A remedial lesson in Bushenomics, aka FUBAR
Oregon DOT | Wikimedia Commons
Note from Dan: The Post of the Day is by J.M. White, an ardent gunner and expert identifier of horse manure. He’s taking on a comment by (who else?) Suzie, who wrote: “This is unbelievable. In four years, their guy has spent more than any president in U.S. History, yet they can only talk about Bush.”
Okay, kids. Obviously, some of our remedial students are struggling with history (and reality, apparently), so we’ll review this chapter once more for their benefit. I know the rest of us would like to move on to more important and exciting issues, but thanks to No Child Left Behind (who came up that again?), we can’t just plop ‘em in Special Ed. and carry on like we used to.
About half of Obama’s spending wouldn’t have been necessary if Bush hadn’t wrapped the Maserati that was our economy around a tree and ran back to Texas to cower and hide on his ranch. Never mind the $2 trillion that he left off of the books, too. The fact that Bush was a virtual ghost during the election campaigns tells you all you need to know about his culpability and guilt. The fact that most of the candidates wouldn’t have wanted his endorsement in the first place should tell you what a debacle his administration was.
The man has become a virtual pariah in his own party. You guys don’t even want his name mentioned. The mess he left us in is the main reason you guys have lost the last two presidential elections. You could realize this and turn the party around, but no, loyalty to the brand is what it’s all about and you guys aren’t very adept at admitting your mistakes, anyway.
It couldn’t be Bush’s fault that the economy tanked under his watch; it was the Democrat-controlled Congress. Yet it can be and is Obama’s fault that the economy isn’t improving at a breakneck pace and it has nothing to do with the obstructionist Republican-controlled House. You can ignore irony and hypocrisy, Republicans, but it doesn’t ignore you. The party of personal responsibility has been nothing more than the party of “not me” and it shows every time someone makes a moronic comment like the one Suzie made above.
The Republican Party modus operandi:
“Oh phooey! The wheel fell off of the wagon. Sure, we knew it was a bit wobbly and missing a spoke. Sure, we hadn’t greased it since we left Ohio. [snaps fingers] It must be the horse’s fault! Stupid horse. He’s determined to destroy this wagon train as we know it. That bastard probably wants us to carry our own weight instead of enjoying the privilege of pulling our load for us. I have an idea, guys. We should complain heartily about this socialist horse and tell everyone that he’s hell-bent on the annihilation of our way of life! As a bonus, we’ll hide all the tools and expect the horse to fix the problem with nothing more than his hooves. Then, as he struggles to fix it (and he won’t easily be able to – he doesn’t have thumbs. Muhahahahaha!), we can do what we do best: piss and moan about his ineptitude. When it’s all said and done, if we dig in deep, refuse to do anything and complain loud enough, hopefully they’ll just forget who started it and blame the horse like the rest of us.”
“Great plan, Boss! The horse looks a little angry, though.”
“Well, if he had just chosen to be a Republican, he could be over here with us, blaming some other horse. That’s his fault, too.”
“Great. Now what do we do about this “low-information voter” thing that the Dems were using against us last year?”
“Simple. We wait six months and then start calling Democratic voters the same name. We’re conservatives; latching onto an idea long after it’s run its course and then acting like we invented it is what we do best!”
“Awesome. Just awesome, Boss. You know, that wheel still really needs to be fixed before we can go anywhere…”
“What wheel?”
February 8, 2013 - 12:11 PM
Well, maybe we should not blame W himself. I think he was just a witless shill who was offered a large sum of moola ($100M or $1B?) to run for a guaranteed win if he would say what he was told to say and do what he was told to do. He did nor realize what he had fronted until his last year in office when he aged about 10 years. Now, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc… They are a different story. Unfortunately, for all the claims of “Change”, Obama has just followed the same path. Obamacare was just a sop to keep him under control.
As usual, J.M. White nails it!
I agree that blaming any one man in a government run by three branches with 545 elected/appointed people is a habit we all need to break. There is nothing a President can do that a Congress cannot undo. The President does have the veto, but Congress has the override and then there is the Supreme Court. We need to be more specific in whom to actually blame and learn how the government actually works because some people seem not to know.
There is no stop and start over when a new President or Congress is elected either.
Well said
When the Republicans lost control of Congress in 2007, we had 5% unemployment and a $350B deficit. Unemployment had been 5% throughout almost all of the decade until the Democrats took over Congress. Now we are celebrating 8% unemployment and a $1,500B deficit.
Busheconomics worked and kept American working. The Democrats dug us into this pit.
WOW! Even Jimmy Buffet eventually admits “It’s my own d@mn fault”. I think the analogy of the horse is interesting. After the progressives finish bankrupting the country maybe we will go back to horse and buggy days. Now THAT will provide lots of “shovel ready” jobs. LOL
Wit and wisdom, now there are a couple “W’s” I can appreciate. Good stuff, JM!
Henry — February 8, 2013 @ 1:11 pm is the PERFECT reason why internet anonymity is so damaging. NO sane person would post such outright lies under their own legal name. But safe in the arms of internet anonymity and whatever he is under the influence of, “Henry” does so.
Henry’s brain has been rubbed smooth by 15 years at Free Republic.
Henry — February 8, 2013 @ 1:11 pm is the PERFECT reason why internet anonymity is so damaging. NO sane person would post such outright lies under their own legal name. But safe in the arms of internet anonymity and whatever he is under the influence of, “Henry” does so.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — February 8, 2013 @ 1:46 pm
Henry be correct. Sandi, not so much. Liberal Progressives would have us believe all their lies and blame of Bush for the present state of the economy. But those of us who have lived through the years realize that the easing of mortgage policy by Liberals during the Clinton administration set the stage for the housing collapse. Funny how Liberal
corruption and graft never seems to get investigated. Those who ran Fannie Mae and Freddie Mack along with Bwarney Frank, Chris Dodd and a host of others should be in jail. Dan, you can blog about your revisionist history. Sandi, you can echo it. Beason, you can bless it with your quasi financial credentials blessed by Dan. But not one iota of it is true. . .the Liberal Lie remains the Liberal Lie.
Sandi
Prove it is a lie. Was unemployment at 5% when the Democrats took over Congress in late 2006/ early 2007? Was the deficit at $350B? Is unemployment at 8% now? $1,500B deficit?
We’ll wait patiently while you gather your facts to refute it instead relying on your mere emotional womantrum.
“whatever he is under the influence of”
IIRC you supported the Civility concept when Casey brought it up.
Hmmm, Henry. And exactly what did congressional Democrats change that plunged the economy into the deepest recession since the Great Depression? Specifics, please.
Hmmm, Henry. And exactly what did congressional Democrats change that plunged the economy into the deepest recession since the Great Depression? Specifics, please.
Comment by Dan Radmacher — February 8, 2013 @ 2:39 pm
For starters Radmacher the policy of relaxing mortgage standards by the Clinton administration resulted in the housing crisis. Bush proposed legislation several times to reign in the liberal policies of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac but was thwarted by the Democrat controlled Congress. Remember Bwarney’s memorable line “I see no problem here”. When you loan
money to those with no ability to repay it a default situation is unavoidable. Now, the Obama administration is suing S&P. . .LOL. . .for marketing of bad paper that Liberal policy forced to be issued. Liberal
corruption is creative. . .but it’s still corruption.
Leon is correct. The liberal vision of “everyone is entitled to own a home” regardless of the capability to pay for it…combined with the crazy bundling games wall street plays, inflated the bubble that popped. But make no mistake about it, the concept that forced lenders into issuing mortgages without proper documentation was 100% a liberal/progressive driven policy. Leon was correct again when he the Bush administration tried to reign in Fannie and Freddy who were carrying out the irresponsible liberal policy, but he didn’t get the job done.
On the other hand, Bush should be embarrassed for his Medicare D program. The is no such thing as a free lunch.
For starters Radmacher the policy of relaxing mortgage standards by the Clinton administration resulted in the housing crisis. Bush proposed legislation several times to reign in the liberal policies of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac but was thwarted by the Democrat controlled Congress. Remember Bwarney’s memorable line “I see no problem here”. When you loan
money to those with no ability to repay it a default situation is unavoidable. Now, the Obama administration is suing S&P. . .LOL. . .for marketing of bad paper that Liberal policy forced to be issued. Liberal
corruption is creative. . .but it’s still corruption.
Banks were FORCED I tell you, FORCED to steal by the dang Democrats!
“the policy of relaxing mortgage standards by the Clinton administration resulted in the housing crisis. Bush proposed legislation several times to reign in the liberal policies of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac”
That much I can agree with, but who’s great idea was it to allow those same banks to overvalue those properties by as much as 200%? That was something that could have definitely been stopped by Bush but was allowed to continue. Make no mistake, the subprime lending was a folly from the start, but allowing a subprime loan for 200k (sans interest) on a property that the bank damn well knew was worth only 100k was nothing short of criminal.
It’s like this: I sell you a $20k car knowing that you’ll default before you ever pay it off. Knowing this, I value the car at $40k instead. I’m aware that you can repay 40k even less than you can repay 20k, but it guarantees that until you default, I’ve doubled the interest payments you give directly to me. I wait for you to default, repossess the car and set the whole scheme up again. Eventually, I’ve been paid for well over the value of the car and I still own the car. That works fine until everyone in my area has defaulted, I can’t loan to them anymore and I have a lot full of cars that are worth more on paper than as they sit. My business folds, as it should.
The blatant overvaluation (and outright criminality) was something that was Bush’s responsibility to stop and he failed completely. Too many powerful people were making a ton of money (off of the ignorance of the poor, no less), and he did nothing but present lame-duck legislation which he knew would never pass. Fix the problem? Hell, he was instrumental in letting it get as bad as it did. Maybe he was a fool – a “witless shill” as mesns said above – but history will remember him as happily fiddling while we all burned.
That’s his legacy. That’s the bed in which he left you Republicans to lay. I know it still stings, guys. It stings us [alleged] liberals, too. We won’t stop mentioning it, though, not ever. We must remind ourselves of and learn from our mistakes; not attempt to bury and forget them, for that’s almost as criminal as letting the events transpire in the first place.
I have yet to figure out if it is a lack of knowledge regarding the history of how the mortgage crises came about or an entrenched belief that what was done must not place blame on D’s.
A simple study of facts, and the pressure on banks to make these loans can easily educate anyone who desires to see the truth.
It is a fact that Bush attempted to avert this problem, however those in congress, ( Frank, Watt, et al…) screamed that there was no “financial crisis” stated that Bush was attempting to keep the “poor” from purchasing “affordable housing”, and ultimately Bush was unsuccessful.
Therefore, since Bush was the “President” and could not accomplish that goal, does that make him responsible? For the sake of argument, I will take the liberal view and answer in the affirmative.
The next logical question is, “if Bush was responsible (as a leader) for all that happened on his watch; shouldn’t Obama (as a leader) be responsible for all that is happening on his watch?”
We hear the constant lament from the left about the cost of “Bush’s wars” but Obama has been “Commander and Chief” for 4 years… he could have said on “day one” bring everyone home “we can’t afford this”. He did not… closing Guantanamo bay??? He did not…
He could have used the “stimulus” to do something useful, like U.S. “infrastructure”, instead we get “green job programs (that stimulate china and cronies)”.
Not to mention, using all his political capital on the “you will know it when you see it, “Obamacare” (the IRS employment act).
Heck, I might almost accept that Bush was responsible for 4 trillion debt increase in his 8 years in office if one liberal might accept that Obama is responsible for 6 trillion in only 4 years and a projected 6-8 trillion in this next term.
J.M.
I hear what you are saying, I would be interested in hearing your opinion of Geithner’s roll in these issues and if you believe him to be the “best” Obama could find.
Seriously, you people should have to own the lies you are telling.
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/06/cra-thought-experiment/
http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/06/25/john-carneys-bizarre-crusade-against-the-cra/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/27/michael-lewiss-the-big-sh_n_591037.html
If you had any decency, you would at least quit lying.
Henry is not “correct”. Henry is engaging in the time honored, “Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics” argument that he knows holds no water. Correlation is not causation. You know you are misrepresenting reality. Don’t you hide in the safety of anonymity and lecture me on civility, I am sick of your childish games.
I do not ask you to believe anything I post, but if you have the integrity to come outside the right wing bubble, you will be exposed to the truth and reality that you apparently are unaware of.
The economic crash was not all on Bush either, but he had eight years in office and people warning of this crisis, starting in 1999. The 1999 Financial Services Modernization Act was the beginning of the end. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2nZbo8SKbg It gave Wall Street the weapons of mass financial destruction that Phil and Wendy Gram wanted.
It is a right wing meme and a proven lie that the economic crash and “the easing of mortgage policy by Liberals during the Clinton administration set the stage for the housing collapse”. The links I offered above prove that is a lie, a simplistic and deliberate lie.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were late to the party. And not to blame for it. http://www.businessweek.com/investing/insights/blog/archives/2008/09/fannie_mae_and.html Another lie.
Leon, your level of dishonesty is just plain specious. And what Bush proposed was to limit the political influence of the people at Fannie and Freddie and embarrass the Dems. It was purely political and that is why he failed. He was dishonest too.
You folks defending Leon need to study some facts.
The CRA, nor Fannie/Freddie/ nor Dems/Libs caused the housing bubble or the economic crash. Here is a link to what Bush “did” and wanted to do for the housing problem: http://www.vdare.com/posts/2002-bushs-speech-to-the-white-house-conference-on-increasing-minority-homeownership
It is clear that you people do not even accept the facts of history. Not the old and not the new.
“Not satisfied with ordinary mortgage-backed securities, however, Wall Street bankers had begun in 2000, according to Lewis, to create a new, more opaque vehicle called the collateralized debt obligation, or CDO. This was a derivative based on existing mortgage-backed securities that was in turn divided into new tranches and sold again to investors. The CDOs became very popular in the 2000s, creating more debt to sell at enticing interest rates, with no more collateral. Increasingly, the CDOs were based entirely on the risky triple-B tranches of mortgage bonds–those most likely to be toppled by even a modest rise in defaults. But as it turned out, those triple-B tranches were increasingly being sold as triple-A value. Charlie Ledley in particular could not believe what he saw–or, better put, discovered–because it took him some time to figure it out.
…Had CDOs been better understood and regulated, the extent of financial collapse would have been mitigated. Had credit default swaps been traded in plain sight and the counterparties like AIG been forced to put up capital, the crisis would have been far less costly. Had the conflicts of interest of credit ratings agencies been dealt with, the tranche system would not have been so abused.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/27/michael-lewiss-the-big-sh_n_591037.html
You folks have no idea how far over your heads this was.
Busheconomics worked and kept American working. The Democrats dug us into this pit.
Comment by Henry — February 8, 2013 @ 1:11 pm
Read my lips Henry. Two unfunded tax cuts. Two unfunded wars. An unfunded Medicare drug benefit. Eliminating the Pay As You Go Runs so he & his Republican Congress to have two unfunded tax cuts, two unfunded wars, an unfunded Medicare Drug Benefit. $250 Billion in corporate tax expenditures each year for 8 years. Deregulated financial industry that leads to economic collapse. Then he is unheard from in 5 years. What part of responsibility don’t you understand Henry???
Bush = 5% unemployment for 6 years.
Obama = 10% unemployment for 4 years.
Deficit under Bush for 6 years = < $350B
Deficit under Obama for 4 years = $1,000+B
Democrat's answer: Bush's fault.
No wonder we are in such a financial hole. The Democrats don't know a good economy when they see one. They think high unemployment is BETTER!
So what else did Obama do?
Bush only killed 440 Muslims using Drones
Obama has killed 2,100+ Muslims using Drones.
That’s your President.
Henry, if it wasn’t so pitiful and pitifully obvious, it would actually be quite funny.
mike o: There hasn’t been a Treasury Secretary in the last 25 years that doesn’t deserve to be drawn and quartered. Okay, maybe that’s a bit harsh. I’ll settle for either/or.
The Secretary of the Treasury has become a faucet position. Turn it on and let the money flow to wherever and whomever they want it to.
It’s best to just not get me started.
Henry – Bush killed more civilians in Iraq than President Obama has since becoming President. Whether using drones or conventional means, whether they were Muslim or Christian, the deaths of many are on Bush’s head.
Such a foolish remark. Of course you forgot the madman named bin Laden who caused the deaths of over 6,000 souls in the attacks of Sept. 11th – and who was captured and killed under President Obama – not your hero, “dead or alive” Geo W. Bush. Had Bush followed up with the memo – bin Laden determined to strike within the United States – there deaths on September 11th may have been prevented or mitigated.
Please don’t re-write such current history, we have enough of those who already do this, and have no need for more.
Jordan Dorner. On the loose as we type. An EXTREMELY violent self-stated leftist who is on a murder rampage in California. Read HIS manifesto. Extreme leftist. Just like the vast backlog of mass murderers we have witnessed in the not-so-distant past…ALL were progressive liberals who voted Democrat. They just can`t control their emotions and slip off of the deep-end. You will probably have to find an un-biased newspaper to read about this very sad and scary situation.
Sandi,
You give yourself away when you quote from the Huffington Post and lose all credibility when you try to argue a point. When you lash out at posts we can all see exactly why you do what you do. Very predictable you are….I will now wait for the inevitable response with left talking points. Ready…set…go!
PP, What is your issue with HuffPost? It has a pretty clearly delineated mixture of fact (like, 80 or more percent of the site) and opinion.
It’s not like World Net Daily, which perverts the news when it’s not making it up, or the GOP-owned CNSNews, which basically puts facts through a garbage disposal before stuffing them in rancid casing, grilling them to a crisp and then serving them up as gourmet sausage.
Hi J.M.,
Did you see this in today’s RTs?
The 29 hour maximum work week for part-timers is spreading like wild-fire…all because of obama’s “affordable” care act. Bastions of liberalism such as colleges and government are hacking away at workers’ hours, and businesses are following suit.
Is that Bush’s fault?
http://www.roanoke.com/news/roanoke/wb/320129
There’s nothing wrong with HuffPo. It’s not like weaselzippers or Breitbart.
Hi applewood! Welcome to the discussion. Now, I understand that the debate at hand, economics, is probably WAY above your head, but that’s no reason to just vomit up some BS tripe bashing on leftwingers and run away. That’s what bratty little kids do. The least you could do is keep it intellectually honest.
Timothy McVeigh was a registered Republican.
JT Ready served as precinct committeeman as a Republican.
Those are two that I found without even scrolling on the first search in google. It took all of twenty seconds. google is your friend. google will help you keep yourself from looking foolish. google is good. Know it. Embrace it. The knowledge is right there at your fingertips.
Now that we have the niceties out of the way, you might want to brace yourself a bit, ’cause I’m about to throw you a textual beating. I’ll try to make it fast.
Mass murder is not a game, you nitwit. There is no team competition involved. Innocent people are dying. It doesn’t matter one f-ing bit what anyone’s political affiliation is. The fact that you would use atrocity to make some sort of [erroneous] political point says more about you than it does the murderers. Unless you have real, viable solutions to the problems you address (regardless of whether they’re on topic or not), you should just keep your mouth shut and your fingers away from the keyboard because you are not helping. Your kind of idiocy is exactly what gets our guns restricted and taken away, but you’re just too damned dense to get that. You are embarrassing all of us! Let that sink in a minute…
Now kindly sod off unless you’d like to join the discussion at hand: ECONOMICS.
Thanks for your time.
PP, right now the lead story on HuffPost is the Northeast blizzard.
Do you believe the blizzard is untrue? Is it a “left-wing talking point?”
Dan, I dont have any “issue” with the Huffington Post. I can call a spade spade though. It was launched in 2005 as a left leaning competitor to sites like Drudge, which tends to be right leaning. I did not slander HP as you did with WND or CNS. It is always good to know your source.
I will note that WorldNetDaily is right libertarian. And for every WND there is Newsweek. To match CNS, call out MSNBC.
It is very hard to listen Sandi vomit “facts” when there is so much subjectivity and emotion in her writing. Emotion tends to serve ones personal ideas of how something ought to be. But who has ever stopped anyone (on both sides) from slanting facts?????
“I did not slander [Huffington Post] as you did with [World Net Daily] or [CNSNews]. It is always good to know your source.”
–Comment by PP
PP,
I have not defamed WND or CNSNews in any whatsoever. All I’ve done is write the truth about them in figurative terms. Your assumption to the contrary is part of a new RWer ethos: the truth sometimes hurts, and truth = defamation when it does. In any event, in no way did I slander them. That is impossible on a blog.
(BTW, when you’re unaware of the definition of terms such as “slander,” it’s best to look them up in a dictionary, lest you expose yourself as unaware).
I thank you for assuming you are the smartest guy in the room! Lest you jest…(is that possible on a blog?)
Have a good Saturday. Get some sunshine!
can someone tell me the real difference between using a drown to kill an American Citizen who has held the world hostage with constant terror plotswhile hiding overseas and the FBI shooting an Alabama kidnapper hold up un a bunker? Neither had a trial, both were bragged about their terror plots, both were obviously guilty. I have not heard any regrets about the killing of the kidnapper. AM I missing something?
Obama authorized the drone program. That’s the difference.
As for who caused the recession and who got us out. We can let the history books decide,but I can tell you geithner, Bernanke, and Obama will go down as heroes. GW, not so much.
Richard J Beason:
“We can let the history books decide,but I can tell you geithner, Bernanke, and Obama will go down as heroes”
Considering who will be writing those history books, you’re probably right.
37.can someone tell me the real difference between using a drown to kill an American Citizen who has held the world hostage with constant terror plotswhile hiding overseas and the FBI shooting an Alabama kidnapper hold up un a bunker? Neither had a trial, both were bragged about their terror plots, both were obviously guilty. I have not heard any regrets about the killing of the kidnapper. AM I missing something?
Comment by Richard J Beason — February 9, 2013 @ 6:02 pm
A drown be tantamount to waterboarding which is a terrible evil that can never be condoned or acceptable.
Really Beason, what if it is you that be next on Obama’s list? Will you
be happy for his usurpation of power then? The guy in AL had ample time
to negotiate and surrendur but did not. Actually a drown might have been effective here. . .a hole in the ground is easy to fill with water; perhaps the youngster could swim.
38.
As for who caused the recession and who got us out. We can let the history books decide,but I can tell you geithner, Bernanke, and Obama will go down as heroes. GW, not so much.
Comment by Richard J Beason — February 9, 2013 @ 6:08 pm
Yeah, and possibly cellmates too!
31.There’s nothing wrong with HuffPo. It’s not like weaselzippers or Breitbart.
Comment by Kristen — February 9, 2013 @ 11:10 am
LOL. . .what’s not for liberals to love there?
richard j beason,
in my opinion, there is no hypocrissy associated with attacking and killing the guy who had killed a person and had kidnapped and was holding a 5 year old child….in an efffort to rescue the child.
I think obama’s killing of terrorists, including American terrorists, by drones, is ok as well. I and many others object to the hypocrissy of obama railing against water-boarding three terrorists for data collection purposes as “bad” (all they had to do was give us some information), and killing scores of terrorists by drone as “good” (who we gave no options to).
Two unfunded tax cuts. Two unfunded wars. An unfunded Medicare drug benefit. Then he is unheard from in 5 years.
Comment by Ron May — February 8, 2013 @ 7:26 pm
Mr. May. . .there is no need to “fund” tax cuts. . .they generate additional revenue by stimulating the economy which also keeps unemployment low and provides funding for such things as wars for freedom and benefits for seniors. You forget, perhaps because your Messiah stands
behind nothing he utters, than Bush pledged to conduct his presidency in a manner which respected the office which had lost much respect and honor due to Slick Willie’s cigar tricks in the Oval Office.
Re: Richard J Beason @ 6:02 pm
According to reports, he shot at the police, first.
Then there is the issue of exigency.
The blatant overvaluation (and outright criminality) was something that was Bush’s responsibility to stop and he failed completely.
Comment by J.M. White — February 8, 2013 @ 4:40 pm
J.M. your diatribe @15 is neat revisionist history and pure hogwash. Bush recommended reining in Freddie and Frannie but Bwarney Frank could
see “no problem”. Trade Bwarney for Bush and your hogwash makes sense.
BTW this present abortion of a dynamic economy belongs lock, stock and barrel to Obama. Rumor has it that if the Liberal Lie is told often enough people will begin to accept it as fact. So keep singing J.M.
PP, you give yourself away when you claim the source is the issue when the link is about a book and quotes directly from it. The Huffington Post happened to be where I read about Lewis’s book, it has nothing whatsoever to do with the quote or the point of the quote. Way to prove you are too dense to know the difference — the one who loses “all credibility” is not me. I am not nearly as “predictable” as you right wingers. Neither are my sources.
“in my opinion, there is no hypocrissy associated with. . .”
–Comment by Frank
Frank, buddy, your addiction to sitcoms is legendary on this blog. Just fyi, “Crissy” was a character on Three’s Company. The term “hypo” never comes before her name. Unless, perhaps, you got hypodermics on your mind. In which case, you got bigger problems than this blog. (Please, go take care of them elsewhere!)
Dan:
““Crissy” was a character on Three’s Company. The term “hypo” never comes before her name.”
The term “nympho”, however, usually comes before her name.
.
Leon and Frank -once you capture someone then light guidelines have always been tho great them humanely except for gwb killing to stop those that refuse to b have up and promise to keep killing is very different Dave he was going to be dead unless he threw his guns out before yhey set off the flares They could not allow him to kill the boy The argument could only work differently if we let him kill the boy then capture him and try him.
Frank and Leon if they captured yhe kidmnapper and t hen tourtured him you migjt have an argument
John Wilburn you are probably rihht, intellectuals wright history; conservatives revise history
Leon can you explain derivatives, CMOs, tell us how fanny mae packaged and sold CMOs, were the CMOs conventional or fanny mae backed, the exponential effect of CMO derivatives, the part AIG played in the bank crisis?
Re: Richard J Beason @ 9:07 pm
“History is written by the victors” — often attributed to Winston Churchill and/or Adolf Hitler; but not documented in either case, as far as I know.
FWIIW, I don’t think that historical revisionism is limited to one ideology or the other.
RJB: Leon is not interested in the details. He’s just interested in placing all blame and responsibility on Obama for everything, ever.
His logic is that the man behind the wheel is responsible for the ride. I’m willing to accept that logic if it’s applied evenly. And the man behind the wheel when we went soaring over the cliff was… George W. Bush.
Hey Frank, from 1995 to 2006 when the GOTP was in charge of Congress, what bill to reform Fannie/Freddie was presented?
What did the GOTP do to oppose Bush’s push for Fannie and Freddie’s affordable housing goals to unsustainable levels?
What did the GOTP ever do to restrict subprime lending?
What exactly was it that Bush asked for and the GOTP Congress refused to do?
You know so much so show us.
http://democrats.financialservices.house.gov/FinancialSvcsDemMedia/file/press/112/06-17-04-new-Fannie-goals-Bloomberg.pdf
Pay attention to some key words in the first paragraph here Hey Frank:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/24/AR2005052401554.html
“The Bush administration is at odds with key provisions of legislation that would create a new regulator for housing finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but the administration will not attempt to derail the bill as it begins moving through the House today.
It was NOT just Dems that helped Fannie and Freddie and it was NOT just Fannie and Freddie that were the financial crash problem.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/12/for-the-last-time-fannie-and-freddie-didnt-cause-the-housing-crisis/250121/
It looks like sub-prime mortgages are coming back again. Who will be responsible this time?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/12/subprime-lending_n_896229.html
Hey Frank, from 1995 to 2006 when the GOTP was in charge of Congress, what bill to reform Fannie/Freddie was presented?
It’s called Senate Bill S-90
“John McCain’s Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac Warnings – MAY 2006″
http://uppitywoman08.wordpress.com/2008/09/21/john-mccains-fannie-maefreddie-mac-warnings-may-2006/
Died in committee. 100% of Republicans voted for it. 100% of Democrats voted against it, and guaranteed it would fail on a floor vote.
Wall Street’s Big Lie (and the one favored by Frank and Leon,
“is that banks and investment houses are merely victims of the crash. You see, the entire boom and bust was caused by misguided government policies. It was not irresponsible lending or derivative or excess leverage or misguided compensation packages, but rather long-standing housing policies that were at fault.
Indeed, the arguments these folks make fail to withstand even casual scrutiny. But that has not stopped people who should know better from repeating them.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/what-caused-the-financial-crisis-the-big-lie-goes-viral/2011/10/31/gIQAXlSOqM_story.html?tid=pm_business_pop
As always, repeating the big lie, does not make it true, it just makes you part of the problem. No surprise there.
hey J.M. and sandi,
what say you folks about the folks working part-time for community colleges, government, and businesses getting their hours cut even more?
An article was published about it in today’s Roanoke Times.
Is THAT Bush’s fault?
“Leon can you explain derivatives, CMOs, tell us how fanny mae packaged and sold CMOs, were the CMOs conventional or fanny mae backed, the exponential effect of CMO derivatives, the part AIG played in the bank crisis?”
–Richard Beason
Richard, the only thing Leon can “explain” is: “It’s all Obama’s fault! (and if not him, Clinton).”
This is not an explanation. It’s a belief system, and a pretty piss-poor one.
Chuck Hagel introduced that bill in January of 2005 and John McCain did not sign onto it until May of 2006, after he found a bandwagon he could jump on the F&F accounting scandal.
The GOTP refused to compromise even though Democrats supported some form of stricter oversight. The National Association of Home Builders opposed the bill, as did the National Association of Realtors. The GOTP was in charge of Congress in 2005 and 2006 Suzie, why did they not pass this legislation?
54.Leon can you explain derivatives, CMOs, tell us how fanny mae packaged and sold CMOs, were the CMOs conventional or fanny mae backed, the exponential effect of CMO derivatives, the part AIG played in the bank crisis?
Comment by Richard J Beason — February 9, 2013 @ 9:14 pm
Yes
56.RJB: Leon is not interested in the details. He’s just interested in placing all blame and responsibility on Obama for everything, ever.
His logic is that the man behind the wheel is responsible for the ride. I’m willing to accept that logic if it’s applied evenly. And the man behind the wheel when we went soaring over the cliff was… George W. Bush.
Comment by J.M. White — February 9, 2013 @ 9:36 pm
J.M.,
You overlook the event where we took off soaring over the cliff. In September 2008 someone or some group pulled over $500 billion in liquid assets out of US financial institutions creating an instant liquidity crisis that brought both McCain and Obama off of the campaign trail.
An investigation was promised but, alas, as with so many things that this
corrupt administration promises details were never revealed and the investigation never completed. Perhaps the culprit here supports Obama and
the corrupt administration. The act certainly affected the election of 2008. Could it be that the entire economic malais we presently experience
is contrived, such economics benefit liberals more so than conservatives.
Never let a crisis go to waste (to obtain political power).
62.“Leon can you explain derivatives, CMOs, tell us how fanny mae packaged and sold CMOs, were the CMOs conventional or fanny mae backed, the exponential effect of CMO derivatives, the part AIG played in the bank crisis?”
–Richard Beason
Richard, the only thing Leon can “explain” is: “It’s all Obama’s fault! (and if not him, Clinton).”
This is not an explanation. It’s a belief system, and a pretty piss-poor one.
Comment by Dan Casey — February 9, 2013 @ 11:27 pm
There you go again Dan. Unable to refute; attack in a personal manner.
This mantra you adopt is wrong, lends nothing to debate and destroys your
creditibility, not mine. Enjoy piss-poor Dan.
As always, repeating the big lie, does not make it true, it just makes you part of the problem. No surprise there.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — February 9, 2013 @ 10:19 pm
Pleaseeeeeeee; stop with the echoes.
Leon – then you most assuredlyy know that the Clinton changes i n guarantee loans had nothing to do with the recession.
Well, as we continue to watch the Socialist state of California sink deeper in debt(please libs, explain this to the folks), and given the FACT that 2 Million+ people have left and landed in good `ol Texas, Governor Rick Perry has put out a radio ad, website, and now will tour San Francisco, Simi Valley, etc., in selling his states lower corporate tax rates to CA businesses…and its working. Daggone near impossible to start a business in Socialistfornia and the state is deeply, deeply in debt…Yet, the liberals think that it is the best model for our Country…talk about `driving while blind`. All failing and overtaxed businesses leave California and head to Texas where you can enjoy your business once again. Goodbye Socialism..Hello Capitalism.
“You overlook the event where we took off soaring over the cliff. In September 2008 someone or some group pulled over $500 billion in liquid assets out of US financial institutions creating an instant liquidity crisis that brought both McCain and Obama off of the campaign trail.”
–Leon
Leon, are are alleging a conspiracy? Tell us all about it!
I agree with Leon. I believe the meltdown was orchestrated by leftwing allies in the financial world. I don’t think for a minute the timing was coincidental. I say the Communists had had this card in their back pocket for a long time–just waiting for the time when they could get their radical candidate nominated without scrutiny.
Pleaseeeeeeee; stop with the echoes.
Comment by Leon — February 10, 2013 @ 9:23 am
64.54.Leon can you explain derivatives, CMOs, tell us how fanny mae packaged and sold CMOs, were the CMOs conventional or fanny mae backed, the exponential effect of CMO derivatives, the part AIG played in the bank crisis?
Comment by Richard J Beason — February 9, 2013 @ 9:14 pm
Yes
Comment by Leon — February 10, 2013 @ 9:05 am
OK. We’re all ears. Let’s hear it. Those “echoes” will stop only when your BS stops.
Comment by Leon — February 10, 2013 @ 9:18 am
I’m not overlooking anything, Leon. Bush was still president in Sept of ’08. Your logic is that the man behind the wheel is responsible, and I’m willing to follow that logic to its conclusions. The FACT (not your conspiratorial conjecture) is that until Jan. of 2009, Bush was at the wheel.
Bottom line: if Obama owns the current state of the economy “lock, stock and barrel” because he’s the current captain of the ship, then Bush owns soaring the nation over the economic cliff when he was the captain, “lock, stock, and barrel”.
Do you get it yet? I’m WILLING to blame Obama for our economy. You win that much, but you don’t get to selectively apply the rules or logic. If you apply it to one president, then in the interest of intellectual integrity, you must apply it to ALL presidents. Are you even capable of intellectual integrity anymore?
Life is not a freaking sound bite. Life is not black and white. There are no teams here. There’s no grand championship game between liberals and conservatives. You don’t win a prize for being lib or con and it’s abysmally stupid to think so. We’re all on the same train, whether you like it or not. So if you don’t have any viable solutions, sit down and shut up. Quit being a part of the problem and quit acting like your head is made of diorite. It is people like YOU who are stagnating this country; I pray that you’ll realize that before it’s too late.
65. Leon – This comment shows that you have no idea of the concepts I asked you about. You act like someone stole the banks money. Not only that, it was over a trillion dollars of capital that disappeared, not $500,000. But the thief was capitalism, not a person or group. The banks invested poorly in a CMO scheme that balooned out of control. The result was over a trillion in asset devaluation, a bankrupt insurance company that guaranteed the values, and a world economy collapsing.
Only the swift action of Bernanke, Geithner, and Obama kept us all from being bankrupt. Also, don’t forget that had not GWB given up on his free market craziness and began the bank bailout, the situation would have collapsed before Obama even got started. Fortunately, GWB understood the situation and over-ruled his GOP nutcases.Too bad it took until the last seconf for him to move.
Hi J.M.,
Did you see this in today’s RTs?
The 29 hour maximum work week for part-timers is spreading like wild-fire…all because of obama’s “affordable” care act. Bastions of liberalism such as colleges and government are hacking away at workers’ hours, and businesses are following suit.
Is that Bush’s fault?
http://www.roanoke.com/news/roanoke/wb/320129
Comment by Frank — February 9, 2013 @ 10:51 am
Mr. Frank:
The short answer is no. Now, at any time you wish, you can stop acting like this is a new business practice. Limiting hours so employers don’t have to pay bennies or insurance has been happening for decades. So it’s intellectually dishonest to say that it’s “all because of Obama’s ACA”.
It has always been more cost effective to hire a part-time person than to pay a full-time employee overtime. It has always been more cost effective to hire two part-time workers than to hire one full-time worker.
So, businesses are now limiting part-timers to 29 hours instead of 32. Too bad. National healthcare was never going to be an easy path and all people will have to sacrifice to make it work. Anyway, isn’t the conservative mantra in this situation that the part-timers should’ve worked harder to acquire a full-time job? What is it with personal responsibility being so damned selective with you guys?
All of this means nothing when you consider from whence the ACA came. You want to complain about who created it and championed it? Look no further than the Heritage Foundation, Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney! It was their brainchild – their baby. They’re so pissed at having their idea stolen from them and successfully implemented that they act like what was once their panacea paradise is now a Democrat-driven Hellride to the Apocalypse.
Seriously, pull your head out of butt, give your eyes a chance to adjust to the sunlight, take a good look around you and get a grip already.
Gov. Jerry Brown should rent about 9,000 buses, load up the quickly pardoned inmates from all of California’s prisons, then send them on a caravan to Waco. The history books will call it “the Sacramento bus lift,” after the Mariel Boat Lift, in which Castro dumped many of his convicts in Florida.
There are lots of guns in Texas, so this will be no problem.
Something tells me Frank sort of didn’t think of any of that, J.M. But we can probably count on him bringing it up repeatedly anyway.
Great idea, Dan! Texas could become our very own Australia.
frank, the IRS has new regulations that safe harbor empoyers and employees in this situation. Also, the State Insurance Co-ops were to be developed to help here, but of course Va has not participated. Once these are in place the part-time person will better job access. The TP is just too short sighted to see how it all fits together.
76. Great idea Dan. They could take all those minimum wage jobs Perry created.
Back when I was Single Copy Manager in the newspaper’s Circulation department, one my duties was to ensure that PTers were skedded no more than 29 hours/week on average.
In other words, this is really nothing new, Frank. Either you know that, and your outrage over it is phony (as usual), or you’re truly unaware.
Yawn.
Life is not a freaking sound bite. Life is not black and white. There are no teams here. There’s no grand championship game between liberals and conservatives. You don’t win a prize for being lib or con and it’s abysmally stupid to think so.
Comment by J.M. White — February 10, 2013 @ 11:41 am
Masterfully said, JM! Until we stop treating politics like a game where there has to be a winner and a loser, we will continue to stagnate and wither as a world power. Our strength is in our ability to come together and work toward a common good.
I never said this crap is new, J.M.
And, I’ll remind you that Bush is gone. And, i’ll also remind you that neither Bush, nor any republicans, had anything to do with obama-care’s requirement that ALL folks working 30 or more hours per week receive health care benefits from their employers.
You libs have relentlessly trashed the rich for the last several years, and REALLY trashed the rich during the campaign, and all the while so …sneakily… convinced the middle-class, working-poor, and poor folks, that the rich were the ONLY ones who were gonna get slammed financially if only obama was re-elected…not them.
That’s sure not happened, has it?
Your whole piece above, which began this thread, is laced with bombs fired directly and exclusively at republicans, as well as scud rockets that are clearly aimed their way as well…with nary a thought given to the blow-back.
You simply refuse to see the hypocrissy in both parties…your diatribing tirade is directed at the party you don’t care for, pure and simple, and since ol’ dano likes watching the bombs you throw at his enemy, he sets you up to do so….again and again and again.
You are whining in artful form, J.M., as only you can do. However, it’s starting to get old.
Hey, I know! I think you are better suited to be “whiner-in-Chief”, rather than “Shunner-in-Chief”. Ergo, please resign your from the latter position, and take full command of the former. You have my blessing.
dano,
i have no doubt that a lib rag like your employer would have assigned you personally to do such a thing with your scheduling of part-timers back in the day.
The point is, and thank you for making it, …back then, there was no FEDERAL REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE HEALTH INSURANCE BENEFITS TO FOLKS WORKING 30 OR MORE HOURS PER WEEK, was there?
Nope. Your employer was doing it as a matter of course. I guess they were smart, ’cause they won’t have to take any such action now as a result of obama-care, will they?
Too bad that colleges and universities and state and local governments weren’t so smart.
79.frank, the IRS has new regulations that safe harbor empoyers and employees in this situation. Also, the State Insurance Co-ops were to be developed to help here, but of course Va has not participated. Once these are in place the part-time person will better job access. The TP is just too short sighted to see how it all fits together.
Comment by Richard J Beason — February 10, 2013 @ 12:32 pm
The IRS is not a safe harbor for anyone. BTW the IRS had a whole bunch of
new regulations for paid preparers to which a Federal Court just advised. . .not so fast; the IRS has no authority to issue such regulations. Happy filings!
Nope. Your employer was doing it as a matter of course. I guess they were smart, ’cause they won’t have to take any such action now as a result of obama-care, will they?
Too bad that colleges and universities and state and local governments weren’t so smart.
Comment by Frank — February 10, 2013 @ 2:32 pm
Could it be possible that the employer had a budget? Oh my!
“The point is, and thank you for making it, …back then, there was no FEDERAL REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE HEALTH INSURANCE BENEFITS TO FOLKS WORKING 30 OR MORE HOURS PER WEEK, was there?
Nope. Your employer was doing it as a matter of course. I guess they were smart, ’cause they won’t have to take any such action now as a result of obama-care, will they?
Too bad that colleges and universities and state and local governments weren’t so smart.”
–Frank
Nope, that’s not the point. The point is, long before the ACA, there were state and federal laws defining which were were part time and which workers were not. If an employer offered full-time workers benefits, ALL those benefits had to be offered to full-time workers. Many employers that offered healthcare had to keep PTers under a certain level of hours, to avoid having to offer them the benefit.
Nothing has changed in the deceptive way you’re claiming. What HAS changed under ACA is, employers with 50 or more FT workers must offer healthcare benefits to full-time workers.
#84 Frank, there were other work rules about hours — whether federal, union or company. Get back to us after you educate a little.
Oops, I see that Dan had already schooled you by the time I posted, Frankie.
Life is not a freaking sound bite. Life is not black and white. There are no teams here. There’s no grand championship game between liberals and conservatives. You don’t win a prize for being lib or con and it’s abysmally stupid to think so. We’re all on the same train, whether you like it or not. So if you don’t have any viable solutions, sit down and shut up. Quit being a part of the problem and quit acting like your head is made of diorite. It is people like YOU who are stagnating this country; I pray that you’ll realize that before it’s too late.
Comment by J.M. White — February 10, 2013 @ 11:41 am
Reckon I can guess which team you are not on J.M. You’re the one with POS of the day which is a propoganda spiel of little merit and no truth.
Here’s a viable solution for all of us on the train. . .let’s find out if
this POTUS is eligible to be POTUS. You may laugh out of ignorance but why would any idiot post a BC which has been proving to be a fraud. Why
does POTUS have a SS# that belongs to someone else? Before we solve this
problem perhaps we might determine just which train we’re on. . .it sure isn’t the transparency train.
74.
65. Leon – This comment shows that you have no idea of the concepts I asked you about. You act like someone stole the banks money. Not only that, it was over a trillion dollars of capital that disappeared, not $500,000. Only the swift action of Bernanke, Geithner, and Obama kept us all from being bankrupt.
Comment by Richard J Beason — February 10, 2013 @ 11:41 am
Your comment Beason reflects you are not very good with numbers or rational thought processes.
85. Leon, on contrair. Congress gave them the authority. as for the RTTP. I believe the court will be overturned on appeal
Re: J.M. White @ 11:41 am
and
Re: Jason Perdue @ 12:43 pm
Yup! A curse on both their houses — right & left.
http://www.rollcall.com/news/parties_solidify_positions_in_sequester_stalemate-222307-1.html
**
Parties Solidify Positions in Sequester Stalemate
By Tim Starks
Roll Call Staff
Feb. 10, 2013, 2:44 p.m.
With 19 days to go, the sequester standoff hardened Sunday. Congressional leaders from both parties said the deep automatic spending cuts must be prevented from taking effect, but Republicans drew a line in the sand against making tax increases part of any stopgap alternative, and Democrats did the same in vowing to protect entitlements and social programs.
SNIP
**
85. Leom, you know as much about tax law as you do derivatives.
–Frank
Nope, that’s not the point. The point is, long before the ACA, there were state and federal laws defining which were were part time and which workers were not. If an employer offered full-time workers benefits, ALL those benefits had to be offered to full-time workers. Many employers that offered healthcare had to keep PTers under a certain level of hours, to avoid having to offer them the benefit.
Nothing has changed in the deceptive way you’re claiming. What HAS changed under ACA is, employers with 50 or more FT workers must offer healthcare benefits to full-time workers.
Comment by Dan Casey — February 10, 2013 @ 2:49 pm
Maybe you’d like to cross reference those regs you cite Dan. . .far as I
know you can have PT, seasonal PT, Commission, and Creative Payroll 101.
PT employees can, and do, receive OT in certain circumstances. Nevertheless, ACA is responsible for this shift to PT workers who lose not only the health insurance benefits but also other benefits due to their revised status. As your company appears so inclined. . .perhaps you will soon discover you are PT.
91.85. Leon, on contrair. Congress gave them the authority. as for the RTTP. I believe the court will be overturned on appeal
Comment by Richard J Beason — February 10, 2013 @ 3:11 pm
Sounds like you fancy yourself the judge. Cease and desist was the order.
File ‘em if you got ‘em! The judge did allow they could charge for PTINS. . .wonder where that $ is going?
93.85. Leom, you know as much about tax law as you do derivatives.
Comment by Richard J Beason — February 10, 2013 @ 3:17 pm
Need your return prepared Beason?
Let’s not forget that Leon is still banging the “Obama-is-ineligible-to-be-President!” drum.
My goodness, even Donald Trump has given up that garbage. Only the true looney-tuners persist.
98.Let’s not forget that Leon is still banging the “Obama-is-ineligible-to-be-President!” drum.
My goodness, even Donald Trump has given up that garbage. Only the true looney-tuners persist.
Comment by Dan Casey — February 10, 2013 @ 3:32 pm
Supreme Court hasn’t given it up yet!
hey dano,
You are twisting into a pretty stale pretzel. If you are so smart, here’s your chance to prove it! Please answer the following simple question!
1. Prior to obama-care, please show me the federal or state requirement that mandated that “all workers employed by companies having 50 or more full-timers had to be provided health insurance if they worked at least 30 hours or more per week.”
What’s your answer, dano?
gdad. sheesh. you flunked.
97. Leon – I can copy court script. The secrect is understanding what is being said. Look for that case to be overthrown soon.
Dave Hicks,
I agree with your comment concerning that there be a curse on both parties.
But, you’d have a hard time convincing me that J.M. and Jason see it that way, particularly after J.M.’s withering whine about republicans, which dano selected to lead off this thread….unless of course you think that ol’ dano selected J.M.’s piece because he thought it insightful, balanced, and designed to get people to really think, eh?
You are wasting your time. J.M. and Jason Perdue “profess” that they want everybody to pull together…and then J.M. comes out with his “withering whine about republicans” …and ol’ dano uses that as the lead to this thread…all designed to stoke the flames.
I’d call that hypocrisy times 2+!
and…the beat goes on…the beat goes on…
hey gdad!
Hey, I’ve got a great idea!
Instead of waiting for dano to respond (so you can cheat off his …answer), why don’t you go out on a limb all by yourself, and answer the question I posed above to ol’ dano, …BEFORE he does?
Frank, as usual, your reading comprehension is atrocious and you fill the massive dead space of your comments with irrelevant Captain Obvious statements. First, I’m pissed at ALL politicians, regardless of affiliation and I think I’ve made that perfectly clear throughout the time I’ve been on this blog. The whole diatribe in this PotD was my usually wordy way of saying that if it’s going to be “Obama is at fault for X” and “Obama is at fault for Y“, then conservatives have no standing to call for any reference to Bush’s responsibility being verboten. It’s that simple. If you’re going to preach about personal responsibility, then at least maintain some integrity as to its application.
No matter how you slice it, the truth is this: If the POTUS is responsible for the things that happen on his watch, then all former and future POTUSs are responsible for their respective watches, as well. Even in your deflective response, you just can’t admit that Bush, as the POTUS, was the only singular person in this nation that could have done more to prevent the financial collapse. He didn’t do that. He did everything in his power to prolong the imminent crash just until he could get the hell out of there and that’s all he did. He wouldn’t dare face the backlash of his rich buddies on Wall Street. After all, they actually do know where the bodies are buried.
This is not something I came up with in hindsight, Frank. I was smart enough to call it out when it was happening back then. I was building houses for $50k, materials and labor, on $20k lots and they were being appraised and put on the market at $200k-250k. Then, they were being sold to every Larry and Mary Podunk the banks could find. I told every person on my crew and others that we’d all be unemployed the next year. I was also smart enough to know that GWB would virtually disappear after he left. There are more sightings of Elvis than there are of George W. Bush these days.
GWB is the reason that so many lifelong Republicans, including myself, have run away from the party and THAT’S why you guys don’t like him being mentioned. He did more damage to the brand than anyone has since Nixon. He’s your LeBron James and you’re Cleveland. Deal with it.
The irresponsible cowards in the GOP can’t even offer an apology, much less admit that he was a HUGE mistake. I’m pissed at all of you for it and rightfully so. It’s funny that you only launch your barely coherent attacks at one side, but call me out on mine. As a matter of fact, essentially your entire comment was a rehash of things I’ve said to you during our interactions here. So, yeah, I drop bombs and sling missiles at the unrecognizable money-addicted harlot that is my former party. They’re good ones, too. If the impact can blow even one conservative’s head out of their ass for just a moment, it’s worth it and I’ll keep dropping them. I’ll continue to use the “artful” power of my written word to carpet-bomb you numbskulls until every last one of you sees the light. Dude, you’re nothing but a towel boy at the GOP Country Club; the only time they even care if you’re breathing is if you don’t have a towel in your hand to give to them.
You can call it whining if you like. After all, a man who repeats the same inane things over and over again across multiple threads would know how to identify it.
Now, on a lighter note and because you only entertain me in small doses, I’m going to the Thrift Shop. I dare you to watch this and not bob your head: (NSFW – language) http://bit.ly/QytRNa (NSFW – language)
Peace.
Leon, first it’s “a propoganda spiel of little merit and no truth.” followed by “let’s find out if this POTUS is eligible to be POTUS. You may laugh out of ignorance but why would any idiot post a BC which has been proving [sic] to be a fraud. Why does POTUS have a SS# that belongs to someone else?”
If it was “proving” to be a fraud by any, you know, applicable standard, then you can bet your ass that the GOP would be trumpeting it from the highest mountain and would be immediately moving to impeach him. But FOX News isn’t covering any impeachment hearings. No, instead, there is only silence from all but the lunatic fringe.
So… anytime you feel like getting off of your tiny bike and unlacing those big red shoes, I’ll be glad to have a serious discussion with you. Until then, I’m pretty sure that we’re just going to keep treating you like a clown.
I can see why Leon and Frank need to remain anonymous. No sane person would ever own such comments. I am starting to think “right wing” is a mental illness.
103.I can see why Leon and Frank need to remain anonymous. No sane person would ever own such comments. I am starting to think “right wing” is a mental illness.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — February 10, 2013 @ 5:26 pm
There is an echo in the room.
J.M.@102. . .there are many, on both sides of the aisle, that know the truth as do many in the media. The evidence that something is amiss is far too numerous to be coincidental. The power elite fear disclosure as it will surely bring down their house of cards. Thus, it is obscured as best possible. On the other hand there are those that are not few in number who pursue the matter as it does matter. If one studies and researches the matter at all they will find it appalling.
As to GWB, as I have indicated, he attempted to reign in Freddie Mac and
Fannie Mae but was thwarted by a liberal Congress in the closing years of his administration. GWB was a good president; much happened during his two terms and there was a strong economy with low unemployment throughout his years. Accordingly, after office he retired. Historically this is what past presidents do although Clinton could not not do so and I expect Obama will be incapable of such as neither were Presidential when serving.
Cigars tricks in the Oval Office, Impeachment and now “lets bypass Congress” to have our way. A President should respect the office, the law
and the constitution which pretty much rules out any liberal progressive minded folks.
hay J.M.,
First of all, your statement, “Bush…did everything in his power to prolong the imminent crash until he could get out of there”, is the purest of hogwash. Almost as good as clinton’s…
Second, I viewed the link you sent, all the way thru to 2:23…then just had to bail. I hope it had a happy ending. I like happy endings.
J.M., I’ll agree that the financial collapse occured under Bush’s watch, if you’ll agree that the seeds of destruction were sown by bill clinton, who was manipulated by his lovable ol’ Treasury Secretary, robert rubin (who was manipulated by Sandy Weill at Citigroup, which gave Rubin a cushy top-level job after he left the Treasury)…who was assisted by James Johnson (democrat party operative), head cheat-in-charge of fanny-mae, and lead obama guy to vet vp candidates…until his role at fannie took on a different “hue”. And, let’s not forget barney frank’s opposition to changing the fast-and-footloose things at fanny and freddie…early in Bush’s second term.
If you truly care to learn more about how the mortgage thing actually went down, beyond just reading lib-jargon, I suggest two books:
“Tearing Down the Walls”, by Monica Langley, Wall Stree Journal, copyrighted 2003. This easy to read book is heavily foot-noted, and is scholarly written. The very fact that this book was published in 2003 makes it, in my opinion, a must read for anyone who …truly… wants to learn some unbiased history about what led to the crash without the hint of red or blue fogging things up. I read the book in 2004, because up to that point, I enjoyed reading about the ups and downs of Sandy Weill’s business career.
Another must-read, in my opinion, is “Reckless Endangerment”, by Gretchen Morgenson (Pulitzer-prize-winning NYTs reporter) and Joshua Rosner. Copy-righted 2011. This book is also easy to read, is heavily foot-noted, and is scholarly written.
The above books, if read, will give you an unbiased historical view (five years before the crash would be pretty unbiased, right?) of what actually happened when deregulation occured under bill clinton’s watch…combined with an unbiased view (after all, Morgenson IS a Pulitzer-prize-winning NYTs writer…) of why the crash happened.
anyhow, it’s been a pleasure, J.M.
…and, Peace be with you.
Of one thing I assure you, in case you chose not to learn anything more than what you do from lib-talking points…Bush wasn’t even a teenie, tiny bit player in the cause of the banking failures.
Now, on to some facts:
1. obama IS personally responsible for obama-care, and gets the credit…so he should personally get the blame for causing lib-bastions of employment (colleges, universities, local and state governments) to reduce the hours of their part-time employees, most of whom have not had a pay increase in several years.
2. obama IS personally responsible for not warning his lib-low-information voters who had NO IDEA that their fica tax rates would return to what they were two years ago, because all they heard obama say, and all they saw or read from lib-main-stream-media sources was that, “obama wasn’t going to balance the budget and cut the deficit on the backs of the middle-class and the working-poor”. That wasn’t going to happen on HIS watch. “The rich didn’t pay their fair share”, and by golly, he was gonna make’m pay. THAT was the message he shouted all during the campaign (heck, all during his term), and low-information lib-voters took him at his word.
And, got screwed. He didn’t even TRY to carve out the folks who make under $50k per year. All he wanted was their vote, and then, screw’em.
100.97. Leon – I can copy court script. The secrect is understanding what is being said. Look for that case to be overthrown soon.
Comment by Richard J Beason — February 10, 2013 @ 4:01 pm
Beason; there is no secret. They will hear the case or not. I hope they
find the courage to do so as the American people have a right to know; which, by the way, is what they really fear. Happy for you that you can
copy court script; everyone should have their gifts.
Frank and Leon – a few facts that you might be interested in. first, it does no good for employers to try to meet the 50 employee rule by converting employees to part-time as the part-time employees hours are aggragated to be considered full-time. You can’t get around the law that way.
Secondlyl emplyers only have to offer a minimum affordable coverage, the employee has to pay for the coverage up to 9.5% of their annual income. If their income is below 95% of the poverty line, they are not counted as they have medicaid available. If the coverage cannot be met at 9.5% of their income, only then may the emplpyer have to kick in the difference to meet the minimum affordable plan.
The penalty comes into account if the employer meets the numbers requirement but does not offer the minimum affordable plan to those emplyees exceeding 95% of the poverty line. Even then there are exceptions to help the employer. It is also important to note that the 9.5% applies only to the employee’s coverage, not deppendents or spouse. So if an employee makes $50,000 a year, he is expected to pay up tp $4,750 per year for their own insurance. Pretty high amount before the employer has to contribute for a minimum plan. The employer does not even have to offer the plan to those below 95% of the poverty line.
For individuals and employees of employers with less than 50 full time employees there will be a tax credit available to help them meet minimum affordable insurance coverage or obtain coverage through state or federal sponsored plans.
The worst thing Clinton did was sign the Gramm-Leach-Bliley act, repealing Glass Steagall, which kept main street banking and investment banking separate. And Frank’s correct that Rubin sold it to Clinton.
A LOT of the bad stuff that later happened would not have had that not been repealed.
Frank, should I assume that you’re in favor of re-enacting Glass Steagall?
I am. But the GOP is absolutely opposed. They’re also opposed to Dodd-Frank, which is a 3/4-assed version of Glass Steagall.
113. dan – Yes, it is amazing that Congress allowed banks to use depositors money to invest in the stock market for the bank. Supposedly, reserve requirements were tobe high enough to protect the depositor, obviously they were not. Had the Gov’t not stepped in, all the depositor’s money would have been gone.
Comment by Richard J Beason — February 10, 2013 @ 7:09 pm
RJB you’re talking to a vacuum (the one between heyfrank’s and Leon’s
ears). They have clearly been drinking bottled paranoia water all weekend
and are now spilling it all over Dan’s blog.
a few facts that you might be interested in. first, it does no good for employers to try to meet the 50 employee rule by converting employees to part-time as the part-time employees hours are aggragated to be considered full-time. You can’t get around the law that way.
Comment by Richard J Beason — February 10, 2013 @ 7:09 pm
Which is why layoffs are happening now and making news (even the RT).
The UnAffordable Care Act goes full tilt in 2014. . .companies are restructing their workforces now in anticipation and to avoid any look back period. This is the second wave of layoffs; the first involved companies producing and marketing durable medical devices which are subject to a special tax under Obamacare.
hey dano!
surprise! surprise! surprise!
I was never in favor of repealing glass-steagall.
i also have no confidence in ANYTHING with dodd’s name on it. barney is the lesser of those two evils.
wall street investment banks should not have been able to do what they did and risk depositors’ money. i was appalled by what i read in 2004, in Langley’s book, which I only bought in order to read more about sandy weill. sheesh.
fdic should insure banking…not investment banking.
i like smaller banks.
read the books i mentioned above. they are a quick read, and, they’ll make you ill.
Richard,
I was doing to some reading about the Woodrow Wilson presidency over the weekend and realized that as we enjoyed the Super Bowl last Sunday the 16th Amendment turned 100 years old that day. The original 1040 was four pages long including two pages of instructions to fill out two pages of a tax form. By the way the original tax was a progessive tax. Those who earned more were expected to pay a higher rate.
In the last 10 years there have been, according to the Tax Foundation, 4,428 changes to the tax code. I believe Congress, in honor of the 100th birthday of the 16th Amendment, could embrace the concept of tax simplification. Think seriously about limiting deductions and credits, expand the definition of income and work toward a flatter, simpler tax code. The orginal idea behind the income tax was to use the revenue generated to fund the operations of the government. In the 100 years since it has grown to encourage individual and corporate behavior of one sort or another.
I’m not trying to put people like you out of work, but it seems we could find a pathway to simplifing the tax code that would avoid having individuals & corporations spending 7 billion hours filling out tax forms.
#104 “Instead of waiting for dano to respond (so you can cheat off his …answer), why don’t you go out on a limb all by yourself, and answer the question I posed above to ol’ dano, …BEFORE he does?”
Hey, Frank, as my reply and Dan’s were just three minutes apart, we were typing at the same time. Dan’s had not been posted by the time I started mine. So there was no “piggybacking” – we’re just both a lot smarter than you.
Are you REALLY this dumb?
Leon You seem to miss a few things one if you have a need for employees, you need them. Making them parttime changes nothing If you do not need the labor you get rid of it Secondly the cost is paid by the employee not the employer in most cases
Your ideas do not fit the facts
So employers are using the ACA as an excuse to screw their employees, just as they did with the Family Leave Act. I’m seeing a trend here.
Ron there are many things that could be simplified and for most wage earners have been If you rent and get a W2 filing a return is very simple A 5 minute return
The complexity comes from giving the incentives to various groups
Lowering and making the rates flatter makes the rates less fair in my opinion and tax the effectiveness of the incentives less
Ron the other crucial fact is we live in a much more complicated time We did not have derivatives a couple decades ago, no hedge funds, business was done in the US not in a hundred countries Business wad done in days not seconds The good old days were simple laid back and took a lot of time That time will nevet return
“Instead of waiting for dano to respond (so you can cheat off his …answer), why don’t you go out on a limb all by yourself, and answer the question I posed above to ol’ dano, …”
Frankie, if you look back, you’ll see that we were typing our answers at about the same time. By the time I starting typing mine, Dan’s hadn’t been posted. I haven’t yet learned how to mindread people. You could learn to read better, though. Sheesh.
111 Leon what in the world are you talking about the can is merely about making tax preparers take CPE so they have some knowledge of what to do CPAs and Attorneys have had to do that and much more for years The goverments have set standards for businesses from barbers to meat cutters thiswill be overturned
125.111 Leon what in the world are you talking about the can is merely about making tax preparers take CPE so they have some knowledge of what to do CPAs and Attorneys have had to do that and much more for years The goverments have set standards for businesses from barbers to meat cutters thiswill be overturned
Comment by RICHARD Richard J Beason — February 10, 2013 @ 11:42 pm
The point you miss Beason is that such licenses or standards are set by State Governments; not Federal. The decision will be upheld. The IRS is
not granted the authority to regulate preparers and has not shown itself capable. Last year over a half billion in fraudulent refunds were issued (ie…PAID). The IRS fails at it’s primary function which is to process
returns; how can it be expected to regulate preparers. Furthermore, despite laws against using the IRS as a political tool it does, and is,
happening. One more reason this is a department of the Federal government which should either be eliminated or cut back severly. Personally, I like Goodlatte’s proposal; abolish the code. Go FAIR TAX!
120.
Leon You seem to miss a few things one if you have a need for employees, you need them. Making them parttime changes nothing If you do not need the labor you get rid of it Secondly the cost is paid by the employee not the employer in most cases
Your ideas do not fit the facts
Comment by RICHARD Richard J Beason — February 10, 2013 @ 10:19 pm
Beason; I really tire of having to inform you of things you should know.
Businesses are eliminating FT employees and utilizing PT employees instead. While this means more PT’s there are plenty of people looking for work as Obamanomics has seen to that. PT’s save the business $ as they get no bene’s and also keep the employer out of the new Obamacare
nightmare regulations and penalties. This is happening now, all over the
country, as employers are well aware of the look back ruling and, accordingly, act in a timely fashion to trim and reshape their workforces.
125 That is court, not can. Using a Galaxy to type remains hard.
#124 OK, I posted a second response that echoed my first one to to Frank because when I looked at the blog at 11:05, my 9:32 p.m. post was not showing even though posts by other people later than mine WERE showing. I assumed Dan had deleted my first post for whatever reason. Not sure why my 9:32 post the showed up later.
Frank doesn’t mind posting the same thing over and over and over and over on the same thread but I generally try to avoid it.
Ron – Since your question, I have been thinking back to the complexity issue. Tax law really did become more complex as technology developed. When we prepared financial statements and tax returns by hand, there was no ability to function in such complexities. Up until the mis-deventies, financials and taxes were relatively simple. They were as fair as you could get under the restrictions. As soon as computers became more commonplace, we began to ue them to better present issues that were indeed complex. Lease arrangments, financial complexities, phase-in and out of tax deductions and credits, etc. were there before but not considered because their calculations were too cumbersome.
But as technology allowed us to have complex finance arrangements, we had to also report them in the financials. Businesses and individuals found new and more compliceted was to do business and the government had to regulate, determine how to tax or not tax, and we had to report them. Since the early 80s it has been a steady stream of increasing complexity.
In taxation, technology has allowed Congress to make the law much more pinpointed in assessing tax and allowing benefits to the groups they select. They can encourage or supply dis-incentive where they deem appropriate. You may argue against such, but these methods have given us housing, developed the enerhy industry, established our manufacturing base and to a large extent moved it overseas and is now bringing it back. We simply live in a complex society that technology has delivered. To try and simplify means to go back to a more general tax policy that accordingly becomes less beneficial to fix the needs of society and less fair when it is one blanket to fit all situations.
1226 – Leon – first of all the federal government as well as stae governments regulate professionals. The IRS has regulated tax preparers for years. The fraud is the very reason additional regulatins are needed. Perhaps it is you who does not know if things you should know.
127. Leon, trying to manipuulate full time to part time during the look back period does very little. You still calculate effective full time employment which means total hours of part time employees are adjusted to be treated as full-time. Very few employers will gain a benefit by trying to manipulate this.
Let’s ignore the slimy bosses doing this and just concentrate on the ACA and Obama. Way to go Leon, keepin’ it real and blaming the wrong people. Nothing new there. I wish I could remember the last time a right winger had an original thought or offered a substantive opinion. Even with dirty tricks like some companies are trying, this will still help millions and millions of Americans.
Even with dirty tricks like some companies are trying, this will still help millions and millions of Americans.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — February 11, 2013 @ 10:31 am
Yep. . .help them right out of their health care coverage!
1226 – Leon – first of all the federal government as well as stae governments regulate professionals. The IRS has regulated tax preparers for years. The fraud is the very reason additional regulatins are needed. Perhaps it is you who does not know if things you should know.
Comment by Richard J Beason — February 11, 2013 @ 9:41 am
Beg to disagree; Attorneys, CPAs, MDs, Engineers, Contractors, Dentists,
Barbers, Hair Dressers and Commercial Drivers are regulated by the state(s). Who regulates you license, if you still have it. . .seems to be missing these days.
Re: Richard J Beason @ 8:18 am
LOL
Actually I rather like folk using such devices.
Makes my constant typos / proofos closer to the norm and not stand out so bad.
7H15 M3554G3 53RV35 7O PR0V3 H0W 0UR M1ND5 C4N D0 4M4Z1NG 7H1NG5!
1MPR3551V3 7H1NG5!
1N 7H3 B3G1NN1NG 17 WA5 H4RD BU7 N0W, 0N 7H15 LIN3 Y0UR M1ND 1S R34D1NG 17 4U70M471C4LLY W17H 0U7 3V3N 7H1NK1NG 4B0U7 17, B3 PROUD! 0NLY C3R741N P30PL3 C4N R3AD 7H15.
.
.
Maybe the ACA will be the nail in the coffin of employer supplied and controlled insurance coverage. Since most of the small businesses doing this have expensive catastrophe insurance anyway, the employees will be better off in the long run to get insurance on their own as they look for a better employer (and they will). The backlash may have them wishing they had handled this differently but if the outcome is people getting better insurance for less, then it is a win/win.
How an employer will dance around less hours, no insurance and same pay will be a really hard sell that is going to cost them the best workers IMO.
http://www.californiahealthline.org/articles/2012/12/6/business-that-drop-health-care-coverage-could-face-backlash.aspx
Re: Richard J Beason @ 8:33 am
Although I respect your point about technology and complexity, I still believe that everyone / groups maneuvering to get in on the tax expenditures (spending on the revenue collection side via reductions in tax liabilities) bandwagon and lawmakers / policymakers perfering to them written into the Tax Code provisions (in order not to have to debate / vote on appropriations every year) is a major factor in complexity.
I have read that from the mid 1970′s to 2000′s the number of tax expenditures (reductions in tax liabilities) provisions had more than doubled.
Sometimes there does not seem to be a reason for the use of revenue spending expenditures v. tax waver expenditures. For example, Medicare hospital insurance benefits are on the spending (revenue appropriations) side of the Federal Budget v. employees who receive health insurance from their employers are entitled to exclude the employer-paid premiums from their gross income on the reduced revenue collection (tax expenditures) side. [Question for the CPA: Does not the employer also get to write off cost employe benefits from gross income?]
FWIIW, I also believe that (in addition to added complexity) this shift from annually reviewing of / voting on revenue expenditures to ignoring tax expenditures (reductions in tax liabilities) contributed significantly to our current tax / revenue imbalance.
Ohh Suzie, how you make me laugh. You should go into standup comedy now as someone else is subsidizing your healthcare! Now you are free! What is your highest level of education again? Come again? If you want “fair” go ride the carousel when they go to Salem.
“The backlash may have them wishing they had handled this differently but if the outcome is people getting better insurance for less, then it is a win/win.” Are you typing on your Obamaphone? When have you ever gotten better product for less with NO competition? Your local doctor is going to be the DMV. Take a number Suzie.
And those “slimy bosses?” Ohh, you mean the boss that hires workers/employees to produce a product/service to bring to market and sell for a profit that brings in tax revenue? Ohh, you mean the boss who pays payroll tax, federal tax, SS tax, Medicare tax? These taxes fund programs that you admire so much sweetie. They really arent free like they tell you on TV. Ohh, you mean the boss who is responsible for employees who each pay taxes also now since they have a job and dont draw unemployment? They actually broaden the tax base! Now Ive tried to keep it simple for you Suzie… Here you go…More people paying taxes=good for entitlement programs that you love so much.
Keep on the attack Suzie. Yell at the top of your lungs how ignorant everyone else is besides you. Then maybe they wont notice how simple you are.
On a side note: Dave Hicks- Great post @ 12:34 !
Maybe the ACA will be the nail in the coffin of employer supplied and controlled insurance coverage. Since most of the small businesses doing this have expensive catastrophe insurance anyway, the employees will be better off in the long run to get insurance on their own as they look for a better employer (and they will). The backlash may have them wishing they had handled this differently but if the outcome is people getting better insurance for less, then it is a win/win.
How an employer will dance around less hours, no insurance and same pay will be a really hard sell that is going to cost them the best workers IMO.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — February 11, 2013 @ 12:54 pm
Only two problems with your wonderful scenerio. 1) the IRS just advised the cheapest available health insurance plan for a family of 4 will be $20k. Since this is all “on the employee” looks like everyone cost to health insurance is going through the roof. 2) Since many, if not all employers are doing the ACA dance such won’t be a reason for making a job change. In fact, with the additional job cuts created by ACA…those of us still employed will overjoyed we still are and would rather take a pay cut than switch. See Sandi, it pays to think things through which I know liberala do not like to do. How’s that hopey, changey thing working out?
135 Leon – We are also regulated by the federal government by federal and state statute. As for my license, look it up its published.
138 dave Hicks – First the tax question – the expenditures are only written off once. The employer writes them off as benefits if he pays them (pretax to the employee) or the empoyee can take as an itemized deduction if they are after tax.
As for complexity, certainly our Cogressmen have been known for writing specific benefits for special groups that have lobbied for these benefits. No question it has made matters more complex. But,I have to take Congress’s word as to the fiscal need for those special designations. If I don’t like them, then I need tovote for an new Congressman. But it is the technologhy that allows Congress to put in these measures that they believe are appropriate. Otherwise, we could never complete a tax return.
Leon, how about you sign your legal name so we can verify whether you have the chops to be commenting, since you feel qualified to comment on someone else’s intelligence, knowledge or integrity, it is only fair.
“Only two problems with your wonderful scenerio. 1) the IRS just advised the cheapest available health insurance plan for a family of 4 will be $20k. Since this is all “on the employee” looks like everyone cost to health insurance is going through the roof. 2) Since many, if not all employers are doing the ACA dance such won’t be a reason for making a job change. In fact, with the additional job cuts created by ACA…those of us still employed will overjoyed we still are and would rather take a pay cut than switch. See Sandi, it pays to think things through which I know liberala do not like to do. How’s that hopey, changey thing working out?”
This little out-of-context nugget was first “dug up” and “reported” by CNSNews, which is an organ of the Republican Party. It’s not true, and the purpose for doing it was to scare people. It’s TOTAL BS and you should know that, Leon.
(But you still believe the Supreme Court is going to rule Obama ineligible, don’t cha?)
Decisions, decisions! Do we tell PP that his diatribe aimed at me but using Suzie’s name was a hoot, or just let it stand and him look like a fool?
PP, you are attacking from the safety of internet anonymity which makes you a coward, and a joke. If I were ever to be intimidated by anyone, it would be someone with a lot more knowledge and integrity that you display.
Bosses deliberately cutting hours to keep from offering insurance will see a backlash and the effects of this economic crash will not last forever.
Oh Leon, Pavlov would be vindicated!
HaHa..These dang Galaxy phones! Richard I see your problem!
Sandi, Who is intimidating you? There are laws against online intimidation…And Im law abiding! You are quite a hoot though!
Poor Frankie had to disappear from this thread after pulling out his pea shooter and missing.
Leon – your estimate is jsut that an estimate. I’e done a lot of checking and at this time there are only guesses as to premiums because the insurance companies are wideniing the age brackets, alot of individuals will be covered under the state sponsored programs, many people will qualify for the 50% tax credit on their premiums and many companies will continue to pay a share of the premium to get the tax credit or in the case of larger companies to compensate the employee just like they have always done.
As for a $20,000 premium for four. I am paying close to that now in a small group and the insurance is limited and that is with no health issues by anyone in the group. Assumming even a 3% hike, I will be pretty close, so I won’t see much difference except I will get a 50% tax credit that I don’t get now. So I will save $10 grand. Woo Hoo.
Re: Richard J Beason @ 3:38 pm
“… writing specific benefits for special groups….”
——————
It is not the “writing specific benefits for special groups” in general that I object to — albeit some such as subsidizing thoroughbred racehorse owners do seem rather specious.
What I object to is the putting them as tax expenditures (spending on the revenue collection side via reductions in tax liabilities) where they don’t have periodic review and they don’t require periodic votes to be maintain (as the would as normal appropriations process in the federal budget).
This little out-of-context nugget was first “dug up” and “reported” by CNSNews, which is an organ of the Republican Party. It’s not true, and the purpose for doing it was to scare people. It’s TOTAL BS and you should know that, Leon.
(But you still believe the Supreme Court is going to rule Obama ineligible, don’t cha?)
Comment by Dan Casey — February 11, 2013 @ 4:08 pm
Here’s another source for you Dan. BTW, also note the unaffordable ACA plans cover only 60% so on top of expensive insurance you get 40% of your
bill unpaid. . .LOL. . .
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/wheels_coming_off_QPojjZX0Bd8BU80hDpcKZP
Sandi Snit @143. . .perhaps Dan will share a bit of crow with you. Why do
you keep asking for my name? Are you making a list like Obama keeps droning about?
Beason @149. . .see link at post 150; ahare crow with Dan.
149. Dave Hicks – Technically since the IRS Code says all income from every source derived is taxable and only those exclusions and deductions and credits specifically allowed by Congress are exclused from taxation and since technically the Congress could tax 100% of your income at a 100% tax rate, the treatment seems correct.
141.135 Leon – We are also regulated by the federal government by federal and state statute. As for my license, look it up its published.
Comment by Richard J Beason — February 11, 2013 @ 3:29 pm
If you are licensed then you know there is no Federal license or oversight; it is all handled by the State Board. Why do you lie
about stuff that is a matter of public reoord? Does such come so
easy to liberals like it is second nature or instinct or are you
just a BO wannabe?
146.Oh Leon, Pavlov would be vindicated!
Comment by Sandi Saunders — February 11, 2013 @ 4:43 pm
Please, never ever confuse me with BO; he likes dog.
Comment by Leon — February 11, 2013 @ 2:39 pm
The $20,000 figure is a number used by the IRS to figure out the penalty for those who do not carry insurance. The IRS will not force anyone to pay $20,000 according to the May 23, 2012 IRS release on the rules and regulations of the Affordable Care Act.
“The IRS’s ASSUMPTION that the cheapest plan for a family will cost $20,000 per year [Bronze level coverage] is found in examples the IRS gives to help people understand how TO CALCULATE the penalty they will need to pay the government if they do not buy a mandated health plan.
Bronze will be the lowest tier health-insurance plan available [under ACA] after Silver, Gold, and Platinum. Under the law, the penalty for NOT BUYING health insurance is supposed to be capped at either the annual average Bronze premium, 2.5 percent of taxable
income, or $2,085.00 per family in 2016.”
So the penalty is assessed against those irresponsible uninsured citizens based on their income and the level of insurance coverage they would have had to pay – this eliminates the additional cost burden otherwise placed on the insured’s premiums.
Your post reflects the right wing’s proclivity for misinformation and their hope that the parroting by their fact-challenged legions will spread the lie. Had you taken the time to find out what the truth was, you might have looked less foolish.
Since reading is fundamental, Leon, here is the IRS site where the information is readily available in pdf. format
http://www.irs.gov/uac/Affordable-Care-Act-Tax-Provisions
Like Hillary says, the $20k figure is an abstract assumption, not any kind of prediction.
Are you listening, LEON?
Mrs. Saunders, you seem to have an issue with “internet anonymity”. I, for one, wish to remain anonymous, not because of cowardice but for safety. I want to keep as much personal information as possible out of public view. Not just for myself, but out of love for my family and friends. I don’t want to wake up and see Black Bart’s roving band of villainous marauders creeping over my back fence. Thus causing me to get ‘Ol Blue (my Red Ryder carbine-action 200 shot range model rife). Just because you choose to have the presence of Dagmar and sing loud and proud like Doris Day doesn’t mean that those who wish to keep their Secret Squirrel gear on are cowards.
Thus causing me to get ‘Ol Blue (my Red Ryder carbine-action 200 shot range model rife).
You’ll put your eye out!
(Someone had to say it.)
GO84, what I have an “issue” with is those who hide in the safety of anonymity attacking those who are not. If you want to remain anonymous, for whatever reason, have the integrity and decency not to challenge the profession, employment or intelligence of someone who is not posting from that same cover and you will have no problem with me. If you choose to use that safety to attack my life, my home, my employment, my looks, my intelligence or integrity, oh hell yes, your attack from that safety will be mentioned and made an issue of.
Other than such cowardly attacks, I have no problem at all with anyone wanting to remain anonymous for any reason or no reason at all.
Please, never ever confuse me with BO; he likes dog.
Comment by Leon — February 11, 2013 @ 7:02 pm
Ah! So you have a BO problem! I’m sure a dog would detect it right away. You can’t fool a dog with a good nose! Today we train dogs to detect high
blood sugar, impending seizures and lots of other things. As soon as we train one to detect BS and lies it would probably behoove you to stay at
home and as anonymous as possible.
154. Leon 0 CPAs and Tax Attorneys are regulated by the IRS under Cirgular 230. CPAs are regulated by the Sarbannes Oxley Act, Bliley Act, SEC, and the Governmental Account Board. We are not only regulated by federral law, the State Board of Accounting specifically states that we must meet all federal as well as state regulations to remain licensed.
As I said, if you question my license, go to the VA Board of Accounting and look me up. You can find my license and my Peer Review if you so desire. While there read up on regulations for CPAs, you have a lot to learn. While online, you might check out my resume, you will find I write and teach VA Board of Accounting Ethics which covers the regulations we practice under.
As for your cites on Insurance costs, that is baloney. I have been trying to find an indication of premiums for next year for my clients and there simply is estimates out there that are reliable. In fact, my best insurance brpker stated that she is advising waiting on making any changes to your insurance until later this year as things as the insurance companies are changing rapidly. One thing is for sure, may of us will have a 50% of premium tax credit to help pay for our insurance. That is a good deal for the consumer.
Leon, perhaps you need to start pulling feathers out of your teeth.
Hillary@156 and Dan@157. . .here’s the link. Try reading it while eating
crow. Article is from the New York Post. . .has another stunning ramification about ACA. . .the kid’s won’t be covered! Enjoy!
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/wheels_coming_off_QPojjZX0Bd8BU80hDpcKZP
Sandi@160. . .It’s only a blog, it’s only a blog. LOL
Beason@162
Richard,
Keep it up and the RT will have to bill you for advertising.
I know it does not surprise you from our previous discourse that I am well
aware of how the profession of accounting is regulated and it isn’t the Federal Government. There are acts like SO which we must comply with but these are not professional regulation or license. FASB and GASB are standards which also must be complied with along with GAAS. The Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended, is truly a piece of work which must be complied with if a professional practices in the area of tax.
In summary, Richard, stop trying to blow smoke up my rear end to see if my ears will wiggle, they will not. You only assume I have a lot to learn; but you should well know what assume means in the accounting profession.
Well Leon – SO is a regulation, Circular 230 is regulation both at the federal level. Try perfoming a governmental audit without meeting the regulatins of GASB and see how long you keep you license. If you are trying to tell me you are a licenced CPA then I have to wonder how you manage to keep it.
Comment by Leon — February 11, 2013 @ 8:29 pm
Not quite sure why I should “eat crow”. Your original post stated,
“1) the IRS just advised the cheapest available health insurance plan for a family of 4 will be $20k. Since this is all “on the employee” looks like everyone cost to health insurance is going through the roof”
Your statement is inaccurate. Is there something about that $20,000 figure being the basis for the penalty [depending on family size, income, and level of insurance] for NOT carrying health insurance that you don’t understand?
Had you read the IRS’ statement of May 2012, you would have learned that many of these regulations do not become effective until 2014 through 2016, plenty of time to refute your “the sky is falling” mentality.
Leon, if it is “only a blog” why the need to lash out from hiding? Do you behave that way in the real world too? Is this how you communicate when it is not a blog?
Oh yes, your ears wiggle. Your nose grows too Leon. From your previous discourse I am shocked that you would claim to be “well aware” of what day it is. It’s only a blog!
“Please, never ever confuse me with BO; he likes dog.”
We can always count on Leon to bring up something really, really stupid.
Laura, glad you liked it. I find it good to have a little levity in life.
Mrs. Saunders, I’m still trying to figure this out. It appears to me that a lot of people on here really don’t like each other and continually just scratch and claw. I’ve read comments where you have insulted people and they have insulted you. So if I understand your principle correctly. Once you’re insulted you want the full name, address, and zip so you can go and have a fist fight with them in their yard? No? Then what difference does it make if you know their “legal name”? I’m not sure why ya’ll stay on here. But, maybe I don’t understand something.
It seams to me that if everyone insults everyone else then no one is really listening to each other. Then this is just a “gotcha” discussion. Ya’ll do realize that no one is ever going to admit that they are wrong? Mr. Casey is never going to post anything that the right is going to like. Sooo what is the purpose of all this bantering?
Ok, let me see if I got this. Ya’ll get on here early in the morning, jump on each other, go to work, while at work keep up with who jumped on you and make sure you get a good one in, feel better, go home, get on and see who has jumped on you so you can jump back on them, and then go to bed. Next morning you start over. This even goes through the weekend.
Mrs. Saunders, you asked Mr. Casey when he was going to start a new group that would exclude those ya’ll don’t like. I believe you said that when they get there own area they could “sniff each other”. However, if I look at what you want, 2 areas for like minded people to interact with there own kind. Then that onerous statement would apply to your group as well. Once you have your 2 groups I think you’ll find that the circular commentary will only be smaller than what is on here now.
Is this what everyone thinks is fun nowadays? I think you’ll find that if you all are insulting on here then you are also having a bad attitude in your personal life.
I’ve tried to break out the popcorn and just watch ya’ll have at each other, but this is just sad people. Mr. Casey puts up a picture that I guess is supposed to be what the topic is but it just winds up being a “gotcha” on the same stuff ya’ll have been playing “gotcha” about on the other pictures. From the post times, ya’ll must have multiple windows open so ya’ll can watch all the area’s at once.
What sad lives you people live. Are ya‘ll so lacking in meaningful interaction with other people that this is your substitute. Day after day, month after month, year after year. Did I see correctly Mrs. Saunders? You have 95,000+ posts. Wow I am impressed. Which one of ya’ll is going for the next prize?
People, it’s ok to go outside in the sunshine or the rain. For you godly people, enjoy the day that god has given you. For you heatherns enjoy the day that life has given you.
LIVE PEOPLE, LIFE IS SHORT
Lest the heatherns start in on me…the square after the word is supposed to be a smilley.
Let’s let his ignorant, juvenile crap go, gdad. He’s now saying that regulations within the industry aren’t federal regulations, which is kind of like arguing over taking a half-dozen suppositories or having an enema; either way, you’re doing something uncomfortable and likely unpleasant to achieve the same end. On top of that, he’s repeatedly claiming a link to an op-ed by “serial health care misinformer” Betsy McCaughey ( http://bit.ly/UR9RSW ) is definitive proof of his earlier claim, even in the face of the actual IRS tax provisions as listed on their own website.
The man is a one-man big top. Let’s just watch him whirl and twirl for a bit more. It’s mesmerizing.
GO84, did you not just pretty much end your comment with the very thing that you are lamenting within it, insulting our “sad lives” and making false assumptions? At the very least you’re taking the internet far too seriously to be telling anyone else to take it less seriously.
But there’s the rub, ain’t it? You can’t just sit back and not interact, can you? You admitted it. It gets a little out of hand in here at times, and you’re free to unplug at any time you wish. But you probably won’t. It is fun, isn’t it? Still, you’re a voluntary captive here and after all, it’s just the internet.
By the way, I have on several occasions admitted that I was wrong on this blog.
“Is this what everyone thinks is fun nowadays?”
Fun is listening to Rwingers blather incessantly after the president is elected to a second term by the largest popular-vote margins since Eisenhower. Even sweeter, ain’t a damn thing they can do about it!
166.Well Leon – SO is a regulation, Circular 230 is regulation both at the federal level. Try perfoming a governmental audit without meeting the regulatins of GASB and see how long you keep you license. If you are trying to tell me you are a licenced CPA then I have to wonder how you manage to keep it.
Comment by Richard J Beason — February 11, 2013 @ 9:13 pm
Richard, are you really this dense. The court just ruled that the IRS has no authority to license paid preparers. If a CPA decides to practice in the are of tax he must, accordingly, comply with standards and rules which are part of the Federal tax code. If a CPA decides to practice in the are of the attest function, there are standards which must be complied with including FASB, GASB, GAAS and. . .soon. . .IASB. That said
the only regulatory authority over the CPA is the respective State Board which is established to protect the general public and accordingly, licenses and, when necessary, discipline CPAs. Alternatively, a CPA can choose not to practice in either area. If employed by a third party and
performing accounting work it is again a requirement to comply with established accounting standards. However, no license is required.
BTW, be advised that my license and/or licenses are none of your concern.
While I give my opinion on various issues I do not try to provide either accounting or tax advice via a blog. To do such, in my opinion, would be
a violation of professional ethics. I believe this is a lesson you have
recently learned as I distinctly recall you used to post differently than you do now.
Hillary@156,
Thank you for making my point. ACA is bad law.
LIVE PEOPLE, LIFE IS SHORT
Comment by GO84 — February 11, 2013 @ 11:34 pm
Agreed and well said. IMO, this blog is cheap entertainment although you will find the occasional post(er) who makes a good point or is informative.
As soon as we train one to detect BS and lies it would probably behoove you to stay at
home and as anonymous as possible.
Comment by wayne goodman — February 11, 2013 @ 8:22 pm
Suggest you follow your own advice.
By the way, I have on several occasions admitted that I was wrong on this blog.
Comment by J.M. White — February 12, 2013 @ 12:27 am
IMO, not often enough. This POTD is not.
Did I see correctly Mrs. Saunders? You have 95,000+ posts. Wow I am impressed.
Comment by GO84 — February 11, 2013 @ 11:34 pm
LOL. . .what a liberal rant.
Fun is listening to Rwingers blather incessantly after the president is elected to a second term by the largest popular-vote margins since Eisenhower.
Too bad it didn’t happen. The election was stolen.
GO84, I realized from your first post here that you do not “get it”. Which is fine, except when you then feel qualified to comment on “it”. You mistake my point, either on purpose or due to a lack of comprehension skill, but either way, it is not for the purpose of meeting anyone that I ask them to come out of their safe hiding place, it is because I believe that people should own their bile and be accountable. Internet bullies who hide in that anonymity and own nothing are the problem on this blog. They are not the entertainment, not the rebuttal, not the substantive posts, not the “loyal opposition”, they are the problem, period.
We can never have a substantive conversation, debate or discussion because some idiot from the right needs to vent their spleen, always anonymously and always with less than truthful and honest rhetoric. It has gotten old, stale, predictable and yes, like shooting fish in a barrel.
As J.M. White said, no one has captured you and forced you to come here, no one. If you do not want to be blasted for hiding in anonymity and venting your insults, you have two choices, sign your real name to them (earn them) or stop doing it. Otherwise you will be even less enchanted with me as this goes on. I promise.
Leon @ post #177 – Delusional much?
If you do not want to be blasted for hiding in anonymity and venting your insults, you have two choices, sign your real name to them (earn them) or stop doing it. Otherwise you will be even less enchanted with me as this goes on. I promise.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — February 12, 2013 @ 7:46 am
Third option; ignore Sandi. Works every time. I wonder if Sandi’s real name is Sandi? ? ?
I have met Sandi and she is who she says she is…even has her own picture as an avatar…and you? Are you a pink whatchamacallit i?
Leon whines, “BTW, be advised that my license and/or licenses are none of your concern.”
I suggest you follow your own advice.
At least Richard has the integrity to sign his name to what he says and own his posts. Blog police like you want to stick it to others while making sure no one can return the favor. Typical right winger.
Blog police like you want to stick it to others while making sure no one can return the favor.
Does Sandi have a complaint against the many leftwingers who also blog from anonymity?
Leon, I beg of you, I implore you, please, please ignore me.
No GO84, you nor Leon “see correctly”. I have been blogging here since 2008 or 2009 but I do not have 95,000 posts. Reading comprehension is a tricky thing.
Is this the new thing….HayFrank, Leon, Mike3, AnotherChuck…just getting on here and whining? There is absolutely nothing worse than whiny men.
“Did I see correctly Mrs. Saunders? You have 95,000+ posts.”
Source, GO84?
176 Leon -Wow, how wrong you are. The IRS, SEC, and the the various agencies overseeing federal audits can and do fine CPAs for violations of their regulations. Perhaps you should review the VA Board of Accounting Ethics violations from 2012 where they cite many of the federal fines issued last year that they back up with state fines and code of conduct violations. I will note again – after the federal fines, we are regulated by the fed as well as by the state and can be fined by both. We can also be fined by the Virginia Department of Taxation for that matter. As for licenses and credentials, you sir are the one bringing such up. I merely answered your inquiry as to the status of my license. I am very happy that you are not a licensed CPA as it would reflect poorly on the profession.
As for an Ethics violation and use of my title on this blog, there is no violation and I chose to not use my title simply because it irritated you and Susie so much. I was cutting you some slack. I am very proud of my professsion and use my title as requested by the AICPA and the VSCPA to promote my profession regularly. I earned the credential and the symbol of financial knowledge it represents. Now eat your crow as you have no clue what you are talking about.
176 Leon -Wow
Comment by Richard J Beason — February 12, 2013 @ 11:58 am
Richard,
You are the one on the defensive. I never questioned you regarding your license status. What I said was if you were you should know. . .it appears now that you do not know what you do not know. Your hubris is quite telling.
176. Leon – By the way, the Court decision concerned paid tax preparers, not CPAs or Attorneys. We are licensed to represent taxpayers before the Internal Revenue Service, unlicensed tax preparers are not. The Court Decision had no affect on CPAs or Attorneys, or Enrolled Agents. Again, you need to study a little more. One other point, in your post at 165 you indicate “we nust comply with”. I surly hope you mean we as a citizen and not we as a CPA.
Geez Sandi you sure have a lot of hate for a liberal Democrat?
I was told that liberals were all encompassing, loving, amicable, earnest and sunny! You seem depressed, moody, hostile and aloof. I would not want to give you my real name…you dont seem stable and I dont want to come home one day and see you staring in the front window of my house.
Your posts paint the picture of an elitist snob…so it is no wonder you love the “American Idol” President so much. Please respond with something witty!
No worries PP, to date, the only people who have made threats of any reprisal on this blog have been you loving right wingers.
I’m trying to imagine something less palatable to “elitist snobs” than American Idol.
Yeah…no lefty has ever made any “threats of reprisal”…just right wingers (sigh).
Keep drinking the Kool-Aid. There is no common ground for you and I mrs. Saunders.
So close to 200 posts! Come on Sandi…I know youve got something to say! Get number 200!
you dont seem stable and I dont want to come home one day and see you staring in the front window of my house.
Your posts paint the picture of an elitist snob…so it is no wonder you love the “American Idol” President so much. Please respond with something witty!
Comment by PP — February 12, 2013 @ 3:15 pm
Not to worry PP. I’m sure that the NRA inspired stand your ground laws
and your trusty AR-15 with its 30 round magazine will give you all the protection you need from Sandi’s wicked and lethal prose. Other than the fact that what she says is true, you have nothing to worry about.
AND WAYNE WINS BY A NOSE! Thanks for your comment Wayne.
Thank you for assuming I have an AR-15. If I did have one, and Im not saying I do, I am sure you would be in the first group of people trying to take away my right to responsibly own one! What I have and own is none of your business as what you own is none of mine as long as we are both responsible people and are not breaking current law. On the other hand, I would invite you and your opinions over for dinner and conversation. You seem to be somewhat reasonable…unlike Mrs. Saunders.
I cannot adequately express how crushed I am that an anonymous internet identity is not smitten with me and my POV. I am just not sure how I will manage to survive such a diss.
PP, if you admitted you had an AR15, it wouldn’t mean anything. You’re anonymous here. Nobody knows or cares who you are. Really.
“Yeah…no lefty has ever made any “threats of reprisal”…just right wingers (sigh).”
On this blog, PP, the only folks I can remember who have made outright or veiled threats or who have invited others to meet them to “settle” things have been people who at least claimed to be right wingers. Dan has had to throw a couple of them off the blog.
You have evidence to the contrary?
Sometimes they issue veiled threats, like they’re gonna contact my boss, if I don’t do what they want. Shivers.
Kristen, am I or I not an elitist snob because I don’t love American Idol? I’ve never watched AI, Survivor, The Bachelor, Dancing with the Stars, Big Brother, or any of the other network reality shows. I’m guessing it means I’m not a good American.
Debbie, just not watching those shows is not enough to achieve elitist snobdom. But, with some more effort, I’m confident you can get there!
Dan I am crushed by your attack on my anonymity. Do my page views not count toward your total? Trust me I will not call your boss…I have better things to do than complain about the internet so you can take your coat off.
Does this blog have opinions from different perspectives or just left leaning? Clearly I have to re-read the rules of the blog if that is the case.
No threats from this anonymous internet identity. I wish you all the best in your endeavors and equal opportunity, not outcome. This is entertainment to me as it should be for all here. Please dont be so thin skinned that you take anything ANYONE says on here personal.
206.Kristen, am I or I not an elitist snob because I don’t love American Idol? I’ve never watched AI, Survivor, The Bachelor, Dancing with the Stars, Big Brother, or any of the other network reality shows. I’m guessing it means I’m not a good American.
Comment by Debbie — February 12, 2013 @ 4:58 pm
I’m ashamed to admit that I watched Survivor once when it first came out.
After a night of retching and vomiting and praying to the porcelain God, I too have managed to avoid the rest of that idiocy.I was even willing to watch the reruns of the old Andy Griffith show until we were afflicted with the hayfrank disease. After that, it gave me heartburn.
Don’t feel bad Wayne, a couple of weeks ago, to ease my guilty conscience I had to admit on Facebook to watching the last half hour of the Honey Boo Boo Thanksgiving show. It was a horrifying spectacle that I couldn’t look away from.
It still chills me to the bone to think about it.
PP,
Obviously you need to read deeper on this blog. There’s a wide variety of opinions, tho not all of them are, or can be, supported by facts.