nein51 said:

---

It's a huge problem for these discussions. You really have to talk about each state like it is a country unto itself. There are 347 airports in Europe. There are 400 in texas alone.

LA County has approx 50 of the population of Sweden, Denmark and Finland combined.

---

Only 50? I guess those Scandinavians really don't like the sun.

Sam Lowry said:

---

nein51 said:

---

It's a huge problem for these discussions. You really have to talk about each state like it is a country unto itself. There are 347 airports in Europe. There are 400 in texas alone.

LA County has approx 50 of the population of Sweden, Denmark and Finland combined.

---

Only 50? I guess those Scandinavians really don't like the sun.

---

Meh. 50…50%. Same diff lol

nein51 said:

---

It's a huge problem for these discussions. You really have to talk about each state like it is a country unto itself. There are 347 airports in Europe. There are 400 in texas alone.

LA County has approx 50 of the population of Sweden, Denmark and Finland combined.

---

You get it.

Rail is another issue that people just don't get the total picture. We hear how great the European inter-city passenger rail system is. And it is great. I love it in Germany. But, the European freight rail system is horrible. They use a higher percentage of trucks and barges to ship goods and are now restricting air travel to fill those trains.

The Europeans spent on passenger rail on ROW that has been there over 100 years and rely heavily on trucks. The US invested heavily in our freight rail system to move goods over long distances and rely on the Auto. It is not fair to say the US didn't invest or doesn't spent on rail. It is tough to do both.

If we want to do both, the investment is substantial. Even bus transit cost it substantial. We are now trying to change mid-stride and making autos villains. Truth be told, the auto and freight rail model has served the US very well.

It turns out very few US cities are set up like Euro hub cities. NYC and Chicago, for instance are very different than Houston. We simply have much more space than they do. Same problems exist when talking about public transport and universal healthcare.

Some systems work very well on a localized level of very homogenous peoples but don't work well on a very large scale, very spread out with people of a million backgrounds.

nein51 said:

---

It turns out very few US cities are set up like Euro hub cities. NYC and Chicago, for instance are very different than Houston. We simply have much more space than they do. Same problems exist when talking about public transport and universal healthcare.

Some systems work very well on a localized level of very homogenous peoples but don't work well on a very large scale, very spread out with people of a million backgrounds.

---

Yup, frustrating when talking to zealots about it. I had a conversations with a Danish Traffic Engineer about the high bike usage in Denmark, always have bike advocates preaching about bikes. I asked what the do.

1 - 100% tax on autos, 71k vehicle (not unusual in Denmark)
2 - $10 a gallon gas
3 - Auto Insurance
4 - 150% value registration
5 - Green tax
6 - Inspections
7 - Parking Fees in Copenhagen, recently doubled.


They price you out of the car ownership. Talked to several bike riders, freezing as they rode to work in October AM, they hate riding and can't wait until they can afford an apartment closer to work or buy a car.

Bottomline, they use economics to get the results they want, which I get. But, we could never do those things in the US and to say Dane's love riding Bikes because of other reasons is disingenuous. So for us in the US to duplicate the Danish road safety and usage results is not realistic, yet politicians throw it out there as an example of how to do it.

I love visiting Copenhagen, great City. Top notch infrastructure and education system, but we could never do what they do. The US is a different animal. The closest I have found to the US is Australia and Canada (not surprising).

nein51 said:

---

It turns out very few US cities are set up like Euro hub cities. NYC and Chicago, for instance are very different than Houston. We simply have much more space than they do. Same problems exist when talking about public transport and universal healthcare.

Some systems work very well on a localized level of very homogenous peoples but don't work well on a very large scale, very spread out with people of a million backgrounds.

---

Yep,

Demark is held out as a shinny example of this by USA progressives.

Of course they fail to explain that Demark has only 5.8 million people (less than the population of Indiana) and is smaller in territory than Oklahoma. With almost all the population being ethnic Danes (85%) and almost half living with in the Copenhagen metro area (45%)

Also, around 90% of Danes own a bicycle...and close to 40% use it as their primary means of transportation. Car ownership sits at less than 62% of the population.

Redbrickbear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

It turns out very few US cities are set up like Euro hub cities. NYC and Chicago, for instance are very different than Houston. We simply have much more space than they do. Same problems exist when talking about public transport and universal healthcare.

Some systems work very well on a localized level of very homogenous peoples but don't work well on a very large scale, very spread out with people of a million backgrounds.

---

Yep,

Demark is held out as a shinny example of this by USA progressives.

Of course they fail to explain that Demark as 5.8 million people (less than the population of Indiana) and is smaller in territory than Oklahoma. With almost all the population being ethnic Danes (85%) and almost half living with in the Copenhagen metro area (45%)

Also, around 90% of Danes own a bicycle...and close to 40% use it as their primary means of transportation. Car ownership sits at less than 62% of the population.

---

I worked with a very very smart consultant who studied in Denmark (I studied in the UK then Baylor). She could not understand that Denmark is like the size of the metroplex in terms of people. It's half the size of LA County. It's just not the same and scale doesn't change for the better in this case. It gets worse.

nein51 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

It turns out very few US cities are set up like Euro hub cities. NYC and Chicago, for instance are very different than Houston. We simply have much more space than they do. Same problems exist when talking about public transport and universal healthcare.

Some systems work very well on a localized level of very homogenous peoples but don't work well on a very large scale, very spread out with people of a million backgrounds.

---

Yep,

Demark is held out as a shinny example of this by USA progressives.

Of course they fail to explain that Demark as 5.8 million people (less than the population of Indiana) and is smaller in territory than Oklahoma. With almost all the population being ethnic Danes (85%) and almost half living with in the Copenhagen metro area (45%)

Also, around 90% of Danes own a bicycle...and close to 40% use it as their primary means of transportation. Car ownership sits at less than 62% of the population.

---

I worked with a very very smart consultant who studied in Denmark (I studied in the UK then Baylor). She could not understand that Denmark is like the size of the metroplex in terms of people. It's half the size of LA County. It's just not the same and scale doesn't change for the better in this case. It gets worse.

---

To complicate it is the governmental structure and culture. It is much more govt prescriptive and the people accept it as long as the quality is there.

Their rail system is 2nd best I have been on. The train to Sweden was smooth. Singapore best.

RMF5630 said:

---

nein51 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

It turns out very few US cities are set up like Euro hub cities. NYC and Chicago, for instance are very different than Houston. We simply have much more space than they do. Same problems exist when talking about public transport and universal healthcare.

Some systems work very well on a localized level of very homogenous peoples but don't work well on a very large scale, very spread out with people of a million backgrounds.

---

Yep,

Demark is held out as a shinny example of this by USA progressives.

Of course they fail to explain that Demark as 5.8 million people (less than the population of Indiana) and is smaller in territory than Oklahoma. With almost all the population being ethnic Danes (85%) and almost half living with in the Copenhagen metro area (45%)

Also, around 90% of Danes own a bicycle...and close to 40% use it as their primary means of transportation. Car ownership sits at less than 62% of the population.

---

I worked with a very very smart consultant who studied in Denmark (I studied in the UK then Baylor). She could not understand that Denmark is like the size of the metroplex in terms of people. It's half the size of LA County. It's just not the same and scale doesn't change for the better in this case. It gets worse.

---

To complicate it is the governmental structure and culture. It is much more govt prescriptive and the people accept it as long as the quality is there.

Their rail system is 2nd best I have been on. The train to Sweden was smooth. Singapore best.

---

They also pay very, very high taxes for it. The mostly homogeneous population also makes it easier to sell "this is for us".

nein51 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

nein51 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

It turns out very few US cities are set up like Euro hub cities. NYC and Chicago, for instance are very different than Houston. We simply have much more space than they do. Same problems exist when talking about public transport and universal healthcare.

Some systems work very well on a localized level of very homogenous peoples but don't work well on a very large scale, very spread out with people of a million backgrounds.

---

Yep,

Demark is held out as a shinny example of this by USA progressives.

Of course they fail to explain that Demark as 5.8 million people (less than the population of Indiana) and is smaller in territory than Oklahoma. With almost all the population being ethnic Danes (85%) and almost half living with in the Copenhagen metro area (45%)

Also, around 90% of Danes own a bicycle...and close to 40% use it as their primary means of transportation. Car ownership sits at less than 62% of the population.

---

I worked with a very very smart consultant who studied in Denmark (I studied in the UK then Baylor). She could not understand that Denmark is like the size of the metroplex in terms of people. It's half the size of LA County. It's just not the same and scale doesn't change for the better in this case. It gets worse.

---

To complicate it is the governmental structure and culture. It is much more govt prescriptive and the people accept it as long as the quality is there.

Their rail system is 2nd best I have been on. The train to Sweden was smooth. Singapore best.

---

They also pay very, very high taxes for it. The mostly homogeneous population also makes it easier to sell "this is for us".

---

Can't argue. I do know a knee replacement can take 3 years to get. Friend of my wife waited over 3 years to get in.

nein51 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

nein51 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

nein51 said:

---

It turns out very few US cities are set up like Euro hub cities. NYC and Chicago, for instance are very different than Houston. We simply have much more space than they do. Same problems exist when talking about public transport and universal healthcare.

Some systems work very well on a localized level of very homogenous peoples but don't work well on a very large scale, very spread out with people of a million backgrounds.

---

Yep,

Demark is held out as a shinny example of this by USA progressives.

Of course they fail to explain that Demark as 5.8 million people (less than the population of Indiana) and is smaller in territory than Oklahoma. With almost all the population being ethnic Danes (85%) and almost half living with in the Copenhagen metro area (45%)

Also, around 90% of Danes own a bicycle...and close to 40% use it as their primary means of transportation. Car ownership sits at less than 62% of the population.

---

I worked with a very very smart consultant who studied in Denmark (I studied in the UK then Baylor). She could not understand that Denmark is like the size of the metroplex in terms of people. It's half the size of LA County. It's just not the same and scale doesn't change for the better in this case. It gets worse.

---

To complicate it is the governmental structure and culture. It is much more govt prescriptive and the people accept it as long as the quality is there.

Their rail system is 2nd best I have been on. The train to Sweden was smooth. Singapore best.

---

They also pay very, very high taxes for it. The mostly homogeneous population also makes it easier to sell "this is for us".

---

We will emulate Europe eventually. Just wait until we get our very own VAT tax.

Germany has a 19% Vat, 48% pay roll tax on middle class income. Then once boomers die off we will have high regulation on hydrocarbons making supply low and energy prices extremely high.

Future voters will be foreclosing on their own future.

The Biden-McCarthy Debt Expansion Act just passed the House. To those who thought this was a Republican bill, the numbers don’t lie: 165 Democrats voted for it, and only 149 Republicans joined them. Those voting against it included 71 heroic Republicans and only 46 Democrats. pic.twitter.com/14SmyLsi2t

— Mike Lee (@BasedMikeLee) June 1, 2023

I'm concerned about the trajectory of Speaker McCarthy's term.

The McCarthy-Biden debt ceiling deal represents a new coalition where Speaker McCarthy will go to Democrats more than his own party.

That's concerning to me and should be concerning to the GOP conference. pic.twitter.com/0T60DIrsKd

— Rep Andy Biggs (@RepAndyBiggsAZ) May 31, 2023

The term for a bill that gets more Democrat votes than Republican votes is a Democrat bill.

GOP leadership just whipped for and passed a Democrat budget that completely eliminates the debt limit for the entirety of Joe Biden’s presidency. https://t.co/eIvbgPPdAn

— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) June 1, 2023

Winners: Biden, McCarthy, the Nation's credit rating.

Losers: Anyone that owes taxes for future debt. https://t.co/kZmMrDYo3d

— Pradheep J. Shanker (@Neoavatara) June 1, 2023

It wasn't even close.

Now it has to be more Rep than Dems for a bill to be good? Come on. That is ridiculous.

RMF5630 said:

---

It wasn't even close.

Now it has to be more Rep than Dems for a bill to be good? Come on. That is ridiculous.

---

At this point, any bill that does not decrease real spending is bad.

RMF5630 said:

---

It wasn't even close.

Now it has to be more Rep than Dems for a bill to be good? Come on. That is ridiculous.

---

Not necessarily…but when exactly was the last time a bill passed a Democratic controlled House by having to rely on majority Republican reps?

P.S.

How many democrats do you think even bothered to read the bill?

In caucus and conference meetings since, conservative members of the GOP have made their frustrations known. While it appears that the legislation will likely get through the House, sail through the Senate, and receive the president's signature, round the clock work continues to strip as much Republican support as possible from McCarthy's deal.

"McCarthy gave away the farm and folded like a cheap suit," one GOP aide familiar with the matter told The American Conservative. Biden and the Democrats got, "everything they wanted. It's stunning how bad he was at negotiating this," the aide continued. "No one expected it to be this bad."

"Even McConnell would have done a better job," the aide claimed.
"Calling it a 'deal' would infer that we got something valuable in exchange for being strapped with $4 trillion in new debt. This wasn't a deal. It was a shakedown, and the American people are the ones who suffer," Rep. Eli Crane of Arizona told TAC. "This is a slap in the face to every hardworking American."

Thus far, more than 30 members of the House GOP have come out to publicly oppose the deal, but sources on Capitol Hill suggest that there are many more Republicans who have privately expressed their intention to vote against it.
"McCarthy will have to rely on Dems to pass the rule," another GOP aide told TAC. Sources, however, could not confirm if the 'nay' contingent was a majority of the Republican conference. One GOP source with knowledge of the matter said that the deal will likely pass with more Democratic support than Republican support.



https://www.theamericanconservative.com/sources-speaker-chair-could-be-vacated/

Redbrickbear said:

---

In caucus and conference meetings since, conservative members of the GOP have made their frustrations known. While it appears that the legislation will likely get through the House, sail through the Senate, and receive the president's signature, round the clock work continues to strip as much Republican support as possible from McCarthy's deal.

"McCarthy gave away the farm and folded like a cheap suit," one GOP aide familiar with the matter told The American Conservative. Biden and the Democrats got, "everything they wanted. It's stunning how bad he was at negotiating this," the aide continued. "No one expected it to be this bad."

"Even McConnell would have done a better job," the aide claimed.
"Calling it a 'deal' would infer that we got something valuable in exchange for being strapped with $4 trillion in new debt. This wasn't a deal. It was a shakedown, and the American people are the ones who suffer," Rep. Eli Crane of Arizona told TAC. "This is a slap in the face to every hardworking American."

Thus far, more than 30 members of the House GOP have come out to publicly oppose the deal, but sources on Capitol Hill suggest that there are many more Republicans who have privately expressed their intention to vote against it.
"McCarthy will have to rely on Dems to pass the rule," another GOP aide told TAC. Sources, however, could not confirm if the 'nay' contingent was a majority of the Republican conference. One GOP source with knowledge of the matter said that the deal will likely pass with more Democratic support than Republican support.



https://www.theamericanconservative.com/sources-speaker-chair-could-be-vacated/

---

Twice as many Republicans voted "Yay" than "Nay". I have very little sympathy for the GOP and these people. When the GOP had the House, the Senate and the Presidency they couldn't get anything done due to in-fighting. Paul Ryan did everything he could to not accomplish Trump's agenda. McConnell at least tried.

RMF5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

In caucus and conference meetings since, conservative members of the GOP have made their frustrations known. While it appears that the legislation will likely get through the House, sail through the Senate, and receive the president's signature, round the clock work continues to strip as much Republican support as possible from McCarthy's deal.

"McCarthy gave away the farm and folded like a cheap suit," one GOP aide familiar with the matter told The American Conservative. Biden and the Democrats got, "everything they wanted. It's stunning how bad he was at negotiating this," the aide continued. "No one expected it to be this bad."

"Even McConnell would have done a better job," the aide claimed.
"Calling it a 'deal' would infer that we got something valuable in exchange for being strapped with $4 trillion in new debt. This wasn't a deal. It was a shakedown, and the American people are the ones who suffer," Rep. Eli Crane of Arizona told TAC. "This is a slap in the face to every hardworking American."

Thus far, more than 30 members of the House GOP have come out to publicly oppose the deal, but sources on Capitol Hill suggest that there are many more Republicans who have privately expressed their intention to vote against it.
"McCarthy will have to rely on Dems to pass the rule," another GOP aide told TAC. Sources, however, could not confirm if the 'nay' contingent was a majority of the Republican conference. One GOP source with knowledge of the matter said that the deal will likely pass with more Democratic support than Republican support.



https://www.theamericanconservative.com/sources-speaker-chair-could-be-vacated/

---

Twice as many Republicans voted "Yay" than "Nay". I have very little sympathy for the GOP and these people. When the GOP had the House, the Senate and the Presidency they couldn't get anything done due to in-fighting. Paul Ryan did everything he could to not accomplish Trump's agenda. McConnell at least tried.

---

Uh no...they increased defense spending and passed some tax cuts for the rich.

They did exactly what the Republican leadership wanted them to do.

Because at the end of the day that is all the GOP donor class cares about (tax cuts and more "defense" spending)

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

In caucus and conference meetings since, conservative members of the GOP have made their frustrations known. While it appears that the legislation will likely get through the House, sail through the Senate, and receive the president's signature, round the clock work continues to strip as much Republican support as possible from McCarthy's deal.

"McCarthy gave away the farm and folded like a cheap suit," one GOP aide familiar with the matter told The American Conservative. Biden and the Democrats got, "everything they wanted. It's stunning how bad he was at negotiating this," the aide continued. "No one expected it to be this bad."

"Even McConnell would have done a better job," the aide claimed.
"Calling it a 'deal' would infer that we got something valuable in exchange for being strapped with $4 trillion in new debt. This wasn't a deal. It was a shakedown, and the American people are the ones who suffer," Rep. Eli Crane of Arizona told TAC. "This is a slap in the face to every hardworking American."

Thus far, more than 30 members of the House GOP have come out to publicly oppose the deal, but sources on Capitol Hill suggest that there are many more Republicans who have privately expressed their intention to vote against it.
"McCarthy will have to rely on Dems to pass the rule," another GOP aide told TAC. Sources, however, could not confirm if the 'nay' contingent was a majority of the Republican conference. One GOP source with knowledge of the matter said that the deal will likely pass with more Democratic support than Republican support.



https://www.theamericanconservative.com/sources-speaker-chair-could-be-vacated/

---

Twice as many Republicans voted "Yay" than "Nay". I have very little sympathy for the GOP and these people. When the GOP had the House, the Senate and the Presidency they couldn't get anything done due to in-fighting. Paul Ryan did everything he could to not accomplish Trump's agenda. McConnell at least tried.

---

Uh no...they increased defense spending and passed some tax cuts for the rich.

They did exactly what the Republican leadership wanted them to do.

Because at the end of the day that is all the GOP donor class cares about (tax cuts and more "defense" spending)

---

It's a uniparty with a facade of dem vs GOP to make us point the finger at each other instead of at them.

Doc Holliday said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

In caucus and conference meetings since, conservative members of the GOP have made their frustrations known. While it appears that the legislation will likely get through the House, sail through the Senate, and receive the president's signature, round the clock work continues to strip as much Republican support as possible from McCarthy's deal.

"McCarthy gave away the farm and folded like a cheap suit," one GOP aide familiar with the matter told The American Conservative. Biden and the Democrats got, "everything they wanted. It's stunning how bad he was at negotiating this," the aide continued. "No one expected it to be this bad."

"Even McConnell would have done a better job," the aide claimed.
"Calling it a 'deal' would infer that we got something valuable in exchange for being strapped with $4 trillion in new debt. This wasn't a deal. It was a shakedown, and the American people are the ones who suffer," Rep. Eli Crane of Arizona told TAC. "This is a slap in the face to every hardworking American."

Thus far, more than 30 members of the House GOP have come out to publicly oppose the deal, but sources on Capitol Hill suggest that there are many more Republicans who have privately expressed their intention to vote against it.
"McCarthy will have to rely on Dems to pass the rule," another GOP aide told TAC. Sources, however, could not confirm if the 'nay' contingent was a majority of the Republican conference. One GOP source with knowledge of the matter said that the deal will likely pass with more Democratic support than Republican support.



https://www.theamericanconservative.com/sources-speaker-chair-could-be-vacated/

---

Twice as many Republicans voted "Yay" than "Nay". I have very little sympathy for the GOP and these people. When the GOP had the House, the Senate and the Presidency they couldn't get anything done due to in-fighting. Paul Ryan did everything he could to not accomplish Trump's agenda. McConnell at least tried.

---

Uh no...they increased defense spending and passed some tax cuts for the rich.

They did exactly what the Republican leadership wanted them to do.

Because at the end of the day that is all the GOP donor class cares about (tax cuts and more "defense" spending)

---

It's a uniparty with a facade of dem vs GOP to make us point the finger at each other instead of at them.

---

Bingo

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

In caucus and conference meetings since, conservative members of the GOP have made their frustrations known. While it appears that the legislation will likely get through the House, sail through the Senate, and receive the president's signature, round the clock work continues to strip as much Republican support as possible from McCarthy's deal.

"McCarthy gave away the farm and folded like a cheap suit," one GOP aide familiar with the matter told The American Conservative. Biden and the Democrats got, "everything they wanted. It's stunning how bad he was at negotiating this," the aide continued. "No one expected it to be this bad."

"Even McConnell would have done a better job," the aide claimed.
"Calling it a 'deal' would infer that we got something valuable in exchange for being strapped with $4 trillion in new debt. This wasn't a deal. It was a shakedown, and the American people are the ones who suffer," Rep. Eli Crane of Arizona told TAC. "This is a slap in the face to every hardworking American."

Thus far, more than 30 members of the House GOP have come out to publicly oppose the deal, but sources on Capitol Hill suggest that there are many more Republicans who have privately expressed their intention to vote against it.
"McCarthy will have to rely on Dems to pass the rule," another GOP aide told TAC. Sources, however, could not confirm if the 'nay' contingent was a majority of the Republican conference. One GOP source with knowledge of the matter said that the deal will likely pass with more Democratic support than Republican support.



https://www.theamericanconservative.com/sources-speaker-chair-could-be-vacated/

---

Twice as many Republicans voted "Yay" than "Nay". I have very little sympathy for the GOP and these people. When the GOP had the House, the Senate and the Presidency they couldn't get anything done due to in-fighting. Paul Ryan did everything he could to not accomplish Trump's agenda. McConnell at least tried.

---

Uh no...they increased defense spending and passed some tax cuts for the rich.

They did exactly what the Republican leadership wanted them to do.

Because at the end of the day that is all the GOP donor class cares about (tax cuts and more "defense" spending)

---

Can't argue.

RMF5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

In caucus and conference meetings since, conservative members of the GOP have made their frustrations known. While it appears that the legislation will likely get through the House, sail through the Senate, and receive the president's signature, round the clock work continues to strip as much Republican support as possible from McCarthy's deal.

"McCarthy gave away the farm and folded like a cheap suit," one GOP aide familiar with the matter told The American Conservative. Biden and the Democrats got, "everything they wanted. It's stunning how bad he was at negotiating this," the aide continued. "No one expected it to be this bad."

"Even McConnell would have done a better job," the aide claimed.
"Calling it a 'deal' would infer that we got something valuable in exchange for being strapped with $4 trillion in new debt. This wasn't a deal. It was a shakedown, and the American people are the ones who suffer," Rep. Eli Crane of Arizona told TAC. "This is a slap in the face to every hardworking American."

Thus far, more than 30 members of the House GOP have come out to publicly oppose the deal, but sources on Capitol Hill suggest that there are many more Republicans who have privately expressed their intention to vote against it.
"McCarthy will have to rely on Dems to pass the rule," another GOP aide told TAC. Sources, however, could not confirm if the 'nay' contingent was a majority of the Republican conference. One GOP source with knowledge of the matter said that the deal will likely pass with more Democratic support than Republican support.



https://www.theamericanconservative.com/sources-speaker-chair-could-be-vacated/

---

Twice as many Republicans voted "Yay" than "Nay". I have very little sympathy for the GOP and these people. When the GOP had the House, the Senate and the Presidency they couldn't get anything done due to in-fighting. Paul Ryan did everything he could to not accomplish Trump's agenda. McConnell at least tried.

---

Uh no...they increased defense spending and passed some tax cuts for the rich.

They did exactly what the Republican leadership wanted them to do.

Because at the end of the day that is all the GOP donor class cares about (tax cuts and more "defense" spending)

---

Can't argue.

---

Me either. The idiot GOP never cut spending when it had controlled both branches of government.

The brutal reality is just a tiny fraction of total spending really is discretionary these days. The priority should be re-working entitlements, but no one has the politcal will to do that. It would require leadership, which clearly 'Murica lacks.

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

In caucus and conference meetings since, conservative members of the GOP have made their frustrations known. While it appears that the legislation will likely get through the House, sail through the Senate, and receive the president's signature, round the clock work continues to strip as much Republican support as possible from McCarthy's deal.

"McCarthy gave away the farm and folded like a cheap suit," one GOP aide familiar with the matter told The American Conservative. Biden and the Democrats got, "everything they wanted. It's stunning how bad he was at negotiating this," the aide continued. "No one expected it to be this bad."

"Even McConnell would have done a better job," the aide claimed.
"Calling it a 'deal' would infer that we got something valuable in exchange for being strapped with $4 trillion in new debt. This wasn't a deal. It was a shakedown, and the American people are the ones who suffer," Rep. Eli Crane of Arizona told TAC. "This is a slap in the face to every hardworking American."

Thus far, more than 30 members of the House GOP have come out to publicly oppose the deal, but sources on Capitol Hill suggest that there are many more Republicans who have privately expressed their intention to vote against it.
"McCarthy will have to rely on Dems to pass the rule," another GOP aide told TAC. Sources, however, could not confirm if the 'nay' contingent was a majority of the Republican conference. One GOP source with knowledge of the matter said that the deal will likely pass with more Democratic support than Republican support.



https://www.theamericanconservative.com/sources-speaker-chair-could-be-vacated/

---

Twice as many Republicans voted "Yay" than "Nay". I have very little sympathy for the GOP and these people. When the GOP had the House, the Senate and the Presidency they couldn't get anything done due to in-fighting. Paul Ryan did everything he could to not accomplish Trump's agenda. McConnell at least tried.

---

Uh no...they increased defense spending and passed some tax cuts for the rich.

They did exactly what the Republican leadership wanted them to do.

Because at the end of the day that is all the GOP donor class cares about (tax cuts and more "defense" spending)

---

Can't argue.

---

Me either. The idiot GOP never cut spending when it had controlled both branches of government.

The brutal reality is just a tiny fraction of total spending really is discretionary these days. The priority should be re-working entitlements, but no one has the politcal will to do that. It would require leadership, which clearly 'Murica lacks.

---

Social Insecurity just needs to be phased out over 10 years.

He Hate Me said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

In caucus and conference meetings since, conservative members of the GOP have made their frustrations known. While it appears that the legislation will likely get through the House, sail through the Senate, and receive the president's signature, round the clock work continues to strip as much Republican support as possible from McCarthy's deal.

"McCarthy gave away the farm and folded like a cheap suit," one GOP aide familiar with the matter told The American Conservative. Biden and the Democrats got, "everything they wanted. It's stunning how bad he was at negotiating this," the aide continued. "No one expected it to be this bad."

"Even McConnell would have done a better job," the aide claimed.
"Calling it a 'deal' would infer that we got something valuable in exchange for being strapped with $4 trillion in new debt. This wasn't a deal. It was a shakedown, and the American people are the ones who suffer," Rep. Eli Crane of Arizona told TAC. "This is a slap in the face to every hardworking American."

Thus far, more than 30 members of the House GOP have come out to publicly oppose the deal, but sources on Capitol Hill suggest that there are many more Republicans who have privately expressed their intention to vote against it.
"McCarthy will have to rely on Dems to pass the rule," another GOP aide told TAC. Sources, however, could not confirm if the 'nay' contingent was a majority of the Republican conference. One GOP source with knowledge of the matter said that the deal will likely pass with more Democratic support than Republican support.



https://www.theamericanconservative.com/sources-speaker-chair-could-be-vacated/

---

Twice as many Republicans voted "Yay" than "Nay". I have very little sympathy for the GOP and these people. When the GOP had the House, the Senate and the Presidency they couldn't get anything done due to in-fighting. Paul Ryan did everything he could to not accomplish Trump's agenda. McConnell at least tried.

---

Uh no...they increased defense spending and passed some tax cuts for the rich.

They did exactly what the Republican leadership wanted them to do.

Because at the end of the day that is all the GOP donor class cares about (tax cuts and more "defense" spending)

---

Can't argue.

---

Me either. The idiot GOP never cut spending when it had controlled both branches of government.

The brutal reality is just a tiny fraction of total spending really is discretionary these days. The priority should be re-working entitlements, but no one has the politcal will to do that. It would require leadership, which clearly 'Murica lacks.

---

Social Insecurity just needs to be phased out over 10 years.

---

Gonna take longer than that.

First, you have too many that paid in and are counting on it with not enough time to change.

Second, you have to develop and implement a system that is better for the Nation. And deploy it at scale, a huge task.

Third, you need to shift those in the new system over, while maintaining the remaining SS. So you will have redundant systems and costs for a while maybe 20 years.

This move will not be money saver in the short or medium term. It will cost a lot to do what people want. A shift to private sector will cost more, always does. Medicare would be similar. If you want to save money, reform is the most cost effective. These moves are not as quick and cheap as people think.

Offer a buyout. I would happily take 75% of the funds I've paid in and would pay in vs expected payout if those funds could be rolled tax free into a 401k or investment account, for instance.

No different than when companies buy out pensions. You would be shocked how many people will take ten cents on a dollar.

I think there are some lawmakers who would like to address the debt.

Until they put pencil to paper and work out just how big it really is.

Let's posit, just for argument, a federal budget that - somehow - spends $100 billion a year less than we take in.

At that rate, we would finally clean up the federal debt around the year 2474.

That of course assumes not only that Congress would somehow agree on a budget that doesn't spend every cent of taxes brought in, and that we could somehow maintain that fiscal discipline for several centuries, something never done before in human history.

I think this explains the Great Reset. That is, some want to burn it all down and pretend we can just ignore our debts, and somehow this won't destroy our nation.

nein51 said:

---

No different than when companies buy out pensions. You would be shocked how many people will take ten cents on a dollar.

---

If I did not have to pay the SS taxes going forward, I would settle for nil. We can call it even.

He Hate Me said:

---

nein51 said:

---

No different than when companies buy out pensions. You would be shocked how many people will take ten cents on a dollar.

---

If I did not have to pay the SS taxes going forward, I would settle for nil. We can call it even.

---

I would not. I have way too much of my money in that garbage program.

nein51 said:

---

Offer a buyout. I would happily take 75% of the funds I've paid in and would pay in vs expected payout if those funds could be rolled tax free into a 401k or investment account, for instance.

No different than when companies buy out pensions. You would be shocked how many people will take ten cents on a dollar.

---

It is very different from private companies. Getting people to take $0.10 on the dollar is not a sound governmental practice. Government is supposed to look after the well being of it citizens, not see if it can bilk them out of $0.90 on the dollar!

Sorry, it is not as simple as rolling into a 401k. Who is going to do the rolling? Who is going to manage the funds and payouts? It is not saving, it is transferring cost. I way for Financial Planners to join the Government payout while screaming they are "Financially Conservative..."

The other part of the equation is that the majority of Americans may want a SS program, it is not a given that everyone thinks like this board and wants it done away. The majority of the people that want it killed seem to be those that don't need it, same with Medicare. I have yet to hear one person that relies on Medicare to say they would prefer to go find and pay for health insurance at 67 and self pay.

nein51 said:

---

He Hate Me said:

---

nein51 said:

---

No different than when companies buy out pensions. You would be shocked how many people will take ten cents on a dollar.

---

If I did not have to pay the SS taxes going forward, I would settle for nil. We can call it even.

---

I would not. I have way too much of my money in that garbage program.

---

Me too. If I could have invested what they took out in FICA tax, I could have retired long ago.

I'd also have accepted what they took out with no gain, but paying all those years and not getting any of it back is non-starter.

Oldbear83 said:

---

nein51 said:

---

He Hate Me said:

---

nein51 said:

---

No different than when companies buy out pensions. You would be shocked how many people will take ten cents on a dollar.

---

If I did not have to pay the SS taxes going forward, I would settle for nil. We can call it even.

---

I would not. I have way too much of my money in that garbage program.

---

Me too. If I could have invested what they took out in FICA tax, I could have retired long ago.

I'd also have accepted what they took out with no gain, but paying all those years and not getting any of it back is non-starter.

---

I don't disagree with you guys. I just think that it is a fool's errand to keep trying to do away with programs that have been in place since the 1930's and that many do use and rely on. I am sure there are better investments, but that is really not relevant to most of the people that rely on it.

RMF5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

nein51 said:

---

He Hate Me said:

---

nein51 said:

---

No different than when companies buy out pensions. You would be shocked how many people will take ten cents on a dollar.

---

If I did not have to pay the SS taxes going forward, I would settle for nil. We can call it even.

---

I would not. I have way too much of my money in that garbage program.

---

Me too. If I could have invested what they took out in FICA tax, I could have retired long ago.

I'd also have accepted what they took out with no gain, but paying all those years and not getting any of it back is non-starter.

---

I don't disagree with you guys. I just think that it is a fool's errand to keep trying to do away with programs that have been in place since the 1930's and that many do use and rely on. I am sure there are better investments, but that is really not relevant to most of the people that rely on it.

---

Yup, you hit the nail on the head.

No matter the party or ideology, once elected politicians want one thing more than anything else: To get re-elected.

Cutting SSI, Defense, or any of a dozen sacred cows would get you primaried.

RMF5630 said:

---

nein51 said:

---

Offer a buyout. I would happily take 75% of the funds I've paid in and would pay in vs expected payout if those funds could be rolled tax free into a 401k or investment account, for instance.

No different than when companies buy out pensions. You would be shocked how many people will take ten cents on a dollar.

---

It is very different from private companies. Getting people to take $0.10 on the dollar is not a sound governmental practice. Government is supposed to look after the well being of it citizens, not see if it can bilk them out of $0.90 on the dollar!

Sorry, it is not as simple as rolling into a 401k. Who is going to do the rolling? Who is going to manage the funds and payouts? It is not saving, it is transferring cost. I way for Financial Planners to join the Government payout while screaming they are "Financially Conservative..."

The other part of the equation is that the majority of Americans may want a SS program, it is not a given that everyone thinks like this board and wants it done away. The majority of the people that want it killed seem to be those that don't need it, same with Medicare. I have yet to hear one person that relies on Medicare to say they would prefer to go find and pay for health insurance at 67 and self pay.

---

You just give people the option. The amount of money I would have right now for retirement vs what SS will pay out (if anything) is staggering.

I'm not saying you force people off of SS. I'm saying you offer the option.

You have to treat SS like the pension plan at a large scale manufacturer because that's EXACTLY how it was designed. Well 90 years later we know that doesn't work and the longer people live the less you can provide it as the costs outweighs the pay in.

At some point there will be a default on SS and I would damn sure take $.50 on the dollar than $.00 which is the reality. It's my money. I paid it in. All I'm asking is an opportunity to use my money (even if at a discounted rate) to grow my personal wealth rather than continue to toss it into the ocean which is what is happening now.

Oldbear83 said:

---

nein51 said:

---

He Hate Me said:

---

nein51 said:

---

No different than when companies buy out pensions. You would be shocked how many people will take ten cents on a dollar.

---

If I did not have to pay the SS taxes going forward, I would settle for nil. We can call it even.

---

I would not. I have way too much of my money in that garbage program.

---

Me too. If I could have invested what they took out in FICA tax, I could have retired long ago.

I'd also have accepted what they took out with no gain, but paying all those years and not getting any of it back is non-starter.

---

Yes. It's a "retirement" account with an awful rate of return.