Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Sunday, Nov. 11, 2012 | 2 a.m.
Another view?
View more of the Las Vegas Sun's opinion section:
• Editorials - the Sun's viewpoint.
• Columnists - local and syndicated writers.
• Letters to the editor - readers' views.
Have your own opinion? Write a letter to the editor.
The recent election indicates that Americans are not that worried about the debt and deficit spending or about a gridlocked Congress even though many Americans say they are very concerned about both. President Barack Obama and this Congress, like their predecessors, talk about the debt and deficit spending but do little about it, yet the president was re-elected.
Americans complain about a partisan Congress but leave the Tea Party intact and allow each party to retain control of one chamber of Congress.
For someone like me, who actually wants compromise and who believes our debt and deficit spending are a clear and present danger to our financial well-being as a nation, this is very disconcerting. I still believe Americans are asleep at the switch and we are all going to pay a heavy price for ignoring the large problems facing us.
As I have long suspected, too many of us still have it too good here to be willing to address some really tough issues. That’s unfortunate because it means events are going to control us instead of us controlling events.
I will say it again: If you (the public) want to really change the makeup of Washington, DC then you *must* get involved with the local political party of your choice. Become real members, make contributions to the person you want to see run, and gain a say in the local meetings and conventions.
If you don't do this, then you are at the mercy of those who do. They will be the ones who select who will be on the ballot (again.)
If neither of the major parties gets you excited because you only agree partially with them, then look to the minor parties instead. If enough dissatisfied people did that then the Libertarians or the Modern Whigs (my personal choice) would grow rapidly and be able to put people in Congress to force new discussions and maybe, just maybe a compromise now and again because neither major party will have a clear majority.
Yes, voting is important, but if that is all you want to do then don't complain about the quality of candidates on the ballot. It's your lack of action that allows them to be there.
People who are depend on government largess will vote for Democrats
Those working class people will generally vote for conservatives
Many purposely split their vote to get A feel good redistributionist President and a fiscally responsible House.
This allows the President to constantly expand our dependency society while Americans are using the House as a firewall to try to contain the cost.
This allows the Democrats to play good guy to the Bad guy Republican.
What is the real problem here? The supply of voters is highly elastic to self interests and democrats are much more effective in focusing their attention on the levers of those factors which trigger voter responses. The dems play the immigration card . The dems play the welfare card. They also play the race card . What better to incentive the black voters than to have a black president? What better than to promise amnesty and welfare benefits to millions of illegal immigrants from across the southern border?
What better than to hand out welfare benefits to 100 million voters ? These factors all trump the demands for more responsible government by what has become a minority of voters, namely Republicans. The shifting demographics and the welfare culture of society is prevailing and the nation is veering toward bigger government ,socialism and debt. It's a death spiral for America, and it's based on a clever well designed strategy that is working .
Micheal,
You have a valid point but for the few seats that changed hands in both houses. We'll see how the re-election of Obama plays out come late December or January. By the way that "fiscal cliff" needs to be renamed to "fiscal slide". Even if a deal isn't made in January there still is a short period of time to correct the deficit and budget. If not then everyone's taxes bounce back to the Clinton tax rate and sequestration takes chunks out of spending for domestic and military programs. I'm mistrustful of the GOP because of the pledge they signed with Grover Norquist. Will the GOP take negotiations seriously with tax revenues as part of the deal?
Future - "Those working class people will generally vote for conservatives"
Those working class people vote Democrat too. You operate under the assumption that welfare is the issue which it isn't. Poor working class people get up every morning and drag themselves to work via public transportation. Go out to a poor neighborhood during rush hour and you'll see exactly what I mean.
The decimation of workers started 35 years ago and we are seeing the end result of a disparity created by the same people who blew up our economy.
YOU CAN'T FIX STUPID, MICHAEL
Here again Michael, you continue on with common sense, practical solutions that that are essential for the country. These clique voters are not going to listen to you, Michael. In essence, these idiots who went to the polls to vote are akin to chess players that remain seated playing their game while the house is engulfed in flames. You can't save them. There are just too many of these morons.
Here is a prime example of the facts when it comes to the two main political parties and their supporters. Of course, the Republicans just love to back the profit motive of corporations who outsource millions of American jobs to China. Now for the shareholders, this is good news. But, the question remains, what about our country as a whole? Since all this outsourcing has taken place, medical evidence has confirmed an outbreak of autism in our children, and mental illness amongst our adults. Where does one think the majority of this comes from? It doesn't take a genius to figure out much of this is linked to Chinese manufacturing of parts and products that are laced with extremely high levels of lead.
From Bill Clinton, to George W. Bush, to Barack Obama; they have all been aware of this problem that exposes the American populace to extreme health dangers. They are not the only ones who are guilty, Congress is just as responsible. While Clinton and Bush all but ignored confirmed reports of high levels of lead content from Chinese manufacturers, Obama has only given a half-hearted attempt to address this problem.
With Obama, another initial campaign promise broken as he backed away from signing an Executive Order banning Chinese imports into the United States. Instead, Obama decided to pledge to the U.S. Consumer Products Safety Commission a significant increase in funding that would greatly expand the inspections of imports. However, this has not panned out since House Republicans not only denied increased funding, the agency's budget from its original, has been slashed by tens of millions of dollars.
So, one would think that when "ObamaCare" was passed, one of the top priorities in mandates would have been for the testing of lead in the human body. Nope, not even close. Many Americans were just too busy in their political chess matches to see the real health hazards that loom over America.
Don't worry America for voting back into power the "status quo". You got what you wanted. Just a word of advice, be careful what you breath in. Be careful what you drink and what you eat. Nah, wait, I take that back. There are no enforceable regulations. I understand, you all have other priorities.
Boftx is correct in pointing out that one 'possible' way to change things would be to support the emergence of a viable 3rd party. It is more likely though that the two parties will remain dominant.
The truth is that we are now a society where the government is gigantic and millions and millions of Americans are dependent on it.
If Conservatives want to have any chance to reverse that, simply arguing that the dependence is 'bad' and big government is 'bad' has zero chance of reversing the trend. We are too far down the road for that and as Bob Jack points out, too many people like what they get from the government.
Conservatives need to change tactics. The 'sole' reason that gigantic government and all the dependency 'seems' to be working well is because.... we are not paying for what it all costs. If we were paying for what it all costs (with real taxes on everyone), I can assure you that what seems to be popular now would become very unpopular, very quickly.
If I were the R leaders, I'd approve the tax on 'millionaires and billionaires, and 'business', just as President Obama wants, while pointing out that it won't come close to paying for what we are spending. Then I'd demand he either raise taxes higher on everyone or make really unpopular spending cuts (that's basically 'any' spending cut) because we are still deficit spending and adding to the debt. When he did not do it, and he will not and cannot, I'd point out where we are headed.
Americans would either finally see that this cannot possibly work financially on a long term basis (see Europe for example # 1) or we will reach the point where the drag of all this debt will affect the standard of living of enough Americans that they will be convinced this isn't working.
Obstructionism hasn't worked and it won't work. Oftentimes, when you cannot convince someone that what they are doing is wrong, the only thing you can do is allow them to do it so they can 'see' the results.
Michael
Gridlock is good. It works most of the time]. Americans like it. It's called checks and balances and built into our system of governance by our Founders and Framers.
See what happens when gridlock doesn't work: Obamacare!
CarmineD
Vernos,
We may or may not go over the fiscal cliff. Here's the problem. Even if we go over the fiscal cliff, ie higher taxes on everyone, defense cuts, cuts to domestic programs, etc, our government will still be deficit spending by large amounts and our debt will continue to grow by leaps and bounds.
There are the conspiracy theorists that believe Obama 'wants' to crash the economy so he can 'remake' America. I tend to dismiss conspiracy theories, but like you, I am curious to see what happens in the first 6 months of 2013.
Either taxes must be raised substantially on most Americans or spending cut substantially in many areas or a combination of both or we just keep heading for financial and economic disaster. If he'd been elected, Romney would have faced the same issues.
I find it nearly impossible to believe that we elected a man that actually 'wants' to change America so badly that he'd 'crash' the economy on purpose, but if the President doesn't lead the way to higher taxes on all Americans and a real reduction in government spending, I'll only have two conclusions to pick from.
The conspiracy theorists were correct or President Obama is profoundly unqualified to be President.
I hope Obama leads the American people and Congress in doing the unpopular things we have to do. If he does, then he is the fine man his supporters believe, a statesman and a patriot. If not, he is as bad, if not a worse President than was George W. Bush.
It should be very interesting.
Michael
It's not the cast of characters that counts. It's the character of the cast.
We can argue about whether there should be two political parties or three or some other optimum number but the perfect number is ZERO. You will search the Constitution in vain looking for mention of political parties. Yet we have evolved a system that has allowed two political parties to not only usurp our election process but also our governing process.
By allowing the continued empowerment of political parties we are only disempowering ourselves. Two things we need to do:
1. States need to adopt an open primary system. Where State Legislatures are unwilling, we should use initiative and referendum processes, where we can, to make the change.
2. We need to actively push for a Constitutional Amendment to overturn the Citizens United decision and get anonymous big money sources of misinformation out of our electoral process.
How's that for change?
Casler, if you truly were concerned about the "debt & the deficit" as you say, you would not bad-mouth the TEA Party - you'd join it. The main target of the TEA Party is to stop the bleeding in Washington D.C. and that's a good thing. We cannot be serious about reducing both the deficits & the $16 trillion debt our children & grandchildren are certain to be burdened with by "compromising." That's nuts. The creepy-crawlers in D.C. will never stop their buying of votes and sending us deeper in debt if we don't hold their feet to the fire. They don't give a rats-ass about debt or deficits because they will be long out of office when the "chickens come home to roost" and they will have theirs in the form of gigantic pensions. And, as long as there are 47 million American's on food stamps and other "entitlements, there will be no stopping the fall into decline. They will continue, as we have just wittnessed, to vote themselves "free" stuff until there is no more to be gotten and then the S**T will hit the fan. Prepare yourself. It is going to happen unless we change course.
Carmine,
Gridlock works when the nation isn't headed for a financial train wreck, but it is! Action needs to be taken and you can't have any action with gridlock, good or bad.
Michael
Jerry,
I don't disagree with what the Tea Party stands for fiscally and economically, although I do disagree with them on several social issues.
Let's look at reality. They have fought and obstructed for 4 years. Result: Re-election of President Obama; fewer Tea Party members in the House and a larger D advantage in the Senate.
If the economy still struggles in 4 years (very likely) what do you think is going to happen to the obstructionists in the Tea Party in 2014? They will be thrown out of office.
They would be better advised to show some cooperation, while at the same time, saying the cooperation is under duress, because they realize some things have to get done for the sake of the country, but they still believe the policies of the D's are the wrong ones.
In my opinion, President Obama will not address the debt or deficits in the next two years and Americans will be angrier than ever in 2014. Do you really want to provide Obama the same excuse he just used to be re-elected...to use again in 2014?
Michael
wtplv - "I find it nearly impossible to believe that we elected a man that actually 'wants' to change America so badly that he'd 'crash' the economy on purpose"
Rewriting history? Have you forgotten the Tea Party caucus did exactly that, causing us to be down graded. You can't be serious about blaming Obama when you have people in the House wanting us to go over the "fiscal cliff" because of their steadfast ideology and pledge to Norquist. I also don't believe Mitch McConnell is serious about compromise, he worries too much about being reelected.
Vernos,
Look at what Jerry Fink wrote. He thinks I attacked the Tea Party. The President is our leader. Please inform me of what he is proposing, other than a small tax increase on the wealthy to address the deficit and debt. It's like going after a tiger with a hammer.
Complain about the Tea Party all you like. Some of the criticism is valid, but until I see President Obama...or anybody propose specific changes to SS and Medicare for future recipients, a total overhaul of defense spending, and a total re-write of the income tax code, just for starters, I will consider them 'unserious' about our deficit spending and our debt. The President wanted 4 more years in the big chair. He got what he wanted. No excuses. Call for the BIG things we must do. If the R's and Tea Party block him, they deserve to be removed and most likely would be. If President Obama doesn't call for these things and then fight like hell for them, then what I said in my previous email stands.
He's the President, Vernos. It's time for him to deliver the tough news and call for the unpopular actions. If he does and the House blocks him, they should be removed. If he doesn't, that's not on the House; it's on HIM!
Michael
Let's remind LVS readers what The Tea Party platform is:
Identify constitutionality of every new law: Require each bill to identify the specific provision of the Constitution that gives Congress the power to do what the bill does (82.03%).
Reject emissions trading: Stop the "cap and trade" administrative approach used to control pollution by providing economic incentives for achieving reductions in the emissions of pollutants. (72.20%).
Demand a balanced federal budget: Begin the Constitutional amendment process to require a balanced budget with a two-thirds majority needed for any tax modification. (69.69%)
Simplify the tax system: Adopt a simple and fair single-rate tax system by scrapping the internal revenue code and replacing it with one that is no longer than 4,543 words -- the length of the original Constitution. (64.9%).
Audit federal government agencies for constitutionality: Create a Blue Ribbon taskforce that engages in an audit of federal agencies and programs, assessing their Constitutionality, and identifying duplication, waste, ineffectiveness, and agencies and programs better left for the states or local authorities. (63.37%).
Limit annual growth in federal spending: Impose a statutory cap limiting the annual growth in total federal spending to the sum of the inflation rate plus the percentage of population growth. (56.57%).
Repeal the health care legislation passed on March 23, 2010: De-fund, repeal, and replace the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. (56.39%).
Pass an "all-of-the-above" energy policy: Authorize the exploration of additional energy reserves to reduce American dependence on foreign energy sources and reduce regulatory barriers to all other forms of energy creation. (55.5%).
Reduce earmarks: Place a moratorium on all earmarks until the budget is balanced, and then require a two-thirds majority to pass any earmark. (55.47%).
Reduce taxes: Permanently repeal all recent tax increases, and extend permanently the George W. Bush temporary reductions in income tax, capital gains tax, and estate taxes, currently scheduled to end in 2012. (53.38%).
Michael says,
"As I have long suspected, too many of us still have it too good here to be willing to address some really tough issues. That's unfortunate because it means events are going to control us instead of us controlling events." (Michael Casler)
Michael what comes to mind are words from Edgar Cayce.
There are some things we cannot control. We can control our politically system, this is done by the people.
Until our individual interests are threaten,... collectively, there will be no action! LTV.
Michael, I am not an expert in Economics as you are, but here's what my inexperience in Economics tells me:
Obama has a plan. Yes, taxing the rich may not bring enough to plug the deficit, but it is a start - you know - a penny saved is a penny earned - and all that jazz. The benefit of that is the impression it inspires of 'leveling' the field. Even Buffet recommended it and I would trust him with the economy, more than any of the armchair economists in this forum. Believe me, it won't hurt them a tiny bit to pay their share instead of their lawyers to manipulate every loophole.
Second. The affordable care act. That is part of the plan. The initial expense is worth the long term benefits of reduced medical expense due to prevention, reduced expense in billions due to employee sick leaves and advanced diseases, even death, and billions in cost of emergency medicine which could be reduced with early detection.
Third. There are about four million jobs in the US that remain vacant due to lack of qualified applicants. Obama wants to increase funding in education to achieve that by hiring more science and math teachers. Why would anyone who can be a scientist or a mathematician wants to be paid peanuts as a teacher? An educated citizenry is a financially independent citizenry.
Fourth. Obama strives to have a fiscally responsible defense spending, which Romney derides as making the military weak. The President has withdrawn us from Iraq and working on Afghanistan. This will save us billions of dollars.
Fifth. His foreign policy is that of smart diplomacy - involving those who need to make change - in crafting policies for change. We cannot barrel ourselves into wars that we cannot afford -financially and most important - gamble the lives of our youth for a vision that is flawed. War NEVER solved anything.
Sixth. Leaving the decision to procreate to those who procreate. Legislating personal responsibility can be very expensive.
Seventh. Safety nets must remain in place. The passing of the ACA saves the government billions by limiting cost of medical equipment, medicines, services, and their efficient use. Each individual - patients, medical providers, and service providers must all take responsibility to make it work. In fact, a non partisan government agency posits that repealing ACA will cost the government billions.
Eight. The government must regulate Wall Street and corporations to protect the general populace. Their main concern is ROI at whatever costs to the detriment of the environment and people. Look at Walmart. Its stockholders belong to the top 100 list of the richest people in the world, yet their employees qualify for welfare.
Nancy states "Why would anyone who can be a scientist or a mathematician wants to be paid peanuts as a teacher?"
Nancy, on the website transparentnevada, it shows you make $82,571.20 in total pay & benefits. That's not peanuts.
http://transparentnevada.com/
Casler has part of it right in this weeks edition of Michael Who Pretends to be Reasonable.
America faces many challenges, but what else is new? The thing is, those on the left and right have very different views on what the most pressing issues are.
We do agree that job are paramount to ending the worst downturn since the Great Depression. That's why the last two years have been so disappointing as we've watched an obstructionist, gridlocked GOP-controlled House work tirelessly, not to fix the economy, but to make Obama a one-term president.
The GOP's election debacle should be a wake-up call but unfortunately the GOP's rank and file will continue to take their marching orders from their de-facto leaders -- Ruse Limbagh, Grover Norquist, and other right-wing extremist -- telling then to stay their destructive do-nothing course.
The GOP is dying because its continued existence depends on dividing the people. It was a formula that's worked very well in the past but has no future in an America that is ready to move forward.
Part two:
I am tired. I do not want to list anymore.
Obama does have a plan. His plan is for the long term - a legacy to his children and to the world. You chose not to see it because you are blinded by Romney's plan, which he won't elaborate, and as far as I can surmise, benefit only a small segment of the population.
I just read an artcle where a longtime friend of Romney said what an awesome and wonderful person he is. This friend had been working with and for him to be President since 1983. I am sure he is, but something is missing in him that failed him to convince people to trust him. Rove went as far as saying he had a weak candidate to work with - justifying his big expense and his own failure.
I respect you for what you want to happen, but the election has been decided and the majority of the people believe and trust the President, more than they trust Romney. Predicting doom and second-guessing never help.
Let us then carry our own responsibility as citizens.
Re. I have been working for the district since 1987 and I have a doctorate degree. I am still here because my daughter is still in school. When you reach a certain step, you do not get anymore and we haven't for a few years now.
That salary includes fringes. I net about $38,000. Peanuts to some, steak to others. Depends who you are.
This is USAToday's editorial board's list of 5 questions the President should answer:
1. Shortly before you took office, your economic advisers projected that if Congress passed a major stimulus bill, the unemployment rate would stay below 8%. The bill passed, but the jobless rate quickly topped 8% and peaked at 10%. In fact, it hasn't been below 8% during your presidency. Did you underestimate the problem, or did you oversell the stimulus?
2. You've repeatedly proposed to raise taxes on those making more than $250,000 a year while leaving the Bush tax cuts in place for everyone else. Soaking the rich might be good politics, but non-partisan tax and budget experts agree it won't come close to producing the revenue the nation needs. That will require far more people to share the burden, including some of the nearly half of Americans who pay no federal income tax. Where do you plan to get the rest of the money? And how will you convince the public that sacrifice is necessary?
3. You promised early in your presidency to cut the federal deficit in half, but your latest budget, the one for fiscal 2013, misses by about $200 billion. The deficit for the fiscal year that ended on Sunday topped $1 trillion for the fourth year in a row. You also gave the cold shoulder to your own deficit-reduction commission, the Simpson-Bowles panel. What evidence can you offer that you take deficit reduction seriously?
4. You have said that Social Security doesn't contribute to the deficit now. But Congressional Budget Office numbers show the program has been in the red since 2010 and is on track to borrow half a trillion dollars over the next decade. According to the Social Security Administration statement being sent to workers across America, the system "is facing serious financial problems, and action is needed soon to make sure the system will be sound." Why do you deny there's a problem, and what specific changes will you support to fix Social Security for the long term?
5. Ballooning health care costs are threatening to bankrupt the nation. Medicare spending alone is forecast to rise from $560 billion this year to $987 billion in 2021. Though the Affordable Care Act sets up numerous cost-saving measures, health experts say it's unclear any of that will be enough. The independent board that's supposed to limit Medicare growth doesn't have the tools to do it. You don't like the Republicans' voucher proposal for Medicare, but how will you contain costs if your experiments don't work out as planned?
The campaign is over and the attack on Romney has ended. It's time for Obama to outline his plan to the American people.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/20...
By the way, we are talking about the economy, not about me. Please stop the attack. Election is over. You gain nothing by denigrating me. You are only denigrating yourself.
Grow up Re. Or grow a heart.
Nancy,
You just don't like anyone challenging your points with facts. Teachers do not make peanuts and that was my point but if you feel $82,000 in total pay & benefits a year is peanuts then you have a right to your own opinion just as I do.
Comment removed by moderator. Personal Attack
NVRef is what's known as a troll. The president was reelected and his party just got their clocks cleaned but hey, a trolls gotta troll. Otherwise there is no joy in Mudville.
Longtimevegan wrote "Once again, you only present one side of the story. Where is the comparing argument? How do you have a debate when only one side of story is being presented?"
I'm waiting for the argument. The USAToday editorial board essentially was asking Obama for his plan to get our economy growing again creating jobs, reducing deficit/debt and addressing the main drivers of our debt.
Longtimevegan, I'm awaiting for the answers to USAToday's questions. Do you have the answers? The election is over. What is Obama's plan to create jobs, grow the economy, reduce debt/deficits and will he address the main drivers of our debt/deficits?
Nancy,
You make many arguments for President Obama and his agenda.
One - I don't have an issue with the wealthy paying more taxes. My point is that it is insignificant and the accountants will find ways to work around the higher rates. I don't care if it's done, but it is just 'feel good candy'.
Two - If I believed the ACA would reduce costs I would be a supporter. It will not reduce costs. You cannot provide insurance to 30 million people and not raise costs on the other people who pay premiums. It's like Romney claiming he could increase military spending, invest in education, cut taxes and reduce the debt. How can you reject 'fuzzy' math in one area and accept it in another?
Three - We need more education and higher teacher pay. We are deeply in debt. If we are going to spend more in one place, we need spend less in another. Neither party or President Obama has shown a willingness to do that. Both the jobs and the educated workers won't mean anything if our economy collapses.
Four - I applaud the President for ending the war in Iraq, exiting Afghanistan and for proposing less military spending. The problem is he will not use the money saved to pay down the debt. He will use it for more government programs. That savings MUST be spent to save us from economic disaster .... and it won't be.
Five - President Obama's foreign policy is not a disaster, but he appears naive about terrorism and its threat to us. I don't favor big wars and interventions but I also recognize the threat and recognize we must confront it, not pretend that we've already beaten it because we killed a leader and many followers.
Six - I support the right to choose but hate abortions.
Seven - Safety nets are good but again, math gets in the way. Our government does so much at such a cost that we cannot afford it all. Yet, we refuse to stop doing anything. We can't go without safety nets, we must help the elderly, we must have a defense to protect our country.... but if we can't find a way for government to do less, we are going to go broke and then we will all have 'none of the above'.
Eight - Regulation was there when the financial melt down happened. It just failed... people failed. Financial regulation is a false God. We need regulation but responsibility is what we really needed. Under both Bush and Obama, the financial entities that crushed all of us and threatened themselves were bailed out with our money and then were allowed to conduct 'business as usual', which they still do today. That was and is a failure of everyone in Congress, former President Bush and President Obama. I do not trust it will get any better in the next four years, despite us being told about all the new regulations. You want to stop bad behavior, you punish those responsible, just like in school.
We need someone who will lead us to do the really hard work ahead. You think President Obama is that guy. I hope you are right, but I don't think he is.
Michael
Commenters have provided some excellent points this morning! As with the subject of voters and government, it is also true for education and parent involvement. Both are strikingly similar!
Most all reasonable citizens acknowledge, and even complain about needed change, and stop at that. Commenter Boftx hit the nail on the head about actively being a participant in changing what has been going on, "...you *must* get involved with the local political party of your choice. Become real members, make contributions to the person you want to see run, and gain a say in the local meetings and conventions."
Walk your talk. Put your money(or support) where your mouth is. Money (or support) talks, and BS walks. It seems like the older generations KNOW this, but these axioms or sayings, are LOST on the present, younger generations. Has the American military and educational institutions smothered any fire within the guts of this new generation of voters to NOT think, act, or resist? It seems like they simply "go with the flow," rather than take a stand, risking "rocking the boat" around them. These are the future majority of voters, those who will be caring for us in the sunset of our lives, when we are most fragile and vulnerable. We should be concerned here as well.
It is the rebels of society who envoke change. People who cannot stay quiet, who cannot remain still in the face of crisis or injustice. These are the people who roll up their sleeves, start working (with or without permission) to fix the issue/concern/problem/wrong/crisis/disaster/dilemma, and lead by example. Usually everyday people, who normally blend into the woodwork until it is time to step up to the plate and take action.
With the grave problems before our country, and the People have recently "elected" leaders, it is time, as writer Michael Casler suggests, for citizens to move into ACTION. Roll up your sleeves, walk your talk, throw your support behind your vision of change. DO it and BE it.
Blessings and Peace,
Star
For Michael Casler:
I agree with you on "...Three - We need more education and higher teacher pay. We are deeply in debt. If we are going to spend more in one place, we need spend less in another. Neither party or President Obama has shown a willingness to do that. Both the jobs and the educated workers won't mean anything if our economy collapses."
One suggestion I have is for our Nevada Lawmakers to legislate enforcement teeth with the "PARENT/TEACHER/STUDENT INVOLVEMENT ACCORD" as we have here in Clark County, Nevada. Holding ALL parties to the accountability fire will drastically reduce costs in education. Retain, pay, and groom "irreplaceable teachers" who are provide effective instruction with documented positive results.
We have to play hardball economics in order to resolve the looming "financial cliff," and change the game for those players who were an active part of driving the American economy into the 2008 economic disaster and the cliff the USA faces today.
No more warm-fuzzy, politically-correct, hand-holding. Those with an IQ and are functional and literate, need to take action, because waiting for those who are low functioning and illiterate to suddenly "smarten up" will put us all in harm's way. This is the reality of the current landscape in our country.
Blessings and Peace,
Star
staralioflundnv,
People are taking action. The American People voted to re-elect President Barack Obama to lead the United States of American for 4 more years. The majority of Americans reaffirmed their belief in the American Political system on November 6, 2012. That is action my friend. that is participation from people who are involved, not just for this election, but actively making a difference in the communities they live in.
The many who post here on the Sun are spirited Nevadans inspired by the events occurring in America. We are only a spark compared the involvement from citizens of other states.
Participation or action from anyone occurs when the direct interest of an individual or group is threaten. Until then, we are all spectators.
To Longtimevegan:
Totally agree with you! Loved the analogy of being "a spark". Most of the Las Vegas Sun Commenters here, are involved and are very dynamic individuals with a very powerful and influencial voice. It is unlikely that these Citizens are static in their lives in regards to making a difference and changing the world they and we live in. My hope is to inspire those readers who browse the Las Vegas Sun Comments.
Blessings and Peace,
Star :)
I disagree that taxing wealthy people will result in nothing. After all, "corporations are people too". Exxon is making about $16B a quarter in profit. That's $16,000,000,000.00 Now, it pays next to nothing in taxes, and what it does pay mainly goes to foreign governments. If you taxed Exxon at 25%, you would have $16B per year to use. Now if you divide that amount by 50, you could give each state $320,000,000 for say schools. Think of the money available if you then did the same to our top 50 companies.
As a country, we give the wealthy and corporations all the breaks, then when it's time to look for money we fire teachers, policeman, and look for ways to cut grandma's SS. This election, the people said enough.
The Tea Party are shills for big business and need to be ignored. There is zero in responsibility for what they propose. The government is not a business, never was, and should never be run like one. Last time I checked, businesses didn't start wars, build aircraft carriers, roads, educate our children or provide safety nets for our elderly. Government doesn't and shouldn't follow business rules. Governments spend in hard times to pick up the slack in the economy, that why you have Hoover Dam. You know - the government spending that is providing you the water and power to live here and spout ignorant nonsense on the internet. (by the way, government invented).
CreatedEQL wrote "Exxon is making about $16B a quarter in profit. That's $16,000,000,000.00 Now, it pays next to nothing in taxes, and what it does pay mainly goes to foreign governments. If you taxed Exxon at 25%, you would have $16B per year to use."
Actually, Exxon's net income is as follows:
2012 Q1 = $9.45 billion
2012 Q2 = $15.9 billion
2012 Q3 = $9.57 billion
total net income = #34.9 billion for the year through 3 quarters.
Estimated taxes to be paid by Exxon is $23.6 billion.
Operating expenses per quarter averages $100 billion. The total net income for three quarters barley covers expenses for one month at Exxon.
CreatedEQL, how would you like to have only one month of savings to cover expenses should you leave your job or have unexpected expenses?
http://ycharts.com/financials/XOM/income...
Estimated taxes aren't paid taxes. They will end up paying at most 4% once the tax accountants get done, like they've done in previous years...
It is unfair for Exxon to pay 4%, when people holding down two jobs to keep food on the table pay more. The middle class doesn't have lobbyists paying off government officials for special treatment.
Here is Exxon's ACTUAL tax rate: 2%, while it's CEO made $35M/year.
http://www.nerdwallet.com/markets/corpor...
Your response is the typical apologist Republican stance....the same one that would force a poor woman who neither wants nor can afford another child to have it or face the full force and fury of the Republican government. Then, once she has it and needs help....slander her by calling her the 47% of 'takers' that are ruining the country. Disgusting to defend this BS, you should be embarrassed.
ReFreeman,
"Your response is the typical apologist Republican stance..." (Posted by CreatedEQL)
Mr. ReFreeman, you are being called out, again. Always giving one side of the story, your view. The Bubble will do that you.
CreatedEQL is trying to balance the comunication flow. However, CreatedEQL does not know the Bubble only allows information out, not information in.
CreatedEQL, Mr. ReFreeman cannot hear you!
Posted by CreatedEQL on 11-11-2012 at 12:30pm.
"Estimated taxes aren't paid taxes. They will end up paying at most 4% once the tax accountants get done, like they've done in previous years...
It is unfair for Exxon to pay 4%, when people holding down two jobs to keep food on the table pay more. The middle class doesn't have lobbyists paying off government officials for special treatment."
"Here is Exxon's ACTUAL tax rate: 2%, while it's CEO made $35M/year."
http://www.nerdwallet.com/markets/corpor......
"Your response is the typical apologist Republican stance....the same one that would force a poor woman who neither wants nor can afford another child to have it or face the full force and fury of the Republican government. Then, once she has it and needs help....slander her by calling her the 47% of 'takers' that are ruining the country. Disgusting to defend this BS, you should be embarrassed."
CreatedEQL wrote "Here is Exxon's ACTUAL tax rate: 2%".
From Exxons 2011 Financial statement:
Net Income = $41 billion
Income Tax Expense = $31 billion
Sorry CreatedEQL, the facts aren't supporting your conclusion.
http://investing.businessweek.com/resear...
Star Ali Mistriel-Kogan Nov. 11, 2012
9:59 a.m.
I loved your comment and I think it is worth repeating often. I enjoyed the discussion between you and Longtimevegan.
Just sent an email yesterday to a friend and told the person exactly what you stated.
Your comments do inspire :)
Freeman: They aren't MY conclusions, I disclosed my source. Many sources echo the same facts.
Here is an excerpt: "Exxon Mobil counts everything -- not just federal income taxes, but also local property taxes, state taxes, gasoline taxes and payroll taxes. The Center for American Progress (CAP) and other analysts count only the company's federal corporate income taxes."
In addition, they receive subsidies, and most of the taxes they pay go to foreign governments not ours.
So, sorry, YOUR facts are wrong.
I'm annoyed. Conservatives only talk to themselves, and only believe themselves. O'Rielly supports Drudge who supports Beck who supports Rove. They live in their own world with their own facts, until reality intrudes. Then they sit there slack jawed, in amazement that their make believe world isn't reality.
The Dems polls were dead on, not made up to suit their argument. They lived in the world of facts, not make believe. Just sayin'.
Let's all take 1 minute and google "Exxon 2009", just to see what pops up.
CreatedEQL wrote "Exxon Mobil counts everything -- not just federal income taxes, but also local property taxes, state taxes, gasoline taxes and payroll taxes. The Center for American Progress (CAP) and other analysts count only the company's federal corporate income taxes."
CreatedEQL, look at the Financial Statement enclosed. It clearly states "Income Tax Expense".
2011 Income Tax Expense = $31 billion
http://investing.businessweek.com/resear...
CreatedEQL, says,
"I'm annoyed. Conservatives only talk to themselves, and only believe themselves. O'Rielly supports Drudge who supports Beck who supports Rove. They live in their own world with their own facts, until reality intrudes." (Posted by CreatedEQL)
CreatedEQL your attempting to communicate with a person in the Bubble. No information is allowed inside the Bubble, unless the information comes from the Bubble Master. Bubble Masters, such as Foxnews, Rush Limbaugh, or websites like the Drudge Report. No matter how you present your side, the person inside the Bubble cannot and will not, acknowledge your information.
The Bubble will say, "present your case and lets have a debate."
This is a false offer, for the Bubble offer is not about debate, but an offer for you to only listen, not talk. The Bubble Citizens cannot hear you while they are in the Bubble. I don't think the Bubble Citizens even know this. They think they are having a debate, but when your in the Bubble, reality does not exist.
The only way to communicate with a person in the Bubble is to communicate with the Bubble Master. For that to happen you must compromise your values and pretend you see and hear what the Bubble Master sees and hear. Like agreeing with Karl Rove, or Sean Hannity, or supporting Bill O'Reilly. Yes, now you see, it's not that important to get your message through the Bubble. Why compromise your integrity, your values, your reality, as 99% of the World sees it. Yeah, now you see, let the Bubble Citizen remain in the Bubble.
The point being offered here, one cannot have a debate when one side does not see of hear reality.
Longtimevegan wrote "CreatedEQL your attempting to communicate with a person in the Bubble. No information is allowed inside the Bubble, unless the information comes from the Bubble Master."
Longtimevegan, I challenged CreatedEQL on his claim that Exxon-Mobile's tax rate equals 2% by presenting Exxon-Mobile's financial statement which showed that Exxon-Mobile's tax liability was $31 billion in 2011 on operating income of $66 billion. We debated and CreatedEQL got frustrated because the facts on Exxon-Mobile's financial statement did not match his liberal rhetoric. He finally stated "I'm annoyed". It happens in debates and we all win some and lose some. Longtimevegan, I give CreatedEQL credit for making an effort to debate and it's something you should take note of and learn from instead of writing baseless & meaningless comments.
Freeman: This is a complete and total lie. There was no "liberal rhetoric", I quoted my sources, and provided links.....just like you. If you don't like my website and stats, I don't like your. My frustration was solely with your intellect, not your facts.
Mr. ReFreeman,
CreatedEQL is basically debating Actual Taxes Paid.
Mr. ReFreeman, you are correct in offering data to CreatedEQL. What is missing is the presentation and the interpretation from you. You see, instead of you explaining your position using the data, you throw out the data in raw form without telling point by point the detail of your position.
CreatedEQL said corporation pay a very lower Tax Rated. CreatedEQL supplied a link with a pie chart showing the percentage to support the comments. Mr. ReFreeman, you supplied a link with a spread sheet, telling everyone to search through and the find the answer to support your position. But, you feel this is how a debate show proceed. You have not shown the Actual Tax Rate for Exxon. That is the debate. That is what CreatedEQL stated in the first post.
Your concluding answer basically slammed the door on CreatedEQL, like saying, take it or leave it.
Sometimes in a debate when one person knows more than the other, it is the responsibility of the person with an insight to educate the other. That is what a debate is all about. Education. Making your point clearly, using comparison, showing cause and affect, to reach your point to a reasonable conclusion. It can be said your informative, it also can be said your incomplete in your reporting. Your close to being an honest broker of information. But your refuse to take the steps that are required.
Readers would like to read a ReFreeman post on the issues and have confidence the information is balanced. Let the debate be about how to improve both sides of the data. And not a question about the clarity of the data. After all, you present numbers, numbers must be explained not just presented.
CreatedEQL wrote "Freeman. This is a complete and total lie. There was no "liberal rhetoric", I quoted my sources, and provided links.....just like you. If you don't like my website and stats, I don't like your. My frustration was solely with your intellect, not your facts."
CreatedEQL, your liberal rhetoric was the typical attack on Exxon-Mobil regarding taxes and profits. Then, you put your faith in a website called nerdwallet to get your stats which was a mistake. Now, you can't seem to counterpoint a published financial statement from Exxon-Mobil. You should be "annoyed" at yourself.
Longtimevegan wrote "Mr. ReFreeman, you are correct in offering data to CreatedEQL. What is missing is the presentation and the interpretation from you. You see, instead of you explaining your position using the data, you throw out the data in raw form without telling point by point the detail of your position."
Longtimevegan, If you can't read and interpret a corporate financial statement then I would suggest taking a business finance class.
"Carmine,
Gridlock works when the nation isn't headed for a financial train wreck, but it is! Action needs to be taken and you can't have any action with gridlock, good or bad.
Michael"
Mr. Casler et al:
We had a divided government before the election and we have the same divided government after. Nothing changed. That's what the American voters want. They didn't give the nod to Obama and the Dems or Reps BUT both. Divided government works. It always has and always will. It was exactly what the Founders and Framers designed our government to be. So no one party and no one person can run the show. Now it's up to the President to lead, build alliances and forge progress to move the country forward, JUST LIKE HE PROMISED.
CarmineD
Michael:
My point is: Obama does have a plan. You claimed he didn't. He has a plan with which you do not agree is not the same as not having a plan.
I have repeatedly stated here that the extent of available information to us is not the same as the presidency. We are simply conjecturing as we do not have all the facts and other considerations. I would say let those who know all the facts make the decision. We elected them and whether we like it or not, we have given them our trust. No amount of propositions we do here can make any difference.
Perhaps anyone who thinks he is smarter than anybody here can run for congress?
Just curious, why do think some people here choose to attack a commenter personally, instead of offering a rebuttal like you do?
@ASadTeacher, said, in response to Michael Casler,
"Just curious, why do think some people here choose to attack a commenter personally, instead of offering a rebuttal like you do?" (Posted By Nancy Agustin)
Attack and challenge are not the same. Especially when the information is distorted purposely and unbalanced. One would say, well that is why we have debates. Not quite. An honest debate is called a debate. Both sides, or all sides, have measurable data on a subject matter. Ninety-Nine percentage of the so-called debates are initiated by commentators who bring unbalance information to the table. Thus begins a distorted discussion on skewed information presented as being factual or mainstream. If you would take a poll from the majority of the readers on the political articles, they would say they are more confused and disappointed by the information presented by the lead commentators on the articles.
Attack, or challenge. Well, attack an outright lie. Challenge distortions and misleading information in hopes of a correct with the intent of having a honest debate. A honest debate is not about perception, its when all sides start by agreeing on accepted truths. Using the basics as an example such as Two plus Two equals Four (2+2=4). Can we all agree? This is how an honest debate begins, with the truth.
Obama does NOT have a plan. Spending ANYTHING above revenues is not a plan. Reducing the amount of deficit spending is not realistic. We must SPEND LESS THAN REVENUES on a continuing basis. When you are bankrupt, you can (almost) operate on a cash basis--spend no more than your income. To keep increasing the deficit saying we'll slow our spending a trickle is not going to turn around the economy. The fiscal cliff is another INVENTION of politicians. They seem to be asking for a public DEMAND so they know what to do. Why do we pay them? They just keep spending and giving it away. Another $34 million free to Syrian refugees. We have more New York and New Jersey refugees without housing who are on their own--they can apply for FEMA loans, get TEMPORARY housing in shelters or a prison. They're talking about hot meals but many people are trapped in soon-to-be condemned housing far from the meal sites, without electricity. Many have no transportation. That's why the seniors died--no way to leave even with mandatory evacuation orders--no way to get out before or after the storm. But we have money to send overseas for every country, problem, squabble, dream, vision, hope, desire, disease....
As one working hard in bringing Obama's plan to fruition, I am busily training folks to upgrade homes.
According to the 'new new Deal', what we are doing is simply putting America into a better place - with knowledgeable workers improving our infrastructure, our economic viability and our national security as our energy consumption drops significantly with this huge investment in our country's built environment.
Yes, the plan is working, many Americans are now working, and few places resemble Las Vegas in the paucity of energy understanding amid the greatest insolation venue in the world.
Maybe if Rosie could just whine a bit more, somebody might wake up and smell the efficiency, hear the wave of understanding and take note of the fact that thousands of Americans are now upgrading homes here and now, property values are rising, and energy is dropping in cost as a result of our president's wisdom.
Few people realize that in this United States, we ramped up the weatherization of our homes from 30,000 a year to 30,000 a month with less than .oo1% fraud.
Few folks have any idea of how many jobs, how much savings and how much expertise we have generated in this effort.
Read the book the New New Deal if you want to see how some of our fellow Americans have spent their time upgrading and improving this place.
Alternately, I suppose that one could merely hate away the day and shout away tomorrow. Look at what the tea partiers are up to!
Europe underlines the response too. Lack of action.
Freeman: I said that Exxon paid 2% in actual taxes, and I can support that claim with websites. That isn't liberal rhetoric, that is a supported argument. Furthermore, a balance sheet is not a tax return, so don't say they are the same. It is you and only you that has provided unsupported rhetoric. I am very comfortable with the facts I provided, and very comfortable ignoring the non-facts you provided.
The article states that nothing was changed, but here is the change I see:
1) Whites are no longer a large enough majority to carry an election on their own.
2) The Dem base contains minorities so it is growing
3) The Repub base is religious, white, and aged....all declining
4) Obama's mid-class plan won over Romney's upper-class plan.
5) The voters reduced Boehner's strength
6) The voters increased Reid's strength
7) Conservative social issues lost. Marriage equality & Reprod rights won.
For me, overall, this represents about the largest change I've experienced in my lifetime, and I'd bet a lot of yours as well. I also consider all of those 7 points verifiable facts, and not "liberal rhetoric".