Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Friday, October 28, 2016

WATCH: Obama Returns To Campaign Trail With Tax Cut Pitch

In a campaign-style speech at a Pennsylvania factory Friday, President Barack Obama accused congressional Republicans of holding the middle class hostage to protect tax cuts for the rich.

Speaking at the Rodon Manufacturing Group in Hatfield, Pennsylvania, Obama reiterated his desire for Congress to extend tax cuts on incomes under $250,000, while allowing the Bush-era tax cuts on incomes over $250,000 to expire.

“It’s not acceptable to me and I don’t think it’s acceptable to you for just a handful of Republicans in Congress to hold middle-class tax cuts hostage simply because they don’t want tax rates on upper-income folks to go up,” the president said.

Warning that a tax hike would be a “lump of coal” leading to a “Scrooge Christmas” for middle-class families, Obama declared once again that he is “ready to sign” an extension of the tax cuts from which 98 percent of Americans currently benefit.

“There are [sic] no shortage of pens in the White House and I carry one around for an emergency, just in case,” he joked. Obama added, “The sooner Congress gets this done, the sooner our economy will get a boost.”

The event represented the president’s first campaign-style event since winning re-election just over three weeks ago. In his speech, he declared that the results of the election prove that the American people are on his side in the tax cut argument.

“We talked about this a lot… We had debates about it. There were a lot of TV commercials about it,” Obama said. “At the end of the day, a clear majority of Americans — Democrats, Republicans, independents — they agreed with a balanced approach to deficit reduction and making sure that middle-class taxes don’t go up.”

Video of Obama’s speech is below, via Politico.

House Speaker John Boehner spoke in Washington shortly after Obama’s speech concluded, and blasted the president’s opening offer in the fiscal cliff negotations as “the wrong approach.”

“The White House hasn’t yet made a serious proposal,” Boehner said.

“There is a stalemate. Let’s not kid ourselves,” he added.

On Thursday, congressional Republicans rejected Obama’s offer to cut $4 trillion from the deficit in exchange for $1.6 trillion in revenue from increasing tax rates on top earners along with capital gains and dividends (in addition to other tax reform), a $50 billion stimulus package, and raising the debt ceiling.

While Boehner claimed that Republicans are willing to “negotiate in good faith,” he also stressed that their “original framework stands.”

A transcript of Obama’s comments can be read here.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2012 The National Memo
  • Someone should tell him the election is over. Now it is time to do some work.

    • joujou228

      He is working, you need to call Boenher and McConnel to counter his offer. They love to scream about cutting so call “entittlement” but too chicken to state what they want to cut. They want democrats to debate with themselves, not this time.

    • I can imagine how distasteful it must be to see a President bringing an issue to critical importance to our country to the attention of the people and solicit our support to put pressure on those whose intransigence and political goals take precedence over doing the right thing for our country. Consider writing to Boehner, Cantor and the rest of the gang instead of wasting time trying to distort the value of leadership with allegations of campaigning after an election is over.

    • edwardw69

      By “him” do you mean Mr. Boehner? By all means, tell him; see what it gets you.

      • kanawah

        edwardw69, that should be BONEhead.

        • edwardw69

          Now, let’s be nice.

    • suddencall

      Someone o ought to tell boner that he lost the election twice and it is time for him to do his job right.He has never shown good faith and he is always over bearing in his actions and speech .It is obvious he is not on our side .
      If he refuses then we already have what we want , Taxes hikes on the rich. Boehner acts like he was born yesterday and can not find the tit.

    • kanawah

      Someone should tell the RepubliSKUNKS they lost that election, and they should stand up and work for the American people, not the rich 2%.

    • We can do a lot of work Bill, only if the Republicans could do exactly as you suggest, recognize that the election is over. Great advice Bill ,but directed at the wrong person. Nice try though. Lol

  • fire the the GOP they are the most worst people on earth.

    • edwardw69

      Grammatically speaking, “most worst” is not possible. On the other hand, when speaking of the GOP, I believe we should make an exception.

    • suddencall

      Put them and their supporters on a reservation until such time they agree to acknowledge the constitution , ” the real one” , not the one they wish they had.
      President Obama , take a vacation and wait till these nuts call and tell us they have come to their senses.No more talking to them and leading them to believe you are going to give the store away. Same for Durban and the senate No more promises to these hostage takers.

      • edwardw69

        Actually, let’s put the “cliff” business on the back-burner, and vote to allow the secession from the Union of Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana and Arkansas. They asked for it back in the 1860’s, and although it will be a bit late, let’s let them have it now. That means eight fewer digbat Senators; and also, a gaggle of Reps will no longer be with us. Should make a difference, especially when we move all those military bases and other government installations to states that will appreciate them.
        Anybody else want to join them? Go right ahead. (Or behind.)

        • Seeing that these red states are also some of the states that are sucking the most welfare dollars from Washington, letting them secede would take a lot of pressure of our tax dollar outflows. Over time it could allow for some tax reductions. Actually, to get an even bigger effect, how about letting Texas, Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina secede too??

        • karinursula

          Hey, hey I live in Arkansas, and I’m on your side, I voted for the President. Instead take Texas.

          • edwardw69

            I was being snide. I lived in Arkansas–a bit North of Marble–after I got out of the Army. I guess you can’t blame a whole state; after all, there are Republicans in California.
            But, any state that votes to leave, should.

      • AdamMos

        Love it!

        Obama should just play golf everyday. That would send the message. Thx for your post!

  • By going directly to the American people President Obama is accomplishing two goals, he is making his position on the tax and spending reduction issues known to the general public, and he is exposing the Republican intransigence and refusal to compromise on an issue that enjoys the support of most Americans known to every person capable of rational thinking.
    I believe we need to do a lot more than just raise the tax rate for our highest earners 3%, but that is a good start and it deserves our full support. We must also eliminate all loopholes, end subsidies to oil companies, pharmaceuticals and the agri-business, and declare the use of tax shelters illegal.
    We must zero in on MEDICARE and MEDICAID fraud and abuse by service providers, we should look into the feasibility of merging Federal government agencies with similar charters, we should consider the closure of military bases overseas rendered obsolete as a result of technology, we should limit foreign aid to humanitarian aid, regardless of who is affected by that decision. We should also address currency manipulation by our largest trading partners, and respond in kind if they don’t cange their ways. We must encourage investment and job creation in the USA, and punish companies and individuals that invest overseas with high taxes, tarifs, and removal of all benefits. Last, but not least, we must avoid medieval crusades to advance the interests of donors. The only thing we got out of the Iraq and Afghanistan experiences is over 4,000 young Americans killed, tens of thousands maimed, thousands of Iraqi’s killed or displaced, widespread anti-American feelings, rejection of our values in countries where our way of life is offensive and our presence is unwelcome, and a $1.5T addition to our national debt that nobody wants to claim responsibility for.

    • montanabill

      Unfortunately, Dominick, he is not making his position clear. As usual Obama talks in big glossy terms, but the devil is in the details. President Obama’s fiscal year 2013 budget calls for a massive $2 trillion tax increase. This amount is not explicitly in the budget because it hides several tax increases in the fine print. Also buried deep in the fine print is the President’s expansion of his cap on itemized deductions, which, unlike in previous years, now applies to tax exemptions and exclusions. At a minimum, President Obama’s cap would include the following exemptions or exclusions:
      State and local bond interest;
      Employer-sponsored health insurance paid for by employers or pre-tax employee dollars;
      Health insurance costs of self-employed individuals;
      Employee contributions to health savings accounts and Archer Medical savings accounts; and
      Contributions to defined-contribution retirement plans and individual retirement arrangements.

      Keep in mind that the high income earners are already automatically getting a 3.6% tax increase because of Obamacare.

      The Congressional Budget Office, the nonpartisan analytic arm of Congress, looked at the president’s 2013 budget and concluded that it would increase the cumulative deficit by $3.5 trillion over its baseline between now and 2022. That greatly undercuts Obama’s argument that he is saving money.

      But the CBO baseline assumed that all of the Bush tax cuts and other tax breaks would expire. It assumed that Congress would stick to the spending caps in the deficit reduction law it passed to avoid a government default. Many, if not most, analysts doubt that the CBO baseline is realistic which even further undercuts the President’s deficit reduction claims.

      However, I do agree with most of your places to find savings. Even though he didn’t get elected, I still also like Connie Mack’s 1% plan. Simply stop all the automatic built-in budget increases and then reduce each department’s budget by 1% per year for about 6 years. There would be a lot of sound and fury and gnashing of teeth, but there is no doubt that there is not a single department or agency in Washington that would be the slightest bit hurt by annual 1% decreases.

      • AdamMos

        President Obama has no interest in eliminating tax deductions for the middle class. Typical Republican BS.His plan generates 1.6 trillion in additional tax revenue by going back to Clinton brackets for the top 2%,the Obamacare tax on people over 250k, raising capital gains and dividend taxes and reducing the gift tax exemption to 3.5mm. Most middle income families do not have significant dividend or capital gains income. This will be the deal and he will get it or better if they decide to go over the cliff, which is fine with him. He does not worry about re election and has the support of the American public. The republicans can suck on it! The jig is up! This is so much fun.

        • montanabill

          Please pay attention. The $1.6 trillion is over 10 years. That is $160 billion applied to $1 trillion deficits per year or $840 billion per year added to the debt at current spending levels. Which would add over $8 trillion to the debt over those same 10 years.

          • AdamMos

            You are absolutely right. We are not raising taxes nearly enough. Perhaps we should take the top two tax rates up to 75%. Now we are talking about serious deficit reduction.

            Keep in mind that not even Ryan’s plan balanced the budget until 2040. That meant just slowing the deficit down until then. Nobody is seriously proposing that we reduce spending and raise taxes so abruptly to balance the budget in even 10 years. Every economist and even Romney said that would have catastrophic effect on the economy.

          • montanabill

            The only real solution to getting the deficit and the debt down is economic growth. Without it, either increasing taxes, substantially cutting spending or both cannot be done without some painful impact to our citizens and to the current economy. The President has failed over the last four years to come up with any plan that has resulted or will result in economic growth. His threats, take-over of healthcare and excessive spending have resulted in the very predictable continual downward spiral of the economy. If he had simply gone to being a cheerleader instead of a liberal activist, people’s minds would have been taken off the divisive politics and recovery would have been well on the way by now.

            Kicking the can down the road on spending cuts, entitlement reform and, yes, even raising taxes on everyone, simply means that when the day of reckoning finally arrives, the results will be granted to be catastrophic.

          • AdamMos

            The recovery is underway. Over 5 miilion new private sector jobs created in the last 30 months. A stock market that has doubled since he took office. Unemployment numbers heading south. GDP growth for the 3rd quarter at 2.7% compared to the last quarter of 2008 when it contracted by 9%. Health Care premiums increasing at a much lower rate. The housing market is rebounding. And he has done this in spite of all the republican obstructionism. Amazing!!!!!

          • montanabill

            Kool-Aid. Compare the data with other recoveries in our history. Determine if any of the ‘progress’ had anything at all to do with the massive government spending. See if the train is still leaving the station faster than you are running.

          • AdamMos

            It is hard to compare this recovery to other recessions since this was the worst recession since the great depression. If you compare this recovery to the great depression then this recovery has been stellar. We also have a party (Republicans ) that did everything possible to stall this recovery. Disgusting but fortunately they failed. GOP RIP

          • montanabill

            You are still buying the Kool-Aid. Get a little more open minded and do a little research away from far left sites.

      • Replying to montanabill –

        And true to form, you will still allow WELFARE FOR THE WEALTHY to continue far into the future.

        The American public spoke LOUDLY during the election. We want the wealthy to carry a more fair and balanced share of the taxes we spend.


        Why should a secretary have ALL of her income taxed at roughly 15% JUST FOR SOCIAL SECURITY, (including the employers portion), when the Billionaire who owns the company only pays the Social Security taxes on an extremely small portion of his or her income?

        Allowing the tax rate to go back up to 39.6% on the highest income earners still adds less than 4% to their tax rate.

        Far less than the 15% they save by not paying Social Security taxes on all their income like the secretary must pay.

        Of course, in your mind, that is fair.

        • montanabill

          You haven’t been paying attention. I have no use for business incentives or special tax breaks for them. If you are referring to people keeping more of the money they earned as WELFARE FOR THE WEALTHY, then you simply don’t understand capitalism.

          Obviously, you don’t know that Obamacare did lift Medicare limits on high income people who effectively already have received a 3.6% tax increase.
          The billionaire, or in my case, something less, pays not only his own SS, but he also effectively pays the employer half for every employee. Both SS and Medicare.

          You fully represent the lack of education provided by public schooling.

          • Lisztman

            @montanabill: Ahem.

            I understand capitalism very well. And, in all probability, I’ve been understanding it for a lot more years than yourself.

            “Keeping more of the money they earned…” Yes. It’s welfare for the wealthy. The mere fact that Joe Sixpack’s meager savings in a day-of-deposit account is “income” whereas your investment account’s dividends are “capital gains” at a preferred treatment of 15% is welfare for the wealthy. If Joe brings his $20/week to an investment firm he’ll be laughed out of the place.

            I am pretty well-off as Americans go. But I STILL don’t have the wherewithal to park cash in tax-free havens overseas. Or to hire accountants and lawyers to help me hide income from taxation. Or any of a vast number of other perks and loopholes already provided to the wealthy to shield their income from “fair share taxation”.

            Personally — I’d give Boehner a choice: a) Adjust the tax tables upwards, especially on the top bracket, or b) Treat every bit of personal revenue realized in a given year as income, and remove every deduction except the basic middle-class “mortgage” (with limits), “healthcare”, “charitable contributions”, “state/local taxes”, 401k, and… I probably missed one without going back to last year’s Schedule A.

            You’re confusing (or equating) corporate welfare and wealthy-personal welfare. They both stink.

            Re: your “Medicare limits — 3.6% tax increase” from where? I think you can make this math work only if a “rich” person suddenly gets a severe hospital bill and has to pay more. If s/he doesn’t go to the doctor, where is the tax increase? The average Medicare cost increase probably averages to something SUBSTANTIALLY smaller than 3.6%.

            As an employer (which it appears you are) — your accountants have long since already figured the SS percentage per employee into the costs of doing business. Were that to disappear tomorrow, would you give it to the employee as income? Probably not. Would you hire another employee? Perhaps. Just as likely not, if you’re already running a tight ship. So you’ll probably pocket further profit. But the employer has been kicking in a share since dirt, and you knew about it when you built your business, and it’s part of the cost of doing business, so stop squawking about it.

          • montanabill

            I’m afraid I have to disagree about welfare for the wealthy. Wealth doesn’t belong to a government to be doled out. It belongs to those who earn it, in whatever legal fashion and in whatever quantity. Free people enter into a contract with their government to pay taxes in return for services. As a society, we have agreed to accept a level of regulation in order to avoid a tyranny of the wealthy. We have seen the extreme of unregulated capitalism. We have also seen the extreme of unregulated government, though fortunately not here, not yet, but inching ever closer (much bigger inches the last 4 years).

            I do have the wherewithal to move money overseas, but since I don’t invest out of country and apparently don’t have sense enough to protect myself from possible U.S. failure, I don’t have any out of country accounts, yet.

            Obamacare removes the cap on Medicare deposits which adds a 3.6% tax to the majority of my income which will put my contribution well into 6 figures.

            You are making a lot of assumptions about how I might run my businesses. The real answer to what I would do if not forced to contribute to employee SS would depend on the business situation at that time. Since I already contribute 15% of salary to their 401K’s, most likely I would use the money to either expand or look for another opportunity.

            My SAT’s of 55 years ago were good enough to get me into any college I could afford. I had to forego scholarships at a couple simply because even with the help, I was stilling paying my own way for the balance and it was simply too much. I worked my way through taking 8 years and 5 universities, and have achieved advanced degrees in math, physics and computer engineering. I taught graduate engineering classes at a major university for a couple of years. One of the reasons for taking so long is that I wanted a complete education so I took 2 semesters of economics, several of world and American history, numerous literature, writing, logic, art, religion and others outside the world of math and science. Public schools and colleges were different then. No politics.

      • The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projections are usually very accurate and reliable, but I think it is important to note that their latest projections assume the current tax baseline will remain unchanged. Obviously, if the tax rate for our highest earners, the capital gains tax rate, and estate taxes for those with assets that exceed $3.5M go up, everything will change accordingly, especially on the revenue side. It is also important to note that some of the increases are influenced by President Obama’s decision to reclassify transportation from discretionary to mandatory, and increases in entitlement spending that has nothing to do with anything President Obama has done. The latter is influenced, in part, by the 2003 MEDICARE Part D reform, a high number of baby boomers retiring, and demographic changed influenced by a low fertility rate that will reduce the contributor/beneficiary ratio from 8:1 down to 2:1. Needless to say, the latter will be unsustainable.
        According to the CBO the 2012 budget deficit is expected to be $1.2T. It is expected to decline to around $930B in 2013, and will continue to go down until 2022, when it is expected to go back up again.
        On the issue of spending reductions, the first thing I would do is a 5% budget cut for all agencies – except perhaps our intelligence agencies – effective immediately. Civil Service and contractor managers keep intentional vacancies to minimize impact to workers when Reductions in Force are mandated, we also engaged in spending sprees towards the end of the Fiscal Year to ensure our budgets were spent to avoid spending cuts the next year. Another are for potential savings is the civil servant/contractor ratio. Civil servants are responsible for providing a vision or direction for the agency, contracting, budget management and oversight. Unfortunately, that is hardly the case and it is not unusual to find civil servants and contractors performing duplicate functions.
        My point is that there are ways to reduce spending without eliminating or reducing the benefits our most vulnerable citizens receive which, by the way, is not welfare. We paid for our SS and MEDICARE benefits are we are not entitled to receive the benefits we were promised in return.

        • montanabill

          I would also like to see a 5% cut, but you can see how hard it is to even get the automatic increases stopped.

          Unfortunately, along the way, the original contract between the people and government which is Social Security has been broken many times. It was originally to be an income supplement to retirement savings. Now, for far too many people, it has become their only source of retirement income. When established, most people lived about 5 years after retirement and the plan was based on that model. That age has increased substantially and most people have received every dollar that was deposited for them after a little more than 7 years of SS benefits. From then on, they are receiving someone else’s money. There are also many more categories of recipients than were originally intended, resulting in many getting payments who never contributed, or getting the payments that actuarially should have covered the recipients who lived longer. It has broken the model.

          Medicare is a broken system. If pays too little for services and is gamed by too many. If our government can’t manage a program like Medicare, imagine what Obamacare is going to be like in few years.

          • Lisztman

            Sorry, montana, your perspective on the origins of SS is slightly skewed. In the 1920s people saved their money for retirement (if they lived that long) in bank accounts or “Wall Street”. Following the crash of 1929, resulting in the instant zeroes created by the failure of numerous companies and banks, uncountable numbers of people were thrown into instant poverty.

            Social Security was devised as a way of ensuring, specifically, that people were NOT reliant on personal savings to avoid the “poorhouse” — essentially, living on the dole, reliant upon either the government or the charity of others (and, at the time, those “others” were nowhere near sufficiently plentiful to meet the demand).

            Social Security was not designed to ensure living in broad comfort. But it WAS designed to meet the basic needs of life. And there are millions living “okay” today on just a SS check. We as a nation have always pressed our citizens to otherwise salt away monies for retirement. But you perhaps don’t appreciate that if you’re struggling on minimum or near-minimum wage you don’t really have any excess to put away. Social Security is about all there is.

            The ONLY reason that SS is even on the table is that some smartasses in Congress in the 70’s noticed all that money over there in the SS Trust fund — and decided that the government needed to borrow against it. That money, borrowed by the Treasury, has to be repaid to the system. It is wrong to say that any change should be made to the detriment of those who contributed in this contract with the government.

            As far as “other categories” — I have no issue with addressing those problems — but you have to separate those problems from the basic SS contract.

            Regarding Medicare — broken? Hardly. Gamed? Absolutely (see the ads for all those free motorized wheelchairs). But regarding your comment on Obamacare — there is NOTHING in Obamacare that has the government managing anything — except for the collection of the penalty (“tax” per CJ Roberts) for non-coverage and the distribution thereof back into the insurance system.

            But Obamacare is, for the most part, merely a set of rules by which the insurance companies must play for the benefit of 100% of the citizens. In its simplest essence, it states that insurance companies have to insure the whole pool. They’re not allowed to choose to collect premiums only from those for whom they’re least likely to pay out anything.

          • montanabill

            I believe my statement was that SS was created to be a ‘supplement’ to personal savings. It was not intended to be your sole source of retirement income. The basic SS contract, as originally developed, did not include provision for people who never contributed, nor people living longer than 5 years after retirement, nor for disability.

            I fully appreciate how difficult it is for people struggling at or near minimum wage. I did that myself for some years. However, if you spend more than the first few years of your working life at that level, it means you have made some very bad decisions, that you have a responsibility, not only to yourself, but also to society, to correct.

            I call Medicare broken because it fails to pay adequate compensation for items covered. If Medicare truly paid full value for services, it would have been broke by now.

          • Lisztman

            “if you spend more than the first few years of your working life at that level, it means you have made some very bad decisions, that you have a responsibility, not only to yourself, but also to society, to correct.”

            Sorry to deflate your argument. No, I’m not at that level. I’m up in the top quintile. But I’m speaking for a LOT of people who have NOT made bad decisions. Believe it or not, there are MANY in this country who are simply not capable of more than bagging groceries (or equivalent) for minimum wage. It is not their fault that they were not blessed with a better IQ. In fact, I tip my hat to them for working hard for income and pride.

            So I iterate my position that someone working at, or near, minimum wage, has little hope of saving for retirement. Sweeping the floor in the diner. For $8/hr. Let me see… if s/he can save $10/wk, eq 500/yr, = 20,000 across 40 years (today’s dollars). How long will that last in retirement? SS was not designed to allow a retiree to live in luxury. It’s subsistence level, but subsistence it is, by itself. And as it was designed to do.

            And there are many jobs that are not minimum wage, or even poverty level, but might as well be. Interesting side point how many of them are filled by immigrants (legal or illegal) — because no one else either wants those jobs or can afford them. That in and of itself tells you something.

            I spent a summer in HS working for agricultural minimum. $1/hr at a time when the “regular” minimum was $1.60. That was a travesty to the hardworking (legal, I think) immigrants with whom I worked. They were above the ag min, but not by a whole lot.

            Meantime, please remember that a 100 IQ is average. For every 120 out there, there’s an 80. Don’t slam those who are working as hard as they can, please.

          • montanabill

            I have always excused those who were born with problem or suffered an illness or an injury not of their own making. Those people, however, comprise a very small percentage of the total. You are simply using that argument as an excuse for everyone so that there can be ‘no bad decisions’. Everyone who is fit has arrived at their station in life by their decisions. IQ might play a part, but not if you don’t use whatever IQ or talent you possess.

            You are right about jobs that are generally filled only by immigrants. Most are hard work. I’ve spent my time in potato fields, apple orchards and bucking hay which pay only for production. I’ve also spent my time in feed mills, pot scrubbing, dish washing and other minimum wage jobs. It is why, when I see a former son-in-law (a grandchild’s father) stay on unemployment and get it for 3 years because he won’t take any job except one like he had, I have no ‘compassion’. He dropped out of school in junior high, but finally got a GED as an adult. But he couldn’t bring himself to take a job he thought was beneath him. He knows I am a business owner and well off. He doesn’t know how well off because we live a fairly modest lifestyle by choice. I could have easily helped him after he got laid off. But I had already seen years of his bad choices and so I wasn’t about to do anything until he showed me he was really trying. He didn’t. He will retire and die on SS. He could have won in the lottery of life if he had just made a few good decisions.

            One aspect of my story is that I am willing and able to help people who need it, but I must be convinced that it is help not a hand-out. I can review each situation and each charity. When the government is used as the vehicle for help, it is far more hand-out than help up. For my perspective, our government is largely responsible for the masses on welfare which, in the end, will be the ultimate down fall of our society. We had substantial government assistance to people following WW II, but in return for aid, something had to be accomplished. We have waived the accomplishment aspect. Now you simply get welfare, either no strings attached or with no one checking for compliance with a requirement.

      • Where can one go to view the details, including the small print, of this bill? that is what I am curious about. right now it is very hard to trust any government offical, after they are elected, they are only in it for themselves. I have as yet to see any government offical to vote for what their constitutants want. The truth of the matter is our government has become so currupt.

    • middleclasstaxpayer

      Brilliant! End subsidies to Oil companies…Once we do that, big oil will have zero incentive to explore & middle-eastern companies will again be sole suppliers to US, at vastly HIGHER prices. Then end subsidies to Pharmaceutical firms…result will be zero incentive to explore for new meds & new cures, at same time Obamacare will discourage students from going into medicine…an incredibly “smart” plan for the US population! Between ideas like this and Obama’s “plans” for job creation (???) , we may as well all just move to Cuba and give the little we have left to Castro!

      • AdamMos

        See ya,

        Hope you like the weather in Cuba. We need to get off the oil all together.
        Big Pharma will continue to research to pad their profits for future. Capitalism works without corporate welfare.
        Will take our chances with Obama.
        Give my best to Castro

      • What happened to the good old American energy and know how? The billion dollar profit oil companies can’t find any way to survive without subsidies. Is that it?

      • Do you honestly believe Exxon-Mobil will stop exploration, drilling, refining and selling oil if we stop subsidizing their business. The only negative impact may be higher prices at the pump, but even that is a mixed bag as it may encourage people to use public transportation, move from suburbia to inner cities where subways and stores/shops are in close proximity to residential areas. It may also encourage habits such as car pooling. The end result would be less dependence on fossil fuels, which would not only help our trade imbalance, but may help slow down the inexorable effects of global warming. Yes, the same global warming that was ridiculed by the Bush administraton when they paraded dozens of oil company scientists to discredit what should be evident to anyone capable of comparing images of our polar caps and glaciers 25 years ago with those taken today.
        Neither the oil companies, nor the pharmaceuticals or the agri-business will abandon their businesses if we stop subsidizing them, the way communist Cuba does to their hapless hapless private sector. Subsidies are a crutch that, like welfare, stifles initiative and a desire to succeed because of our own abilities and commitment. U.S. industry did not become the global industrial catalyst it has been throughout the last century because of corporate welfare, they have dominated the global market because of our business practices, work ethics, and resourcefulness.
        Quite frankly, I am surprised to see Republicans, who pretend to be conservatives, insisting on the retention of corporate welfare.

      • Replying to middleclasstaxpayer –


        Maybe living under Castro for a while will do you some good.

        • middleclasstaxpayer

          Thanks for travel advice. Unfortunately, none of us will have to go anywhere to experience a Communist-like environment. Think about it….demonize the well-to do…BEEN THERE! Turn the many against the few…DONE THAT! Redistribution of wealth…..will pick up greatly in intensity soon. Oh sure, it’s easy to say..”tax the rich” but when their resources run out, the tax man will be coming for YOU! Then you may think differently about your hero! Stalin & Lenin would be proud though!

      • Lisztman

        Ah, yes, mct. You have a brilliant comprehension of business models. Big Oil loses its government subsidies — so they will suddenly decide to stop locating new sources of revenue. Pharm loses its government perks so they are going to shrug and settle for decreased profits… ????

        Where does it say, how do you figure, that Obamacare will “discourage students from going into medicine”? There’s a disconnect there that I utterly fail to fathom.

        What you’re offering is the Republican mule-mindset from the right. Continue the subsidies for corporate America and to hell with its citizens and taxpayers.

        • middleclasstaxpayer

          You logic is the same brilliant thinking that the Bakers Union used to advise its 18,500 workers to strike against Hostess…ie: someone ELSE will pick up the slack.
          RESULT: 18,500 workers are now OUT OF WORK….you can’t expect others (icluding businesses) to work hard for free. When you reduce incentives (like reducing pay for doctors after the dozen years they DO work for free or slave wages) this causes LESS students to pursue medicine, thanks to the great govt ideas like Obamacare! The government can’t even run something as simple as its Post Office, so how is it going to manage the world’s (formerly) best healthcare system???

          • Lisztman

            Again, mct, your brain is fried by paying too much attention to what they’re saying on Fox News.

            If you research what happened to Hostess — it followed the Bain Capital model. Several rounds of buyouts over the last years — and in each case the leveraging took capital out of the company. Over the last year or so the executives of Hostess awarded themselves exorbitant (200% and more) pay raises — in the MILLIONS of dollars ranges. Taking lots more cash out of the company.

            When the people actually DOING the work of producing Hostess products asked for some fair treatment (having already suffered pay cuts in recent years) they are faulted for having destroyed the company. Do your homework.

            Once more: I repeat: Obamacare is not designed to MANAGE anything — except the extraction of penalties (or, per CJ Roberts, the “tax”), via the IRS, from those who refuse to participate in the national health pool until, of course, they need help — and expect everyone else to pay for it. I thought you were against paying for everyone else’s benefits! I guess you enjoy subsidizing those who show up at the ER with no insurance…

            And I’ll state categorically that there are VERY few who go into medicine (purse an MD) because they want to get “rich”. They wish to stimulate their brains; they wish to help society. They want to do it because they CAN. I’m not saying that they don’t expect to be properly compensated. But you are somehow deluded that Obamacare is/will-be responsible for suddenly cutting their compensation… Go read the law. Or a good, full, summary of it. You’re drinking Rush Limbaugh-flavored Kool-Aid.

          • middleclasstaxpayer

            You’re DREAMING if you think the Union in Hostess situation requested anything reasonable….look at unionization efforts in NYC… workers making $7.25 per hour are DEMANDING a more than 100% raise to $15. PER HOUR! If everyone did this, the US economy would tank immediately, not that it’s not heading in that direction anyway. You are drinking the “cool-aid” and can’t see the forest for the trees! Keep dreaming, as no one will be able to change your mine until everything crashes, and then you (and Obama) will simply blame someone else….maybe it’ll be Geo Bush’s fault again. You folks are sick!

          • Lisztman

            Ummm. You’re dreaming again, mct. Everything crashed in 2008 (pushed by the years before) and we’ve been picking up and reassembling the pieces ever since.

            Go back to your room and take a rest. The nurse will be by shortly with your meds…

          • middleclasstaxpayer

            Unemployment under your “hero” has been at record lows for past 4 years, despite his weak & misguided efforts to contrary….I wonder if he EVER met with his “jobs” council?? What a joke. Sad part is, after 4 MORE years of non-success, he will still be blaming Bush instead of looking in the mirror at the real loser!

          • Lisztman

            @mct: Unsupported claims; an error (I believe) in the construction of the first phrase, resulting in meaning exactly the opposite of what I think you meant to say; there IS success — all indicators are trending in the proper direction, as opposed to the direction they were taking in late 2008 and early 2009 before President Obama got a hold of the reins… And I missed the joke, whatever it was.

            You really need to get your act together and find something of substance to say before you open your mouth.

          • middleclasstaxpayer

            Obama formed his “jobs Council”, then failed to ever meet with it for at least 6 months, probably more. Just formed the “council” to make it appear he was serious. The man has NEVER had a private sector job…one semester teaching one class in law is NOT a private sector job. “Community organizing” is NOT a job. Bill Clinton spoke the obvious truth during 2008 campaign when he called Obama “THE AMATEUR! Unemployment has “inched” down just recently, depending on how you crunch the numbers, but when 2013 arrives and Obamacare settles in, the stuff will hit the fan…it won’t take long to see the real damage an amateur can wreck on our economy. Just stay tuned…even you will be forced to admit the awful truth when it bcomes unavoidable.

          • Lisztman

            @mct: You forgot to mention Benghazi.

          • middleclasstaxpayer

            By the tone of your comment, you appear to take the murder of four brave US citizens as some sort of afterthought, just like officials in the WH, including our president, who watched the entire assault & murders, but did NOT lift a finger to help….It has been reported that reinforcements were within one hours reach and ready to respond, but were told to stand down. Only the Commander in Chief could give such an order when Americans were under attack on US soil. Obama realized if his rescue failed, it might cost him his precious reelection a la Carter, so he chose to do nothing and let four brave Americans be murdered as he watched. What a DISGRACE!

          • Lisztman

            The “tone of my comment” was meant to suggest that you’ve taken up the ultra-right-wing mantras. Who deny facts. Or make up their own. (Most of what you stated there is not fact.)

            Re Benghazi: I’m not sure which reports you’re quoting. The ones I respect are the ones that stated, in essence, that the CIA was running things there. I STRONGLY doubt that the CIA is going to share clandestine stuff with 300 million random Americans, especially those with insufficient faculties to understand that. My short and quick answer: “Forget Benghazi. It’s a non-starter.”

            And because I know you won’t — I’ll tell you straight out that events like that happen every five or ten years, due to a variety of circumstances, and always in the outposts of less-than-civilized civilization. The right wing (fueled by Fox News and Hannity/Limbaugh/et al) has to latch on to “Something” to indicate how poor a job a given individual is doing. Usually, as in this case, the “something” is highly partisan and entirely unwarranted. Go find another tree to bark at. There’s nothing in this one.

          • middleclasstaxpayer

            So the murder of four brave Americans on US soil in Benghazi is a “non-starter” for liberals…if they were YOUR brothers, or YOUR sons or husbands, you might think differently. And you also think the murder of 4 brave Americans, which was witnesses in real time by WH and president, who did NOT lift a finger to help, is “partisan & unwarrented.” Well at least we know where patriotism & concern for our brave citizen is sorely lacking. Thanks for your vivid clarification.

          • Lisztman

            I have not heard you complaining about the murder of 4000 brave American soldiers in Iraq who were sent there looking for WMDs that did not exist.

            The situation in Benghazi? House Republicans earlier quashed requests for increased security for diplomatic outposts and CUT their budgets.

            Go find a different tree to gnaw on, mct. Your obstinacy is truly annoying.

          • middleclasstaxpayer

            Even fellow liberal & favorite democrat Bill Clinton accepted the logic of WMDs at the time……I guess you consider him a fool also?

          • Lisztman

            No. GWB asserted that there were WMD’s in Iraq. Which we found, after the fact, to have been a lie. A purposeful lie. GWB wanted into Iraq and this was his means.

            We all accepted the logic of WMDs. We didn’t understand that that particular President was capable of looking all of us straight in the eye and telling a whopper. For which thousands of American citizens have paid with their lives.

          • middleclasstaxpayer

            Search the internet for the real facts…BILL CLINTON agreed about WMD’s in Iraq, so even liberals thought it so. You can’t change history. Sorry pal!

          • Lisztman

            Yes. He agreed, given the faulty and misleading information he received from the GWB Administration. Had GWB told the truth, Clinton & Company would have thought otherwise.
            You can’t change history. You can acknowledge the lie that created it.

          • middleclasstaxpayer

            The at-the-time believable information came from people on the ground, and many democrats (incuding Bill Clinton) & republicans believed it to be factual. It’s very easy, after the fact, to dismiss it as erroneous, but “at the time” most believed its veracity and acted accordingly. Saddam was a monster who outfitted 100’s of suicide bombers with free vests if they would sacrifice their lives for his cause. He was more than capable of utilizing WMDs if he had them. We did the right thing, knowing what we knew at the time.

          • Lisztman

            We did absolutely the wrong thing.
            The “people on the ground” to whom you refer — whom Congress believed — were the minions sent out by Bush to propagate the lie. He had NO reasonable evidence to conclude that there were, indeed, WMDs. If you have a source (other than Fox News) to support your contention that people on the ground (presumably, in Iraq) knew of WMDs, please provide it.
            Apparently you still believe the lie.

          • middleclasstaxpayer

            If liberal icon & hero Bill Clinton BELIEVED IT, why do you feel that the info was questionable. You trust President Clinton, don’t you? Then his judgement should be acceptable as well. If the info later turned out to be incorrect, hindsight doesn’t make the original decision wrong. Just an honest error. Of course you and your kind will ALWAYS want to blame someone else for your and others failures. It’s much easier to sleep well at night when all that goes wrong in world is SOMEONE ELSES FAULT. May as well blame ALL the world’s ills on GWB. And of course, record unemployment, the largest US DEFICITS EVER, and so on, couldn’t possibly be that idiot Obama’s fault. He’s at the mercy of “others” as you see it. Best of luck with that point of view,

          • Lisztman

            Circular logic, mct. You’re peeing into the wind here.
            Clinton, and everyone else, believed the lies because they didn’t expect that the President (GWB) could/would lie to them. (But he did.)

            If it’s my fault, I will say it’s my fault. If it’s Obama’s fault, I will say it’s Obama’s fault. But if something is Bush’s fault, I’ll say it’s Bush’s fault, without reservation.

            Go to ANY one of the business analysis pages and you will see that the current economic conditions STARTED in 2008. And reached their depths in early 2009, LONG before President Obama’s policies began to have any effect. Yes. GWB’s no-tax and spend-too-much policies got us into this mess.

            You don’t have to believe it. Go watch some more Fox News. They’ll make you happy. You WON’T get any satisfaction from me. If you wish to debate, go sharpen your sword. It’ll help. To date, you have no facts; only unsubstantiated wishes.

          • middleclasstaxpayer

            So recession reached its depth in 2009, LONG BEFORE Obama’s policies began to have any effect. So his policies must be working by now. Let’s see, unemployment inched back towards 8% (at 7.9 crrently), jobs grown is weakest since great depression, and many very large firms are cutting back further in 2013 (FEDEX, UPS, CITI-Group)….jobs losses with just these 3 is over 35,ooo folks….add the help of labor unions (obama likes these guys), and you can add another 18,500 losses because of “great advice” from Union representing Hostess bakeries, largest bakery in world, now bankrupt because of greedy (but Obama supoported) laboor unions, in just this one month. Great record! Wonder what he’s planned for an encore? Maybe he’ll finally decide to meet with his “jobs council” after a 9+ month lapse.

          • Lisztman

            Go read the fine print. Hostess ownership accused the union of busting Hostess. Go read where excess profits were extracted and shipped out during several prior buyouts. Go read where the senior management awarded themselves extreme pay raises (like, 200% and more) within the last six months. Sure sounds like a company in trouble, doesn’t it? And you have the temerity (translation: balls) to blame it on the union?

          • middleclasstaxpayer

            It was the Hostess UNION that recommended strike! If the owners were making so much, WHY would they want to go out of business?? And by the way, if you own a company you built from scratch,who is supposed to benefit from all that hard work. Obviously you never built any businesses, and therefore you never ADDED to our economic growth by creating jobs for others, you were just a “taker.”

          • Lisztman

            Yes. The union recommended strike. Because management was insisting on further pay cuts. In addition to those already implemented over the last few years.
            In the meantime, out-of-town (read: vulture capital) ownership had already milked all the money out of the company. What little remained was allocated to management (CEO, GM, CFO, etc.) in terms of humongous pay raises — HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of dollars — over the last year.
            So any BS that says the union killed the company is exactly that: BS.
            Stop reading the Fox Business News report on the subject. Go find some alternate media coverage and you’ll find the truth.

            If you own a company you built from scratch, you usually benefit from all that hard work (I’m presuming your company is successful). Once you pay your “fair share” to society you deserve to keep what you’ve earned. At the same time, presuming that you have a “flock” of employees who have helped you make that business profitable, it is your duty to “take care” of your employees.

            About your closing insult: I have done my share of adding to economic growth over my career by working, designing electronics, for 38+ years. Value added to the company’s products. Including patents in my name (ownership of same transferred to my company). If you insist on calling me a “taker” you’re an even sadder excuse for a human being than I previously thought.

          • middleclasstaxpayer

            OK, so you feel it is important that owners “give back” to society. Please share your opinion of the honorable Nancy Pelosi & her husbank running a large offshore business that likely exploits its workers based upon local customs. I’m willing to bet you don’t find HER actions suitable for criticism.

          • Lisztman

            OK, mct. I have searched for information on said “large offshore business” and can’t find any reference to it. If you would care to name said company (if you can) I’ll read up and get back to you. If you can’t (and I suspect you or Fox News made this up) I’ll write you off as a TOTAL liar and professional troll.

            I read, in its entirety, the following article from 2007 (as Nancy Pelosi was about to become Speaker of the House) — which dissects Paul Pelosi’s business investments. No indication of that large offshore business.

            I repeat — if you don’t name it, you’ve manufactured yet another piece of slander.

          • middleclasstaxpayer

            My comments are now being “reviewed” by the Memo…..I guess this is how you & they control any unflattering remarks made about liberals. Great discussion group!

          • Lisztman

            I control nothing on this site. I DID ask you to tell the truth, and back up accusations with references and/or sources.

          • middleclasstaxpayer

            I’ll try again……I read something in the San Francisco Chronicle about Pelosi’s husband 5-6-7 or more yrs ago, and his/their offshore business, I think in pineapples for Dole. Now unable to locate reference, but have two week off coming up & I will find it. In Meantime, try THIS on for size: While Nancy Pelosi has been a longtime supporter of the United Farm Workers, the small vineyard she and her husband own in St. Helena doesn’t hire union labor to pick the grapes there. Likewise, the couple have investments in the boutique hotel in Rutherford and the upscale Italian restaurant chain, which aren’t union shops.
            “If your view is that labor unions are essential to protecting workers’ rights, you ought to have the attitude that we really need a union” in your own investments,
            This reference is in SAME 2007 SF Chronicle article you looked at. How did you MISS this revelation about Pelosi family? Your comments on the hypocricy here?

          • Lisztman

            I read all that. To unionize, or not unionize, in states that “recognize” the right of workers to organize, is the right of the employees, not the business of the employer. Should the Pelosis’ employees have organized, I doubt that they would have squawked too hard.
            I have a small investment account for retirement and a 401K. I do not go through them item by item to ensure “proper political thinking” of each principal represented within those accounts.

            Why not go do something worthwhile, like ask the Republicans in the Senate why they turned down an international treaty, modeled on the Americans for Disabilities Act? Why not ask who is funding the fight against ensuring that the “very rich” make appropriate and suitable income tax payments? Why not ask a Republican House why they can’t help disabled Veterans, especially those who are disabled as a result of their service to our Nation?

            In short, I think your arguments re the Pelosis are rather picayune. Why not put your effort into something truly worthwhile?

          • middleclasstaxpayer

            While searching for an answer to your previous question, uncovered this tidbit on your beloved Nancy Pelosi: As detailed by Bloomberg, “Pelosi and her husband, Paul, with a net worth estimated at $40 million, bought shares in the initial public offering of credit-card company Visa Inc. in 2008, when Pelosi was speaker of the House… They bought the shares just before legislation died that would have limited the fees credit-card issuers could charge retailers. The shares more than doubled in the next two months.”

            Pelosi has also invited San Francisco investment banker William Hambrecht to serve as an expert at economic forums on Capitol Hill on multiple occasions, even speaking to reporters by his side at the U.S. Capitol, without disclosing the fact that Hambrecht is her son’s boss and her husband Paul’s business partner. One of the business deals struck by Paul Pelosi and Hambrecht yielded more than $100,000 in income for the Pelosi family in 2010.

            While serving as Speaker of the House, Pelosi repeatedly overlooked corruption by her fellow partisans. The evidence suggests this “ethics blind spot” extends too frequently to her own activities. Pelosi’s penchant for abusing the perks of her office is reprehensible. ANY COMMENTS???

          • Lisztman

            Why are you chasing Nancy Pelosi? Do you have an axe to grind, here?

            The quick answer is that I don’t personally have the resources to dig deeply into her personal finances and the business connections of her husband. I doubt that you do, either. I DO know that for some reason you’re chasing her. I’ll note for the record that there are 534 other politicians in Congress — and I can GUARANTEE that if you “investigate” any one of them you’ll find business connections.

            Re: Visa. Did Nancy (I wouldn’t ordinarily use first names out of respect, but do, here, to distinguish from husband Paul) buy the Visa shares at an IPO, or did Paul? Did either of them know what would happen in subsequent legislation? Was “buying Visa’s IPO” a fiscally bad decision had the “legislation” to which you refer been passed? For that matter, were the shares recommended by EITHER of them? Or was their investment in Visa recommended by a financial advisor? You have too little information to proceed. Were there anything truly inappropriate about the behavior, it would have been long ago pursued by many with far more acumen than yourself.

            I can GUARANTEE that those on the inside know of Nancy’s business connection to Mr. Hambrecht. That sort of connection can’t possibly be a “secret” that you’ve just unearthed. If one needs professional assistance, s/he goes to someone s/he knows and trusts over choosing someone unknown, or someone of uncertain trustworthiness. What’s your point?

            Neither of the above is “corruption”. Go find something else to talk about. Sorry, mct. I don’t have the time to continue to debunk your partisan witch hunts. This is my last reply. Should you choose to continue (in this forum), you’ll be talking to nobody. Write a letter to your Congressperson.

          • middleclasstaxpayer

            If Mitt Romney has “benefited” as did Pelosi’s, liberals would be all over him w/criticisms….If Romney has promoted a son as Pelosi’s did liberals would be howling foul! Just an observation. You didn’t comment on Nancy Pelosi’s apparent disdain for union labor in her and husbands winery, chain of restaurants, etc. Guess it’s OK to push for unionization for others, but avoid it in your OWN businesses if you are a Pelosi. Makes perfect sense. Do as I sayNOT as I do. You claim to criticize liberals if appropriate, but I don’t see that happening?? What did I miss?

          • Lisztman

            Circular logic, mct. You’re peeing into the wind here.
            Clinton, and everyone else, believed the lies because they didn’t expect that the President (GWB) could/would lie to them. (But he did.)

            If it’s my fault, I will say it’s my fault. If it’s Obama’s fault, I will say it’s Obama’s fault. But if something is Bush’s fault, I’ll say it’s Bush’s fault, without reservation.

            Go to ANY one of the business analysis pages and you will see that the current economic conditions STARTED in 2008. And reached their depths in early 2009, LONG before President Obama’s policies began to have any effect. Yes. GWB’s no-tax and spend-too-much policies got us into this mess.

            You don’t have to believe it. Go watch some more Fox News. They’ll make you happy. You WON’T get any satisfaction from me. If you wish to debate, go sharpen your sword. It’ll help. To date, you have no facts; only unsubstantiated wishes.

          • middleclasstaxpayer

            Let me get this straight…when GWB administration provided WMD info, it was completely false, BUT, when Obama admin provides info, say on Benghazi, it’s fully accurate????? You have a lot in common with Rip Van Winkle!

          • Lisztman

            The GWB administration provided 100% false WMD info. It knew that it had manipulated the info. But used that to drum up support for an invasion of Iraq.

            Re: Benghazi:
            1) The magnitude of a rogue dictator such as Saddam holding WMDs is FAR greater than the magnitude of the murder of 4 diplomats and/or spies in a remote, volatile, outpost.
            2) It has already been stated that the CIA was conducting operations in Benghazi. Rather typical, wouldn’t you say, to collect intelligence in that type of location?
            3) The CIA is NOT, repeat, NOT, going to share information with every American. Not me. Not you. And with good reason.

            The Obama administration has probably let out about as much info regarding Benghazi as it will. For the reasons above. Deal with it. It’s STILL not on the same plane with Saddam Hussein, WMD’s, and the loss of 3000+ American lives in Iraq.

          • Lisztman

            See reply immediately above

    • Mr. Vila
      This country needs more rational thinkers like you. The Bush Era Tax Cuts have done nothing to help the economy. We were told that they would stimulate growth. They did not, the top wage owners did not reinvest in jobs and construction. They just took the money overseas or saved it for themselves. If individuals earning over $250,000.00 do not want to help this economy grow, then we should end the tax cuts for everyone. An, start to invest locally to help our local communities grow. Take your investments out Wall Street, and invest directly in local businesses. Do all your banking in local credit unions, or small local banks. Do not shop in international or national store chains. Give all your business to local stores and shops. If we all did this, we would soon see the top 1% of wage owners change their minds about paying a little more in taxes!
      Dominick keep writing, I like how you think.

      • I agree, WIlliam. Dominick should be a statesman!

    • A single payer system as in Medicare, for the rest of the population would significantly reduce costs. All those company and hospital executives, and those who get sweetheart deals on drugs and equipment, would be the losers.

      • Hopefully that will be the eventual solution to our escalating medical costs. There is simply no justification to support middlemen who do not add anything constructive to the process. I see Obamacare as a first step towards a more equitable and effective healthcare system, but like every other major change, progress can only be achieved incrementally. Unfortunately, the influence of special interests in policy making and our ability to reach an unbiased opinion based on facts is so pervasive that a large segment of our population does not hesitate to support policies that are against their own best interests because of the distortions and fear mongering from those who will be affected by desperately needed changes. In this case, insurance companies, pharmaceuticals and unscrupulous service providers.

        • Why are they protecting the Corporate greed! Just look at how much money HOSTESS is making by claiming bankruptcy. Thousands of people loosing their jobs and they still come out millionaires. That crap about needing money to pay out benefits to employees is bull? The only people getting attractive packages will be management…….Obama better use that pen!

        • S-3

          It ain’t coming fat enough, especialy for people who live in Repugnicant states or states opting out of Obamacare, that’s for sure.

          Violent revolution and anarchist against these middlemen is the only feasible cure for this madness plaguing America at this point, IMHO.

        • Lisztman

          “…a large segment of our population does not hesitate to support policies that are against their own best interests.”

          Exactly, sir. There are FAR too many who accept at face value what they heard on Fox News (merely the most noticeable of many). I have been accused of being, in effect, an overeducated liberal. Guilty as charged. I have a BS. (My wife, the teacher, has an MA because NY requires it of her.) Extended education (including those who do WORK in high school rather than merely putting in the time) forces one to learn to think. To do background research. To digest information from multiple sources.

          There are many reasons that massive numbers subscribe to Fox News or any of a number of conservative rags, online pubs, etc. But it’s usually because that outlet has a “hot button” — be it access to women’s care (perhaps a/k/a “abortion rights), gun ownership, taxes, et al. And since, of course, the favored medium shows “correct” thinking on one topic, it must have all the right answers.

          Throw into the mix the high-volume, high-power, screeching of half-truths and lies — all rhetoric designed to whip up one’s baser instincts, and we suddenly have a large cross-section of this Nation that is willing to accept the “distortions and fear mongering” that you’ve mentioned.

          Personally, I like the Canadian model. If a given media outlet chooses to use the word “News” — it is bound to tell the truth.

          Or go back to what I was taught when I served on my HS newspaper oh, so long ago — if it’s “news” it had better be purely factual; if it’s opinion, it goes on the editorial page and is labeled as such.

          Now… what do we do about ultra-right-wing talk radio?

      • There is much more involved in the high costs of medical care than always blaming it on insurance companies & hospitals. Indeed, the costs of the educated & compassionate people in these professions can be quite high but they are the ones by their education & shills that help us all. There are many other reasons that medical costs are very high: millions of people that choose NOT to buy health insurance, Millions of Illegals getting it free or very cheaply, and the many multi-million dollar frivilous medical lawsuits. Under Obamacare, Millions of Illegals are added to the health care system as well as those that didn’t purchace insurance. The costs under this system will skyrocket and there will not be competition. Meanwhile Obama wants to give Amnesty to Millions of Illegals further draining our resources. This doesn’t make any sense an all.

        • Lisztman

          Sorry, Plznnn.
          You’re buying the right-wing rhetoric.

          You’re forgetting that a high percentage of those “millions of illegals” already participate in the system via employment (whether such employment is legal or not).

          You see “millions added” to the health care system. In a nation of 300+ million citizens, an increase of 3 million represents a total change of 1%. Hardly a number to cause mind-numbing alarm.

          “…as well as those that didn’t purchase insurance.” You’re dead wrong. Those individuals are already in the system. As freeloaders. If one of them falls off a roof and is taken to the ER with compound fractures and a punctured lung — the hospital takes care of him. And the rest of us have to pay (via our insurance premiums and/or individual hospital costs) because the hospital doesn’t have the resources to do it for free.

          Forcing those who, prior to now, have failed to be carried on an insurance plan, or to purchase their own, are now required to do so. This ensures that THAT portion of the total pool is paying its way, bringing DOWN the costs on all the rest of us.

          Re frivolous lawsuits: absolutely. But that has nothing to do with Obamacare. Treat that as a separate issue and do something about it. Wrapping that in with Obamacare is like going to the doctor to be treated for a broken bone and complaining because s/he also noticed that your blood pressure was sky-high and prescribed something to address that — and you see that as part of a “broken bone” invoice…

          Last — if the House leadership truly wishes to engage in a meaningful dialog on the “illegals” problems, GREAT! But tying that into healthcare is a red herring.

        • Lisztman

          deleted by post-er.

      • S-3

        Which is the way it SHOULD be. This is why healthcare sucks in America, period. Also, I am sickened Sout Carolina won’t participare in something useful to America for once like Obamacare. If this state is destroyed by violent revolution and anarchy, it WIL be an act of God, as far as I’m concered, for sleeping with devils like the red state scumfucks controlling us with their pro-corporae, for-profit, minority and women hating BS!! FUCK. THEM. ALL. TO. HELL. AND. CASTRATE. THEM!!

    • I Couldn’t Agree With You More My Friend!!!

    • maybe you should have run for President, you would have had my vote Dominick!

    • montanabill

      Ok, Mr. Rational Thinker, provide us with the details on this great ‘compromise’. Not your suggestions, with which I agree, but the President’s spending cuts and his plan to remove fraud and abuse from Medicare and Medicaid, and in the future, Obamacare. I fear you are imprinting your rational thinking on the President, and he has a different game plan.


    Nothing will happen in Washington until we get rid of the obstructionist Repukelican’ts. You had a chance to get rid of them all (Repukes and Dems) and voted most of them back in. Better luck in 2014–maybe the people will be sick and tired enough of the deadlock and vote them out then. Until then, we are stuck with the same crap congress we had–let the tax cuts expire and then maybe something MIGHT get done.

  • I am so tired of hearing Boehner his bullcrap I could scream. As far as i’m concearned Sob and Gop mean the same. In fact I prefer Sob. They are nicer and lie less.Every time Boehner says “the American People” it is followed by a bare faced lie.We won the election,please dont give in and let them have the victory.

  • dslocum

    Boehner is out of touch with reality! The taxpayers spoke during the election and their speaking now in the polls. Even the great majority of Republicans want the rich to pay their fair share. They need to stop accumulating wealth by stealing from the middle class with Congress’ seal of approval. Do your job, Congress! You take your pay checks.

  • I don’t understand the people out there that think the Rep Party has any concern for the middle class. They show over and over again that they only care about the upper class. They weren’t worried about the dept when they created it but now with a Dem President its become our biggest problem. Where were they when we started two wars gave two tax cuts that were aimed mostly at the rich and a prescription drug plan, none of them were paid for, yet now it all falls at the Dem feet. Somehow its all the Dem fault, wake up America, put the blame were it belongs, with the Rep that put this ball in motion.

  • timetwo

    6 trillion is spent per year on welfare, don’t you think that would be a good place to start cutting?

    • edwardw69

      Define welfare. What programs would that be?

      • highpckts

        He must mean ANYONE getting government help!! Most of the welfare recipients are from southern states and mostly white!!

    • Replying to timetwo –

      Don’t you mean 6 Trillion is being spent on WELFARE FOR THE WEALTHY?

    • Where do you get your figures??? The TOTAL 2011 Budget was only 3.63 Trillion !

    • AdamMos

      You are an idiot. The total budget is 3.6 trillion. True welfare accounts for about 500 billion annually, mostly medicaid. In America, we care for the poor and the disadvantaged.

    • Nothing compared to Corporate Welfare “timetwo, go dig up some some facts and come back. Take you heavily tinted goggles off, just for a few seconds maybe, so you can actually check your facts out some more and the re-post

  • Canistercook

    How about ‘negotiating’ instead of ‘campaigning’ Mr. President. Almost 50% of the country did not vote for you and some are tired of your campaign speeches and are waiting for your leadership and negotiating skills to appear. You continue to try to organize your ‘base’ to use them to attack the other half of the country. Yes we know you are using the ‘rich’ effectively to try and ram through your programs just as Hitler found the Jews and Stalin found his base. Sit down and negotiate Cuts and Taxes both need to be negotiated.

    • zola98

      Cainstercook, take your own advice..sit down and do some research. PO is correct to take his message to the people. Stop denying that thea majority of Americans gave PO a victory ie mandate to implement their wishes ie end Bush’s the tax cut for the rich, take SS and Medicare off the table. SS and Medicare do not have anything to do with the debt as it’s a paid benefit ie American workers paid into those programmes through their payroll taxes. Cut defense spending, agri business and oil subsidies and use that money to pay down the debt.

      • Canistercook

        You are wrong, the payroll taxes will not continue to support the social security and supplementary social security and Medicare Benefits, along with government salaries and pensions, especially unless we are able to keep unemployment levels at a low level. It is all going into and coming out of the same pot. Defense spending has been cut, and I agree that any subsidy to businesses need a hard look as to why and if they should be discontinued along with demanding that entitlements be carefully and well managed and reserved for those deserving and truly in need of them. Obamacare just awarded a huge subsidy to the Insurance companies and Bush awarded a huge subsidy to the Drug companies with his drug program. I am being taxed to support those new subsidized programs.

        • Lisztman

          Wrong again, CC. Go on the ‘Net and find Moody’s chart on defense spending. Across the last 50 years — the DoD budget reached an approximate lowest point (tied with about 1977) in about 1998. It has risen, sometimes sharply, EVERY SINGLE YEAR since then (that’s 15 years and counting).

          I don’t know where you get your data. Or information. Fox doesn’t count as a legitimate source.

    • Canistercook,
      You and people like you are the reason Boehner is still speaking with his ass instead of his mouth. WE THE PEOPLE OVER 50% voted for President Obama, and if the republicans would get out of President Obama’s way. A WHOLE LOT would be accomplished for the betterment of this country.

      • Canistercook

        so you believe the other 50% have no rights I guess. You sure are a Communist or a Facist!

        • karinursula

          the other 50% also want the rich to pay more taxes

          • Canistercook

            And many of that 50% pay nothing and contribute little if anything to a well run civilized society. So of course they want to steal from those that work hard.

      • I concur

    • Replying to Canistercook –

      George the Second stated that he had a “mandate” for his programs, even though he had less than 50% of the vote.

      With more than 50% of the vote supporting President Obama, I think it is a safe bet to call it a mandate.

      Besides, if we go over the financial cliff, who do you think is going to take the blame? President Obama, or the obstructionists on the Right who have played the game of “do it my way, or we will not play at all”.

      GROW A PAIR.

      The extremists on the right had big money on their side and still managed to loose the election.

      It’s time to face facts. The free ride for the 1% may not be completely over. But WELFARE FOR THE WEALTHY will not come out unscathed this time around.

      • Canistercook

        Guess you are considered an obstructionist if you don’t agree to give half of your field of corn to the guy next door that sat home and failed to plant his field. Takes two to tango and a good leader to lead.

        • Lisztman

          @Canistercook: Sorry, Sir. Several things…

          We have a good leader trying to lead, but it’s damn difficult to lead a mule who sits on his butt and refuses to go anywhere.

          US Income Taxes are, at the moment, for all practical purposes, at their lowest since the early 1930’s (a brief exception for the top bracket in the late ’80’s). I do NOT want to hear that you are overtaxed. A gajillion graphs out there on the ‘Net for you to verify this. Take your pick. They’re not lying.

          US tax rates are, overall (after deductions, exclusions, etc.) among the lowest in the developed world. (data also widely available, and consistent)

          The 2001 tax cuts were set in place with an expiration date. They were not made permanent because GWB knew he’d run into political trouble at the time if he tried that. Unfortunately, the present US House of Representatives doesn’t understand the concept of “expiration”. They equate “expiration of a temporary cut” with “increase”. Not the same thing. (Neglecting the fact that Norquist has outlived both his brain and his usefulness.)

          Unless you decide to do something surreal like end SS or retire the DoD, you will not balance the US Federal budget by further austerity. It is time to bring revenue (taxes) to a level commensurate with the services that Americans expect. If you believe austerity is the answer, ask Greece how it’s working out….

          Beyond that — your intimation that “giving half your field to the guy who failed to plant a field” does an extreme disservice to the millions upon millions of citizens working their butts off and paying their full tax bill. They don’t have the monies to access lawyers and accountants to trim their tax bills. They don’t have investment accounts that are only taxed at 15% — their Day-of-Deposit accounts, that are paying <1%, are taxed as income, not dividends.

          Methinks you doth protest too much. It's time to dig up a few of those canisters of cash you cooked up and buried in the Caymans, bring them home, and create a few jobs as all you 1%-ers keep promising. The current business model is to KILL domestic jobs and send them overseas where you can pay subhuman wages with zero benefits.

          • Canistercook

            Doesn’t sound like you make much money or live in California if you think taxes are low and lowest in the world. You are grossly misinformed.

    • Canistercook, you can only negotiate with persons who are willing to negotiate. It does not matter what percentage of the country voted for him, he won the election, people like you need to just accept that, dampen you anger and try and deal with the reality. I guess Post Trauma Stress makes the latter a little difficult to do

      • Canistercook

        And Stalin and Hitler won elections. And a majority of people accepted their win. Some did not and they were a minority. How they along with Obama they won should have been questioned and those that questioned them and were punished is food for thought. In this case approximately 47 million American people voted against Obama. Negotiation means just that and while running for office both sides said they would ‘negotiate’. Now you are stating that there is no room for negotiation. I am not angry but concerned about the future when I see what is happening to freedom of thought. Isn’t that tyranny! Looks like you endorse Tyranny.

  • kanawah

    With Bonehead and Deputy Dawg running wild on the hill, the only answer is to let it go over the cliff, and then the Republiskunks will be in a position of cooperate or face the consequences in 2 years.

    The RepubliSKUNKS are only interested in their rich big dollar donors, they are unwilling to serve the people that they were elected to serve. (The 98%, not the 2%)

  • bslow

    This presdent needs to understand that his campaign is over. STAY HOME AND WORK OUT A DEAL!!!!!

    • The deal has been made, the republicans need to sign the deal.

  • The Republicans are ready to negotiate in good faith, Boehner says, but then he adds the original framework stands. That original framework means we say NO to all your proposals, and yes only to a decrease in taxes for the wealthy. Eventually the Republicans will paint themselves into a corner where they will stay for 50 years.

  • This taxpayer is tired of paying for Welfare for the Wealthy………and Corporate Crooks.

  • ayayaboy


  • Lisztman

    We need Dominick Vila to run for Congress. He gets my vote (if he’s in New York…)

  • Boehner is disgusting. He is criticizing the President for real offers on the table saying they are “not serious”, yet he and his cronies do NOTHING/OFFER NOTHING to get this matter resolved. He needs to be evicted from his office. Fine, I say, let nothing happen and let the Bush cuts expire and see where that leaves these money powergrubbing asswipes in January.

    • karinursula

      I wonder if anyone knows how many days Congress worked this year. Talk about waste of our tax money.

  • No he is just saying that the election is over. The people spoke. Obama had 332 electoral votes to 206 and a popular vote of OVER 50%. It s time to move forward. The republicans have been dragging their feet and saying their way or no way. Pass the jobs bill, keep the tax cuts for people making less than $250,000, pass the bill to help the returning troops get jobs.

  • William Deutschlander

    I am waiting for Boehner to some day make an inteligent statement !

  • Jim: Montana is a relic from the days of the robber barons and subsequently the John Birch Society. I am certain he must be a SnorQuist devotee and a Koch, Adelson, Trump, etc supporter. Problem is even the queen of England rules at the beheast of the citizenry. These elitist plutocats scarf up massive amounts of wealth that no one could possibly use in several lifetimes. Their crusade rides falsely on the coattails of Capitalism, which they abuse and champion as their cause. They fail to realize there would be nothing for them to parttake in if it were not for those who break their back to earn a decent wage and keep their lives and families intact.

  • You are right, Jim. Montana believes in the significance of the era of the robber barons. Someone on here said we don’t have titles like coudukes, earls, etc, but we have titles like CEO’s and the like, snobs who try ev

  • No, he is very in touch with something and it isn’t us. He is a user, a fraud, a con artist and a shill. It makes me ill just to look at him. Who in the F ===does he think he is? Disgusting maggot!

  • Great Article Dominick Vila. Thank You. Lets hope we can get a jump start on this as soon as possible.

  • onedonewong

    ..The voters want a balanced approach your right Barak. So where is the balance?? All you have offered up is to tax the rich and new spending programs.
    As usual your proposal is DOA in the Senate and the House just like everyone of your budgets so far,
    Time for you to put on your big boy pants if you have any and start acting like a president rather than a petulant child

  • Luu

    Same old story of obstructionism! Just tell them not to balance the budget for your own group of the greedy old party (GOP) over the dead bodies of the poor and powerless!
    San Diego/Calif.

  • Campaign Trail With Tax Cut Pitch/// its not a campaign pitch its the PRES. gig to the ppl that voted him in the hous and seeing how the GP ding dongs dont want to lission t him he, talking to the ppl. and telln them what the pary of no theGO ding dongs doing to the country (AGAIN ) and its the GOP thats getting mad because he,s telling the ppl. the truth . if thy had any bransat ll ( it makes one wonder if thy realy do ) thywould do the right thing . for the next elction the partys of noprob. will be one then . and all from thi own stupid doings .

  • Those repugs need to pull their heads out of their asses and realize that we won they lost their plan to make our President a 1 term Prez failed we the american people have spoken and if the repugs dont wish to cooperate then they should be charged with High Treason.

  • Pres. Obama is making it very clear to the American people how Republicans are continuing their opposing ways and refusal to compromise. Pres. Obama is clearly demonstrating that the GOP do not have the middle class best interest.

  • petkeeper

    Sounds to me like a good plan. Now if the Republicans will let it pass, we would all be further ahead and the economy could grow. The amount of tax is so minimal, I don’t understand why they fight it. It’s all in the money lobiest, that has a hold on us or perhaps the tea party influence, hard to tell. Yea! President Obama – Go for it!!!

  • go with buffets plan. throw BOEHNER OUT!!!!!!

  • Dominick Vila, what states do you live in? When are you going to run for public office? We need clear thinking Americans like yourself in positions of trust. You have covered a multitude of options that would surely get our nation back to where we should be. God bless you and all your kin. God bless America. Now is the time that “we the people” have got to stop giving lip service and start putting pen to paper. Congress is employed by us. They need to be reminded of that fact.

  • President Obama is right 200% because for 30 years these greedy rich have been getting
    tax breaks, loopoles from the Republican in Congress, so now is pay back time if they do
    not like it then move out of the US. Why should the american majority Middle class have
    to pay dues all the time ? Who is the Boss ? ( Not Kings, Queens, not president, Congress,
    its the people the 98% who are the Boss )

  • To cut huge costs in Medicare the US must follow northern Europe system ( not south )
    Finland, Holland, UK, Denmark, Switzerland, Sweden, Germany, they nationalized all hospitals and put all doctors on gov. payroll. Survey found citizens of these countries
    are the most happy people in the world with good Jobs, health care, housing, Un
    employed benefits, S.S.

  • ridemybroom

    if these people dont do the the right thing isnt it time we bring the country to a standstill and get rid of these bastards !…im all for it…time for them to resign !!

  • The problem is that Boenher and Pride (think Bonnie and Clyde) think the only definition of a serious proposal is someone offering themselves up as a sacrifice.

  • joceandre

    It’s about time to get some fairness with the taxing system. I am sick and tired of getting caught in the middle. I am a registered nurse , I pay high taxes for what? As long as I have been filing ,always had to pay back and did not get a brake, frankly I would like just for once see those guys with some of the stinking bedpans full of stools I have had to deal with and just for that we nurses deserve a break.

  • imabrummie

    If Boehner and his army of obstructionists truly believe the fatuous notion that those at the top who have been the highest beneficiaries of the infamous Bush tax cuts are job creators, perhaps he could explain to the 98%ers (including myself) where are all these fabulous jobs they have created since the beginning of the recession. I think he and they would have an impossible JOB doing that.

  • MarvelousMarv22

    I’m 67 and about to get a $30. increase in my monthly benefit. My cost for Medicare will increase by $7., my supplemental insurance will go up $9., my medications will go up $40. per month, not to say anything about my other monthly bills and yearly bills like house & car insurance and property taxes.

    Where is the justice? They need to change the formula they use to determine our benefit increases.

    We Retired Seniors have paid a steep price already, with no increse for the years of 2010 & 2011, while everything else went up.


    Marvin Johnson

  • President Obama is doing the right thing. President Obama won a clean election the voters decided and that is the way he should do go to the people. President Obama said he will change the way government works not from inside Just from the out side.

    It will be not easy for Obama to governm, some Republican decided to rock block him and tried to stop his agenda. The Republicans main issues is not rasing taxes for the millionars their issue is they do not want to accept that President Obama won the reelection.

    There are powerful forces out there that are motivated for personal hatred against Obama, they can not accept this man and his family are living in the White House. They feel frustrated they were in the fantasy that Obama was going to be throw out the window that he will be a one term President and they failed and cannot get over that.

  • rlthorn

    President needs to take his(our) message to those districts of members of the House that are the more strident opposers of his tax proposals. Take the battle to the enemy. Fight them on their own turf. This is a real opportunity to strike a blow in the heartland of the “Tea Party” and should not be missed.

  • Lisztman

    FYI, Canistercook, I was employed for nearly 40 years. I’m ruminating on continuing with a new position or retiring. My wife (a professional) and myself (a professional) had, for a good number of those years, a combined AGI putting us squarely in the top couple of percent. I live in New York, which isn’t that far off from California, taxwise.
    I know exactly whereof I speak. I did NOT say taxes were low. I stated that Federal income taxes are lower than at most times in the last 75 years. I stated that US income taxes are among the lowest in the world. Both are easily verifiable, and true, statements.
    Stop grousing and making things up because you don’t like paying for all those things you want…

  • amen dominick……………but boner still puts up his opposition……………no concrete plan from him or his party……….obama put his out there…………boner and mcconell…….put yours out there or vote…………quit your norquist whining and just saying no…………………put a concrete plan out there or shut the f up and vote!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Lisztman

    Post removed by post-er.

  • Lisztman

    @mct — a reprint from below, so that you can read it…

    The “tone of my comment” was meant to suggest that you’ve taken up the ultra-right-wing mantras. Who deny facts. Or make up their own. (Most of what you stated there is not fact.)

    Re Benghazi: I’m not sure which reports you’re quoting. The ones I respect are the ones that stated, in essence, that the CIA was running things there. I STRONGLY doubt that the CIA is going to share clandestine stuff with 300 million random Americans, especially those with insufficient faculties to understand that. My short and quick answer: “Forget Benghazi. It’s a non-starter.”

    And because I know you won’t — I’ll tell you straight out that events like that happen every five or ten years, due to a variety of circumstances, and always in the outposts of less-than-civilized civilization. The right wing (fueled by Fox News and Hannity/Limbaugh/et al) has to latch on to “Something” to indicate how poor a job a given individual is doing. Usually, as in this case, the “something” is highly partisan and entirely unwarranted. Go find another tree to bark at. There’s nothing in this one.

  • Lisztman

    @montanabill: “As usual Obama talks in big glossy terms, but the devil is in the details. President Obama’s fiscal year 2013 budget calls for a massive $2 trillion tax increase. This amount is not explicitly in the budget because it hides several tax increases in the fine print.”
    I don’t understand how you can be accusing “talking in big glossy terms” and then talk about “the fine print”. Which is it?

    That the ACA causes you an “automatic 3.6% tax increase”? Would you please elaborate upon how that happens? Is that on ALL your income? (If it isn’t, then it’s something less than 3.6%. Please be honest with your arithmetic.)

    Apparently you do not have the background to appreciate the underpinnings of “Intelligence Quotient” (IQ). 100 — that’s “one hundred” — is an AVERAGE individual. Roughly half of humankind has higher than that — roughly half has lower. The IQ is not something that you can “change” by study, or schooling, or working. For the most part, it is what it is. It is driven primarily by genetics, although there are indications that it can be altered in the early formative years (infancy) by diet, environment, and… Mozart? And, no, I’m an engineer, not a psychologist, so if I have it wrong, please correct me as you see fit.
    A nice, simple explanation, here:

    34% (one std. dev.) have IQ between 85 and 100 and 34% between 100 and 115. 13% between 70 and 85. 2% less than 70. The primary use of IQ tests is to identify “special needs” children. To allow those with the very low “scores” to function in society. But down there, above “special needs” you’ll find millions upon millions of individuals who struggle with the basics. And with hard work they MIGHT get through high school, or learn a trade — providing the latter can be accomplished under direction and with a minimum of thought. They’re likely to end up in repetitive jobs; fixed tasks; (flipping hamburgers, filling stock shelves, monitoring a machine and calling for help if it jams, and the like). Not exactly what you’d call decent-paying jobs.

    The gist of my argument is that you are calling out these people for not “improving” themselves. If they work hard at one of the above for a number of years, they may achieve seniority. The best shifts. Weekends off. First choice of vacation time. Management? Unlikely, for the majority (you’ll note that there’s still only one manager for every n hard workers). School? Even the local Community College will require something on the order of Literature 101 or Algebra. Not asking for an analysis of the psychology of James Joyce or the second derivatives of trig functions. These people have a tough time reading the newspaper — forget Stephen Crane. They can’t grasp the concept of Ven diagrams, and couldn’t “solve for x” if their lives depended upon it. For these people, that goal of “self-improvement”, to a level required for advancement, remains, sadly and forever, a goal.

    This is NOT the story of a few tarnished individuals. It is the story of an enormous chunk of our society, which chunk you are treating with disdain.

    I recognize that there is, also, a large segment of society who feels that society “owes” them something. I haven’t figured out what to do with them. Unfortunately, and I believe it’s driven by a lot of factors not excluding my generation as parents (I’m 62), I haven’t figured out how we as a society jog this segment into getting off its collective lazy butts and joining the fray. But generalizing that segment to include everyone in the lower-earning classes is counterproductive to honest debate on the topic.

    • Lisztman

      I erred slightly. I believe it has been demonstrated that there are possible negative effects on IQ in the womb (particularly due to such things as drugs and malnutrition) as well as positive effects (I think that’s where Mozart came in).

  • Lisztman

    PS to mb:
    You wrote, elsewhere, “A single mother of two working full time at a minimum wage job would earn over $24,000/yr”
    Minimum wage in New York is $7.25/hr. x a full-time 40-hour work week x 52 weeks is $15K. I don’t know where you get that “24K” number from. It (24K) works only if she’s working 15 hours per week overtime, every week, and actually getting time-and-a-half for it. If she’s working two jobs to get that 55 hours, it ain’t 55 hours, it’s a 63-hour week.

  • Lisztman

    .removed by lisztman

  • Lisztman

    .deleted by Lisztman

  • Lisztman

    ..deleted by Lisztman

  • Lisztman

    Comment moved into “reply to” box. Sorry. I’m having difficulties with the user interface. Blame it on elder age…

  • Lisztman

    I addressed the Pelosi-unionlabor issue either here, earlier, or possibly elsewhere. Suffice it to say that the way it works it is not their business “to hire union labor”. It is their business to hire workers. If the workers choose to organize (in a non-RTW state) that is their right, and their business.

    Was it Pelosi’s son who got promoted? Last I knew it was a business connection who had been brought it to answer questions and/or consult. But, in the meantime, politicians aren’t personally doing the hiring (unless it’s their own staff). Most politicians, if they have a relative or friend who is otherwise qualified to do a given job, will push the name of that relative or friend. That cuts both ways (Rep/Dem) all over, so for me it’s a total non-starter.

    I am not here to criticize liberals. I am here trying to answer your question(s). You keep dredging up other non-issues. Are you purposely baiting me? It ain’t working, in case you haven’t noticed. But I’m getting REALLY tired of answering your silly questions. If nothing else, this thread hasn’t moved in a week. Go find a different one, ok?