BGFalcons82;799883 wrote:Got any change left to believe in?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-0612-rates-20110611,0,7432941.story

I'll give Barry credit for one thing: He's made sure that none of his most important initiatives occur prior to November, 2012. They have crafted legislation, regulations, and executive orders to take place after he thinks he's getting re-elected. Kind of smarmy, but no one will actually feel the pain before they pull the lever for more skyrocketing energy costs, even MORE expensive gasoline, and a crippled economy that only government intervention and control can fix. For those of you that think he's not hell bent on destroying capitalism, I suggest you start paying attention to what he's doing instead of listening to his glorious readings of his teleprompter.

The thing about Obama is- currently he's in full campaign mode. Every speech, policy, etc. is geared toward appearing "mainstream" and not too radical. If these are the polices he adheres to now, in full campaign mode, what will he do if re-elected when he has no future campaign/voter wrath to worry about?

An interesting article on how we got to where we are today with the deficit. Plenty of blame to go around.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/outlook/votes-that-pushed-us-into-the-red/?hpid=z2

Bigdogg;802233 wrote:An interesting article on how we got to where we are today with the deficit. Plenty of blame to go around.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/outlook/votes-that-pushed-us-into-the-red/?hpid=z2

I'm sick of this blame shit. That's all anyone ever wants to do, who's fault is it? Who gives a fuck, how about someone come up with a solution. Fucking politicians are worthless.

tk421;802289 wrote:I'm sick of this blame ****. That's all anyone ever wants to do, who's fault is it? Who gives a ****, how about someone come up with a solution. ****ing politicians are worthless.

Paul Ryan, Republican, has offered up a great solution. However the liberal democrats in the senate and the radical in the white house will not let it see the light of day.

If the senate and the white house do not change hands in 2012, we will never recover.

I'm not up to date 100% on his solution, but I do know anyone that's on TV whose first words about the deficit and debt are "tax the rich" I automatically dismiss as a complete moron. The idea that this country can survive and flourish just by taxing the rich is seriously stupid, and this country is headed straight for hell because half the population believes that shit.

What a bunch of typical Post horseshit. If you voted for a tax cut, you get included in the blame for the deficit -- as if the money they're "giving back" didn't already belong to the people who are getting it and not the damn government.

This isn't a revenue problem -- it's a SPENDING PROBLEM.

The government already takes in enough money; giving it any more will only result in more foolish spending and more debt. How can you trust the people who got us into this hole to dig us out if you give them more money?

Stupidity.

We've seen this same philosophy in action time and again in other programs...like the war on poverty and school funding. Despite throwing billions after billions, we never see any improvement, just requests for even more money.

Stop the madness.

Writerbuckeye;802506 wrote:This isn't a revenue problem -- it's a SPENDING PROBLEM.

This is the plain and simple fact that the left refuses to admit for whatever insane reason. Unfortunately there are some with an "R" moniker next to their names who also turn a blind eye to the obvious.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/56993.html


Just a little more ..... change we can believe in ..........

And then there is this:

http://cafehayek.com/2011/06/open-letter-to-barack-obama.html

WOW!

QuakerOats;803050 wrote:http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/56993.html


Just a little more ..... change we can believe in ..........

Apparently, he is the one the donors have been waiting for. Everyone else?--Pony up the cash and you too can feel the generosity of this President that promised to be unlike all of his predecessors.

Stocks Slide 1% As Greek Crisis Turns Violent - AP
A violent protest against the Greek government's latest austerity package hit stocks hard Wednesday and sent the euro sliding over a percent against the dollar.


And obama is steering our ship directly into these waters ............. change we can believe in ...

From AEP:

"...the cumulative impacts of the EPA’s current regulatory path have been vastly underestimated, particularly in Midwest states dependent on coal to fuel their economies. We have worked for months to develop a compliance plan that will mitigate the impact of these rules for our customers and preserve jobs, but because of the unrealistic compliance timelines in the EPA proposals, we will have to prematurely shut down nearly 25 percent of our current coal-fueled generating capacity, cut hundreds of good power plant jobs, and invest billions of dollars in capital to retire, retrofit and replace coal-fueled power plants. The sudden increase in electricity rates and impacts on state economies will be significant at a time when people and states are still struggling,” said Michael G. Morris, AEP chairman and chief executive officer.

Although some jobs would be created from the installation of emissions reduction equipment, AEP expects a net loss of approximately 600 power plant jobs with annual wages totaling approximately $40 million as a result of compliance with the proposed EPA rules.

“We are deeply concerned about the impact of the proposed regulations on our customers and local economies. Communities that have depended on these plants to provide good jobs and support local services will face significant reductions in payroll and property taxes in a very short period of time. The economic impact will extend far beyond direct employment at power plants as thousands of ancillary jobs are supported by every coal-fueled generating unit. Businesses that have benefited from reasonably priced coal-fueled power will face the impact of electricity price increases ranging from 10 percent to more than 35 percent just for compliance with these environmental rules at a time when they are still trying to recover from the economic downturn,” Morris said.

“Although discounted by some, the potential impacts on the reliability of the transmission system, particularly in the Midwest, are significant. The proposed timelines for compliance aren’t adequate for construction of significant retrofits or replacement generation, so many coal-fueled plants would be prematurely retired or idled in just a few years. AEP’s compliance plan alone would abruptly cut generation capacity in the Midwest by more than 5,400 MW. Depending on the year, another 1,500 MW to 5,200 MW of AEP generation would be idled or curtailed for extended periods as pollution control equipment is installed,” Morris said.


obama making good on his statement about bankrupting coal plants ....... change we can believe in....

QuakerOats;804371 wrote:obama making good on his statement about bankrupting coal plants ....... change we can believe in....

And guess whom the coal miner's union will proudly get behind, sponsor and endorse??? Insanity reigns.

On a side note, if there are coal-fired electricity producing plants that get all of their coal from Ohio, employ only Ohioans, and supply power to only Ohioans, how does this fall under the "commerce clause" of regulating industry between states? In other words, how do the feds have any jurisdiction over states that keep to themselves?

Didn't Obama also say he wanted to see much higher electricity bills...because it would mean they were stopping the use of coal?

BGFalcons82;804422 wrote:And guess whom the coal miner's union will proudly get behind, sponsor and endorse??? Insanity reigns.

This is absolutely true and I've witnessed it first hand.

My brother and I had a heated "discussion" with his hard-core unionist father-in-law a few years ago. He was a 25 year employee of Simco Peabody Coal Company which once was a major employer of hundreds of well-paid individuals who strip mined coal and reclaimed land in the Coshocton County area. The mines supplied coal to the Columbus & Southern Electric power plant in Conesville, Ohio.

Extreme environmental policies implemented by the EPA and the Ohio EPA eventually regulated those jobs out of existence.

He insisted that eeeeeevil wascally Republicans in Congress caused the mines to shut down. We argued that liberal Dems in Congress beholden to environmentalist nut cases were more likely to blame. We suggested he should open his eyes and stop goose stepping to the marching orders issued by his union masters. He refused to see that voting for Dems was like voting himself out of a good paying job.

Unbelievable.

Writerbuckeye;804737 wrote:Didn't Obama also say he wanted to see much higher electricity bills...because it would mean they were stopping the use of coal?

Yes he wants higher prices. He believes energy is too cheap so Americans waste it. He does not want wait on the free market to get around to it through supply and demand. So what he wants is federal government policy to intervene and make it more expensive for energy producers to generate electricity to the level that prices are driven so high Americans are forced to conserve energy consumption.

Like in the cold Ohio winters you will not want to set your thermostat above 60 just buy a snuggie. But don't worry the leftist loons in Washington will have their thermostats at 75. They can't be distracted by such inconveniences. After all these central planners are taking us to the promised land.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIp2q0H9pIE

Obama could not accomplish his objectives through congress with cap and trade legislation so he is using whatever other arms of the federal government are at his disposal. The EPA is one of the strongest.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/11/02/hidden-audio-obama-tells-sf-chronicle-he-will-bankrupt-coal-industry

So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted

Come board leftists...defend this.

tk421;802423 wrote:I'm not up to date 100% on his solution, but I do know anyone that's on TV whose first words about the deficit and debt are "tax the rich" I automatically dismiss as a complete moron. The idea that this country can survive and flourish just by taxing the rich is seriously stupid, and this country is headed straight for hell because half the population believes that ****.

Google David Walker....former US comptroller. Taxing the wealthy is only one part of the equation in addressing the national debt. I agree that we have a major spending problem. But whenever you lose your manufacturing base to foreign countries, the government keeps the masses employed artificially by expanding the government. It matters not who's party is in office. The reality is.....since 1980, the GOP has been more irresponsable than the Democrats....when it comes to increasing the national debt...at an approximate rate of 3:2.

believer;804868 wrote:This is absolutely true and I've witnessed it first hand.

My brother and I had a heated "discussion" with his hard-core unionist father-in-law a few years ago. He was a 25 year employee of Simco Peabody Coal Company which once was a major employer of hundreds of well-paid individuals who strip mined coal and reclaimed land in the Coshocton County area. The mines supplied coal to the Columbus & Southern Electric power plant in Conesville, Ohio.

Extreme environmental policies implemented by the EPA and the Ohio EPA eventually regulated those jobs out of existence.

He insisted that eeeeeevil wascally Republicans in Congress caused the mines to shut down. We argued that liberal Dems in Congress beholden to environmentalist nut cases were more likely to blame. We suggested he should open his eyes and stop goose stepping to the marching orders issued by his union masters. He refused to see that voting for Dems was like voting himself out of a good paying job.

Unbelievable.

I'm pretty sure that the union workers considered many things when endorsing Obama. They are not real crazy about coal companies circumventing EPA safety laws...and as such...are a little tired of having to pull dead miners out of holes.

BGFalcons82;804422 wrote:On a side note, if there are coal-fired electricity producing plants that get all of their coal from Ohio, employ only Ohioans, and supply power to only Ohioans, how does this fall under the "commerce clause" of regulating industry between states? In other words, how do the feds have any jurisdiction over states that keep to themselves?

The federal government, with the federal judiciary's stamp of approval, has twisted and stretched the commerce clause into for all intents and purposes an unlimited federal power. A good example of how unlimited this power is would be is Wickard v. Filburn.

The federal government placed limits on wheat production in order to drive up wheat prices during the depression era. Roscoe Filburn grew more wheat than the feds permitted. But get this the wheat he was growing in excess of federal limits was for his own consumption. He did not place it on the market. He used the excess to sustain his family and feed his livestock. Filburn was ordered by the Federal government to destroy his excess wheat and pay a fine. Destroy the wheat when so many were going hungry in the world? So let it be written so let it be done.

The SCOTUS ruled because Filburn's excess wheat production reduced the amount of wheat he would consume on the open market, and wheat was a national commodity, the federal government had the power under the commerce clause to order him to cease the production of wheat for personal consumption.

The SCOTUS reasoned that Filburn's growing of wheat for personal consumption alone would not have a major impact, but if countless farmers followed in the footsteps of Filburn the effect would be significant. Thus the federal congress possesses the power to regulate intrastate and non-commercial private activity, if such activity were viewed by congress to have a significant effect on interstate commerce. No matter how it effects the individual.

I have a garden. So if I plant corn, tomatoes, beans, etc. And countless others are doing the same thing. And my garden and others reduced the amount of produce on the open market. The feds can fine me and order me to destroy my produce? This is nothing short of tyranny. I don't use that word lightly. Lets call a spade a spade.

With this logic and jurisprudence the federal government could regulate riding a bicycle. If I choose to ride my bicycle to work instead of driving I am reducing the amount of gasoline I consume. Gasoline is a national commodity. My choosing to ride a bicycle to work reduces the amount of gasoline I consume on the open market. Therefore the federal government has the power and authority to fine me and order me to destroy my bicycle.

Footwedge;805215 wrote: The reality is.....since 1980, the GOP has been more irresponsable than the Democrats....when it comes to increasing the national debt...at an approximate rate of 3:2.

Actually, the facts are, obama has piled on more debt than all the presidents combined, Washington thru Reagan, and his continued deficit spending is beyond pale. He is the greatest debt creator in the history of the world.
Change we can believe in.....

Communism: putting the means to production off limits to the private citizens.

http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2011/06/16/16greenwire-obama-admin-objects-to-alaska-oil-and-gas-deve-61926.html

Change we can believe in ........

QuakerOats;805323 wrote:Actually, the facts are, obama has piled on more debt than all the presidents combined, Washington thru Reagan, and his continued deficit spending is beyond pale. He is the greatest debt creator in the history of the world.
Change we can believe in.....

You really believe that is a fair comparison? McCain would have done the same thing to avoid total economic worldwide collapse. At least be fair about it. Two wars, tax cuts, and deregulation of the financial markets got us to where we are now. But believe what you want to.

I automatically dismiss the argument that tax cuts have helped create our current mess.

Money given BACK to taxpayers is not responsible for more debt...more SPENDING above income is responsible.

The government is not entitled to our money. A tax break is simply returning to the people what was theirs to begin with. When that income is removed from the treasury, it is the responsibility of Congress to cut spending accordingly. It's not any different than if the economy takes a downturn and less revenues are available.

Pretty much every state in the union has to find ways to live within its means -- the federal government should be no different.

Bigdogg;805422 wrote:You really believe that is a fair comparison? McCain would have done the same thing to avoid total economic worldwide collapse. At least be fair about it. Two wars, tax cuts, and deregulation of the financial markets got us to where we are now. But believe what you want to.

Our revenues are 21% higher than they were 7 years ago; we do not have a [tax] revenue problem; WE HAVE A SPENDING PROBLEM. And the funds spent on the stimulus were completely misdirected (by obama) toward completely unproductive uses; i.e. public sector union handouts. The facts don't lie.