Slashdot Mirror
House Websites Jammed After Obama Debt Speech
Hugh Pickens writes "CNN reports that House switchboards have been flooded by phone calls — nearly twice the normal average — and hit with an unusual volume of constituent e-mails as voters voice their concern over the worsening debt-ceiling crisis. At least 104 of 279 congressional websites surveyed by CNN were down or had experienced slow connections on Tuesday, after President Obama's speech Monday night. In his address to the nation, Obama called on the American people to 'make your voice heard.' House Speaker John Boehner's website responded with a 'Server Too Busy' or 'Bad Request (Invalid Hostname)' message during parts of the day. His switchboard reported as many as 150-300 callers on hold, wanting to leave their thoughts for the speaker. House Chief Administrative Officer spokesman Dan Weiser said that lawmakers' websites and phone lines began to sag with the traffic on Monday night. 'Last night we had some website problems. ... There was some websites that were hosted by outside vendors that had slowness, sluggishness, people had trouble getting in. And that was rectified early this morning.'"
This is extortion. This is anti-American. Rep Mike Lee Admits Extortion.
In specific Tea Party Republicans are threatening to put the nation into default, holding the entire US economy and millions of lives hostage to pass their amendment to the Constitution. They want the nation to default because it will boost recruitment into their militias. They want a civil war and are apparently beyond compromise. They cannot be reasoned with apparently.
Who are these people? Before they called themselves the Tea Party they called themselves the John Birch Society. and before they were called the John Birch society they called themselves the American Liberty League.
This is the same American Liberty League that was behind the Business Plot.
The Business Plot was the attempt to overthrow the US government and in specific overthrow FDR and install a fascist dictatorship. The history of that can be seen by watching this video.
Read about Smedley Darlington Butler and how he single handedly saved the nation from a coup. Now that we have a black President the forces looking to have a coup have grown stronger than ever. And these groups hate the feds and the government because these are the ones investigating them. The solution? Tax cuts, smaller government, which means less FBI investigations into them.
And btw I expect "them" to rate my post down into oblivion. Expect to see it rated as flamebait, overrated or something else.
It seems like the more extreme Republicans that are running things in the House don't have a political philosophy so much as they have a religion. It's hard to convince a zealot of anything.
Pay attention, kids: we're experiencing history! This is another stage in the long decline of the United States.
Hail Eris, full of mischief...
E pluribus sanguinem
This is Democracy inaction
There, fixed it for you.
Our system of government was not setup for this large of a population. When the countru was founded there were many who thought the constittuent:representative ratio was too high and it is faaaar worse now. It is time to dissolve the union and form 50 new nations.
And those limits can be overwhelmed by a large response.
Or is the real news story that Americans are expressing something about their political parties for once?
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
Pity you can't vote for another party and leave the Dems and Reps out of it. Mind you, you'd need some kind of system in place that allows anyone to stand for a seat and be voted in, regardless of how much money they put in to one of the two parties in the democracy.
Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
Now we're going to Slashdot them too!
Hi, you seem to be using the FALSE EQUIVALENCE fallacy!
Let me bring you up to speed: two long and incompetently-waged wars kept of the budget books for political reasons, at the same time we had a tax cut. Nobody's ever cut taxes during a war, let alone two, because that's a really fucking stupid thing to do.
In the latest episode of the Washington Follies, the Republicans demanded big cuts in spending. Fine, say the Dems, here's $3 trillion in spending cuts But we want $1 trilliion in eliminated tax subsidies and raised taxes on the rich. NONONONONO, scream the Republicans, TAXES BAD TAXES BAD.
That's not "durr, they're equally bad".
Hail Eris, full of mischief...
E pluribus sanguinem
HA HA HA HA.
Do you even know what the amending process entails? Hint: you have to get a supermajority of the state legislatures to approve the amendment. Do you have any fucking idea how long that would take? /Years/. We don't have time for that kind of political theater bullshit. If Republicans want that, they should put it out as a separate measure. If the people and their representatives in the states want it, it'll pass on its own merits.
Hail Eris, full of mischief...
E pluribus sanguinem
The Congressional filtering system is extremely efficient. No matter what you say, somehow you're always supporting the position that the Congresscritter has already taken.
I've been writing to "my" Congressional "representatives" for almost forty years, and even when I've bluntly said that Senator Bozo has a severe case of craniorectal insertion, I get a letter back thanking me for supporting him.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
Defaulting on the federal debt will simply mean the federal government is limited to its revenues and whatever it can print (and that will totally screw over the poor and vulnerable). We have over $2T in revenues. All that means is that the federal government will have to prioritize.
How about we start means-testing Social Security and Medicare. If Grandma has a pension, fat 401k or private assets she gets no Social Security.
So what if she "paid into the system her whole life." I have no kids and pay thousands of dollars in property taxes, mainly to support local schools. Do you see me whining, bitching and moaning about the injustice of paying for something from which I derive no personal benefit? No. It's called civic responsibility. Part of your duty as a citizen is to put the common good before yours and frankly, I'm sick of ordinary Americans adopting the same "fuck you, I'll get mine" attitude they accuse the rich of having and then acting holier than thou toward them.
Say they decide to pay the troops, what about the contractors who were promised money who are risking their lives as well? You think the mercenaries are going to be happy when they find out they might not be paid and that their contract may even be canceled? So how are they going to get their money?
Also how will the troops be paid? That isn't even a guarantee. The foreigners who own the nations debt have to be paid before anyone else and that includes the troops. After the foreign debt holders are paid then the President can think to give priority to the troops, or to contractors, or to social security. And at some point, somewhere, some people aren't going to be paid. Which people can afford not to get paid for a month?
And when a budget is finally passed, will that lost month's pay be included in the budget? The point is that this will fuck the system up internally, as well as fuck up the entire economy.
So we should march on D.C. this week? What should I put on my sign? "More Debt NOW!"?
...it's too late for the pebbles to vote. Regardless of your fiscal outlook, the fact is the debt ceiling must be raised, simply because of economic inertia. Fiscal conservatives may be correct that less government spending is good - but that perspective doesn't matter today, as our economic difficulties are the result of decisions years, maybe decades past. If you want to avoid raising debt ceilings in the future (a goal I actually support), that's fine - we can have a discussion on the best fiscal policy to pursue over the next ten years in order to achieve that. But *today* is not the time to debate *this* particular ceiling. That discussion should've happened ten years ago. Playing with the cap today is irresponsible at best, and cynical exploitation of economic trouble created, in part, by an ex-president from your own party, to secure a victory in 2012 ... well, not even at "worst", as that's pretty much exactly what the Republicans are doing.
The point is, you don't change economic trends overnight. The necessity of raising the debt ceiling cannot be altered today, even with the best intentions. I want to stay balanced and not single a particular side for blame, but it seems that the politicking is all about discrediting the sitting president to hurt his incumbent standing in 2012, rather than any form of principled economic disagreement.
Btw: captcha: "defraud"
It's no new taxes without balancing the budget.
Yeah, except that lowering taxes doesn't seem to grow the economy. Certainly not enough to make up for the lowered rate. Too bad. It's all sensible except for that point.
Anyway, the top 20% pays 86% of the taxes, maybe, but don't they own an equally large (or larger) share of the wealth and income?
When I was a kid, in the 1960s, tax rates were way over 50%. Tax rates in England peaked at 90%. While 90% marginal tax rates will certainly hurt your economy, it's not at all clear than 30%, 40%, 50% rates will do much damage. If we can manage to spend some of that on useful infrastructure things, it may even be good in the long run. Just think! We could have a well-educated, healthy workforce, streets and networks that work, et cetera.
The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies.
Over the past 5 years, our federal debt has increased by $3.5 trillion to $8.6 trillion.That is “trillion” with a “T.” That is money that we have borrowed from the Social Security trust fund, borrowed from China and Japan, borrowed from American taxpayers. And over the next 5 years, between now and 2011, the President’s budget will increase the debt by almost another $3.5 trillion.
Numbers that large are sometimes hard to understand. Some people may wonder why they matter. Here is why: This year, the Federal Government will spend $220 billion on interest. That is more money to pay interest on our national debt than we’ll spend on Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program. That is more money to pay interest on our debt this year than we will spend on education, homeland security, transportation, and veterans benefits combined. It is more money in one year than we are likely to spend to rebuild the devastated gulf coast in a way that honors the best of America.
And the cost of our debt is one of the fastest growing expenses in the Federal budget. This rising debt is a hidden domestic enemy, robbing our cities and States of critical investments in infrastructure like bridges, ports, and levees; robbing our families and our children of critical investments in education and health care reform; robbing our seniors of the retirement and health security they have counted on.
Every dollar we pay in interest is a dollar that is not going to investment in America’s priorities.
Senator Barack Obama
Senate Floor Speech on Public Debt
March 16, 2006
-- Amazing how things change...
if (it != oneThing) it = another;
No, Obama has spent more dollars, but Bush has spent more PERMANTE dollars.
By this I mean that Bush's policies amounted to taking tax money and burning it on the white house lawn.
While Obama has certainly done some of this as well, most of his most expensive policies have already or will recoup most if not all the money invested. What this means is that the long term impact is just the interest on the debt for the time the money was out.
There is an intersting article published a few days ago:
http://ezkool.com/2011/07/two-potus-spending-2/
What I find amazing is that as far as I can tell, Regan, Bush junior and Obama all seem to have read '1984' and decided that it demonstrated a sound financial plan! Read the book. The key aspect of the financial system was making production disapear through war. This kept most of the population poor, reduced the availability of consumer good and had the fringe benefit of sparking patriotism...
What I cna't believe
We have over $2T in revenues. All that means is that the federal government will have to prioritize.
How about we start means-testing Social Security and Medicare. If Grandma has a pension, fat 401k or private assets she gets no Social Security.
So what if she "paid into the system her whole life." I have no kids and pay thousands of dollars in property taxes, mainly to support local schools. Do you see me whining, bitching and moaning about the injustice of paying for something from which I derive no personal benefit?
I have a better idea. How about we do the following programs:
1. Stop Agriculture subsidies
2. Stop Ethanol subsidies
3. Raise the tariffs on goods entering this country from countries like China so our tarrif restricts their exports to us like they restrict our exports to them.
4. Impose a tariff on any US companies' goods that are manufactured over seas so it becomes cheaper for them to be made here.
5. Stop bombing brown people
6. Quit Being Team America world Police and bring all our troops home from Europe, Asia, Africa, South America, Canada, Mexico. I think that covers everything
7. Quit buying military equipment the military doesn't want or need (I'm looking at you F-35 JSF and all your friends)
8. Closing tax loopholes, you know ones like the carried interest deduction for hedge fund managers or the ones the allow Exxon to get a check from the government.
9. Close down the some federal departments
10. Shit can the TSA airport screener and their scanners
11. Adjust congressional pay to so that it matches the median or average pay (I don't know which is lower) of the private sector employees in the country (this won't save much but is more symbolic)
12. Quit pissing money away on stupid stimulus spending like bailing out banks, car companies, or any other private entity.
Those seem like they would be a good start and would probably do more than stupid crap like suggesting means testing Social security or Medicare. Granted changes do need to be made to both of those programs, but don't hold them up as being the elephant in the room at the moment. In case you haven't noticed social security is considered an insurance program as is medicare, as such any changes made should only affect those no already on it or about to go on it. I would love to be able to say to social security you can keep all the money that my employers and I have already paid in in for me but give me the 12.4% (6.2% I pay and the 6.2% my employer pays) of my income that is paid in each year for me back so I can just add it to my Roth IRA (I already paid taxes on this income I have the pay stub show that) in return I won't ever be able to collect social security.
Time to offend someone
We voted for him with our eyeballs and dollars. Sorry you live in a society with a belief in the freedom to express your opinions and ideas. I know you must hate it. That's why you have to come here to express your opinions and ideas. But people don't give a shit about what you say, so it's not fair. Right?
A dollar shouldn't be a relevant unit of power in a democracy.
The legal obligations of purported news sources not to lie should be stronger, so at least one distortion on our system could be reduced. You think it's just sour grapes when someone wishes they could be heard, but when they are systematically excluded due to preferential treatment given to the wealthy, it's a legitimate complaint - at least, if you believe in anything like a democratic process.
Although the moon is smaller than the earth, it is farther away.
"The Republican plan would allow Obama to increase the debt ceiling by $2.4T"
It's not the President's job to increase the debt ceiling. The cowards are just looking for a way to get around their blood oath AND be able to score points in the next election, pretty much the definition of dirty pool.
He's already threatened mine. In fact, I could make an argument he got me laid off.
I work in Aerospace at a company that manufactures interior fittings for private jets. Essentially we pimp them out.
When Obama first opened his Pie Hole about how corporations should not be buying these jets, within two weeks we had nearly 60% of our orders canceled as the jet builders like Gulfstream, Falcon, etc. had their orders canceled or placed on hold. With one Class Warfare speech he helped put thousands of people out of work.
Now, a year later I'm back with the same company and sure enough DipShit opens his PieHole again trying to demonize jet owners. We saw a 15% decrease in orders this time. I guess people realize he's just talking out of his ass.
Private jets, yachts, expensive cars, etc. are no different than dishwashers, washers, dryers, TVs, etc. They are luxuries that people pay for and the industries that build these things support thousands of jobs. In fact, in our industry, it’s almost 100% U.S. jobs, and well paying jobs at that.
People bitch and moan about how "rich people" and corporations have their money locked up and are not hiring, yet when they engage in commerce with that very same money, purchasing high end goods that end up paying for many, many salaries, they are demonized by this POS POTUS.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
The Tea-Party Republicans ran on platforms of cutting spending and lowering the debt. Can you blame them for not turning on their constituents and breaking promises to pass legislation their home districts are against? I thought we were tired of politicians making campaign promises, then breaking them in office.
Funtime Candy Wow! - my plan for eventually conquering Japan.
The answer is not to give a little ground, it is for both sides to completely cave in.
The US welfare system and other social programs is a joke, they are horribly inefficient and provide little. Why does the US spend more on healthcare yet get less?
And why do the rich in America got an entire party supposedly representing 50% of the population cater solely to their needs? Because all the republican tax cuts are for the super rich, not the working middle class.
America needs to reform. A better tax system and more efficient spending. A lot more money in and a lot less money out.
Neither side is willing. Don't forget that the republicans need the social spending to avoid social unrest that would soon see just how much a security gate is worth when armed poor rise up. And the democrats got plenty of backers with corporate jets.
US politics has reached stalemate. The status quo works fine enough, in a world that doesn't change but the world has changed and the 50/50 distribution of political power makes the US unable to cope.
The US needs a plan for its economy, dare I say it a planned economy? That doesn't work if two parties are only intrested in the next sound bite, the next election in less then two years.
Just hold an election for the entire system (both houses) this year and just do the same thing whatever it is for 4 years at least. At this point what you do matters less then just doing ANYTHING. Cut all wellfare and deal with the civil uprising or tax the hell out of everything and deal with the civil uprising or don't do anything and deal with the economic mayhem. But do SOMETHING.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Politicians don't believe in anything (yes, that includes your guy too, whoever he is). The only thing they're thinking about is the next election. And, in this case, Republicans have a vested interest in keeping the economy in the shitter through the end of 2012 (because it hurts Obama's reelection potential). In other words, they're not religious, they're just immoral opportunists who won't hesitate to throw the entire country under the bus just to advance their own short-term political interests.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
The debt crisis involves a complex series of tradeoffs, and polling along the lines of "would you rather let millionaires keep their tax cuts, or cut all services to the poor" might get us more accurate information.
This is the point. I suspect that 47% (not a majority, mind you, just a plurality) has wildly different ideas about how to go about balancing the budget. We already know that 72% of Americans support raising taxes on the highest tax bracket. Plans for reducing and eventually eliminating the deficit *should* be on the table at all times, but we shouldn't be held hostage by the debt ceiling. Obama should do as Clinton said: raise it and let the court figure it out. He cares way too much about getting re-elected though.
"after you count up all the loopholes and compare how much of their "income" actually gets taxed at the much lower Capital Gains rates, actually pay less in taxes than the middle class do?"
I won't talk rates, I'll talk what's actually paid. Definition: Middle class has a broad definition, but I'll take $30,000-$100,000, which covers the span of most definitions and gives you a large middle class with which to make your argument.
The top 10% of earners, above 114,000, pay 70% of all income taxes. So, no, the middle class pays less than the rich. The lower 50%, below $33,000, pays almost nothing.
Short-term capital gains taxes go up with your tax bracket, and the rate is the same. Even if you bought something at $10,000 and a few laters it grew with inflation to $10,500, you still have to pay tax on the $500 even though you technically didn't make any money. Long-term rates are less in order to offset inflation losses and encourage long-term investment that helps the economy over quick flipping.
Obviously the rich are more likely to invest, so I'm pretty sure it's a safe bet to say that top 25% pay almost all capital gains taxes.
And those limits can be overwhelmed by a large response.
Or is the real news story that Americans are expressing something about their political parties for once?
I think the buried lead is that these systems weren't even built with the expectation that they'd be used by a significant number of voters.
"All these years believing you're the signified monkey, only to find out you're just a big hunk of nobody cares."
In 2008, the top 0.1% (140,000 people) earned 10% of all income and paid 19% of all income taxes.
The top 1% (over $380,000) earned 20% of income and paid 38% of all taxes.
The top 5% (over $160,000) earned 35% of income and paid 59% of taxes.
Notice the trend, they all pay MORE in taxes than their percentage of earnings.
Now when you go below that, the top 5-10%, $114,000-$160,000, the percentage of earnings about equals the percentage of taxes paid at 11% each.
It gets flipped when you go below that, $67,000-$114,000 pays 16% of the taxes, but has 22% of the income.
$33,000 to $67,000 has 20% of the income, but pays 11% of the taxes.
You are already looking at a highly progressive tax structure.
Wouldn't you know it, the top 10% paid almost exactly 70% of the taxes, although earning only 46% of the income.
Probably because they're already paying a far higher precentage than everyone else.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html
All data from the IRS, raw data links on the page.