No, actually it is not - the Energy Department’s Loan Guarantee Credit Committee put the project on hold in January 2009.
Regards,
Shodan
President Obama doesn’t appear to be an idiot of any size. He’s clean and articulate, didn’t you get the memo. You just have a policy disagreement with him, no need to start name calling.
Here’s a puzzler for you. If you don’t think the money should have been invested at all, how is it Obama’s fault that 1000 jobs were lost? Assuming any of what you say is true, those jobs never would have existed. Advancing the money, even to a failed venture, doesn’t cost jobs.
Let me speak for the 2 percenters for a moment. I don’t want to pay 90% of my income in taxes. Nor 70% or even 50%. I’m okay paying a few percent more than the current rates on income over $250,000. Paying less would be fantastic, and if we can get back to budget surpluses, I’ll be the first to celebrate a tax reduction after the deficit is paid down. I really don’t get all the freaking out about relatively minor changes in our tax policy. I suspect there’s something else going on.
Your original statement was that the Bush administration “shelved” the project.
Here’s what happened:
The Bush administration never “shelved” Solyndra. What you posted was false.
You’re inventing an implication that no one else sees.
The rest of us infer these statements:
[list=A][li]Businesses and indeed all Americans rely for success, comfort, and daily needs upon the base of services that have been provided by the federal government since its founding.[/li]
[li]Taxes are the means by which these services can be provided.[/li]
[li]Income taxes have superseded excise taxes and tariffs as the primary source of taxes.[/li]
[li]Income taxes (which include corporate taxes) will always need to be imposed to fund the continuing need for services.[/li]
[li]Doing so will benefit everybody, and it is an excellent investment for businesses in particular.[/li][/list]
That’s not a partisanly twisted interpretation of his remarks as quoted by Hentor the Barbarian. That’s what would get you correct answers if you read this as part of the SATs.
Infrastructure is not specifically mentioned anywhere in those words, so it’s more of a stretch to find the implication to it. But all speeches must be fit into the larger context and we all know that infrastructure in particular is not being funded properly. All experts agree that at least a trillion dollars in infrastructure spending is needed just to bring current services up to standards, and more spending is required in the future. All of the above inferences on services work just as well when the services are infrastructure creation and repair. There’s no way out of this loop. Well, no right or logical way.
The Keystone pipeline is not government infrastructure. It’s a privately funded project that’s hardly uncontroversial. The GOP was essentially holding 10’s of thousands of jobs hostage while shilling for private interests, notably the Koch brothers.
Actually, talking points serve to energize the base. See Shodan.
This works even for talking points formed from selectively edited quotes that (when one looks at the whole speech) can be clearly seen to be a load of steaming dung. This is because the base does not typically care for accuracy or detail.
Accuracy or detail have no place in talking points.
The base will lap them up, however.
Great, so…when are we gonna start demanding things from the people who don’t have money to contribute? Say, requirements that they do well in school or make dropouts learn a trade or stop the rampant pregnancies of people who know better?
If we’re all in this together, then the expectations should go both ways. I’ve always been happy to spend money and time to help people who demonstrate some measure of effort. I work full time and run two businesses in service to making my life better, now I get to keep less because others who don’t contribute?
This will absolutely sound like an anti-poor people rant, but I also include things like farm subsidies, corporate welfare and the like. I wouldn’t bitch at tax hikes if there also spending cuts. I’m a businessman - I look at everything as an investment.
No, you are just trying to blow smoke. So it goes.
[QUOTE=Exapno Mapcase]
Infrastructure is not specifically mentioned anywhere in those words, so it’s more of a stretch to find the implication to it
[/QUOTE]
So you don’t think roads and bridges are infrastructure? Geez, the crap you people post with a straight face.
Regards,
Shodan
Unlike Romney, then, I assume you wouldn’t pass on a deal that cut the deficit by $10 in spending cuts for every $1 in tax hikes.
Well, I’d have to see the plan, but based on your statement, I’d be okay with it. If it’s nebulous " deficit cutting" like the promised savings from Obamacare, then no. I want to see actual cuts, not projections of maybe some savings down the road.
I’m happy to cut everything, including defense and corporate handouts, but something that is estimated and based on the future is no good. Show me a budget of what we spend on, say, attack helicopters right now, and I’ll get a red pen and start slashing.
I hope nothing I wrote was construed as denying that. My quibble was specifically with Sateryn76’s assertion that tax dollars are flowing into our coffers.
Wow, pretty nitpicky, but how about property and sales tax breaks and subsidized loans:
[www.ftc.gov/os/2008/01/080116postal.pdf
It may not be funds going directly in, but it has the same effect on the bottom line.
The word “infrastructure” was not used.
Now, do you have a substantive response?
I’m all for access to birth control and education, but from where I’m sitting this is not exactly a conservative argument. Seriously, how do you want to handle this- demanding people below the poverty line get a 3.0 or lose their aid and that they not have children?
Well, I’m not exactly a conservative.
I dunno how to fix this stuff. Maybe a great Charter School but a requirement is that all the girls get Norplant? Clunky at best, and I’ll probably be accused of advocating eugenics, etc., but there has to be some pressure on that problem somewhere, and what we’re doing now isn’t working.
Farmers and corporations and such are much easier - just pull their funding. Mcdonalds can pay for their own overseas advertising, and ADM can compete on a level playing field, just like all the other business owners.
Or join the military?
We do have efforts to address these concerns. We have efforts to try to prevent people from committing crimes and using drugs and killing animals and beating children and having sex with minors and keeping library books too long too.
There’s already a demand for these things. Is there some consequence you’re proposing? If you have better ways to address social ills, we’re all ears.
But more importantly, how is this relevant? If someone gets pregnant as a teenager, does that mean that America’s strength isn’t our shared community and sense of purpose? Does a pregnant teenager mean that 36% is the best top marginal tax rate? I don’t follow.
I can’t speak for anyone else, but why the “we’re all in this together” meme drives me crazy is because it really doesn’t seem like it from here. I’m doing my part, but the rest…
You have politicians and corporate interests dividing the pie in Washington, generally acting against rational business and market models, which if I did in my business, I would be a failure. Then you have low income people continually making just awful personal choices that I avoided, even when they were painful, and I’m expected to give them my money.
Why is everyone demanding things from me, and not from them?
That is why Obama’s comments grate so harshly - we’re the only ones doing the “right thing”
Y
Are you familiar with the concept of “examples”?
You said it was “more than a stretch” to decide that Obama was talking about infrastructure when he mentioned roads and bridges. It’s really difficult to come up with a substantive response to something so ridiculous, other than to point out that it’s silly.
Roads and bridges and the Internet and so on are infrastructure. That’s what the word means. If you are going to blow a gasket because you don’t like how Obama’s speech is being spun, you might want to spend the effort to try to understand what he did say.
Or not.
Regards,
Shodan
'Cause I’m a girl? It’s just two less keystrokes on my phone.
If it’s something else, I’m not getting it.