Hey republicans...We should make a deal with the democrats(a trade off)

[ScienceRocks]

What we should do come budget time is to make a deal--->We'd get Welfare reform, a stronger hand when it comes to taxes and our choice of fixes for the healthcare reform law. Tart reform? Got it!!!


Obama would get the 3 parts of his policy below.
1. removing our troops from the middle east
2. 500 billion in infrastructure(that has to GO to bridges and real infrastructure) per year over the next 4 years.
3. 30% across the board increase in the tech and science budget.

Is this a good deal? This would take the money back home.

Obama gets some of what he wants and we get some of what we want. This can't happen for us any other way either.

 

[ScienceRocks]

The welfare reform could be our choice with the deal getting the senate and president accepting the house bill.

Here's a few idea's.
-Cut back unemployment to 24 weeks at anyone time.
-Force them to go to work programs/set up internships
-Make getting on disability harder

We could use our weight on the tax issue to decrease the corporate taxes???

 

[auditor0007]

What we should do come budget time is to make a deal--->We'd get Welfare reform, a stronger hand when it comes to taxes and our choice of fixes for the healthcare reform law. Tart reform? Got it!!!


Obama would get the 3 parts of his policy below.
1. removing our troops from the middle east
2. 500 billion in infrastructure(that has to GO to bridges and real infrastructure) per year over the next 4 years.
3. 30% across the board increase in the tech and science budget.

Is this a good deal? This would take the money back home.

Obama gets some of what he wants and we get some of what we want. This can't happen for us any other way either.

Matthew, you can't be a Republican with all liberal ideas. Also, your numbers are a mess. We don't need $500 billion in infrastructure spending every year, and not so fast. $200 billion to $250 billion per year over the next ten years would make much more sense, but still we need to pay for it. It can't be done on more borrowed money. This creates a big problem because it means a need for higher taxes, and very few are going to support that because it can't all come from the top ten percent. It would have to be across the board.

 

[The Rabbi]

George Bush thought he could work with Democrats. Instead they hijacked his policies, demonized him and blamed him when they didnt work out.
Matthew must be about 15 years old to believe otherwise.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Auditor, I agree.


Rabbi, the republican party should always be willing to work out a deal! This is the best chance to get some of what you want.

 

[The Rabbi]

You dont walk into a negotiation having already given in. I dont see Democrats rushing to cut deals with the GOP.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

You can't deal in good faith with the Democrats, they are pathological liars and are as committed as any other Jihadists to "Death to the USA"

 

[LoneLaugher]

What we should do come budget time is to make a deal--->We'd get Welfare reform, a stronger hand when it comes to taxes and our choice of fixes for the healthcare reform law. Tart reform? Got it!!!


Obama would get the 3 parts of his policy below.
1. removing our troops from the middle east
2. 500 billion in infrastructure(that has to GO to bridges and real infrastructure) per year over the next 4 years.
3. 30% across the board increase in the tech and science budget.

Is this a good deal? This would take the money back home.

Obama gets some of what he wants and we get some of what we want. This can't happen for us any other way either.

The fact that welfare reform heads you list of what the Democrats need to give the Republicans speaks volumes. The annual expenditure on welfare is a drop in the bucket. Now, if you consider Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security to be forms of welfare, there is money there.

In addition, if the GOP had any ideas for health care reform that have not already been adopted by Obama, they would have introduced them by now. Obamacare is a Republican plan that Republicans have decided is toxic based on its being named after Obama.

I appreciate the thought, though. At least you are willing to consider good faith negotiations. That beats most nutters.

Finally, I am against tart reform. The sweet kind, the pop kind and the human kind.

 

[NightFox]

Is this a good deal?

Sure, for the statists and their cronies it's a GREAT deal, trading grandiose promises for tax payer money is always a good deal for 'em. What happened to all that "stimulus" money that was supposed to be spent on infrastructure and R&D? What is the economy getting out of all the billions of dollars we already spend every year in these areas? Can you show any projections based on realistic statistics that will demonstrate that such investments will provide a rational return on investment?

Ignoring the fact that graft and cronyism slices the lions share right off the top of any proposed government "investment" schemes and offering up exactly ZERO fact based projections regarding ROI makes all these ideas sound just peachy but the reality remains, mis-allocated resources have a negative impact on the overall economy and until you can demonstrate with cold hard facts that these resources aren't going to be mis-allocated then it's nothing more than a warm & fuzzy mirage.

 

[zeke]

Matthew, there is some hope for you. Just not in the Republican party.

Anyway why would someone such as yourself (that seems to have some good intentions) want to associate themselves with the likes of some of the people on here who say they are Republicans?

 

[Sallow]

What we should do come budget time is to make a deal--->We'd get Welfare reform, a stronger hand when it comes to taxes and our choice of fixes for the healthcare reform law. Tart reform? Got it!!!


Obama would get the 3 parts of his policy below.
1. removing our troops from the middle east
2. 500 billion in infrastructure(that has to GO to bridges and real infrastructure) per year over the next 4 years.
3. 30% across the board increase in the tech and science budget.

Is this a good deal? This would take the money back home.

Obama gets some of what he wants and we get some of what we want. This can't happen for us any other way either.

What do you have against Tarts?

They are nice with tea.

 

[Sallow]

Is this a good deal?

Sure, for the statists and their cronies it's a GREAT deal, trading grandiose promises for tax payer money is always a good deal for 'em. What happened to all that "stimulus" money that was supposed to be spent on infrastructure and R&D? What is the economy getting out of all the billions of dollars we already spend every year in these areas? Can you show any projections based on realistic statistics that will demonstrate that such investments will provide a rational return on investment?

Ignoring the fact that graft and cronyism slices the lions share right off the top of any proposed government "investment" schemes and offering up exactly ZERO fact based projections regarding ROI makes all these ideas sound just peachy but the reality remains, mis-allocated resources have a negative impact on the overall economy and until you can demonstrate with cold hard facts that these resources aren't going to be mis-allocated then it's nothing more than a warm & fuzzy mirage.

Miss all those road crews and building projects, did ya?

In any case..you are right..not all the money that was supposed to go to infrastructure, actually went there.

In states like Louisiana, where Jindal cut taxes on the wealthy folks, he used that money to cover shortfalls. Same with Rick Perry.

But the Stimulus did go to alot of projects and saved alot of jobs.

 

[DiamondDave]

What we should do come budget time is to make a deal--->We'd get Welfare reform, a stronger hand when it comes to taxes and our choice of fixes for the healthcare reform law. Tart reform? Got it!!!


Obama would get the 3 parts of his policy below.
1. removing our troops from the middle east
2. 500 billion in infrastructure(that has to GO to bridges and real infrastructure) per year over the next 4 years.
3. 30% across the board increase in the tech and science budget.

Is this a good deal? This would take the money back home.

Obama gets some of what he wants and we get some of what we want. This can't happen for us any other way either.

The fact that welfare reform heads you list of what the Democrats need to give the Republicans speaks volumes. The annual expenditure on welfare is a drop in the bucket. Now, if you consider Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security to be forms of welfare, there is money there.

In addition, if the GOP had any ideas for health care reform that have not already been adopted by Obama, they would have introduced them by now. Obamacare is a Republican plan that Republicans have decided is toxic based on its being named after Obama.

I appreciate the thought, though. At least you are willing to consider good faith negotiations. That beats most nutters.

Finally, I am against tart reform. The sweet kind, the pop kind and the human kind.

FLAT OUT LIE....

Welfare and entitlements are the LARGEST expenditure of the federal government

 

[LoneLaugher]

What we should do come budget time is to make a deal--->We'd get Welfare reform, a stronger hand when it comes to taxes and our choice of fixes for the healthcare reform law. Tart reform? Got it!!!


Obama would get the 3 parts of his policy below.
1. removing our troops from the middle east
2. 500 billion in infrastructure(that has to GO to bridges and real infrastructure) per year over the next 4 years.
3. 30% across the board increase in the tech and science budget.

Is this a good deal? This would take the money back home.

Obama gets some of what he wants and we get some of what we want. This can't happen for us any other way either.

The fact that welfare reform heads you list of what the Democrats need to give the Republicans speaks volumes. The annual expenditure on welfare is a drop in the bucket. Now, if you consider Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security to be forms of welfare, there is money there.

In addition, if the GOP had any ideas for health care reform that have not already been adopted by Obama, they would have introduced them by now. Obamacare is a Republican plan that Republicans have decided is toxic based on its being named after Obama.

I appreciate the thought, though. At least you are willing to consider good faith negotiations. That beats most nutters.

Finally, I am against tart reform. The sweet kind, the pop kind and the human kind.

FLAT OUT LIE....

Welfare and entitlements are the LARGEST expenditure of the federal government

I said welfare. You said welfare and entitlements.

Are you dishonest?

 

[NightFox]

Miss all those road crews and building projects, did ya?

Not at all, make work projects and contractors lining their pockets fixing roads few people drive on was quite entertaining, though not nearly entertaining as bridges collapsing and high volume roads in a state of repair resembling the aftermath of Hiroshima.

When it comes to government spending, the volume of what is spent is not indicative of the quality of what it is spent on, in fact it's most often the case that the two are inversely proportional to one another.

In any case..you are right..not all the money that was supposed to go to infrastructure, actually went there.

Which is of course an excellent argument for handing even more money over to the politicians & bureaucrats in charge of this sort of thing, after all if you don't continuously feed inefficient, ineffective operations other peoples money they quickly go out of business.

In states like Louisiana, where Jindal cut taxes on the wealthy folks, he used that money to cover shortfalls. Same with Rick Perry.

I was wondering when we'd get to the part where "it's the other parties fault", didn't take long.

But the Stimulus did go to alot of projects and saved alot of jobs.

Saved a lot of whose jobs ? what kind of jobs ? how much did these "saved" jobs contribute to increasing the output and efficiency of the economy? What opportunity costs where imposed by "saving" these jobs? In case you hadn't noticed "saving" some government bureaucrats job isn't quite as productive as creating a new job that actually results in something of value being produced, in fact it's counterproductive.

 

[Seawytch]

What we should do come budget time is to make a deal--->We'd get Welfare reform, a stronger hand when it comes to taxes and our choice of fixes for the healthcare reform law. Tart reform? Got it!!!


Obama would get the 3 parts of his policy below.
1. removing our troops from the middle east
2. 500 billion in infrastructure(that has to GO to bridges and real infrastructure) per year over the next 4 years.
3. 30% across the board increase in the tech and science budget.

Is this a good deal? This would take the money back home.

Obama gets some of what he wants and we get some of what we want. This can't happen for us any other way either.

What do you have against Tarts?

They are nice with tea.

Ha! You went with tasty treat, I went with "loose women"...which actually have the potential to be reformed. Of course, I'm sure he meant "Tort Reform".

Many states already have strict Tort Reform laws on the books...hasn't lowered health care costs a bit in those states, just like the CBO said it wouldn't.

 

[The Rabbi]

What we should do come budget time is to make a deal--->We'd get Welfare reform, a stronger hand when it comes to taxes and our choice of fixes for the healthcare reform law. Tart reform? Got it!!!


Obama would get the 3 parts of his policy below.
1. removing our troops from the middle east
2. 500 billion in infrastructure(that has to GO to bridges and real infrastructure) per year over the next 4 years.
3. 30% across the board increase in the tech and science budget.

Is this a good deal? This would take the money back home.

Obama gets some of what he wants and we get some of what we want. This can't happen for us any other way either.

What do you have against Tarts?

They are nice with tea.

Ha! You went with tasty treat, I went with "loose women"...which actually have the potential to be reformed. Of course, I'm sure he meant "Tort Reform".

Many states already have strict Tort Reform laws on the books...hasn't lowered health care costs a bit in those states, just like the CBO said it wouldn't.

Oops
Mississippi tort reforms lead to reduction in lawsuits - amednews.com

 

[Seawytch]

What do you have against Tarts?

They are nice with tea.

Ha! You went with tasty treat, I went with "loose women"...which actually have the potential to be reformed. Of course, I'm sure he meant "Tort Reform".

Many states already have strict Tort Reform laws on the books...hasn't lowered health care costs a bit in those states, just like the CBO said it wouldn't.

Oops
Mississippi tort reforms lead to reduction in lawsuits - amednews.com

Reduction in lawsuits, not lower premiums.

Is Mississippi paying a lower rate than less strict Tort Reform states?
Health Care Expenditures per Capita by State of Residence

Average Per Person Monthly Premiums in the Individual Market

 

[The Rabbi]

Ha! You went with tasty treat, I went with "loose women"...which actually have the potential to be reformed. Of course, I'm sure he meant "Tort Reform".

Many states already have strict Tort Reform laws on the books...hasn't lowered health care costs a bit in those states, just like the CBO said it wouldn't.

Oops
Mississippi tort reforms lead to reduction in lawsuits - amednews.com

Reduction in lawsuits, not lower premiums.

Is Mississippi paying a lower rate than less strict Tort Reform states?
Health Care Expenditures per Capita by State of Residence

Average Per Person Monthly Premiums in the Individual Market

Premiums for malpractice liability insurance have dropped. Availability of doctors has soared. Are you going to argue those aren't positives for consumers?
Oh yeah, and your links are outdated and don't prove anything. But nice try.