“Wall Street ate the economy.” I forgot who said it, but think they
are right. Along with that: GE in 2008 made 56% of it profits from finance
making it the largest non-bank lender in the country.
Twinkies and the like have been saved while we relaxed laws for
open pit mining; it’s good to have national priorities.
Does anyone else think it is
a bit hypocritical for Boehner to rush in as the hero to the Iowa grade school
class giving them a tour of congress when sequester cuts made it not possible
for them to tour the White House.
How do you define filthy stinking rich? Then, how to the filthy
stinking rich become filthy stinking rich become filthy stinking rich?
Modern beatitudes:
· Blessed are the
rich, this is their kingdom.
· Blessed are
wealthy for they are happy as pigs in slop.
· Blessed are the
egomaniacs for they can lord it over others.
· Blessed are
those who hunger and thirst for wealth and power for they can control the
country.
· Blessed are
those who put their feet on the throats of the downtrodden for they get an even
bigger share of the economic pie.
· Blessed are the
sneaky because they can bamboozle the masses.
· Blessed are the
war-mongers for they shall always make money at the expense of others lives.
· Blessed are
those who persecute others unrighteously, they will get theirs right now.
~The Book
of the Filthy Rich 5. 5-13
It is more blessed to receive than to give for I want mine and
yours as well. ~ Misers 7. 18
If someone slaps your cheek take him out with an assault weapon.
~NRA 2.2
If you can give the shaft to Caesar, do it. ~ Opportunists 4. 13
If someone takes your coat, waterboard him. ~ Vengeance 6. 34
I’m mad as hell because I’m mad and hell. ~ Whacko 9. 22
If at first you don’t succeed complain about it forever. ~ Whiners
5.5
Hate your enemies and do everything in your power to destroy them.
~ Antisympathetic 7. 66
Wow!
ReplyDelete"when sequester cuts made it not possible for them to tour the White House."
ReplyDeleteThis was actually Obama's own choice. Not Boehner's.
Just like that infamous quote where Obama chose to threaten to cut help for poor kids and disabled kids.
It was a secret service choice in implementing the results of sequester. If you read the bit on sequester you might note the term "congress" appears frequently.
DeleteWhat infamous quote?
Sequestration (from http://www.auburn.edu/~johnspm/gloss/sequestration)
ReplyDeleteOriginally a legal term referring generally to the act of valuable property being taken into custody by an agent of the court and locked away for safekeeping, usually to prevent the property from being disposed of or abused before a dispute over its ownership can be resolved. But the term has been adapted by Congress in more recent years to describe a new fiscal policy procedure originally provided for in the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Deficit Reduction Act of 1985 -- an effort to reform Congressional voting procedures so as to make the size of the Federal government's budget deficit a matter of conscious choice rather than simply the arithmetical outcome of a decentralized appropriations process in which no one ever looked at the cumulative results until it was too late to change them. If the dozen or so appropriation bills passed separately by Congress provide for total government spending in excess of the limits Congress earlier laid down for itself in the annual Budget Resolution, and if Congress cannot agree on ways to cut back the total (or does not pass a new, higher Budget Resolution), then an "automatic" form of spending cutback takes place. This automatic spending cut is what is called "sequestration."
Under sequestration, an amount of money equal to the difference between the cap set in the Budget Resolution and the amount actually appropriated is "sequestered" by the Treasury and not handed over to the agencies to which it was originally appropriated by Congress. In theory, every agency has the same percentage of its appropriation withheld in order to take back the excessive spending on an "across the board" basis. However, Congress has chosen to exempt certain very large programs from the sequestration process (for example, Social Security and certain parts of the Defense budget), and the number of exempted programs has tended to increase over time -- which means that sequestration would have to take back gigantic shares of the budgets of the remaining programs in order to achieve the total cutbacks required, virtually crippling the activities of the unexempted programs.
The prospect of sequestration has thus come to seem so catastrophic that Congress so far has been unwilling actually to let it happen. Instead, Congress has repeatedly chosen simply to raise the Budget Resolution spending caps upward toward the end of the legislative session in order to match the actual totals already appropriated, thus largely wiping out the incentives that the reformed budget procedures were expected to provide for Congress to get better control of the budget deficit.