouldn't just be handed to you (like working a job while in school for the university instead of just getting a grant, etc).
transportation - really, you should categorize this one as 'infrastructure'. Highways, public transportation, etc. this has been one of the governments big boondoggles. they have lost a lot of money that never gets repaid and actually costs more to run than brings in (ex. Austin recently installed their own version of the Rapid. It loses millions each year to operate). I agree highways and bridges and such need to be maintained, but I don't think they bring back the money they take (it's just a necessity of our individual-car-culture).
So, what to spend $$$ on. I think research is key. Research in areas that could provide growth and jobs in the country. It's obviously difficult to predict many of these fields, but Cleveland actually is going a decent route by pursuing medical-technologies (though competing with Nashville and the Medical-Mart has pros and cons associated with it).
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,543 |
It's funny.
I was listening to the radio today, and they had the head of the WRTA on. (Western Reserve Transit Authority, or local bus company) They ha e relied on property taxes, but as they spread out further into the suburbs, they went to a 1/4% sales tax to pay for their services.
They received money in the stimulus bill last year with which they bought something like 18 12 passenger buses. They use these buses for people who are outside of 3/4 of a mile from a regular bus line.
The fare ranges from $2 to $3.50, and I believe that was round trip. They often have 1 passenger trips, and I believe he said that their average is something less than 2 per trip.
So ..... we now have a subsidized taxi service, I guess.
This is stimulius dollars at work. This way they can spend our tax dollars on expanded routes for 1 person, and probably wind up having to hire more drivers, because what is essentially taxi service for $2 is a pretty damn good deal. This means that, inevitably, we will "need" more tax revenues to pay for more drivers .......
And we wonder why we're in trouble. It's an idea that sounds nice. It sounds compassionate. However, people have walked to a bus stop for decades .... and they somehow managed to survive the experience. Today though ..... it's just a bit too hard.
I can see doing something to help senior citizens who cannot walk to a bus stop, or handicapped people .... but I'm sorry ..... if you are a healthy person, you can handle a 3/4 mile walk. If you can't ..... work hard, save your money, and buy a car.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,590
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,590 |
What's really funny is that they can state that with those expanded routes that they "created job" whether on new drivers or on the people who built the busses ....
until you look at how much it actually costs to create each one of those jobs ..
"Believe deep down in your heart that you're destined to do great things."
@pstu24
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 386
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 386 |
the strongest thing I got out of this is when he said and I quote " no one should be denied the opportunity to defend the country that they love because of someone that they love" excellect
what I hated is seeing the handful of republicans and the suited military personnel lookng like they wanted to throw up in their mouths and give nasty dirty looks
We are sending 18 year old kids into war I could care less in they love Eve or Steve.
Just goes to show we have came so far in this country yet we still have hatred or bias for a group of people for who they are.
the hating and bashing and denying the gay/lesbian group of humans is no different then the hating of blacks in this country or denying the women the right to vote or the segregation of the human race......
im NOT in support or in hatred of this President I believe he is doing as well as he can in things and doing as poor as he can in others but in this case and the repelling of the Dont ask dont tell policy he got this right HANDS DOWN
JMHO
I am the artist that was known as Dawgmanincincy
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum State of the Union
|
|
![[Linked Image from i26.tinypic.com]](http://i26.tinypic.com/30vow7m.jpg)
