> In a statement, White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer indicated > Obama would sign the two-month extension measure, saying it had met his test > of "preventing a tax increase on 160 million hardworking Americans" and > avoiding damage to the economy recovery.
Interesting. But that's really jumping the gun a bit. Boehner and the House passed a 1 year extension. They haven't agreed to a 2 month extension yet. And they shouldn't. They should amend this Senate bill, or they should get conference committee to work out the differences.
As for the pipeline, there's nothing the Republicans would like more than for Obama to declare that pipeline "not in the national interest." Let's see him defend that in a Presidential debate. Let's see how much the unions will support his campaign when he declares their jobs "not in the national interest."
Dan1620: "You forgot to adjust for inflation. Defense, (incuding my pension, HC) is a drop in the bucket compared to SS/MC/MA"
Sorry dan, but payroll taxes have taken care of SS/MC for decades and even provided a huge $3 Trillion surplus, which has been squandered by warmongers in Congress. The national security/defense expenditures come out of the "general fund" which has been supplemented by SS/MC and reduced by ignorant supply side idiocy!
Again you leave out the facts that oil will be sold to anyone at market prices, we will pay the same for a barrel of that oil as Europe, China, S. America. So where's the benefit long term?
I didn't leave it out. I assumed that everyone knows that a "barrel of oil" is always sold at "market rates" (depending on grade). Doesn't matter where it comes from. What varies the price is the transportation costs to get that oil to the refinery. I never said that it would lower gas prices in the US. The benefit would be jobs in the US. We have refineries that are not running at full capacity. Remember, this oil "ain't stay'n" in the ground, Canada will ship it somewhere to be refined. Why not us? I thought all libs wanted more manufacturing jobs in the US, well here it is. Or are we going to let Canada ship those jobs overseas too?
We're shipping refined oil overseas, so if our refineries aren't running a full capacity that means the demand isn't there. No need to add jobs if the demand isn't there, same as what the rest of the business's are saying, no demand for the product, no jobs.
retm, I don't really understand your logic, but how about a statement from The US Energy Information Administration (a government agency).
Refineries and upgraders are huge, expensive projects requiring long-term maintenance. Since processing capacity already exists in the United States, it's more profitable for companies to ship the oil south.
More specifically, the price difference between the raw bitumen taken out of the oilsands and refined oil - called the crack spread - isn't large enough to encourage oil companies to build additional upgraders in Alberta.
The Gulf Coast is by far the leader in refinery capacity, with more than twice the crude oil distillation capacity as any other United States region. (The difference is even greater for downstream processing capacity, because the Gulf Coast has the highest concentration of sophisticated facilities in the world.)
I see once again that CBS has removed my post. What is the matter CBS do not want people to know that the XL pipe line is going directly thru NDN land? We do not want the pipe line going thru our reservations OUR land is not for sale, instead the only way the Government can do this is to violate our treaties, freeze us out starve us out and continue to commit mortal genocide that has NEVER stopped since 1492. We know what the Koch brothers the Republicans and the oil companies want and the GB wannabe Harper in Canada.The oil will be going to Asia As for job creation it will be only a temporary fix. This issue should have Never been part of the bill..but hey that's the only way they can shove this pipeline thru. like NAFTA like CAFTA . Once again we will get screwed by the Companies and the US/Canadian government...OUR Land is not FOR sale!
Now that the subject is taxes......just think how much the US treasury could collect IF all religious property holdings were subjected to taxation. (Leave just the Sunday auditorium as exempt.) I say take a close look at your local religious establishment, no matter what denomination, and ask yourself, "Why is this collection of enormous and elaborate buildings necessary for religious worship and exempt from local property taxation?"
Churches are BIG businesses, second only to the military complex, and then followed by the prison systems, and should therefore be treated as a business.....after all, they are selling a "promise".
Dan1620: "Just think how much money we could save by cutting the size of the federal government in half!"
Just think how much REAL MONEY we could save by cutting back on the national security/defense budget of over $1 Trillion -- and go back to the Clinton years of less than $300 billion for defense!
Might have to cut YOUR government check and make YOU pay for your health care instead of giving you entitlements and socialized medicine, though, dan!
The article corroborates what is being said in Europe. Obama is trying to hold the economic meltdown that is occurring till after the elections in 2012. According to European news Obama is working lockstep with Sarkozy of France to assure their reelection, both to be held within the next year. Overall the economic situations in the Euro Zone is tenuous, Italy alone has a debt load in excess of 13 trillion, far higher then its GDP can absorb. Spain, a large economy needs a bailout as well, and the French economy is why Sarkozys reelection is in doubt. The American economy while not as bad as the Euro Zone still reflects one of two Americans at or in poverty. Obamas solution to the stalling economy was to invent Obamacare. So much for Hope and Change.
Your interpretation is simply wrong. Infact it is difficult to comprehend any rational person getting the message that wrong.
Your choice of words and their connotations belie your motives (i.e. lockstep). Indeed the financial sector has Europe by the shorthairs with ability to raise interests and force political triggers for any entity that currently holds any significant debt balance.
Certainly, there is a second shoe to fall, but not in the way you suggest. A return to supply-side expansion cannot create growth where there is none to be had, so good luck with your winds of political change.
Maybe i can't see it, but to me this is another bad agreement and a bad bill. 2 months for extension? Then why bother at all.
We need to start divercing some of these grab bags and have some real discussion of merit.
For instance, a payroll tax "holiday" seems great to the immediate short term; but further unfinds SS and medicare. Is this truly wahtwe need is to make the programs more insolvent. Personally, i think it's a pretty bad idea, unless you are trying tomake the system require extreme redefinition and/or eliminate it.
Second, the oil pipeline profits and jobs CANNOT be claimed as part of this or any other bill, for the simple reason that it is going in regardless. The only reviewal issue is routing of the pipeline and WHEN it is going in. I swear it is a done deal, whether it start in 2012 or 2013. After all it is in fact supported by both parties (and they have been so heavily lobbied).
Extending unemployment benefits for 2 months is meaningless. In fact all of this kick the can less than a quarter down the road philosophy is what is killing the effectiveness and the perceived effectness of the Fed Govt. Every two months there is another repeat discussion, followed by threatening,posturing and the wringing of hands, then another short-sighted agreement, followed by a bad bill applauded as "the best we could do".
One thing that Govt is supposed to be able to do is plan and look longer term than private industry, as true infrastructure maintenance absolutely depends on it.
This cannot go on, where budget bandaids are the only substantive discussion every few months.
The bigger issue both houses are addressing is controling the spending by the white house. There is no doubt that Obama's foreign aid policies are a big part of our economic meltdown and government debt. Geither just returned from Europe where he pledged 50 billion in bailouts to Euro Zone banks. Folks, that money should be spent here at home. Obama's administration has focused on social issues only both here at home and globally, ignored the business sector and the middle class issues for three years, only now remembering we exist because he wants another term to prance and cavort on the world stage as a "leader". Remember back to when he won the election, one of the first things Obama was going to do was "Green the Whitehouse". His big "announcement" was greeted with guffaws by both sides of the aisle, the staff at the whitehouse and all government employees. Obama apparently was the lone Senator who did not know all the previous presidents had been "Greening the Whitehouse" for decades. He was the only President who considered this an innovation worthy of a press headline to show his "great intellect and superior intelligence" over that of his predessors. The whispers of a resident in the whitehouse began at that moment.
Funny Canada has four refineries right there in Alberta that can refine the tar sand oil. Why do they have to pipe it to the Gulf Coast, unless it's for exporting that oil to S America and Europe.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
DING! DING! DING!
YOU WIN retm-w.
That's EXACTLY where that oil is going...EXPORT.
Any of that money going into your pocket??
NO!
Then why a Repub pushed fast track ledgislation?
Stop struggling and let the Repubs hold you down over the kitchen table,with pants at your ankles...so the oil companies can give you an answer.
Your point is well taken. Why haven't the politicians pounced on this information. Texas refineries number in the hundreds, is their a capacity problem involved or the expense of transport? Overall I see a decision making issue, China is building an oil pipeline throught Myanmar to Iran. Hilary Clinton just returned from Myanmar where she promised them foreign aid in exchange for them modidfying their "human rights" behavior. The foreign aid indirectly benefits China which borders Myanmar by reducing the contributions the Chinese have to contribute in foreign aid. If you read any news on China, the Chinese government is absolutely thrilled at our foreign aid committment to Myanamar. There is no gain in jobs for America with this foreign aid, yet a pipeline from Canada to Texas is a jobs program for American workers. My question is why are we supporting a pipeline from China through Myanmar to Iran but opposing a pipeline from Canada to Texas?
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Reply to Comment The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
> Obama would sign the two-month extension measure, saying it had met his test
> of "preventing a tax increase on 160 million hardworking Americans" and
> avoiding damage to the economy recovery.
Interesting. But that's really jumping the gun a bit. Boehner and the House passed a 1 year extension. They haven't agreed to a 2 month extension yet. And they shouldn't. They should amend this Senate bill, or they should get conference committee to work out the differences.
As for the pipeline, there's nothing the Republicans would like more than for Obama to declare that pipeline "not in the national interest." Let's see him defend that in a Presidential debate. Let's see how much the unions will support his campaign when he declares their jobs "not in the national interest."
Sorry dan, but payroll taxes have taken care of SS/MC for decades and even provided a huge $3 Trillion surplus, which has been squandered by warmongers in Congress. The national security/defense expenditures come out of the "general fund" which has been supplemented by SS/MC and reduced by ignorant supply side idiocy!
you have cradle to grave benefits from the military that you get more out of then you put in.
luadda
Again you leave out the facts that oil will be sold to anyone at market prices, we will pay the same for a barrel of that oil as Europe, China, S. America. So where's the benefit long term?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I didn't leave it out. I assumed that everyone knows that a "barrel of oil" is always sold at "market rates" (depending on grade). Doesn't matter where it comes from. What varies the price is the transportation costs to get that oil to the refinery. I never said that it would lower gas prices in the US. The benefit would be jobs in the US. We have refineries that are not running at full capacity. Remember, this oil "ain't stay'n" in the ground, Canada will ship it somewhere to be refined. Why not us? I thought all libs wanted more manufacturing jobs in the US, well here it is. Or are we going to let Canada ship those jobs overseas too?
Refineries and upgraders are huge, expensive projects requiring long-term maintenance. Since processing capacity already exists in the United States, it's more profitable for companies to ship the oil south.
More specifically, the price difference between the raw bitumen taken out of the oilsands and refined oil - called the crack spread - isn't large enough to encourage oil companies to build additional upgraders in Alberta.
The Gulf Coast is by far the leader in refinery capacity, with more than twice the crude oil distillation capacity as any other United States region. (The difference is even greater for downstream processing capacity, because the Gulf Coast has the highest concentration of sophisticated facilities in the world.)
Churches are BIG businesses, second only to the military complex, and then followed by the prison systems, and should therefore be treated as a business.....after all, they are selling a "promise".
"Just think how much money we could save by cutting the size of the federal government in half!"
Just think how much REAL MONEY we could save by cutting back on the national security/defense budget of over $1 Trillion -- and go back to the Clinton years of less than $300 billion for defense!
Might have to cut YOUR government check and make YOU pay for your health care instead of giving you entitlements and socialized medicine, though, dan!
Your choice of words and their connotations belie your motives (i.e. lockstep). Indeed the financial sector has Europe by the shorthairs with ability to raise interests and force political triggers for any entity that currently holds any significant debt balance.
Certainly, there is a second shoe to fall, but not in the way you suggest. A return to supply-side expansion cannot create growth where there is none to be had, so good luck with your winds of political change.
We need to start divercing some of these grab bags and have some real discussion of merit.
For instance, a payroll tax "holiday" seems great to the immediate short term; but further unfinds SS and medicare. Is this truly wahtwe need is to make the programs more insolvent. Personally, i think it's a pretty bad idea, unless you are trying tomake the system require extreme redefinition and/or eliminate it.
Second, the oil pipeline profits and jobs CANNOT be claimed as part of this or any other bill, for the simple reason that it is going in regardless. The only reviewal issue is routing of the pipeline and WHEN it is going in. I swear it is a done deal, whether it start in 2012 or 2013. After all it is in fact supported by both parties (and they have been so heavily lobbied).
Extending unemployment benefits for 2 months is meaningless. In fact all of this kick the can less than a quarter down the road philosophy is what is killing the effectiveness and the perceived effectness of the Fed Govt. Every two months there is another repeat discussion, followed by threatening,posturing and the wringing of hands, then another short-sighted agreement, followed by a bad bill applauded as "the best we could do".
One thing that Govt is supposed to be able to do is plan and look longer term than private industry, as true infrastructure maintenance absolutely depends on it.
This cannot go on, where budget bandaids are the only substantive discussion every few months.
Try again.
luadda
Funny Canada has four refineries right there in Alberta that can refine the tar sand oil. Why do they have to pipe it to the Gulf Coast, unless it's for exporting that oil to S America and Europe.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
DING! DING! DING!
YOU WIN retm-w.
That's EXACTLY where that oil is going...EXPORT.
Any of that money going into your pocket??
NO!
Then why a Repub pushed fast track ledgislation?
Stop struggling and let the Repubs hold you down over the kitchen table,with pants at your ankles...so the oil companies can give you an answer.