THIS IS NOT ->Delawareliberal


Monday, September 18, 2006


Who is Castle Really Working for? Part III-b

Budget Neutral

These duty suspensions, tax cuts, corporate welfare - whatever you want to call them, purchased by Syngenta and Dupont through Mr. Castle are illegal would have been illegal if Democrats were in charge.

The budget act of 1990 requires that all significant revenues losses be “offset” by a spending cut or a revenue increase elsewhere in the federal budget. However, revenue losses of less than a half-million dollars are considered de minimis and do not require an offset. hhlaw PDF

Since the benefit to DuPont and Syngenta and the corresponding loss to the treasury is over $210 million it is clear that these earmarks are illegal.
Where are all my conservative balanced budget hawks?
PayGo expired in 2002; Russ Feingold tried to renew it but the renewal died in the Senate on a 50-50 vote.

The Hill: PAYGO can work again

By Sens. Lincoln Chafee (R-R.I.) and Russ Feingold (D-Wis.)

"When PAYGO was on the books during the 1990s, it worked. While it was not perfect, it worked well enough to help lower the deficit and, eventually, balance the federal budget. (snip) PAYGO expired in 2002. It is no coincidence that in that same year, the budget plunged back into the red."

Thanks GOP! That is some good GOP style governing!! And thanks to a Delawareliberal reader for the catch.

Where are all my conservative balanced budget hawks?

They're all busy lobbying for cuts in Social Security and health care to pay for Castle's free ride for agri-business.
You know, you may have tapped a vein here. Farmers are already pissed at Dupont, Monsanto, and all companies trying to lock them in via contract to specific seeds and chemicals. But now when they hear those same companies are also not paying their fair share in taxes - oh my.
...lock them in via contract to specific STERILE seeds and chemicals.
PAYGO would require a colossal tax hike, which would kill the economy.

Deep spending cuts are required first. Once the budget is balanced, then reinstitute PAYGO.

Also, PAYGO would not work unless entitlements are addressed.
So anon 3:55 was right. We need to lobby for cuts in Social Security and health care to pay for Castle's free ride for agri-business.

Got it.
HOOT what is killing the economy in every measure that affects me

are job shifting out of country
and immigrant shifting in country

both of these hurt

the first by taking career jobs and leaving no-pay no-benefits service jobs

the second by depressed wage and further strained social services

entitlements for corps is exactly what Jason is unveiling here.....

PayGo is American.

Since DLC's Clenis (a funny for Clinton I stold from Atrios'),
we have had to go glowball.

Yikes! that sounds like Geobbles and that rhymes with global and that means market players.

Anyway, the economic cubbord is bare with the debt and the tax cuts and the damned social safety net.

And no that is not a cheap shot using a Hitler propaganda chief, it is a reminder that all things perish if the means are used so to justify the ends.
PAYGO would require a colossal tax hike...

Wrong. Once again you are out of your league in an economic discussion.

PAYGO only requires tax increases on NEW spending. Under PAYGO if Republicans want to avoid tax increases, all they have to do is stop the spending increases. Isn't that what you want too?

You ARE in favor of stopping the spending increases, aren't you? so why are you afraid of PAYGO?

Answer: Republicans are against PAYGO because it would tie their hands in implementing even more tax cuts for the rich.
I am against PAYGO right now because politicians are impotent when it comes to fixing entitlements, and that will result in colossal spending increases, which would mandate colossal tax hikes. If the spending can be curtailed, then we can go with PAYGO. I'm not against it in principal.

"tax cuts for the rich"

That's a real sophisticated economic talking point, anon. I would bow down to your immense intellect, but I don't know your name.

Okay, genius. Define "new spending."
anytime someons says "it would kill the economy" i have serious, serious doubts.

They said the same thing about the KYOTO protocol?

Isn't the war killing the economy? Some how I don't think Paygo will kill anything...
Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home


November 2005   December 2005   January 2006   February 2006   March 2006   April 2006   May 2006   June 2006   July 2006   August 2006   September 2006   October 2006   May 2007  

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]