Wisconsin Economy Surging Without Tax Increases

reply to post by xuenchen


Those votes may not go to Romney. Wisconsoners might fool you on matters such as these.

reply to post by thepresident

You provided a couple rhetorical questions

Let's check the handy dandy dictionary-

rhetorical question 
noun
a question asked solely to produce an effect or to make an assertion and not to elicit a reply, as “What is so rare as a day in June?”

Yup

This was the question that I asked you that you are still avoiding........................

What was partisan about what I posted??? Please enlighten me!!!

Now since you put your foot in your mouth, what was rhetorical about that question, being that you are the one who said, my comment was "partisan garbage"?

Care to elaborate or more deflection???

reply to post by thepresident


It isnt being negative if it is the truth, lying has not done any good, maybe your beloved party hasnt realized that yet. They will after november though, fear not.

Before you try to claim "patrisan" political rhetoric, please keep in mind, I hope both parties die, in their entirety, and burn in the hell they deserve, for being apathetic losers, at both life, and politics.

An important part of the preliminary numbers should be included:

These are unaudited figures subject to final review by the State Controller's Office prior to the publication of the Department of Administration's Annual Fiscal Report to be released October 15, 2012. Additionally, the Legislative Audit Bureau performs an audit of the State’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, which is published in December of each year. These collections do not offer guidance on the budget balance for FY12. Other general purpose revenues and the final general purpose revenue expenditures will have substantial bearing on the final budget balance.

Source.

Also of note is that Wisconsin's unemployment rate has been increasing since April of this year. Fewer people have jobs but tax revenue increases?

This wouldn't be the first time Scott Walker played with the numbers to make it seem he's doing better than he is.

Originally posted by seeker1963
reply to post by thepresident

 

The Private Sector added 200,000 jobs this month

Would you rather have 200,000 people collecting welfare?

How does a record amount of people on food stamps grab you?????

We've been told by the financial experts for months now that the U.S. recession is officially over. That may be what the calculations say, but it certainly doesn't feel that way for the millions of Americans struggling to keep their heads above water, or their mortgages away from the financial cliff, or any of the other dozens of cliches we've created to try and keep stories about financial woes at least marginally distinguishable from one another. To wit: In June, 46.7 million people used food stamps in America. That's roughly one out of every five adults and more people than have used food stamps in the program's 50-year history.

Source

Care to continue your deflections or would you like to put down your pom poms and come down to reality to realize that these things are going to bite us all in the ass if we don't quit this stupid partisanship garbage???

Maybe it was all those WalMart employee training secessions learning how to collect food stamps and work a wallyworld!

what a great employer .. here I will work you and show you how to suspplement your income with government handouts since I don't pay enough......

Yup...That's what I'm taking about! Walker-RYAN-ROMNEY!

reply to post by xuenchen


Actually believe it or not is a few states in the US that are doing just fine and unemployment is very low along with welfare services.

Perhaps states like mine that is one of the highest in poverty and unemployment will take lessons from them including our own Federal government.

Is nice to see that at least the Republic still work for some states.

Benton Harbor Michigan has figured out a great way to get out of debt. They are 3 mill in the whole so if they borrow 3 mill from the state taa daa!!!! Magically out of debt!! I would assume they have no intentions of paying the state back

Originally posted by seeker1963
How else can anyone explain the 16 Triillion dollar debt our country is in???

Eleven years' worth of wars in two countries paid for completely by borrowing.
The profiteers who live in a symbiotic relationship with many congressional voters are the defense contractors...and some of them ARE the defense contractors or at least receive 'trickle down' benefits such as Paul Ryan....

The last time they tried to bring up an amendment to the annual funding appropriations bill that would get the war in Afghanistan headed quickly toward a semblance of 'ending' by the end of next year...it was not even allowed up for vote.

It was the modification of one section...taking the following out of the bill:

SEC. 1216. UNITED STATES MILITARY SUPPORT IN AFGHANISTAN.

(a) Sense of Congress- It is the sense of Congress that--

(1) following Al Qaeda’s attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, United States and coalition forces have achieved significant progress toward security and stability in Afghanistan;

(2) as the United States completes transfer of the lead for security to the Afghan National Security Forces by the end of 2014, the United States should ensure that the gains in security are maintained;

(3) the United States mission in Afghanistan continues to be to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda, as well as to prevent its return to either Afghanistan or Pakistan;

(4) the specific objectives in Afghanistan are to deny safe haven to Al Qaeda and to deny the Taliban the ability to overthrow the Afghan Government;

(5) the Taliban, Haqqanis, and associated insurgents continue to enjoy safe havens in Pakistan, but are unlikely to be capable of overthrowing the Afghan Government unless the United States withdraws forces precipitously from Afghanistan;

(6) the Haqqani Network provides unique capabilities and capacity to the Afghan Taliban, and additionally, serves as a combat multiplier to the Afghan insurgency due to its geographic primacy over the key terrain of the Paktika, Paktia, and Khost provinces, as well as North and South Waziristan, and willingness to introduce international weaponry and technology into the battle space and serve as the reception point and integrator of international foreign fighters into the Afghan insurgency;

(7) the Haqqani Network has been the most important Afghan-based protector of Al Qaeda;

(8) the unique capabilities and effects brought to the battle space by the Haqqani Network necessitate that the Government of Afghanistan should have superior operational capacity in order to maintain the security of Afghanistan over time;

(9) the United States military should not maintain an indefinite combat mission in Afghanistan and should transition to a counter-terrorism and advise and assist mission at the earliest practicable date, consistent with conditions on the ground;

(10) significant uncertainty exists within Afghanistan regarding the level of future United States military support; and

(11) in order to reduce this uncertainty, and to promote further stability and security in Afghanistan, the President should--

(A) fully consider the International Security Assistance Force Commander’s assessment regarding the need for the United States to maintain a ‘significant combat presence through 2013’;

(B) maintain a force of at least 68,000 troops through December 31, 2014, unless fewer forces can achieve United States objectives;

(C) maintain a credible troop presence after December 31, 2014, sufficient to conduct counter-terrorism and train and advise the Afghan National Security Forces, consistent with the Strategic Partnership Agreement (signed on May 2, 2012); and

(D) maintain sufficient funding for the Afghan National Security Forces to accomplish the objectives described in paragraphs (3), (4), and (8).

(b) Notification- The President shall notify the congressional defense committees of any decision to reduce the number of United States Armed Forces deployed in Afghanistan below the number of such Armed Forces deployed in Afghanistan on--

(1) December 31, 2012;

(2) December 31, 2013; and

(3) December 31, 2014,

prior to any public announcement of any such decision to reduce the number of United States Armed Forces deployed in Afghanistan.

(c) Matters to Include in Notification- As part of a notification required by subsection (b), the President shall--

(1) provide an assessment of the relevant security risk metrics associated with the marginal reduction in force levels; and

(2) provide a by-unit assessment of the operational capability of the Afghan National Security Forces to independently conduct the required operations to maintain security in Afghanistan.

(cont)

reply to post by queenannie38


(cont)

And replace it with the contents of this document.

You see, it was set up that once war is declared by a president and approved by congress, the only thing that must be done after that is to meet once a year or maybe every two years and discuss whether funding for that war should be continued. This amendment would end the war at the end of 2013 and states that any redeployment after 2014 would require a new approval by congress of a new declaration of war.

Something WAY harder to push through than just the yearly appropriations to fund it as ongoing.

Do you see what is going on?


This is not Obama doing this.
We have to let our congressmen know we are not happy with this and will not accept it...you have to make yourself heard or it will just continue forever...until we are all starved to death and dying of exposure.

reply to post by xuenchen




NOT breitbart again!

Don't you have ANY other sources at all?
State government websites...anything?

reply to post by queenannie38


In this election, Obamacare is the biggest issue along with a stagnant economy. SORRY, BUT Foreign policy takes a backseat.

Originally posted by seeker1963
How does a record amount of people on food stamps grab you?????

As a misrepresentation by your source.
Check the real source.

The goal is actually to increase usage of the program which is typically well below 100% on the national average.

Read here.

Your source makes it sound as if it is a sign that things aren't going well when there is really no correlation given the goals for increased participation for eligible families...i.e. the 'working poor.'

reply to post by RELDDIR


What does your reply have to do with what I said?

Nothing.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by xuenchen

 

So keeping taxes low encourages companies to hire more which increases the amount of tax payers which increases the amount that government takes in???

*wow*

Does the left know about this?

What a bizarre point of view?

No wonder Gov. Scott Walker won his recall election in a landslide.

He has the magic formula that we should follow in all 50 states.

reply to post by queenannie38


People do not seem to grasp, especially those 'fiscal conservatives' who should, that these wars we are fighting are intricately tied to our stagnant economy.

Those on the left just want to keep spending our money.... on social programs, health care, more bureaucracy.

Those on the right just want to keep spending our money.... on war and bank bailouts and corporate welfare and more bureaucracy.

I live near the Wisconsin border. They allow liquor sales on Sunday. Downtown Hudson is fairly flooded with cars from St. Paul and Minneapolis all day Sunday. Hudson also makes a TON of money from ticketing non-residents (and that is just ONE of the border towns.) Ticketing non-residents in Wisconsin is big$. They also make a killing every 4th of July selling the bigger fireworks to people who live in states that allow sparklers, etc.

Originally posted by PatriotGames2
reply to post by queenannie38

 

People do not seem to grasp, especially those 'fiscal conservatives' who should, that these wars we are fighting are intricately tied to our stagnant economy.

Those on the left just want to keep spending our money.... on social programs, health care, more bureaucracy.

Those on the right just want to keep spending our money.... on war and bank bailouts and corporate welfare and more bureaucracy.

The troops were pulled out of Iraq.

The troops left the US Army only to find no jobs.

They joined the ranks of the unemployed and underemployed.

The Obama economic - stagnation - was caused by his unending regulations being

thrown at small businesses across America.

reply to post by Eurisko2012


...And this is something new?

Obama and the left have done nothing but exacerbate these issues. You will not hear me defending them. Neither will I defend the Republicans because they are not helping as far as I can tell. There’s nothing new about this. Obama did not create or cause this, he helped continue it to an amazing degree.

"The amount of major business regulations that the Obama Administration created in its first three years outnumbers those created by Bush 4:1. 106 new major regulations were created by the Obama Administration that cost businesses $46 billion annually. The Bush Administration created 28 new major regulations in its first three years that cost businesses $8.1 billion—nearly 5 times less." Two steps forward, one step back.

But yeah, at least the troops were pulled out of Iraq.

American politics as usual. I hope Romney is elected though, maybe he will change things around. After all, he promised.

Originally posted by PatriotGames2
reply to post by Eurisko2012

 

...And this is something new?

Obama and the left have done nothing but exacerbate these issues. You will not hear me defending them. Neither will I defend the Republicans because they are not helping as far as I can tell. There’s nothing new about this. Obama did not create or cause this, he helped continue it to an amazing degree.

"The amount of major business regulations that the Obama Administration created in its first three years outnumbers those created by Bush 4:1. 106 new major regulations were created by the Obama Administration that cost businesses $46 billion annually. The Bush Administration created 28 new major regulations in its first three years that cost businesses $8.1 billion—nearly 5 times less." Two steps forward, one step back.

But yeah, at least the troops were pulled out of Iraq.

American politics as usual. I hope Romney is elected though, maybe he will change things around. After all, he promised.

edit on 8-9-2012 by PatriotGames2 because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-9-2012 by PatriotGames2 because: (no reason given)

I see you are from Texas.

Your state has shown us the way to introduce tort reform into our medical system in

all 50 states. - Cap punitive damages at $250,000. -

That's a good start.

We must repeal Obamacare.