Promote your business or product on 700level.com. For
more information about advertising with us CLICK HERE!

Why don't we cut welfare spending in half? Oh wait, that's not fair.

Didn't we spend almost $700 billion in welfare last year? Wonder why we can't stimulate our economy while Democrats run things? Look no further than California. Arnold asked for a budget & they came back $17 billion over budget because of all the handouts.

Speaking as a Cali resident, there is PLENTY of blame to go around for the budgetary disaster. It spreads almost equally across the aisle.

In short, Arnie is right. The republicans suck. The democrats suck. A $42 billion shortfall cannot be fixed by spending decreases alone. This is especially true due to the broken nature of California's system in which some absurd proportion of funds MUST be spent on given programs, leaving legislators with very little discretion remaining. (Yes, this is endogenous and we can parcel out blame for the rules fairly easily. But these are the rules, and they've been the rules. You've got to work within them to solve the mess.)

Any possible chance Daschle doesn't make it? It seems like you have to beat a child to death in order to not be confirmed.

On another note, when Mexico and Korean delegates were interviewed by Fareed Zakaria (on CNN, boy is that guy creepy looking) they were asked what they did when their financial sectors and "banks" needed to be cleaned up. In both instances, they were counseled by the IMF (read USA) to NOT bail out banks, to ride it out and not to nationalize the financial sector. Each ultimately lost 15% of their GDP (devastating). But now, they don't have ANY problems with their banking systems.

PS, is it just me or is anyone else furious at hearing the justification regarding the bonuses being 1/3 less than normal on Wall Street? Cuz my response is, when your company nearly loses 100% of its value, then you should lose nearly 100% of your bonus. This clown was on yesterday talking about how Wall ST was reinventing itself. That was insulting.

jules, did you hear giuliani's rationale for the bonuses? certifiable lunacy.

What did he say, Flesh? I didn't hear it. I'm just really enraged at the whole thing. No where on the planet do I know of a biz that's losing money that pays out a single bonus.

Meanwhile, while all of these companies are cutting jobs by the thousands, good old government continues to grow. Must be nice to stick your nose in business and dictate, yet not have to go through any business cycles.

In defense of the government, they didn't have much choice. The private sector fucked up more royally than anyone possibly imagined it could and the government was left with the option of trying to prop things up or accepting unfathomable losses.

Now, they essentially have a license to do what they do best...spend without a care in the world.

The private sector fucked up more royally than anyone possibly imagined it could and the government was left with the option of trying to prop things up or accepting unfathomable losses.

it's what BMA consistently ignores. he's just not equipped with the brainpower to look at an entire problem. private business always good, government always bad.

for jules:

basically, taxpayer money should go towards bonuses for the rich on wall street since they spend money in fancy restaurants and saks and thus stimulate the economy.
click here

for the record, i linked to a partisan site because it came up first on my google search, but i first read the article earlier on cnn.com

Wow.....talk about delusional.

Before BMA makes some ridiculous post:

It is absurd that the latest Obama appointee has had to withdraw her nomination over $300 that was paid years ago.

This is completely unlike the other tax issues for two very significant reasons:
1) The sum was much, much less ($300)
2) It was cleared up years ago, before the nomination process even began.

What are we doing here? We're selecting for individuals who knew all along they were going to run for office and paid steadfast attention to the potential public relations nightmare of not paying $300 for six months. Is this who we want in office? Or, we're selecting for people who are very good at covering up their misdeeds. Is this who we want in office?

Geithner should have probably been confirmed. I'm willing to admit that there are two sides to this issue here.

Daschle should not be confirmed. I fail to see any way around it.

Killefer should definitely be confirmed. Again, I fail to see any other side to this debate.

"Among Bush bashers on this site, I don't even think I'm among the top 10."

Sorry FD. At the time I read/posted, I believe you were going at it with the others. Timing is everything.

However this thread remains the MOST PREDICTABLE THREAD EVER.

Daschle withdraws nomination.

He should have called one of those tax assistance numbers. He could have settled for pennies on the dollar and none of us would have been wiser

This administration continues to be a train wreck and it's great to watch.

Glenn's boy "Unka Tom" quotes Kool Moe Dee-


y'all never should have let him off the porch
link

Every day there's a new tax cheat in the land of hope.

This Daschle clown is by far the best, though. The imagery of a guy who's made a career out of class warfare being driven around in an extravagant car by a chauffeur, all provided by a "wealthy donor," and then failing to pay a hundred thousand dollars in taxes on the services. Priceless.

Gotta love these bank execs-
Yo, click it

The only way these nimrods are going to stop is if they're caught. Have to wonder what stuff hasn't been caught by someone.

This administration continues to be a train wreck and it's great to watch.

I agree...worst 2 weeks of my life.

Just to scare Jules a little:



The dude looks like he was put together from spare parts.

I don't think many people would argue with this move:


click here

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 
31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45  46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 
61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 
91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 
121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 
151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166