Investor, Entrepreneur, Educator · Springfield, MO · Member since 2009 · 21k+ posts · 12k+ votes
Just heard some "official" of the Tea Party bunch saying that they were responsible for the cleaning of the house and that the Republicans will need go along with them!
She was saying there would be no compromise to their agenda!
Now, I'm thinking...LOL, they don't have a clue yet. The Republicans can keep any motion for any bill they make on the bottom of the pile, keep them from being on any committee, basically keep anyone out of the loop and basically impotent with regard to any other compromised bill. That's in the House.
If anything comes out of the House, it will likely be shot down in the Senate, and if it does get to the President, it can be vetoed.
Just saying, to walk in the door singing that they have a mandate of the people (which they don't) and that there will be no compromise doesn't sound like the best way to start the new day.
Looks like problems already between the Tea Party and the Republicans....now does all that look to you?
Real Estate Investor · Phoenix, AZ · Member since 2009 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes
15y
Mike, I legally immigrated but do not find illegal immigration upsetting. Having said that, I need to clarify that I was not trying to turn this into a debate on immigration but merely pointing out that the California Republicans lost the Latino vote by fighting this battle and the party runs the risk of doing the same thing in other states that have a high Latino population. This does not portend well for Republicans in many states that have been reliably Republican.
Regarding social security, I am afraid I would like to see it completely eliminated and not just cut. I do not see any reason for the government to be involved in non-governmental things such as people's savings, pensions, health care, education, postal service, etc. I prefer free and competitive markets wherever possible and it is a stretch to suggest that savings and investments are not suitable for the private sector.
Bellevue, WA · Member since 2008 · 156 posts · 57 votes
15y
This is a fight that has been brewing since the beginning of the Tea Party. It works the other way too -- if the TP folks aren't happy with something the establishment Republicans propose, they have enough votes to work with the Democrats and kill it.
Most TP people know this is a process that will take multiple elections. now we will see if their flame can last until the 2012 cycle.
Investor · Westminster, CO · Member since 2009 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes
15y
Financexaminer, the American People spoke yesterday and said government is getting to big and spending too much. If the power brokers in both parties don't wake up and pay attention, 2012 will make 2010 look like a kindergarten recess.
Yes, the Senate can knock down anything that comes their way and Obama can veto anything that comes his way. But if that happens, it will be 60-40 conservatives in the Senate and a Republican president in 2013.
While there will be compromise on some things, on other's there will be NO COMPROMISE.
Harry Reid and Barbara Boxer had a tough fight on their hands and even they KNOW that they need to back off of some of their agenda.
What the Tea Party did more than anything else is to get the Republican party to move back to it's core values. No more middle of the road baloney. As Margaret Thatcher said, the worst place to be is in the middle because you get hit by BOTH SIDES.
Here are some things that there cannot be any compromise on. Eliminate Death Tax. Repeal the current Health Care Monstrosity and start over. Lower Corporate Tax rates (the US has the second highest Corporate Tax rate in the world). Extend the Bush tax cuts.
We can compromise on Military Spending, Immigration Reform, Social Security, Welfare, Infrastructure, etc...
In 2006 and again in 2008, the Dems thought they had a mandate from the people and I didn't hear Financexaminer argue then! It's funny how it looks when the shoe is on the other foot!!
Investor, Entrepreneur, Educator · Springfield, MO · Member since 2009 · 21k+ posts · 12k+ votes
15y
Originally posted by Tom Cullen:
Since when does the winner compromise?
The LOSER must compromise, not the winner.
This spin that the TP/GOP must now compromise is a load of crap. They must try to systematically dismantle everything thing Obama has mucked up since taking office. Obama will resist of course, then comes 2012 and his removal.
TC
P.S. When exactly did Obama ever compromise?
Tom, between the TPers and the Republicans having to compromise......
But now that you put it that way, who won, who is the winner? The TP is sharing views with Republicans and together they took the House, The Dems still have the Senate, the President is still in the White House, if anyone lost, it was the White House, but there is the veto and neither will ever get 2/3 to push anything through.
So without compromise, what do you have....?
Gridlock! Nothing......unless that was the real agenda and what was hoped for, in that case, the Repub-TPers won, was that the real agenda, take enough seats so that no compromise is necessary to stop everything?
In my way of thinking here there was no clear winner that accomplishes anything, so do you see the TPs as the winners?
Investor · Hampton Bays, NY · Member since 2009 · 907 posts · 258 votes
15y
It appears that the skill set to win an election is very different from the attributes required to govern effectively. We have had a divided country since before the Civil War but that should not keep us from coming to the table with an open mind to solve the enourmous chanllenges that face all of us.
I have been dissapointed with the blatant misstatement of facts and outright lies that have replaced honest and open debate on the issues.
Unless we are able to have open discussion of the issues and shine a light on the hidden ajendas of our politicians I fear that our government will continue to be ineffective.
Investor · Westminster, CO · Member since 2009 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes
15y
Here is what we do come January.
1. Extend the Bush Tax Cuts for another 4 years.
2. Dissect the Health Care Bill (aka GUT IT), and tackle the real problem, HEALTH CARE COSTS and TORT REFORM.
3. Create a "Work Permit" system for the 21st century. Green Cards are so 20th Century.
4. Re-create the Welfare System starting with requiring a Drug Test for every applicant (we charge $2.00 for a UA where I work)
5. Get American's infrastructure back to world prominence.
6. Energy: DRILL and DEVELOP new forms of energy. Give rewards to American Companies that develop new forms of renewable and non polluting energy. But in the meantime, we need coal and fossil fuels.
7. Stop wasting time on the petty BS, ie. No toys in Fast Food Childrens meals if the fat content is too high.
8. Get OUT of the business of saving private companies. LET THEM FAIL! America is all about creating new companies, when I was born, Wal Mart, Cisco, Microsoft, Gateway, Dell, Intel, Best Buy, etc... did not even exist.
9. GET OUT OF THE MORTGAGE BUSINESS.
10. GET OUT OF THE UNITED NATIONS!
Investor, Entrepreneur, Educator · Springfield, MO · Member since 2009 · 21k+ posts · 12k+ votes
15y
Mike, sounds like you're running for office! That's better than I heard from our Republican canidates here! But I have to disagree with tort reform, you cut off my left leg when I was supposed to have my right leg taken, you owe me big time, and if I can crawl, I'll collect it one way or another! Saying that bad doctors get off the hook just makes them worse. Saying my leg is only worth 10 K is ludicrest! Now, I might compromise to the extent of a medical board and then my attorney, the last thing you want is a doctor that is not held accountable....and I thought that whole tea bagger thing was about holding people accountable....Good example is Germany, doctors can not be sued and the people call them butchers! I've seen some of their work, not pretty and wealthy Germans go to England, Egypt, India, here, where ever there are no German doctors....least use to be.....come to think of it, that's really a socialist and communist thing to do, limit people's rights to recovery for damages and have a protected class/profession!
Anyway, I don't think many if any of the things you just described will happen under current management.
Investor · Westminster, CO · Member since 2009 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes
15y
Tort Reform doesn't mean the elimination of all law suits. It means REFORM. Today, you can sue anyone for any reason. I could sue you for not agreeing with me. It would get thrown out, but we would both incur legal costs. I am sure many folks on BP can give stories of frivolous lawsuits they have had to endure.
If a person has been wronged, then they should have legal recourse, but not because they didn't recover from a terminal cancer.
Real Estate Investor · Phoenix, AZ · Member since 2009 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes
15y
It will be great if the TPers can influence policy and reduce the size of government. But I am not holding my breath for that to happen - the last century shows that the size of governments throughout the world keeps increasing.
We should also not read too much from the results of a mid-term election. Furthermore, Republicans have set themselves on the wrong side of demographics by attacking immigration, which has alienated Latinos - the fastest growing voter group.
I am afraid we are really not going to see much happen to reduce the size of government. :(
Real Estate Investor · Grand Blanc, MI · Member since 2008 · 17 posts · 25 votes
15y
I don't see how the GOP can post a viable argument as to how they will win in 2012 because of the whole Mitt Romney phenomenon. I don't understand how a candidate can be a prior governor, win the majority of the GOP straw polls and have an impeccable GOP record and not be the nominee or a VP candidate for their party. That is what the GOP will have to figure out if they want to defeat the Dems in 2012. Otherwise the Tea Party will eat up and bounce out the moderate or progressive GOPers and will nominate less qualified candidates to fill complicated positions. I am an independent which means I vote for the candidate that I agree with the most (not so much the name of the party) so I voted for republican Reps, but not so much Republican Senators because there has to be a balance to the rhetoric. Did I vote for Obama? Or did I vote for McCain? Good question, if McCain would have selected Romney, he would be president right now. Since he didn't, I didn't vote for him. I voted for the rhetorical conceptual positive speaker with amazing tele-prompting skills. Politics is an old game mastered by 8th grade girls. The adults should take some notes as to how the kids do it, because they know exactly how to get the word out and how to squash the opposition.
Real Estate Investor · Phoenix, AZ · Member since 2009 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes
15y
Tom, my concern is that the government is on an inexorable path towards becoming all-encompassing, like in a science fiction horror movie. I would love nothing more than having more libertarian-leaning people influencing policy and radically reducing the size of the government, similar to what Mike M has posted but also cutting other programs such as defence, social security, etc.
The reason I am not very hopeful about this is because mid-term elections tend to attract voters who are more politically motivated whereas the presidential election gets a lot of middle-of-the-ground voters as well. These people will generally vote more towards the center and the TP candidates may not fare well in such an election. That's what I meant by not reading too much into the results of a mid-term election. (In addition, there is always the possibility that the Republicans will now be considered partly incumbent and therefore any resentment against the government may not help them in two more years.)
Regarding immigration, the equation as far as votes is simple enough. The people who are most strongly opposed to illegal immigration are in the Republican party. The people who are most pissed off about it are Latinos. They are also the fastest growing major voting block. So the long term trend for Republicans in states with a large Latino population is not favorable. If you recall what happened with Wilson in California, that is what I see happening in a few more important states that have traditionally been Republican. This is unfortunate because immigrants, by nature, should be Republican-leaning - after all, most of them left highly regulated economies to come to the U.S.
Investor · Westminster, CO · Member since 2009 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes
15y
Vikram
The folks who are the most pissed off about illegal immigration are those who immigrated legally. Why should some folks get a FREE RIDE while others went through the proper channels? My idea is to welcome immigrants with a much simpler process for living and working here.
Personally, I am about as 'mixed' as they come. My grandmother was 50% Cherokee, on my mother's side. On my father's side, I have a lot of Scandanavian blood, folks who discovered America long before Columbus. One of my wife's ancestors, Rutledge, signed the Declaration of Independence. Our country is a MELTING POT of a myriad of races, cultures, ideals, philosophies, religions, etc... But America is also a country of FREEDOM and LAWS (how is that for irony)! And laws need to change with time. Just as there was no 75 MPH speed limit 200 years ago, immigration laws were much different 200 years ago. 21st Century Immigration needs a new approach, just like anything else. US Citizens have a "Social Security" Card so make Guest Workers get an "Immigrant Security" Card.
As for cutting Social Security, that isn't going to work. Social Security was designed as a "stand alone" system, a legal PONZI scheme where new investors pay off old investors. The SS system needs to be revised, but I don't think it needs to be cut.
Real Estate Investor · Phoenix, AZ · Member since 2009 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes
15y
Mike, I legally immigrated but do not find illegal immigration upsetting. Having said that, I need to clarify that I was not trying to turn this into a debate on immigration but merely pointing out that the California Republicans lost the Latino vote by fighting this battle and the party runs the risk of doing the same thing in other states that have a high Latino population. This does not portend well for Republicans in many states that have been reliably Republican.
Regarding social security, I am afraid I would like to see it completely eliminated and not just cut. I do not see any reason for the government to be involved in non-governmental things such as people's savings, pensions, health care, education, postal service, etc. I prefer free and competitive markets wherever possible and it is a stretch to suggest that savings and investments are not suitable for the private sector.
Lexington, KY · Member since 2010 · 315 posts · 133 votes
15y
I hope the Tea Party doesn't compromise. I'm glad they made that statement right after the election results were clear - and I hope they keep harping on that message enough to bring some change.
The Tea Party certainly doesn't have the presence in congress to get anything done but they can at least continue to spout their views and agenda. When enough Americans get on board hopefully the Republicans realize it is in their best interest to ride the wave - and for that matter the democrats too.
It's time we get back to what our constitution intended, give power to the states, reduce spending, cut entitlements, bring our troops home and protect our borders, devalue the dollar and cut corporate taxes to 0%, and focus our spending on education.
We need radical change, and not the kind of "change" Obama apparently had envisioned.
I think dems and reps both have it wrong and the Tea Party is not 100% right on every issue either, but they most accurately reflect my personal sentiments and hopes for the direction of our nation (ex. I love Rand Paul but he needs to drop issues like abortion for the 100 other issues of greater importance).
I hope the Tea Party has enough presence to get a clear message across to both parties as well as to the constituents that are too ignorant to know what is right for this country.
Real Estate Investor · Phoenix, AZ · Member since 2009 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes
15y
I read a good Op Ed piece in the WSJ from a tea party senator from some state. I liked what he had to say in the article. (Don't know anything else about him though.)
Lexington, KY · Member since 2010 · 315 posts · 133 votes
15y
I agree Vikram, good article.
"The fight begins today", that's exactly right. No time for congratulations, this is in fact just the beginning.
IAfter a few unsuccesful attempts at a stimulus and a generally strong negative connotation of the word itself, I would actually support a large "stimulus" focused on three things:
1)Rebuild our aging infrastructure
2)Build a "smart grid" and build large alternative energy projects to power it
3)Build water recycling and conservation projects
This would solve some of the largest issues looming over America in the long term, while at the same time creating jobs, putting money in workers pockets, and boosting the domestic economy in the short term - exactly what we need.
No more "stimulus" that goes to funding emerging market development to the extent that it has become overbearing and unsustainable and has emerging economies imposing restrictions to reduce foreign investment.
Real Estate Investor · Audubon, PA · Member since 2009 · 13k+ posts · 8k+ votes
15y
This is the part that I hope all will take to heart:
Lastly, don't let your re-election become more important than your job. You've campaigned long and hard for the opportunity to go to Washington and restore freedom in America. People will try to convince you to moderate conservative positions and break campaign promises, all in the name of winning the next race. Resist the temptation to do so. There are worse things than losing an election—like breaking your word to voters.
At your swearing-in ceremony, you will, as all senators do, take an oath to "support and defend the Constitution." Most will fail to keep their oath. Doing these five things will help you maintain a focus on national priorities and be one who does.
Congress will never fix entitlements, simplify the tax code or balance the budget as long as members are more concerned with their own narrow, parochial interests. Time spent securing earmarks and serving personal ambitions is time that should be spent working on big-picture reforms.
Investor, Entrepreneur, Educator · Springfield, MO · Member since 2009 · 21k+ posts · 12k+ votes
15y
I don't see that as being in any way leftest as to what Steve posted. it's what we should all expect.
Most people listen to what is being said by their party's representativies and take it as gospel, IMO. Not many, IMO, actually think about what is proposed and the effects of it other than what they are told. For example, we just voted down the state being able to put a real estate sales tax in place. Those for it, said it would increase sales tax 300%, threats and fear used by the Rep. establishment to get the new tax. Pure BS! Sales tax increases must be voted on and voters won't do that in my lifetime! Purely obsurd statements.
As Mike mentioned, wack entitlements, OK, I can agree, but to which ones and by how much? That's the problem. I had a friend on Medicare who just had surgery and got a walker. The "salesman" showed up in the hospital room and introduced himself while a nurse was there. He said something like.."I'm soandso, I'm with XYS, whileXYS is owned by the hospital, it's a seperate company that provide equipment. He had the paper work and a bill for the walker that he left so the paitemnt could leave the hospital. $126.00 for a very flimsy walker, it had toys for wheels, I've seen better on baby strolers! I can se that there was about $15.00 in materials and could be assempled in less than 2 minutes. At $60.00 it won't have been such a rip off and the hospital would have made a profit.
There are several points in this example. One, is that if you were lending money to someone and had them agree to give you a JV position in the company, you'd be nailed for a controlled business relationship, but for a hospital to own the company that sells the equipment, sold in the rooms before they check out and funding the equipment deals, that's okay....
So using under handed techniques, having controlled business relationships and marketings services before disclosing prices is something accepted and expected in the hospital industry, as well as the rips offs in Medicare....point is, you can't just cut the entitlement used to pay for ludicrest charges, you also have to attack the greed and business tactics that lead to the overcharging.
Republicans just have never done very well in regulating any industry, they have the worst record for accepting corporate money and voting in the best interests of big business rather than for the benefit of any consumer. I think this is one area they need to improve and compromise greatly to ensure a level playing field. I'm not saying the Dems don't take the money too, I'm saying it's the Republicans that will convince people that a vote was given for some agenda as a smoke screen for underlying benefits for big business. The government< IMO, should net be run and controolled by big business, but by the people.
As to the consitutionalists of shrinking government, sounds great, I'm all for it, but what offices do you shut down? If we had a flat tax, we could save by shutting down the IRS, but I doubt Charles Perkins, being a CPA, would appriciate that, LOL, as many CPAs would be out of work! Shut down FDIC (which is what Bush practically did) so banks can run at will, with very little oversight or supervision....the flip side is scamming bankers motivated by greed that will be paid for by all of us. Shut down the FDA and heath departments, then you can go to a resturant and die from a tuna sandwich.
Point is, for every action, there is an opposite and equal reaction, even in business and politics. We all like the actions proposed, but the reactions are not understood by the public, those are left to the statements made by those pushing the agenda. Voters really need to be better educated.
Real Estate Investor · Elkhorn, WI · Member since 2008 · 453 posts · 104 votes
15y
Originally posted by Financexaminer:
Republicans just have never done very well in regulating any industry, they have the worst record for accepting corporate money and voting in the best interests of big business rather than for the benefit of any consumer.
interesting statement. When a political party (dems) are anti-business...meaning they hate insurance companies, banks, etc...OF COURSE they will receive less support from private business! The republicans (the only party that still wanst private business around) are their only hope...OF COURSE businessess will send more money their way! For example, would you give political money to someone who wants to put YOU out of busines?
In Addition, can you back up your claims that republicans don't have the best interest of the consumers in mind? This is a very broad statement.
Investor · Little Rock, AR · Member since 2010 · 628 posts · 251 votes
15y
Originally posted by Tom Cullen:
Since when does the winner compromise? Especially after a very large historic victory?
The LOSER must compromise, not the winner.
This spin that the TP/GOP must now compromise is a load of crap. They must try to systematically dismantle everything thing Obama has mucked up since taking office. Obama will resist of course, then comes 2012 and his removal.
TC
P.S. When exactly did Obama ever compromise?
I hate to back this conversation up. I just posted in another thread to remind all what Oblammy said just days before the election.....
Something to the tune of the Teaparty/GOP taking aback seat??
And remember when he tried to stir the DooDoo with the Hispanics by saying the GOP was their enemies??
Now he is holding a meeting in two weeks to "reach across the isles". Screw him and all the other jackasses that he rode up there with. Even if it stalls things, never comprimise.
Don
Lexington, KY · Member since 2010 · 315 posts · 133 votes
15y
Finexaminer -
Yes frankly I think we could get rid of the IRS and implement a sales tax - no income tax. That promotes savings.
We could get rid of a large portion of the DOE, programs like SS, medicare and medicaid, welfare, keep the FDIC for deposit insurance but cut their workforce at leas tin half and stop breathing down the necks of banks and imposing process and procedure regulations instead of top level regulations. Cut defense spending significantly.