THE Political Thread (All Political Discussion Here)
Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 886, 887, 888  Next

 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Topic HOF This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
32
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 04 Nov 2009
Posts: 51161
Location: 818

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:13 am    Post subject: THE Political Thread (All Political Discussion Here)

Quote:
(CNN) -- Ticktock. Ticktock.

Just over a week remains. If the Democrats and Republicans don't stop bickering and agree to how the U.S. should pay its bills, the federal government will shut down, come October 1.

And at a time when the economy's finally showing signs of life, that could be troubling.

Shutdowns don't come cheap. Federal agencies have to use up time, energy and resources to plan for one. Shutting down and then reopening the government also costs money.

According to the Congressional Research Service, the two previous shutdowns -- in late 1995 and early 1996 -- cost the country $1.4 billion.

But what would a shutdown mean for you? Would your daily life be affected?

(The answer's yes, so keep reading.)


10 ways a government shutdown would affect your daily life
_________________
Nobody in the NBA can touch the Laker brand, which, like the uniform color, is pure gold.


Last edited by 32 on Fri Oct 07, 2016 8:09 am; edited 4 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
K28
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 29 Nov 2012
Posts: 10038

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:17 am    Post subject:

I hope it happens, it will hurt the Republicans badly.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
City_Dawg
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Jul 2006
Posts: 46526
Location: Coming soon and striking at your borders.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:29 am    Post subject:

Not happy if my sis who works for the feds can't go to work because a bunch of old people who like arguing with each other for the sake of arguing can't make up their minds.
_________________
LAVAR 3:16...

Hypebeasts we know aboutchea'
Don't rep the Lakers unless they popular...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ribeye
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 10 Nov 2001
Posts: 7586

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:44 am    Post subject:

I am not nearly as concerned about this as with the debt limit coming later in October.

I ask myself, as one must always try to put the shoe on the other foot, would I consider supporting such action, if for instance, the Democrats had threatened to not increase the debt limit, when we (arguably, illegally and immorally) were going to invade a sovereign nation that had not threatened the US? Today I say no, but back then I felt very strongly that we were making a horrible decision, and there are few worse decisions than going to war on false premises, that maybe I would have considered such an action.

But neither party should ever have such power.

The debt limit should simply be abolished. When a budget is passed, it is paid for without shenanigans. If you are concerned about the debt, don't pass budgets that greatly increase it (war and economic downturns notwithstanding), as both parties have been more than willing to do since around 1980.
_________________
For the adults in the room only
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DuncanIdaho
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 13986
Location: In a no-ship

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:49 am    Post subject:

ribeye wrote:
The debt limit should simply be abolished. When a budget is passed, it is paid for without shenanigans. If you are concerned about the debt, don't pass budgets that greatly increase it (war and economic downturns notwithstanding), as both parties have been more than willing to do since around 1980.


Yes. What Congress is basically doing is buying stuff and then refusing to pay for it, and extorting the executive branch with our country's credit held hostage.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
KobeRe-Loaded
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 09 Dec 2003
Posts: 14944

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:54 am    Post subject:

What else is new?
_________________
#11/08/16 America became GREAT again
#Avatar-gate
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Ben Vereen
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 1262

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:03 am    Post subject:

kray28_ wrote:
I hope it happens, it will hurt the Republicans badly.


pretty selfish thing to say. it will hurt us ALL badly
(not a repub btw)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Reflexx
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 25 Jun 2005
Posts: 11163

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:17 am    Post subject:

I doubt this will make the government fiscally responsible.

They only see this as an opportunity to attack the other side.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
dvdrdiscs
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 6174

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:27 am    Post subject:

kray28_ wrote:
I hope it happens, it will hurt the Republicans badly.



I do too but real people will be hurt by this.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
dvdrdiscs
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 6174

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:28 am    Post subject:

DuncanIdaho wrote:
ribeye wrote:
The debt limit should simply be abolished. When a budget is passed, it is paid for without shenanigans. If you are concerned about the debt, don't pass budgets that greatly increase it (war and economic downturns notwithstanding), as both parties have been more than willing to do since around 1980.


Yes. What Congress is basically doing is buying stuff and then refusing to pay for it, and extorting the executive branch with our country's credit held hostage.



The plan is to hope the public doesn't know what the debt ceiling is. That's why you keep on hearing them talk about our debt and why this president keeps overspending. The irony is that THEY (congress) are the ones holding the purse strings. They bank on ignorance and it has been successful in the past.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Wilt
LG Contributor
LG Contributor


Joined: 29 Dec 2002
Posts: 8841

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:48 am    Post subject:

dvdrdiscs wrote:
DuncanIdaho wrote:
ribeye wrote:
The debt limit should simply be abolished. When a budget is passed, it is paid for without shenanigans. If you are concerned about the debt, don't pass budgets that greatly increase it (war and economic downturns notwithstanding), as both parties have been more than willing to do since around 1980.


Yes. What Congress is basically doing is buying stuff and then refusing to pay for it, and extorting the executive branch with our country's credit held hostage.



The plan is to hope the public doesn't know what the debt ceiling is. That's why you keep on hearing them talk about our debt and why this president keeps overspending. The irony is that THEY (congress) are the ones holding the purse strings. They bank on ignorance and it has been successful in the past.


If you ask the American people if they want the government to get smaller, they'd say yes. If you ask them if they'd support cuts to social programs, they'd say no. If you ask them if they'd support cuts to military spending, they'd say no. If you ask them if they're liberal, or conservative, or moderate, very few will say they're liberals, but most of them support liberal programs.
_________________
¡Hala Madrid!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ribeye
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 10 Nov 2001
Posts: 7586

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 12:02 pm    Post subject:

I have a question for the attorneys out there: Using the same logic of unsettled law as did Yoo regarding torture, could the advice of counsel work in the following scenario:

Say the debt limit is not increased. Obama, on the advise of counsel, decides to use some, or all, of proposed methods to continue funding and paying for the government: Marshall Law; the platinum coin; Section 4 of the 14th Amendment (which states that “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law … shall not be questioned”); or the legal argument of Lex posterior derogat priorif (when two laws come into conflict and both cannot be applied, the more recently enacted law trumps the older law): The current appropriation bills (which tell the executive branch to spend the money) are in conflict with the older law (the debt ceiling law, which tells the president not to borrow more than a certain amount).

Now, since this was on the advise of counsel regarding unsettled law, does this protect the President, as it did with Bush?

It might be moot as I doubt there would be a conviction resulting from the House impeachment of the President, which would most certainly precede the Senate hearing.

Still, if Obama could do this, wouldn't this just strengthen the Imperial Presidency concept to the point that the President could do just about anything, with (or maybe even without) advise of counsel, as long as he held one House?
_________________
For the adults in the room only
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ribeye
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 10 Nov 2001
Posts: 7586

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 12:14 pm    Post subject:

dvdrdiscs wrote:
DuncanIdaho wrote:
ribeye wrote:
The debt limit should simply be abolished. When a budget is passed, it is paid for without shenanigans. If you are concerned about the debt, don't pass budgets that greatly increase it (war and economic downturns notwithstanding), as both parties have been more than willing to do since around 1980.


Yes. What Congress is basically doing is buying stuff and then refusing to pay for it, and extorting the executive branch with our country's credit held hostage.



The plan is to hope the public doesn't know what the debt ceiling is. That's why you keep on hearing them talk about our debt and why this president keeps overspending. The irony is that THEY (congress) are the ones holding the purse strings. They bank on ignorance and it has been successful in the past.


They, the 535 of them, propose a budget, but one man has far greater power, as it requires his signature. A 2/3 vote can, and has, overridden a Presidential veto, but I' don't know if Congress has ever overridden a Presidential veto on the budget. If it has, it would be rare.

As such, I consider the President to have more control of the purse strings.
_________________
For the adults in the room only
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 18364

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 12:24 pm    Post subject:

At this point, both sides have been crying wolf for so long that the American public isn't listening. The world didn't end when we went over the fiscal cliff. Until the government shutdown or the debt limit actually interferes with people's lives, the American public will tune it out as just more noise from Washington.

Politically, I think that the Republicans have postured themselves in just about the worst way possible. They've made this about Obamacare in particular, not about cutting the deficit in general. It looks like petty politics, with the Republicans continuing their crusade against Obama. But how many people are even paying attention?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Wilt
LG Contributor
LG Contributor


Joined: 29 Dec 2002
Posts: 8841

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 12:54 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
At this point, both sides have been crying wolf for so long that the American public isn't listening. The world didn't end when we went over the fiscal cliff. Until the government shutdown or the debt limit actually interferes with people's lives, the American public will tune it out as just more noise from Washington.

Politically, I think that the Republicans have postured themselves in just about the worst way possible. They've made this about Obamacare in particular, not about cutting the deficit in general. It looks like petty politics, with the Republicans continuing their crusade against Obama. But how many people are even paying attention?


All of that is true. But the same American people will reelect over 90% of the representatives they elected in 2012. That's the problem. People are angry, the two parties are corrupt as hell, Congress has record low approval ratings, it's a do-nothing Congress. And yet, for some inexplicable reason, people love their congressman/woman.
_________________
¡Hala Madrid!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 117688
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 1:13 pm    Post subject:

Let me guess which public employees will continue to get paid even if it does shut down.
_________________
#lakerclownshow
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
chef
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 04 Feb 2003
Posts: 5360
Location: Honda full of Silver

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 1:32 pm    Post subject:

the solution is to kick the can down the road.

seriously, how many times does this or the debt ceiling or fiscal cliff come up. they wait until the last minute, then borrow money to delay it from happening. then we get the same news stories,, rinse and repeat.
_________________
Got money? And you know it! Take it out your pocket and show it then throw it!!!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ribeye
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 10 Nov 2001
Posts: 7586

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 1:39 pm    Post subject:

Wilt wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
At this point, both sides have been crying wolf for so long that the American public isn't listening. The world didn't end when we went over the fiscal cliff. Until the government shutdown or the debt limit actually interferes with people's lives, the American public will tune it out as just more noise from Washington.

Politically, I think that the Republicans have postured themselves in just about the worst way possible. They've made this about Obamacare in particular, not about cutting the deficit in general. It looks like petty politics, with the Republicans continuing their crusade against Obama. But how many people are even paying attention?


All of that is true. But the same American people will reelect over 90% of the representatives they elected in 2012. That's the problem. People are angry, the two parties are corrupt as hell, Congress has record low approval ratings, it's a do-nothing Congress. And yet, for some inexplicable reason, people love their congressman/woman.


It is explicable, in part anyway. They way they, the Republicans now, but this is not unique to them, have carved out House districts, they are among "friends": they are safe. If you have a 65% friendly district, you or someone of your party will likely get elected.

Taking your theme a step further, if a district or a state wants their "bridge to nowhere," or flood control, or whatever the special project, the district will go for it, the state will go for it, as they tend to benefit. But do the people in Texas (couldn't resist) care if the levees in Sacramento are secure enough to weather a hundred-year storm? Probably not.

As I digress further, there is a conservative/libertarian notion that the more local the better. I agree to some extent. Rather than California pay more taxes to the federal government, instead of the begging, pleading, finessing, finagling, coercing, bribing, or bartering with the Federal government to get levees secure so that Sacramento won't be the next New Orleans, why doesn't California keep more of their money and spend it directly on the levees, and skip the BS? Maybe, instead of paying out $1.25 for every dollar Calforina receives, it could be closer to $1.05 or $1.10.
_________________
For the adults in the room only
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
dvdrdiscs
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 6174

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 1:50 pm    Post subject:

ribeye wrote:
dvdrdiscs wrote:
DuncanIdaho wrote:
ribeye wrote:
The debt limit should simply be abolished. When a budget is passed, it is paid for without shenanigans. If you are concerned about the debt, don't pass budgets that greatly increase it (war and economic downturns notwithstanding), as both parties have been more than willing to do since around 1980.


Yes. What Congress is basically doing is buying stuff and then refusing to pay for it, and extorting the executive branch with our country's credit held hostage.



The plan is to hope the public doesn't know what the debt ceiling is. That's why you keep on hearing them talk about our debt and why this president keeps overspending. The irony is that THEY (congress) are the ones holding the purse strings. They bank on ignorance and it has been successful in the past.


They, the 535 of them, propose a budget, but one man has far greater power, as it requires his signature. A 2/3 vote can, and has, overridden a Presidential veto, but I' don't know if Congress has ever overridden a Presidential veto on the budget. If it has, it would be rare.

As such, I consider the President to have more control of the purse strings.



At the end of the day, Congress still decides how much money goes into which area. The president only has the power to approve of it, but he can't decide where to spend money. And as you said, Congress can always override it so why would you consider a president's veto but not a Congress' veto?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
dvdrdiscs
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 6174

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 1:51 pm    Post subject:

chef wrote:
the solution is to kick the can down the road.

seriously, how many times does this or the debt ceiling or fiscal cliff come up. they wait until the last minute, then borrow money to delay it from happening. then we get the same news stories,, rinse and repeat.



The right wants to kick it down the road because they have said it's within their best interest to do so. The left is also at fault for going along with it. Sequestration anyone? Our system blows.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
999
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 19 Oct 2006
Posts: 19578

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 1:59 pm    Post subject:

I hate the Republican politicians...I really do... especially Senator Cruz. they are not real americans...

Last edited by 999 on Mon Sep 23, 2013 2:26 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Wilt
LG Contributor
LG Contributor


Joined: 29 Dec 2002
Posts: 8841

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 2:03 pm    Post subject:

ribeye wrote:
Wilt wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
At this point, both sides have been crying wolf for so long that the American public isn't listening. The world didn't end when we went over the fiscal cliff. Until the government shutdown or the debt limit actually interferes with people's lives, the American public will tune it out as just more noise from Washington.

Politically, I think that the Republicans have postured themselves in just about the worst way possible. They've made this about Obamacare in particular, not about cutting the deficit in general. It looks like petty politics, with the Republicans continuing their crusade against Obama. But how many people are even paying attention?


All of that is true. But the same American people will reelect over 90% of the representatives they elected in 2012. That's the problem. People are angry, the two parties are corrupt as hell, Congress has record low approval ratings, it's a do-nothing Congress. And yet, for some inexplicable reason, people love their congressman/woman.


It is explicable, in part anyway. They way they, the Republicans now, but this is not unique to them, have carved out House districts, they are among "friends": they are safe. If you have a 65% friendly district, you or someone of your party will likely get elected.

Taking your theme a step further, if a district or a state wants their "bridge to nowhere," or flood control, or whatever the special project, the district will go for it, the state will go for it, as they tend to benefit. But do the people in Texas (couldn't resist) care if the levees in Sacramento are secure enough to weather a hundred-year storm? Probably not.

As I digress further, there is a conservative/libertarian notion that the more local the better. I agree to some extent. Rather than California pay more taxes to the federal government, instead of the begging, pleading, finessing, finagling, coercing, bribing, or bartering with the Federal government to get levees secure so that Sacramento won't be the next New Orleans, why doesn't California keep more of their money and spend it directly on the levees, and skip the BS? Maybe, instead of paying out $1.25 for every dollar Calforina receives, it could be closer to $1.05 or $1.10.


But at some point, there has to be a realization that your congressman is at least partly to blame for the situation in Congress. You can't separate the two (your congressman and Congress as a whole) as if they're completely unrelated. I understand pork and local issues, sure, but this is turning into collective cognitive dissonance, which is related to my above post how people hate the idea of government but love government benefits.
_________________
¡Hala Madrid!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
marga86
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 30 Jun 2008
Posts: 3366

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 2:05 pm    Post subject:

So many issues with people not looking at the ACTUAL problem, but try to look for someone to BLAME for it.


That really gets us no where as a nation.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ribeye
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 10 Nov 2001
Posts: 7586

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 2:24 pm    Post subject:

dvdrdiscs wrote:
ribeye wrote:
dvdrdiscs wrote:
DuncanIdaho wrote:
ribeye wrote:
The debt limit should simply be abolished. When a budget is passed, it is paid for without shenanigans. If you are concerned about the debt, don't pass budgets that greatly increase it (war and economic downturns notwithstanding), as both parties have been more than willing to do since around 1980.


Yes. What Congress is basically doing is buying stuff and then refusing to pay for it, and extorting the executive branch with our country's credit held hostage.



The plan is to hope the public doesn't know what the debt ceiling is. That's why you keep on hearing them talk about our debt and why this president keeps overspending. The irony is that THEY (congress) are the ones holding the purse strings. They bank on ignorance and it has been successful in the past.


They, the 535 of them, propose a budget, but one man has far greater power, as it requires his signature. A 2/3 vote can, and has, overridden a Presidential veto, but I' don't know if Congress has ever overridden a Presidential veto on the budget. If it has, it would be rare.

As such, I consider the President to have more control of the purse strings.



At the end of the day, Congress still decides how much money goes into which area. The president only has the power to approve of it, but he can't decide where to spend money. And as you said, Congress can always override it so why would you consider a president's veto but not a Congress' veto?


Do you know hard it is to override a budget veto? It is near impossible. In fact today, I would say it is impossible.

Usually, in normal times with a normal Congress, the President submits a budget which is analyzed by the CBO, which goes to the appropriation committees to to see if and where they agree or where there is disagreement. But with many time constraints there is not time for Congress and the President to haggle back and forth, so as has been the case lately, they just do continuing resolutions.
_________________
For the adults in the room only
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ribeye
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 10 Nov 2001
Posts: 7586

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 2:27 pm    Post subject:

Wilt wrote:
ribeye wrote:
Wilt wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
At this point, both sides have been crying wolf for so long that the American public isn't listening. The world didn't end when we went over the fiscal cliff. Until the government shutdown or the debt limit actually interferes with people's lives, the American public will tune it out as just more noise from Washington.

Politically, I think that the Republicans have postured themselves in just about the worst way possible. They've made this about Obamacare in particular, not about cutting the deficit in general. It looks like petty politics, with the Republicans continuing their crusade against Obama. But how many people are even paying attention?


All of that is true. But the same American people will reelect over 90% of the representatives they elected in 2012. That's the problem. People are angry, the two parties are corrupt as hell, Congress has record low approval ratings, it's a do-nothing Congress. And yet, for some inexplicable reason, people love their congressman/woman.


It is explicable, in part anyway. They way they, the Republicans now, but this is not unique to them, have carved out House districts, they are among "friends": they are safe. If you have a 65% friendly district, you or someone of your party will likely get elected.

Taking your theme a step further, if a district or a state wants their "bridge to nowhere," or flood control, or whatever the special project, the district will go for it, the state will go for it, as they tend to benefit. But do the people in Texas (couldn't resist) care if the levees in Sacramento are secure enough to weather a hundred-year storm? Probably not.

As I digress further, there is a conservative/libertarian notion that the more local the better. I agree to some extent. Rather than California pay more taxes to the federal government, instead of the begging, pleading, finessing, finagling, coercing, bribing, or bartering with the Federal government to get levees secure so that Sacramento won't be the next New Orleans, why doesn't California keep more of their money and spend it directly on the levees, and skip the BS? Maybe, instead of paying out $1.25 for every dollar Calforina receives, it could be closer to $1.05 or $1.10.


But at some point, there has to be a realization that your congressman is at least partly to blame for the situation in Congress. You can't separate the two (your congressman and Congress as a whole) as if they're completely unrelated. I understand pork and local issues, sure, but this is turning into collective cognitive dissonance, which is related to my above post how people hate the idea of government but love government benefits.


Really. This should be the dictionary example of cognitive dissonance.
_________________
For the adults in the room only
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Topic HOF All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 886, 887, 888  Next
Page 1 of 888
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2010 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB