Welcome to PatsFans.com

Jim bunning...Hero of the Week

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by PatriotsReign, Mar 2, 2010.

  1. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    25,596
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +140 / 1 / -8

    He get's my vote for his courage and common sense. Nothing more need be said.

    Personally, I prefer to see some incentive given to people who actually get a job!
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2010
  2. PatsWSB47

    PatsWSB47 Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    7,766
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +109 / 0 / -1

    #12 Jersey

    He's a hypocrite. He's the first to vote for tax cuts for rich people and then wants to fund it by cutting unemployment.
  3. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,830
    Likes Received:
    89
    Ratings:
    +150 / 3 / -19

    Tell that to all of the people he put out of work this week.. a party of 1 is idiotic in this day and age.. there is a move afoot to remove him from the Baseball HOF..
  4. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    25,596
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +140 / 1 / -8

    BB HOF? That's irrelevant to this thread....next?

    He brought up the question, "How are we going to pay for this?" And no one had an answer. Call me strange (and you prolly will), but I think that's a valid question, don't you?

    Shouldn't that question be asked of every proposal that will cost money? Isn't that just common sense?

    BTW....how long should people be able to collect unemployment...in your opinion?
  5. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    25,596
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +140 / 1 / -8

    "Rich people"...you say that as if there is something inherently wrong with them.

  6. PatsWSB47

    PatsWSB47 Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    7,766
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +109 / 0 / -1

    #12 Jersey

    Nothing at all wrong with being rich, I wish I was right now, but in terms of wondering where a next meal would come from I think the unemployed are way more needy. They get unemployment because they were working. Some will abuse it but this is not welfare for able bodied people that have always refused to work. Bunning should remember that. Wouldn't it be ironic if this jerk lost his job over this and ran out of benefits?
  7. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    25,596
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +140 / 1 / -8

    Ok, if it's NOT a welfare plan, when does a person's unemployment benefits run out? Non-welfare programs have a definitive END period. Please tell me what that period is.

    I was on unemployment once in my life in 2002. Once it ran out, that was it. What makes today's unemployed any different?

    BTW...I agree that the wealthies Americans never needed a tax cut.

    Last edited: Mar 2, 2010
  8. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    15,201
    Likes Received:
    221
    Ratings:
    +310 / 7 / -3

    #12 Jersey

    It's not just "unemployment" he's fukcing up, yanno. He's also managed to cut Medicare payments to physicians by 21%, to put an end to COBRA payments for tens of thousands of people and to put 2,000 Department of Transportation workers on indefinite furlough.

    It's a bill that's going to get passed anyhow.....you know it, I know it, Bunning knows it......but once all of these things go into effect it will take massive amounts of manpower and paper-pushing to return the benefits. All of which will cost still MORE money.

    He's doing nothing more than delaying the inevitable - claiming that he's worried about how it's going to get paid for - and yet he seems entirely unconcerned that he's singlehandedly adding higher and higher costs in the process.

    There's a reason he was voted one of the 5 worst senators by Time Magazine in 2006 - good to see he's consistant if nothing else.
  9. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,640
    Likes Received:
    113
    Ratings:
    +141 / 1 / -4

    How did you get that from what he said? Opposing tax cuts for the rich is not opposing the right to be rich; it's just financial sense in a civilized society. It's expensive to run the U.S. and we need to get money from somewhere to do it. It makes sense to go to those for whom our nation has provided most generously, namely the rich. In an ideal world, we would all have milk and honey and would not have to pay any taxes, but that's not reality. The reality is we have people who are honestly out of work, can't pay their rent, can't pay for meals, can't pay for daycare; and just as our nation provides economic opportunity for the wealthy, we need to do the same for those who are down on their luck. True, some people will take advantage, but that happens among the wealthy too, and I would rather devote my energy to making a case against them, then against some single mom who can't bring herself to do a lot of job hunting while she's getting unemployment.
  10. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    25,596
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +140 / 1 / -8

    You bring up some valid points. Some which I agree with. However, the question still remains...."How are we going to pay for this?"

    Once again, this is a question that common sense dictates should be asked of every single proposal that comes up for vote. I believe "Pay-Go" was supposed to force this issue but has never been enforced. I just wonder how any gov't can survive if they don't ask this simple accounting principle question.

  11. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    25,596
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +140 / 1 / -8

    Ok, fair enough. But since unemployment is not a welfare program, when should it end? I believe this new $100 BILLION proposal extends benefits for another year. That would mean some people will have been on unemployment for 3 years!

    What if this recession lasts another 3-4 years? Will it then become a semi-permanent welfare program? God, I hope not.

  12. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    15,201
    Likes Received:
    221
    Ratings:
    +310 / 7 / -3

    #12 Jersey

    I suppose the difference would be that in 2002 it was Bush demanding that Congress extend unemployment benefits for another 26 weeks (after the original 26 weeks plus a 13 week extension which occurred after that time period was exhausted.)

    Bush Calls for an Extension Of Unemployment Benefits - NYTimes.com

    Oh, and he didn't have any suggestions as to how to pay for it, either.

    Edited to add: The unemployment rate in 2002 was 5.5% - roughly half of what it is today. Desperate times call for desperate measures sometimes.

    http://money.cnn.com/2002/03/08/economy/economy/index.htm
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2010
  13. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    25,596
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +140 / 1 / -8

    Mine ran out after 39 weeks, so it wasn't 26 + 26 + 13. But maybe because I lost my job in April, 2002.

    You say "Bush" as if maybe I liked or voted for the guy. I never voted for him or supported him as president. Prolly one of the worst ever.

    But now the crisis has indeed arrived and it's time to start asking this question. Should it have been asked long ago? Of course it should have! If not now, when?

    Last edited: Mar 2, 2010
  14. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    15,201
    Likes Received:
    221
    Ratings:
    +310 / 7 / -3

    #12 Jersey

    It is a worry, I agree.....but even more worrisome is what happens if none of these things in this particular bill get passed? Besides the obvious bits being touted here - the unemployment extensions and the COBRA, the loss of 21% of Medicare payments to physicians who are already reluctant to take on new Medicare patients, there are also small business loans benefits which are being cut as well as child care credits and flood insurance programs.

    What happens when all these millions of people are suddenly cut off from services they depend on and which will no longer be affordable to them? Does that not drain the already fragile economy still further causing an even more desperate downturning spiral?

    Maybe the question shouldn't be "how will we pay for it if we do it" but "how will we pay for it if we DON'T do it?"
  15. reflexblue

    reflexblue PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    Messages:
    17,242
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +20 / 3 / -0

    #91 Jersey

    They should all do some crime, it pays if you have but the street. I'd do that before i live in a card board box. Then PR could pay the 40K it would take to take care of me. If everyone did this it would create jobs...new prisons, more CO's, etc. :rolleyes:
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2010
  16. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,672
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    When corporations stop sending all of the jobs overseas and begin acting responsibly. Of course this won't happen without the government coming down on them instead of going down on them...but then again, that won't happen either since they're all one big happy family.

    The unemployed are not to blame, here. Companies that have removed jobs from the US are. Any American corporation who employs foreigners in a foreign country should have to pay a tax that goes to paying unemployment. We really need to review this "global economy" crap we've been fed for the past 25 years. Trade regulation and responsibility of corporations have to be brought back to reality.

    And Americans have to wake up, too. They blindly invest in mutual funds that include holdings in foreign companies and American companies that are wrecking the middle class in this country, all for the sake of a cushy retirement with way more than they need. It's really a complex problem that needs to be seen in more depth than "cutting off unemployment insurance". That's a band-aid on a gunshot wound.
  17. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    25,596
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +140 / 1 / -8

    I never said I was against unemployment. My point from the beginning is asking the question, "How are we going to pay for this". Of course we don't want people starving and dying on our streets because their benefits ran out.

    How about if we add incentives for people to take jobs they don't want (like working at Micky-D's or WalMart).

    What I'd like to see is the beginning of a new era in our political landscape that demands accountability. This is not a case of "either we extend unemployment or we discuss how we're going to pay for this"

    What is scaring the bejeezus outta me is that I haven't heard a single discussion of how we're going to pay for ANYTHING. I think we would all agree that the day has arrived when this discussion must take place.

    Even Obama's health care proposal puts off the issue until 2018. It just amazes me that no one in our federal gov't has the marbles to force this discussion.

    Even Bunning admitted he supported extending the benefits, but wanted to force this discussion. That is why I gave him hero of the week status. After all, someone's gotta say it.

    Last edited: Mar 2, 2010
  18. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    25,596
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +140 / 1 / -8

    You brought up some great issues but totally side-stepped answering the question.

    Wistah, the FACT is, the benefits WILL have to end at some point. I love how you bring up irrelevant (but valid) points to rationalize your evasiveness!

    I should try that sometime!

  19. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    38,807
    Likes Received:
    119
    Ratings:
    +295 / 1 / -7

  20. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,672
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    NOT irrelevant. What you call side-stepping I call getting to the root of the problem, which is seldom done on this forum. Everyone is content with scratching the surface when they see a problem in this country. We constantly treat the symptoms over and over without trying a cure. It's like the fat guy trying to lose weight by joining a gym, but he never goes and keeps eating the wrong food.

    My answer is never. As long as corporations continue to siphon jobs from America with the consent of the government and the society as a whole (who do so by supporting those corporations thriough investment) continue to allow this, we are responsible for keeping up the maintenance on the POS economy. Until it hurts and people wake up, that's out responsibility.

    What do you propose we do with everyone whose job has gone forever and can't find work when the benefits run out? Why do you insist on punishing them and letting the real scum walk?

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>