Home Mail MemberMap Chat (0) Wallpapers
Go Back   ChiefsPlanet > The Lounge > D.C.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-10-2012, 11:45 AM  
whoman69 whoman69 is offline
The Master
 
whoman69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Casino cash: $61445
Senate Filibuster Targeted By House Democrats, Dream Act Activists In Federal Lawsuit

Senate Filibuster Targeted By House Democrats, Dream Act Activists In Federal Lawsuit

By Nick Wing

A federal lawsuit claiming the filibuster is an unconstitutional "accident of history" is set to be considered on Monday, months after it was filed by a coalition of House Democrats and activists.

The plaintiffs, including Democratic Reps. Keith Ellison (Minn.), Hank Johnson (Ga.), John Lewis (Ga.) and Mike Michaud (Maine), as well as a trio of undocumented immigrants represented by government reform group Common Cause, claim that the filibuster is "inconsistent with the principle of majority rule" and had never been contemplated by the drafters of the Constitution. They filed the suit in May, and on Monday will face a motion by Senate lawyers to have the case thrown out.

Filibuster rules grant massive power to Senate minorities by requiring a supermajority of 60 senators to vote to end debate on a bill. Traditionally a rare occurrence, their use has surged since 2009.

"Actual or threatened filibusters have become so common that it is now virtually impossible as a practical matter for the majority in the Senate to pass a significant piece of legislation or to confirm many presidential nominees without 60 votes," argued Emmet Bondurant, a Georgia attorney who represents the challengers, according to NBC News.

In this particular case, Common Cause argues that filibuster rules are preventing Erika Andiola, Celso Mireles and Caesar Vargas -- three young professional undocumented immigrants -- from achieving a "path to American citizenship" offered by the long-stalled Dream Act. The legislation has been filibustered repeatedly by Senate Republicans, most recently in 2010.

The latest legal push against the filibuster comes as Senate Democrats are seeking to reform the procedure through legislation. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has come out aggressively and optimistically in favor of filibuster reform, claiming that the changes will go through in January whether Republicans like it or not. President Barack Obama has embraced Reid's and other Democrats' plans to reform the rules.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/1...n_2270729.html
Posts: 23,082
whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 03:39 PM   #16
whoman69 whoman69 is offline
The Master
 
whoman69's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Casino cash: $61445
Quote:
Originally Posted by alnorth View Post
I don't like, or believe in the filibuster. I've argued about its useless stupidity many times.

This lawsuit is garbage. The filibuster only exists because a majority of the senate wants it to exist. The MICROSECOND that 51 senators decide not to respect the filibuster, then *poof* it'll be gone.

No one should ever take "well we got filibustered" as an acceptable answer. If the party you prefer is in power, they have the votes for what you want, no excuses, they should pass it. Any time something the majority wants is filibustered, its because they were too damned gutless and cowardly to get rid of the filibuster. There's no case here.
You can only change senate rules with a majority vote at the beginning of any Congress.

Republicans have clearly abused the system with a record number of filibusters with watered down rules that complete a filibuster just by objecting to either further discussion on a bill or to block voting on the bill. It was never intended to be a requirement to have a 60% threshold to pass any legislation.

Prior to when Aaron Burr changed the rules it was a simple majority to allow discussion to continue. Even after that the system of filibuster was not used for another 30 years after. Filibuster rarely used during the 19th century even though a single senator could do so. Republicans used more filibusters in the last 6 years than were used from 1919 with the supermajority filibuster rules though a good portion of the Reagan administration. They have filed more motions in the last 3 Republican minorities than the Democrats have in the last 5. Reagan was complaining about obstructionist Democrats when they had 40 filibusters per Congress term but his own party in majority increased that number to when they took over.
__________________
-Watching Eddie Podolak
Quote:
Originally posted by Logical
When the boobs are a bouncin, the Chiefs will be trouncin
What the Raiders fan has said is true, our customs are different. What Al Davis has said is unimportant, and we do not hear his words.
Posts: 23,082
whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 04:07 PM   #17
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $463930
Quote:
Originally Posted by whoman69 View Post
Heard you whining Democrats blocking Bush's judicial nominations when filibuster levels were a fraction of what we see now.
What are you talking about?

Quote:
Originally Posted by whoman69 View Post
You lie. Republicans changed the rules before they lost power to the current system where you only have to state intent to filibuster and can do so to both block discussion of a bill and then block voting on the bill. Reid was stupid to allow those rules to continue on a handshake and now you criticize him when he wants to go back to the old way.
What are you talking about? I haven't lied about anything. Are you having one of your episodes?
__________________


"Well, it is one thing for Bill Clinton to say, I feel your pain. It is another thing for Barack Obama to say I feel your pain that I have caused." - George Will
Posts: 74,327
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 04:12 PM   #18
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $463930
Quote:
Originally Posted by whoman69 View Post
You can only change senate rules with a majority vote at the beginning of any Congress.

Republicans have clearly abused the system with a record number of filibusters with watered down rules that complete a filibuster just by objecting to either further discussion on a bill or to block voting on the bill. It was never intended to be a requirement to have a 60% threshold to pass any legislation.

Prior to when Aaron Burr changed the rules it was a simple majority to allow discussion to continue. Even after that the system of filibuster was not used for another 30 years after. Filibuster rarely used during the 19th century even though a single senator could do so. Republicans used more filibusters in the last 6 years than were used from 1919 with the supermajority filibuster rules though a good portion of the Reagan administration. They have filed more motions in the last 3 Republican minorities than the Democrats have in the last 5. Reagan was complaining about obstructionist Democrats when they had 40 filibusters per Congress term but his own party in majority increased that number to when they took over.
This just goes to show how the more democrats fix something, the more broken it becomes. It was democrats, not Republicans, who modified the cloture requirements thereby encouraging more and more filibusters. And now you want to "fix" it again? No thanks.
__________________


"Well, it is one thing for Bill Clinton to say, I feel your pain. It is another thing for Barack Obama to say I feel your pain that I have caused." - George Will
Posts: 74,327
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 06:09 PM   #19
whoman69 whoman69 is offline
The Master
 
whoman69's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Casino cash: $61445
2 new filibusters this week, one to protect tax breaks for companies that outsource and another to that would disclose campaign contributions bigger than $10K.
__________________
-Watching Eddie Podolak
Quote:
Originally posted by Logical
When the boobs are a bouncin, the Chiefs will be trouncin
What the Raiders fan has said is true, our customs are different. What Al Davis has said is unimportant, and we do not hear his words.
Posts: 23,082
whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 06:11 PM   #20
whoman69 whoman69 is offline
The Master
 
whoman69's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Casino cash: $61445
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
This just goes to show how the more democrats fix something, the more broken it becomes. It was democrats, not Republicans, who modified the cloture requirements thereby encouraging more and more filibusters. And now you want to "fix" it again? No thanks.
This just goes to show what a Republican homer you are. Republicans hold the country hostage and you just shit and grin.
__________________
-Watching Eddie Podolak
Quote:
Originally posted by Logical
When the boobs are a bouncin, the Chiefs will be trouncin
What the Raiders fan has said is true, our customs are different. What Al Davis has said is unimportant, and we do not hear his words.
Posts: 23,082
whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 07:05 PM   #21
blaise blaise is offline
MVP
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Plano, TX
Casino cash: $9617515
Quote:
Originally Posted by whoman69 View Post
2 new filibusters this week, one to protect tax breaks for companies that outsource and another to that would disclose campaign contributions bigger than $10K.
Sounds good.
Posts: 19,484
blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.blaise is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 07:06 PM   #22
petegz28 petegz28 is online now
Supporter
 
petegz28's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Olathe, Ks
Casino cash: $245378
Quote:
Originally Posted by whoman69 View Post
This just goes to show what a Republican homer you are. Republicans hold the country hostage and you just shit and grin.
Yea, yea, anytime the Dems don't get their way they always stomp their feet and pound their fists and accuse Repubs of holding the country hostage.
__________________
"Finally, anyone who uses the terms, irregardless, a whole nother, or all of a sudden shall be sentenced to a work camp."

Stewie Griffin
Posts: 62,268
petegz28 is obviously part of the inner Circle.petegz28 is obviously part of the inner Circle.petegz28 is obviously part of the inner Circle.petegz28 is obviously part of the inner Circle.petegz28 is obviously part of the inner Circle.petegz28 is obviously part of the inner Circle.petegz28 is obviously part of the inner Circle.petegz28 is obviously part of the inner Circle.petegz28 is obviously part of the inner Circle.petegz28 is obviously part of the inner Circle.petegz28 is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 08:02 PM   #23
whoman69 whoman69 is offline
The Master
 
whoman69's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Casino cash: $61445
Quote:
Originally Posted by blaise View Post
Sounds good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by petegz28 View Post
Yea, yea, anytime the Dems don't get their way they always stomp their feet and pound their fists and accuse Repubs of holding the country hostage.
So I'll put you both on record for being in favor of tax breaks for companies that outsource jobs overseas. We might not say they were holding the country hostage if they would just allow something to pass.
__________________
-Watching Eddie Podolak
Quote:
Originally posted by Logical
When the boobs are a bouncin, the Chiefs will be trouncin
What the Raiders fan has said is true, our customs are different. What Al Davis has said is unimportant, and we do not hear his words.
Posts: 23,082
whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 09:45 PM   #24
alnorth alnorth is offline
MVP
 
alnorth's Avatar
 
Moon Lander Champion Skeet Shoot Champion
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Iowania
Casino cash: $12390352
Quote:
Originally Posted by whoman69 View Post
You can only change senate rules with a majority vote at the beginning of any Congress.
That is completely incorrect. The GOP was going to use the so-called "nuclear option", in the middle of a senate, before the gang of 14 stopped it.

Procedurally, this is how the nuclear option works. The rules say that the filibuster can only be amended in the middle of a senate term by a 2/3 majority. The rule which says THAT can ITSELF be amended with a simple majority. If the president of the senate or the senate parliamentarian disagrees, that ruling can also be overruled by a simple majority.

I say again: the MICROSECOND that a majority of the senate decides not to respect the filibuster, *poof* its gone. If your party controls the senate, DO NOT take "we got filibustered" for an answer. If they have the votes to pass something you want, they should pass it, period, no excuses. If they don't, its because they were too cowardly and gutless to get rid of the filibuster, and also incredibly stupid enough to trust the other party if they ever get in power to also respect the filibuster.
__________________
<WarMoose> Think about how stupid the average person is. Now realize that half of them are dumber than that.
<Chunda> Why half?
Posts: 24,403
alnorth 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.alnorth 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.alnorth 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.alnorth 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.alnorth 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.alnorth 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.alnorth 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.alnorth 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.alnorth 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.alnorth 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.alnorth 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 11:17 PM   #25
HonestChieffan HonestChieffan is offline
Country Santa Year Around
 
HonestChieffan's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In the Country in MO
Casino cash: $1256681
Quote:
Originally Posted by whoman69 View Post
So I'll put you both on record for being in favor of tax breaks for companies that outsource jobs overseas. We might not say they were holding the country hostage if they would just allow something to pass.
What was the senate bill you refer to regarding tax breaks? Nevermind I think ai found it...

Amends the Internal Revenue Code to: (1) grant business taxpayers a tax credit for up to 20% of insourcing expenses incurred for eliminating a business located outside the United States and relocating it within the United States, and (2) deny a tax deduction for outsourcing expenses incurred in relocating a U.S. business outside the United States. Requires an increase in the taxpayer’s employment of full-time employees in the United States in order to claim the tax credit for insourcing expenses.


So....this "tax break" for outsourcing is in regards to being able to deduct expenses related to relocation of "a business" (whatever the **** that means) overseas. How does this deal with outsourcing where a part of a company here in the US is simply shut down and the activity they did is now done under contract overseas....like help desks? It won't. What if a business starts in the US and develops a market overseas that can sustain production there and the company expands into that market moving a portion of the US based people or equipment overseas. Do they get to deduct the expenses related to that expansion? From the way this bill is written, no one can tell. Bottom line is, maybe the intent is good but the bill is a piece of shit that proves politicians have no earthly idea what they are writing when they write this crap and the general public believes the spin and has no idea what they support.

And the idea of a tax credit? Are you kidding me? You support giving big business a loophole in this environment?

You should thank the filibuster not fear it.
__________________
Frazod to KC Nitwit..."Hey, I saw a picture of some dumpy bitch with a horrible ****tarded giant back tattoo and couldn't help but think of you." Simple, Pure, Perfect. 7/31/2013

Dave Lane: "I have donated more money to people in my life as an atheist that most churches ever will."

Come home to Jesus Dave. Come home.

Last edited by HonestChieffan; 12-11-2012 at 11:28 PM..
Posts: 26,952
HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2012, 07:00 AM   #26
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $463930
Quote:
Originally Posted by whoman69 View Post
So I'll put you both on record for being in favor of tax breaks for companies that outsource jobs overseas. We might not say they were holding the country hostage if they would just allow something to pass.
Do you even understand how this tax break works? Can you explain it?
__________________


"Well, it is one thing for Bill Clinton to say, I feel your pain. It is another thing for Barack Obama to say I feel your pain that I have caused." - George Will
Posts: 74,327
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2012, 07:01 AM   #27
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $463930
Quote:
Originally Posted by alnorth View Post
That is completely incorrect. The GOP was going to use the so-called "nuclear option", in the middle of a senate, before the gang of 14 stopped it.

Procedurally, this is how the nuclear option works. The rules say that the filibuster can only be amended in the middle of a senate term by a 2/3 majority. The rule which says THAT can ITSELF be amended with a simple majority. If the president of the senate or the senate parliamentarian disagrees, that ruling can also be overruled by a simple majority.

I say again: the MICROSECOND that a majority of the senate decides not to respect the filibuster, *poof* its gone. If your party controls the senate, DO NOT take "we got filibustered" for an answer. If they have the votes to pass something you want, they should pass it, period, no excuses. If they don't, its because they were too cowardly and gutless to get rid of the filibuster, and also incredibly stupid enough to trust the other party if they ever get in power to also respect the filibuster.
Agree.
__________________


"Well, it is one thing for Bill Clinton to say, I feel your pain. It is another thing for Barack Obama to say I feel your pain that I have caused." - George Will
Posts: 74,327
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2012, 07:08 AM   #28
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $463930
Quote:
Originally Posted by HonestChieffan View Post
What was the senate bill you refer to regarding tax breaks? Nevermind I think ai found it...

Amends the Internal Revenue Code to: (1) grant business taxpayers a tax credit for up to 20% of insourcing expenses incurred for eliminating a business located outside the United States and relocating it within the United States, and (2) deny a tax deduction for outsourcing expenses incurred in relocating a U.S. business outside the United States. Requires an increase in the taxpayer’s employment of full-time employees in the United States in order to claim the tax credit for insourcing expenses.


So....this "tax break" for outsourcing is in regards to being able to deduct expenses related to relocation of "a business" (whatever the **** that means) overseas. How does this deal with outsourcing where a part of a company here in the US is simply shut down and the activity they did is now done under contract overseas....like help desks? It won't. What if a business starts in the US and develops a market overseas that can sustain production there and the company expands into that market moving a portion of the US based people or equipment overseas. Do they get to deduct the expenses related to that expansion? From the way this bill is written, no one can tell. Bottom line is, maybe the intent is good but the bill is a piece of shit that proves politicians have no earthly idea what they are writing when they write this crap and the general public believes the spin and has no idea what they support.

And the idea of a tax credit? Are you kidding me? You support giving big business a loophole in this environment?

You should thank the filibuster not fear it.
He's a simpleton who doesn't understand that an income tax is supposed to be a tax on revenue minus expenses. He wants to punish certain types of expenses by disallowing them and subsidize companies beyond the normal deduction that incur other types of expenses. It's the type of intrusive government that democrats always seem to prefer.
__________________


"Well, it is one thing for Bill Clinton to say, I feel your pain. It is another thing for Barack Obama to say I feel your pain that I have caused." - George Will
Posts: 74,327
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2012, 04:37 PM   #29
whoman69 whoman69 is offline
The Master
 
whoman69's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Marion, IA
Casino cash: $61445
Quote:
Originally Posted by HonestChieffan View Post
What was the senate bill you refer to regarding tax breaks? Nevermind I think ai found it...

Amends the Internal Revenue Code to: (1) grant business taxpayers a tax credit for up to 20% of insourcing expenses incurred for eliminating a business located outside the United States and relocating it within the United States, and (2) deny a tax deduction for outsourcing expenses incurred in relocating a U.S. business outside the United States. Requires an increase in the taxpayer’s employment of full-time employees in the United States in order to claim the tax credit for insourcing expenses.


So....this "tax break" for outsourcing is in regards to being able to deduct expenses related to relocation of "a business" (whatever the **** that means) overseas. How does this deal with outsourcing where a part of a company here in the US is simply shut down and the activity they did is now done under contract overseas....like help desks? It won't. What if a business starts in the US and develops a market overseas that can sustain production there and the company expands into that market moving a portion of the US based people or equipment overseas. Do they get to deduct the expenses related to that expansion? From the way this bill is written, no one can tell. Bottom line is, maybe the intent is good but the bill is a piece of shit that proves politicians have no earthly idea what they are writing when they write this crap and the general public believes the spin and has no idea what they support.

And the idea of a tax credit? Are you kidding me? You support giving big business a loophole in this environment?

You should thank the filibuster not fear it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu View Post
He's a simpleton who doesn't understand that an income tax is supposed to be a tax on revenue minus expenses. He wants to punish certain types of expenses by disallowing them and subsidize companies beyond the normal deduction that incur other types of expenses. It's the type of intrusive government that democrats always seem to prefer.
You two have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Must have had Mitt Romney explain it to you. Currently business are deducting moving expenses involved with sending jobs overseas. There's already a loophole they are taking advantage of. The bill takes away that loophole and replaces it with an incentive for businesses to bring jobs here.
__________________
-Watching Eddie Podolak
Quote:
Originally posted by Logical
When the boobs are a bouncin, the Chiefs will be trouncin
What the Raiders fan has said is true, our customs are different. What Al Davis has said is unimportant, and we do not hear his words.
Posts: 23,082
whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.whoman69 is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2012, 05:11 PM   #30
patteeu patteeu is offline
The 23rd Pillar
 
patteeu's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Casino cash: $463930
Quote:
Originally Posted by whoman69 View Post
You two have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Must have had Mitt Romney explain it to you. Currently business are deducting moving expenses involved with sending jobs overseas. There's already a loophole they are taking advantage of. The bill takes away that loophole and replaces it with an incentive for businesses to bring jobs here.
It's not really a loophole when it's a part of the income calculation (i.e. revenue minus expenses). "Loophole" is more appropriate when we're talking about a subsidy like the "incentive" that you're talking about.
__________________


"Well, it is one thing for Bill Clinton to say, I feel your pain. It is another thing for Barack Obama to say I feel your pain that I have caused." - George Will
Posts: 74,327
patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.patteeu is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.