Force the debt limit, NO INCREASES
-
No one going to answer?
sorry, didn't think the question was all that insightful. Yeah I'd guess somebody is going to put up with some inconvenience. That's what happens when you run out of money. You either borrow more which you can't pay back or you have to reorganize, give up a few things.
WSS
sorry, didn't think the question was all that insightful. Yeah I'd guess somebody is going to put up with some inconvenience. That's what happens when you run out of money. You either borrow more which you can't pay back or you have to reorganize, give up a few things.
WSS
No its a fine question steve, and one that I for would like to hear an answer to. Who here will lose their job, have their hours cut, or lose benefits? Because I know for a fact that you guys have no theoretical regard for nameless faceless people you don't know.
-
No, it's a dumb question. How the heck do the few of us know what will be happening to us?
But one indication, is a simple google search:
****************************
is lots of .... But what is the proof that this is due to Obamacare? Benefits ...
- Paper lists employers who blame Obamacare for cuts in hours, jobs ...blogs.marketwatch.com/.../the-surprising-list-of-employers-who-blame-o...Sep 11, 2013 - One media outlet's chart shows more than 250 employers thus far have cut back on hours and employees in order to avoid Obamacare ...
- With Eye on ObamaCare, Companies Move to Cut Workers' Hours ...www.foxbusiness.com/.../with-eye-on-obamacare-companies-move-to-c...Sep 11, 2013 - The list of companies moving to cut hours for part-time workers continues to ... ObamaCare requires that companies with 50 or more employees provide .... Related Stories: The Private Exchange Alternative: How it Compares ...
- Obamacare Is Causing Some Restaurant Owners to Cut Employees ...www.businessweek.com/.../obamacares-fast-food-menu-cutting-workers-...Sep 20, 2013 - By 2015, any company with more than 50 such employees ... Obamacare's Fast-Food Menu: Cutting Workers' Hours for Some, Slower Growth for Others ... Fox is sure that pressure from Obamacare-related costs will slow the ...
- Claims Obamacare is causing employers to cut back workers' hours ...www.cleveland.com/business/.../charges_obamacare_is_causing_e.htmlSep 5, 2013 - ... take effect until 2015. So claims that employers are cutting back hours to avoid penalties are only anecdotal , employers and experts say. ... Is the Affordable Care Act, also know as Obamacare, to blame? ... Related Stories.
-
Read that final paragraph again, closely, cal.
-
So ok fast food workers and blockbusters are going to cut back the hours of dome part time workers. Big deal. Cal you really need to read the stuff you post, brother.
-
There's more:
Unions:
Search ResultsCBN TV - Labor Unions Suffer Buyer's Remorse on Obamacare►►www.cbn.com/tv/2549965568001SimilarJul 17, 2013
obamacare health care buyer's remorse labor unions teamsters james hoffa unions unintended ...Chairman's View: Unions Have Buyer's Remorse for Obamacare ...www.rpc.senate.gov › Chairman's ViewCached
SimilarChairman's View: Unions Have Buyer's Remorse for Obamacare. “Well, union leaders should be angry. The Obama Administration misled them into believing ...Buyer's Remorse from ObamaCare Backers? - Commentary
Magazinewww.commentarymagazine.com/.../buyers-remorse-from-obam...Cached
Similarby Seth Mandel - in 84 Google+ circlesJul 16, 2013 - Last Thursday, representatives of three of the nation's largest unions fired off a letter to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, warning that Obamacare ...Freedom's Lighthouse » Buyer's Remorse? Labor Unions send ...freedomslighthouse.net/.../buyers-remorse-labor-unions-send-letter-to-de..
.CachedJul 22, 2013 - Here is Avik Roy of the Manhattan Institute talking about how major Labor Union leaders are “changing their tune” on ObamaCare – which they ...Buyer's Remorse: Another Union Comes Out Against Obamacare ...weaselzippers.us/.../buyers-remorse-another-union-comes-out-against-ob...Cached
Jul 11, 2013 - Another union is crying foul over what it says is Obamacare's negative impact on its members' current healthcare coverage under ...Buyers' Remorse: Union Leaders Demand Changes to Obamacare ...www.uschamber.com/.../buyers’-remorse-union-leaders-demand-change...Cached
Over the weekend, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said, “Obamacare has been wonderful for America.” It's a gotcha quote that's sure to be a ...Left Turn: Buyer's Remorse? Unions Grow Wary of ObamaCare ...edworkforce.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID...Cached
Jan 31, 2013 - Nearly three years after ObamaCare became law, union leaders seem to be second-guessing their fervent support for thegovernment takeover ...Labor Unions Suffer Buyer's Remorse on Obamacare - YouTube► 3:35► 3:35
SimilarJul 17, 2013 - Uploaded by The Christian Broadcasting Network
Labor Unions Suffer Buyer's Remorse on Obamacare.Labor Unions Suffer Buyer's Remorse on Obamacare | Christian ...cc.org/news/labor_unions_suffer_buyer039s_remorse_obamacareCachedA key ally in the Obama administration's successful fight to pass health care reform is now suffering buyer's remorse. Labor unions helped elect Democrats to ...Unions Have Buyer's Remorse on Obamacare | Via Meadiablogs.the-american-interest.com/.../unions-have-buyers-remorse-on-oba...Cached
SimilarJan 31, 2013 - Unions Have Buyer's Remorse on Obamacare. When Obamacare passed in 2010, it did so with substantial union support. But now that unions ...
-
sorry, didn't think the question was all that insightful. Yeah I'd guess somebody is going to put up with some inconvenience. That's what happens when you run out of money. You either borrow more which you can't pay back or you have to reorganize, give up a few things.
WSS
No its a fine question steve, and one that I for would like to hear an answer to. Who here will lose their job, have their hours cut, or lose benefits? Because I know for a fact that you guys have no theoretical regard for nameless faceless people you don't know.
well then it looks like your answer is probably nobody here. And even that faceless bunch that you are worried about seems like they will get their back pay soon after this debacle is over which should be in about 2 weeks. Right before the deadline. Just as soon as this little piece of Kabuki theater is over they will come to some sort of bullshit compromise and send everybody a check.No its a fine question steve, and one that I for would like to hear an answer to. Who here will lose their job, have their hours cut, or lose benefits? Because I know for a fact that you guys have no theoretical regard for nameless faceless people you don't know.
WSS
-
Cal has the greatest source of all though, search results!
You can't argue with that Cysko...
-
Will you lose your job or benefits?
Woody I am not personally attacking you because I don't know you, but the point of my comment is that you don't have to be a person who is losing his/her job in order to make the OP's statement. This country NEEDS to stop raising the debt ceiling or else it could be the end of this great republic.
-
It is easier to call for this and that and cutbacks here and there when they do not affect you directly.
Look at the one republican gov., he didn't want anything to do with gay rights. Then boom, it is his son that's gay and all of a sudden it matters.
This govt. shutdown (or is it slimdown?) is just non essentially things here and there, it doesn't matter. But are you missing anything? Are you part of the nutrition program for poor women and children?
The U.S. Department of Agriculture announced Saturday that if Congress can't cut a deal to fund government operations past Monday, "No additional federal funds would be available to support the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC)’s clinical services, food benefits and administrative costs."
I'm just saying that asking these questions matters in this situation, it isn't off topic. Sure, we may have to make some hard decisions and some people may suffer (and it won't be the people making the decision) but to act like this has nothing at all to do with the conversation is idiotic.
-
It doesn't have anything to do with the subject at hand.
It isn't about changing a stance if it involves somebody in "you" family.
It isn't about (let's raise the debt limit so children won't starve.).
It's about the debt ceiling cannot continue to be raised. It shouldn't have been
raised this many times.
Stop increasing the spending. And if Obamao won't stop, stand with the rest of the majority
of America and don't give this arrogant marxist pig president everything he wants, in
more and more billions.
Stop the spending increases. And Obamaocare is part of that in a huge way. It can't be afforded.
Utopia is nice and all that, but this gigantic bill will soar our debt to certain economic destruction,
and all the civil strife that goes with it.
We've had it so good for so long, that all sorts of woodys don't understand that it is very, very possible
it could all come tumbling down.
Cloward-Piven. Read up on it. Weimar Republic. Read up on it.
-
There is more then enough daily tax revenue to "pay the bills" as Obama likes to say. Bottom line is it's time for the house GOP to really grow a set and refuse to increase the debt limit. It's time to FORCE some painful cuts, YES people will lose benifits, YES some banks will fail, YES some people will lose work, but it's the only way to preserve a nation.
It drives me crazy to hear this idiot attempt to decieve peoeple into believing that raising the debt limit does not increase debt.
There is more then enough daily tax revenue to "pay the bills" as Obama likes to say. Bottom line is it's time for the house GOP to really grow a set and refuse to increase the debt limit. It's time to FORCE some painful cuts, YES people will lose benifits, YES some banks will fail, YES some people will lose work, but it's the only way to preserve a nation.
It drives me crazy to hear this idiot attempt to decieve peoeple into believing that raising the debt limit does not increase debt.
You know I sympathize with the desire to reduce spending on principle. I agree 100% just like I'm asked at home to live within my means, that government should also do so. The problem with this is that not raising the debt limit is going to throw the entire world into another economic recession.
That aside though, when I sit down to look at my family budget, the first place I look for cuts are the largest budget items. Whenever people talk about making spending cuts in the government, the first thing that comes up are social services. Yet we spent ~24% of our budget on military spending last year. If Republicans want Democrats to consider cuts to social services (and Dems needs to do that), than Republicans need to be willing to talk about cuts on military spending. And given the scale of the problem, you can't just look at making budget cuts, you have to look to increase revenue. It should be an 'all options on the table' conversation, yet each party goes into the conversation taking their favorite parts of the budget off the table.
-
I have a very simple solution: axe military spending. Our government allocates more money to their armed forces than the next 10 biggest armies combined. (http://pgpf.org/Chart-Archive/0053_defense-comparison) You know you're going into overkill, pun intended, when you're spending over triple the combined martial budgets of nations as military-centric as Russia & China. Our country is so huge, that it's essentially unconquerable, like the aforementioned countries. The fact that the next three most powerful armies are all armed with nuclear arsenals essentially creates a stalemate, anyway. You nukes us, we nuke you.
-
No. We need to increase military spending not decrease. China is massively increasing there spending. I realize you liberals would love to have all the money go to welfare and free health care for deadbeats, but we do actually need a military and a strong one, yes, stronger then all combined.
-
No. We need to increase military spending not decrease. China is massively increasing there spending. I realize you liberals would love to have all the money go to welfare and free health care for deadbeats, but we do actually need a military and a strong one, yes, stronger then all combined.
No. We need to increase military spending not decrease. China is massively increasing there spending. I realize you liberals would love to have all the money go to welfare and free health care for deadbeats, but we do actually need a military and a strong one, yes, stronger then all combined.
-
Seriously: 1 H-bomb>China's entire army
Fantasy League Updates Weak SexStarted by Zombo, Today, 09:10 AM @slowburn said:okay, bazooka, you win. r u fucking happy now? u got the last word. btw, your avatar and board name really grate my nerves for some reason.. http://thumbpress.com/best-of-surprised-koala-bear-meme-25-pics/ -
If the objective of the US military is to defend our nation and interests, than the military is larger than it needs to be. And when I say defend, I mean defend, not "defend". The Pentagon states we have 761 active military sites around the globe. This is not defense, this is imperialism, and imperialism is expensive. We already claim a technological advantage over the world. We maintain good relations with our geographical neighbors. America can not be invaded, it can only be attacked by terrorism or long-range missiles. Both problems can be dealt with with considerably less expenditure than we currently spend.
It's fine to call for spending cuts to welfare and health care, but only if you are willing to accept cuts to military spending as well.
"I said, 'I need someone who's going to want to get on the roller coaster with me knowing that it's not always going to be fun,'" -Paul DePodesta -
Osirus, I'm sure that if you went through your family budget you could find some things that you could do without or spend a few minutes to do more cheaply. I'm positive we could trim some fat in the military or any other budget. Unfortunately there's no reason to if you just pop up the borrowing limit every year. I have friends and family members that bitch constantly about being short of money and yet they smoke cigarettes.folks who are on disability for example got an extra $300 a month then they can continue to smoke. If not they might more strongly consider giving up cigarettes right? And in that way they wouldn't have to jeopardize their medicine rent etc
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
Seriously: 1 H-bomb>China's entire army
Seriously: 1 H-bomb>China's entire army
H-bombs are so 1952. Besides, China's got them, too.
-
Seriously: 1 H-bomb>China's entire army
H-bombs are so 1952. Besides, China's got them, too.
H-bombs are so 1952. Besides, China's got them, too.
That's the point I was trying to make. Troops are essentially worthless amongst the nuclear mega-powers (US, China & Russia). It creates a stalemate. Besides, all 3 countries are so gigantic that they're un-invadeable, anyway. Ask Napoleon, Hitler and Hirohito how well their invasions went.
-
If the objective of the US military is to defend our nation and interests, than the military is larger than it needs to be. And when I say defend, I mean defend, not "defend". The Pentagon states we have 761 active military sites around the globe. This is not defense, this is imperialism, and imperialism is expensive. We already claim a technological advantage over the world. We maintain good relations with our geographical neighbors. America can not be invaded, it can only be attacked by terrorism or long-range missiles. Both problems can be dealt with with considerably less expenditure than we currently spend.
It's fine to call for spending cuts to welfare and health care, but only if you are willing to accept cuts to military spending as well.
If the objective of the US military is to defend our nation and interests, than the military is larger than it needs to be. And when I say defend, I mean defend, not "defend". The Pentagon states we have 761 active military sites around the globe. This is not defense, this is imperialism, and imperialism is expensive. We already claim a technological advantage over the world. We maintain good relations with our geographical neighbors. America can not be invaded, it can only be attacked by terrorism or long-range missiles. Both problems can be dealt with with considerably less expenditure than we currently spend.
It's fine to call for spending cuts to welfare and health care, but only if you are willing to accept cuts to military spending as well.
Nobel Peace Laureate Obamao gives you a +69!
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login