Skip to main content

President Barack Obama views the new bridge under construction adjacent to the Tappan Zee Bridge after making remarks on infrastructure at the Washington Irving Boat Club in Tarrytown, N.Y., May 14, 2014.
President Barack Obama views the new bridge under construction adjacent to the Tappan Zee Bridge.
President Obama continues to press on the need to invest in infrastructure. Asked by Kai Ryssdal of Marketplace "we sit here in an economy where corporate profits are up, but the money's not being spent, where the jobs that are being created are low-wage, low-skill jobs. How's that supposed to work? How do you reconcile the disconnect there," Obama said:
Well, there's some things we could be doing right now that would make a huge difference. When I was at that bridge in Georgetown, Washington, D.C., yesterday, we were talking about the fact that we've got $2 trillion of deferred maintenance: roads, bridges, an air-traffic control system that's creaky, an electrical grid that wastes too much energy and is highly inefficient, and we could be putting hundreds of thousands of folks back to work right now and not only put a big boost to the economy in the short term, but also lay the foundation for economic competitiveness in the long term. That creates a lot of middle-class jobs. The challenge we have is not that we don't know what to do. The problem is that we've got a Congress right now that's been saying no to proposals that would make a difference.
That's an excellent summation of how ridiculous it is that Republicans are blocking infrastructure spending:

1) Our bridges, air-traffic control system, and electrical grid are not good enough for our needs right now.

2) Repairing and updating them would create hundreds of thousands of jobs, which would in turn boost the economy.

3) We need better infrastructure to be competitive in the future.

But no. Screw all that, Republicans need to oppose the president in all things and keep corporate taxes low at all costs.

Originally posted to Daily Kos Labor on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 08:21 AM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  See, Republicans always have to oppose (20+ / 0-)

    the Democrats and the President to keep up appearance of a two party system that offers choices.

    So, I would advise the Democrats and Obama take over all the real good Republican and nutcase political view points, then the Republicans must oppose Obama ... and voila ... they would end up doing what we and Obama wanted in the first place.

    Sigh, I am so tired of this.

    We know a hell of a lot, but we understand very little. Manfred Max-Neef

    by mimi on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 08:30:00 AM PDT

    •  DOT should post signs at all semi-dangerous (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jesuisunenicole

      and dangerous bridges warning drivers that their safe passage is not assured.

      Slap a few thousand signs around the country so that all can see the real danger that a decaying infrastructure means on a daily basis. Like bridges collapsing into the river below, for example.

      Make the People demand that Congress fix their bridges, et al.

      "I did not have sex with that bridge"

      by Scottsdalian on Fri Jul 04, 2014 at 06:41:41 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  A fine idea, but totally unrealistic. (0+ / 0-)

        I like the sarcasm in your comment but red state DOTs that tried to put up ARRA project signs had to immediately remove them when GOP and tea party politicians saw them posted.

        •  No sarcasm. Totally real. (0+ / 0-)

          Public safety. Full disclosure.

          Nobody can say 'who knew?' when a bridge collapses or roads are buckled.

          If Feds are paying for bridge, they can put up emergency signs. Such as warning that a bridge just might collapse any time.

          Oh...and put a corrective price range on the sign too. ("Estimated Cost to Replace Bridge: $25,000,000 - $35,000,000" or somesuch.)

          "I did not have sex with that bridge"

          by Scottsdalian on Fri Jul 04, 2014 at 10:32:02 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Obama must get no credit - the R rule! (29+ / 0-)

    damn the country, just make sure that Kenyan commie (etc etc) gets no credit...............

  •  Conservatives are just too f*cking stupid/ignor... (36+ / 0-)

    Conservatives are just too f*cking stupid/ignorant/corrupt to understand or care about basic economics. Infrastructure spending, from a macroeconomic perspective, is free. Actually, you get more out of it than what you put in. Its the best goddammed investment a society can make. We current need ~2 trillion dollars worth of infrastructure work. If we set about fixing that we could put thousands and thousands to work and the economy would take off like a rocket

  •  Obama had the chance to push for (11+ / 0-)

    infrastructure investments during the stimulus negotiations.

    He also had the mandate ("never let a good crisis go to waste") AND a Democratic house and senate.

    What did he and his administration push for? Tax cuts.

    Now, in yet another election year, he's saying we need infrastructure investment?

    And you don't think that's funny?

    Jesus.

    •  There was money for infrastructure (21+ / 0-)

      in the stimulus.  However, he did not have the 60 votes needed until the summer of 2009, and the stimulus negotiations took place during the transition from Bush to Obama.  (Franken wasn't seated until the summer, and then Kennedy passed away a few months later, and Dems lost his seat and 60 votes to Scott Brown)

      I agree, however, that the amount was way too small and Obama should never have included tax cuts in there to start.  Make it all infrastructure and aid to the states and negotiate tax cuts into the deal to get the 1 or 2 R votes needed to beat the filibuster.

      "I'm not a member of an organized political party - I'm a Democrat." Will Rogers

      by newjeffct on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 08:42:33 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  plus he seems to ignore history as to (3+ / 0-)

      how to get infrastructure built in this country

      For example the interstate highway system - which has been describe as the largest construction project ever (with no qualifications!) - was sold by Eisenhower based on military needs.

      But instead, Mr. Obama opts to burnish his military credential by continuing insane overseas adventures instead of pushing for domestic initiatives . ..

    •  Yeah... (10+ / 0-)

      ...and all that ended in November 2010. It's July 2014.

      The only thing funny here is that you think your argument carries any weight whatsoever.

      Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

      by MBNYC on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 08:56:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't get your point at all. (4+ / 0-)

        2010 midterms were a reflection of Obama having lost the momentum that got him elected in the first place.

        A real lost opportunity because of bad political maneuvering.


        "We must make our choice. We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." - Louis Brandies

        by Pescadero Bill on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 09:26:04 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  His point was that I should stop criticising Obama (0+ / 0-)

          because around here, my opinion doesn't count. This is a propaganda tactic I am familiar with. Try to create the illusion of consensus, and make "dissenters" feel isolated.

          lol. Regardless, this kind of crap gets the Troll Treatment™.

      •  From Marcy Wheeler aka emptywheel (0+ / 0-)

        Obama Has Been Covering Up the Presidency’s Role in Torture for Years

        Did the White House order the CIA to withdraw 920 documents from a server made available to Committee staffers, as Senator Dianne Feinstein says the agency claimed in 2010? Were those documents – perhaps thousands of them – pulled in deference to a White House claim of executive privilege, as Senator Mark Udall and then CIA General Counsel Stephen Preston suggested last fall? And is the White House continuing to withhold 9,000 pages of documents without invoking privilege, as McClatchy reported yesterday?

        We can be sure about one thing: The Obama White House has covered up the Bush presidency’s role in the torture program for years. Specifically, from 2009 to 2012, the administration went to extraordinary lengths to keep a single short phrase, describing President Bush’s authorization of the torture program, secret.

        Some time before October 29, 2009, then National Security Advisor Jim Jones filed an ex parte classified declaration with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, in response to a FOIA request by the ACLU seeking documents related to the torture program. In it, Jones argued that the CIA should not be forced to disclose the “source of the CIA’s authority,” as referenced in the title of a document providing “Guidelines for Interrogations” and signed by then CIA Director George Tenet. That document was cited in two Justice Department memos at issue in the FOIA. Jones claimed that “source of authority” constituted an intelligence method that needed to be protected.

        link
    •  the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (15+ / 0-)

      included $150 billion in new federal infrastructure funding. The President also proposed additional infrastructure legislation that did not see the light of day because Republicans made sure of it.

      Now, in terms of this:

      What did he and his administration push for? Tax cuts.
      Do you honestly believe everyone to be ignorant to what the President did when he first entered office?

      Um, the President also passed a massive healthcare legislation that has currently given tens of millions of people access to healthcare.

      The President also expanded the Pell Grant program, which allowed millions of people access to a college education.

      What else did he do when he entered office again? Oh, yes, he saved the U.S. car industry.

      But according to you, all the President did was cut taxes....

      Shaking my head at the anti-Obama propaganda that goes on in this community. In the meantime, few criticism of the obstructionists destructive Republicans.

      Unbelievable....

      •  IMHO 175 billion, see wiki (0+ / 0-)

        http://en.wikipedia.org/...

        Spend 175 billion use a 2.5 multiplier, and you get 4.2 million jobs, the WH claimed 4.25, the CBO said 3.6 to 4.6.

        Krugman uses the 2.5 multiplier for infrastructure jobs.

        .................expect us......................... FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

        by Roger Fox on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 12:30:03 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Obama premptively self-negotiated the stimulus (0+ / 0-)

        His initial proposal was larded with tax cuts because he wanted to reach across the aisle.  

        If he had started with fewer tax cuts and more infrastructure spending, the result would have been better.

        "When I was an alien, cultures weren't opinions" ~ Kurt Cobain, Territorial Pissings

        by Subterranean on Fri Jul 04, 2014 at 12:50:31 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Weak tea when strong brew was needed (3+ / 0-)

      Bush retread TG serving the tea instead of a brewmaster like Krugman.  I like Obama, support him and respect him.  But trying to do Repub lite at the beginning of his term was a historic miss.

  •  Republicans: "Failure is our goal" (11+ / 0-)

    If you want to be worse off than you are now. If you want to feel hungrier and sicker, vote Republican.

    One point is that those wasteful energy grid ends up consuming product from folks like the Kochs and the oil/natural gas industries.
    There's big money in inaction, and those who profit are calling the shots in the GOP.

    "And all I ask is a merry yarn from a laughing fellow-rover, And quiet sleep and a sweet dream when the long trick’s over." - John Masefield

    by mungley on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 08:33:37 AM PDT

  •  Worse than Bush.....that's our story and we're (5+ / 0-)

    sticking to it.

  •  Yep - the mini stimulus from 2009 (7+ / 0-)

    only had a small impact on infrastructure, but it did help.  However, most economists at the time said it was way too small.

    "I'm not a member of an organized political party - I'm a Democrat." Will Rogers

    by newjeffct on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 08:37:41 AM PDT

  •  Civilian Conservation Corps 2.0. (11+ / 0-)

    Civilian Conservation Corps 2.0.

    •  Amen. CCC & WPA. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bahaba, sethtriggs

      .................expect us......................... FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

      by Roger Fox on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 12:37:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  My recommendation on that score can... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bahaba, sethtriggs

      ...be found in Resurrect and Energize and Modernize the Conservation Corps:

      Despite right-wing spin, the administration’s stimulus package has created and saved many jobs. Just not enough, and not quick enough. Everybody except the Party of No and their accomplices recognize something more must be done about unemployment. But the only way to get Republican backing for effective jobs action would be to give the very richest of their pals another nice upward transfer of wealth plus some vigerish in the form of new penalties on working people.

      Because of the Civilian Conservation Corps and the Works Progress Administration, Americans can go just about anywhere in this country and see FDR's hand on the landscape. These programs weren't flawless, but they were smart, effective, pragmatic. To hear some Party of No politicians and rightist pundits tell it, however, this particular use of the public sector was just short of a Bolshevik coup. So, obviously, anything with a whiff of New Deal scent about it is going to set off another round of patented GOP sulking and barking amplified by our ever-helpful national media. [...]

      An audaciously and pragmatically crafted CECC would mesh perfectly with programs already being funded by the $80 billion green portion of the two-year stimulus package and with the still languishing American Clean Energy and Security act passed by the House five months ago. It could provide entry-level positions with good training and a job ladder for one of the most heavily unemployed demographics – men and women aged 18-25, especially those with only a high school diploma, though the program shouldn’t be for them alone. From those first government-funded green jobs, they could move on higher-skilled, better-paying ones in the private sector.

      Predictions for such jobs are optimistic. The union/eco-group coalition known as the Blue Green Alliance recently predicted in the white paper, Building the Clean Energy Assembly Line, that there would be 850,000 new manufacturing jobs alone by 2525, based on an economy powered 25% by renewable energy. The  recent Booz, Allen, Hamilton Green Jobs Study for the non-profit United States Green Building Council concluded that the building industry will create 7.9 million green jobs in the next four years.

      Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

      by Meteor Blades on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 02:33:50 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Congressional GOP misses target...repeatedly. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    elwior, ChemBob

    Unapologetically punishes wall in the process.


    If you’ve become a crusty old fart, may I suggest a change in diet?

    by glb3 on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 08:45:30 AM PDT

  •  Republicans are willing to spend 100% (7+ / 0-)

    of a 5% tax allowing US corporations to repatriate their offshore profits. That would fund a lot of infrastructure jobs. The Democrats hate the idea, but in my view those funds are never coming back to the US at a 35% rate and 5% of Trillions is more than 35% of zero.

    "let's talk about that" uid 92953

    by VClib on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 08:45:32 AM PDT

    •  Completely agree. That money is NOT coming (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      VClib, bahaba

      back at 35%.  

      Better to get 5% of that money, and have it come back, than insist on 35% of nothing.  

      •  LOL. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        RMForbes, Grabber by the Heel

        Yeah the best way to handle extortion is to give the extortionists what they want every time.

        Riiiiiight.

        That's worked soooo well with conservatives.

        What's that definition of insanity again?

        "What could BPossibly go wrong??" -RLMiller "God is just pretend." - eru

        by nosleep4u on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 01:19:58 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The corporations are very content to leave the (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          nextstep

          cash offshore where they have no current US tax liability. I don't think anyone is trying to extort anything. The Congress would love to turn some of that cash into revenue for the Treasury, but the companies have no urgency to bring the cash home.

          "let's talk about that" uid 92953

          by VClib on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 01:26:34 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  and I'm very content in pulling corporate charters (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            starduster

            of any corporation doing business in America if they are caught hiding their profits earned here offshore. But I believe in the corporate death penalty.

            Really don't mind if you sit this one out. My words but a whisper -- your deafness a SHOUT. I may make you feel but I can't make you think..Jethro Tull

            by RMForbes on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 02:29:11 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Profits earned here can certainly be invested (0+ / 0-)

              offshore. There is no restrictions regarding US multinationals investing US profits anywhere in the world. The issue is a profit earned here that are reported as earned in another country to escape US income taxes. My guess is that those games are most often played by companies with armies of exceptional tax lawyers and accountants who can always make a case that it is a gray area, and therefore not criminal. Companies with scale and resources are always going to work to minimize their worldwide tax liabilities, they have a fiduciary duty to do that.

              Corporate charters are granted by states who rarely "pull" charters for any reason other than not paying state taxes and fees.

              "let's talk about that" uid 92953

              by VClib on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 03:00:06 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Just because these transnational corporations have (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Roger Fox

                been able to bribe politicians into carving out tax loopholes that allows them to avoid taxes by inflating the costs of services provided by their subsidiaries in tax havens so that they can eliminate their domestic tax liability does not make it right. And it's no reason to give them a tax holiday so they can bring their savings back onshore to buyback some of their stocks. Two or twelve wrongs don't make a right.

                All we would need to do is make an example of one corporation that has been flagrantly thumbing their noses at the IRS and trillions of dollars would begin to flow back into our domestic economy.  I say do it to Exxon first because they are currently reneging on their Gulf cleanup. If we pulled Exxon's corporate charter, nationalized their domestic assets and then told Apple they were next this bullshit would end very quickly.

                Really don't mind if you sit this one out. My words but a whisper -- your deafness a SHOUT. I may make you feel but I can't make you think..Jethro Tull

                by RMForbes on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 03:29:09 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I've had the same thought (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  RMForbes

                  Nationalize an oil company, then ask "who is next?".

                  .................expect us......................... FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

                  by Roger Fox on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 04:48:43 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Yep, I meant BP but Exxon works too (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Roger Fox

                    Really don't mind if you sit this one out. My words but a whisper -- your deafness a SHOUT. I may make you feel but I can't make you think..Jethro Tull

                    by RMForbes on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 05:02:50 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Roger to nationalize an oil company (3+ / 0-)

                    the government would have to acquire all of its assets at fair market value. That old Fifth Amendment "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." Plus the federal taxation of oil companies is very straight forward. It's the companies with lots of intellectual property who can play the most innovative tax games with the IRS because IP lives in the cloud and can be "domiciled" anywhere.

                    "let's talk about that" uid 92953

                    by VClib on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 05:14:41 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  No it wouldn't (0+ / 0-)

                  It's one thing to thumb your nose, but have a plausible legal case and another to commit tax fraud. None of the Fortune 500 are going to be "made an example of" because every one of those companies has a Big 4 national tax partner who has signed off on the return and each of those returns is audited every year. That makes the likelihood that there is a big case of tax fraud lurking that will scare the others into repatriating their offshore profits at a 35% tax rate is comical.

                  To capture more revenue from US headquartered multinational companies will require some significant changes in the US Tax Code for C corporations, and that isn't happening any time soon. The US is really a loner when it comes to international taxation and taxing profits earned offshore. No other G8 country tries to tax income earned outside its borders. The US aught to bring its code into the 21st Century. If GM builds and sells a car in China why should it pay any US income tax on the profit? And why should it have to pay a tax to bring the cash back to the US?

                  Take the 5% of trillions and fix the interstate highway system. It's better than 35% of O.

                  "let's talk about that" uid 92953

                  by VClib on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 05:09:31 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  No Fortune 1000 company pays a 35% corporate (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    sethtriggs

                    tax rate. In fact, 25% of these corporations pay no corporate taxes at all. I would be agreeable to lowering the top corporate tax rate to 25% if all these tax loopholes were closed but as of now these taxes are owed and need to be paid. If I didn't pay my S-corp taxes I would be hit with a huge fine on top of the money I owed, C-corps shouldn't get any special treatment. Why should we let these corporations get away with and be rewarded for cheating on their taxes? It makes no sense at all.

                    Like I said upstring, there are ways to force these companies to operate morally, up to and including the corporate death penalty.

                    Really don't mind if you sit this one out. My words but a whisper -- your deafness a SHOUT. I may make you feel but I can't make you think..Jethro Tull

                    by RMForbes on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 05:26:45 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  RMF - if they have a 0% federal tax rate then (0+ / 0-)

                      they can bring the cash back any time. If they owe 0% and we can get them to pay 5% we would be money ahead. No problem.

                      They aren't cheating. They are working the system which any corporation who has the expertise can do. The taxes on those offshore profits aren't due until they bring the cash back to the US and they have no legal obligation to ever repatriate it. No individual has a legal, moral, ethical or patriotic duty to pay more that the letter of the IRS code requires. No one ever said it better than Judge Learned Hand the most famous, and most quoted, US judge who never sat on the Supreme Court.

                      "Anyone may arrange his affairs so that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the treasury. There is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes. Over and over again the Courts have said that there is nothing sinister in so arranging affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everyone does it, rich and poor alike and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands."

                      "let's talk about that" uid 92953

                      by VClib on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 05:57:07 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  But they are cheating by overcharging their own (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        sethtriggs

                        domestic subsidiaries for parts and/or services from their subsidiaries in tax havens, leaving little or no profits in products sold in our domestic markets. There are several tax reduction strategies that are illegal or at least were illegal before the deregulation frenzy beginning in the Reagan Administration. It's not legal to take ill-gotten gains to bribe politicians into creating tax loopholes legalizing those profits. It's wrong and they should not be rewarded for acting immorally.  

                        Really don't mind if you sit this one out. My words but a whisper -- your deafness a SHOUT. I may make you feel but I can't make you think..Jethro Tull

                        by RMForbes on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 06:17:38 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  If companies are engaging in tax fraud (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Pi Li

                          or have been bribing members of Congress they should be prosecuted. However, we can't prosecute companies for laws or regulations that are no longer on the books.

                          The rules related to transfer pricing are actually strict. Every Fortune 500 company is audited every year by the IRS and I would imagine that transfer pricing is a major audit item for both the outside CPA firm who is certifying the independent audit, the independent tax review, and the IRS.

                          To change enforcement the Congress is going to have to change the code. It would be great if we could find some bipartisan areas to work on a new corporate code. The current one penalizes exports and favors imports, which is backwards. The current code also encourages corporations to not have their headquarters in the US, or recognize profits in the US. Why would we do that?

                          "let's talk about that" uid 92953

                          by VClib on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 07:36:52 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  I don't disagree but I still don't think these tax (0+ / 0-)

                            avoidance strategies shouldn't be rewarded with a tax holiday. If anything they should get hit with a fine and jail time for the executives involved. If caught doing something in anyway illegal the response needs to be swift and severe.

                            Really don't mind if you sit this one out. My words but a whisper -- your deafness a SHOUT. I may make you feel but I can't make you think..Jethro Tull

                            by RMForbes on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 07:51:35 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Tax avoidance stratagies that don't break the law (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Pi Li

                            can't lead to convictions and jail time. If companies are breaking the law they should be prosecuted. However, it is nearly impossible to prove criminal intent when you have premier outside lawyers and accountants blessing your practices. If the IRS doesn't agree with a particular tax treatment a settlement is negotiated or the issue goes to Tax Court. The benefit the Fortune 500 companies have is that they have better lawyers and accountants representing them than the IRS, Treasury or the Department of Justice. The overwhelming majority of the best and brightest tax professionals from those three agencies punch their tickets and then go to work in the private sector where the compensation is dramatically higher.

                            "let's talk about that" uid 92953

                            by VClib on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 08:10:35 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Well the HSBC Bank got away some pretty (0+ / 0-)

                            bad shit, I don't have much faith that any major corporation will be held responsible for their illegal actions in today's legal environment. It's something that needs to change before I will have any faith in the system at all.

                            Really don't mind if you sit this one out. My words but a whisper -- your deafness a SHOUT. I may make you feel but I can't make you think..Jethro Tull

                            by RMForbes on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 08:22:08 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Banks are in a very different class than the (0+ / 0-)

                            Fortune 500. They don't make any "products" or have any transfer pricing issues. And Swiss banks are a category in and of themselves. They are trying to straddle two sets of laws. In Switzerland violating the tax code is a civil matter and disclosing private financial activity to the US is a criminal matter. In the US it is the opposite. The Swiss banks are between a rock and a hard place.

                            "let's talk about that" uid 92953

                            by VClib on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 08:56:36 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  No, we are the one's that are really between (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            sethtriggs

                            a rock and a hard place. There are two sets of laws; one for the large corporations and extremely wealthy individuals and another set of laws for the rest of us.

                            Really don't mind if you sit this one out. My words but a whisper -- your deafness a SHOUT. I may make you feel but I can't make you think..Jethro Tull

                            by RMForbes on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 09:17:12 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Why aren't the laws & regulations in effect (0+ / 0-)

                            anymore? What ever could have happened?

    •  Add in a .1% financial trading tax (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      OleHippieChick
      •  That will kill the deal (0+ / 0-)

        I favor a really thoughtful financial securities transaction tax. So far the proposals I have read haven't really thought through the right amount of the fee. One thing is certain each asset class should have a very different fee. This isn't a place where one size fits all.

        The initiation of a transfer tax is a very big deal and needs to include the EU and UK, if at all possible. Trying to add this to the corporate repatriation kills it.

        "let's talk about that" uid 92953

        by VClib on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 10:05:20 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Why not? An even higher FTT worked just fine (0+ / 0-)

          until it was killed in 1967 during LBJ's Administration. The 0.004% transaction fee charged by the exchange doesn't create a problem at all and raising that fee to 0.5% would bring back sanity to the markets by effectively ending high frequency trading. That would be a very good thing.

          Really don't mind if you sit this one out. My words but a whisper -- your deafness a SHOUT. I may make you feel but I can't make you think..Jethro Tull

          by RMForbes on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 02:35:52 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Wrong approach. (0+ / 0-)

      They should be told they can repatriate now at the normal rate, or it can start going up 1% every year.

      "What could BPossibly go wrong??" -RLMiller "God is just pretend." - eru

      by nosleep4u on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 01:17:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Try getting that one through Congress (0+ / 0-)

        I don't think a majority of Democrats in the House and Senate would support your idea. It doesn't matter if the rate is 35% or 50% the cash isn't coming back. It would irrational for any multinational company to bring the cash back to the US under current tax law. It's going to take a significant change in the corporate tax code to lure that cash from OUS. The cash will come back using carrots, not sticks.

        "let's talk about that" uid 92953

        by VClib on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 01:24:00 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  An ACA type approach is what is called for. Off... (0+ / 0-)

          An ACA type approach is what is called for. Offer them the ability to bring back the money onshore at a discounted rate (15%?), and if they fail to do so their regular tax rate starts going up for each year that they don't. In the same way that you can either pay the "fine" for not having health insurance or accept a subsidy (in most cases) and buy health insurance so that you're part of the solution to the problem.

          •  Trenchman - I don't think a majority of Democrats (0+ / 0-)

            would like your idea. The companies owe no tax on the OUS earnings until they bring it back to the US. They have every legal right to keep the cash offshore and invest it anywhere else in the world. What Congress needs to do is craft a carrot, not a stick to bring the money back to the US. I don't think there is any consensus in Congress to try and collect higher taxes on OUS earnings from years past. Any change will impact tax years in the future.

            "let's talk about that" uid 92953

            by VClib on Fri Jul 04, 2014 at 09:03:15 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Federal Infrastructure Bank. (0+ / 0-)

          Concept:

          Create Federal Infrastructure Bank and fund it with repatriated corporate offshore cash.

          Each year the corp. leaves the money in the FIB, 20% of the tax is waived. Leave the money in the FIB for 5 years, then all taxes are waived.

          The FIB will use those funds for infrastructure improvements. FIB could either use the corporate funds directly...with direct loans.....or could further leverage those funds for even greater infrastructure improvements.

          Loans would be repaid from increased tax revenues created via the infrastructure construction projects and then improved economic activities.

          In 5 years, offshore cash would be fully repatriated.

          "I did not have sex with that bridge"

          by Scottsdalian on Fri Jul 04, 2014 at 07:31:37 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Scott - the concept is interesting (0+ / 0-)

            An interest free loan to the US to use for infrastructure, totally voluntary.

            I LIKE IT!!!!!!!!!!

            "let's talk about that" uid 92953

            by VClib on Fri Jul 04, 2014 at 09:05:12 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  It's not interest free loan. Businesses are buying (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              VClib

              down the cost of repatriating offshore money without paying "taxes".

              It's a concept, not a detailed proposal. Feel free to include ideas to better this concept.

              Need: $2-3 Trillion Cash for infrastructure
              Have: $2-3 Trillion Cash available for repatriation.

              Any way we could match up our Need with our Have? This is my/Obama's concept.

              What's your proposal?

              "I did not have sex with that bridge"

              by Scottsdalian on Fri Jul 04, 2014 at 10:14:58 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  I wish he wouldn't just say "congress" (3+ / 0-)

    as though it's all of congress that is doing this. It's a specific and known group of people and he has the ability to shine a very bright light on that.

  •  Even Christie recognizes the need,... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    elwior, polecat, FiredUpInCA

    ...hence his theft borrowing of Port Authority funds for repair of the Pulaski Skyway.  

    I'm not always political, but when I am I vote Democratic. Stay Democratic, my friends. -The Most Interesting Man in the World

    by boran2 on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 08:47:40 AM PDT

  •  Modern, smart grid is such a no brainer. (11+ / 0-)

    Infrastructure spending that creates jobs & saves energy - which makes it an economic & environmental boon.

    I'll tell you right out, I am a man who likes talking to a man who likes to talk. - Kasper Gutman

    by rasbobbo on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 08:49:09 AM PDT

  •  Our Craven Corporate media report this daily... (0+ / 0-)

    ...oh, wait.

  •  He's the worst president ever (6+ / 0-)

    I read about it on that crazy leftist socialist liberal website, CNN.  They have scientific proof, apparently.  It's all the talk.  What's this about policy and stuff?

    When truth is only a matter of opinion, advantage goes to the liars.

    by Sun dog on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 09:22:40 AM PDT

  •  I see ads on MSNBC, of all places (7+ / 0-)

    saying, "Bring your business to New York and you won't pay taxes for 10 years!"  How, exactly, will new businesses have the infrastructure they need if they don't pay state taxes?  Sure, there's local and federal, but that won't fill the hole.

    (aka NobleExperiments). ‎"Those who make a peaceful revolution impossible make a violent revolution inevitable" ~ John F. Kennedy

    by smrichmond on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 09:28:15 AM PDT

  •  GOP harms America to make Obama look bad (12+ / 0-)

    "The end of democracy and the defeat of the American Revolution will occur when government falls into the hands of lending institutions and moneyed incorporations." ~ Thomas Jefferson

    by Lefty Coaster on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 09:39:26 AM PDT

  •  There is no money for infrastructure rebuilding (8+ / 0-)

    in the USA!  Just ask any Republican!  However, if you want to illegally invade and destroy another country and then rebuild their infrastructure then there is an unlimited amount of money to spend and not a dime of it has to be offset by spending cuts.

  •  Infrastructure public-private partnerships (P3) (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    msdrown, sethtriggs

    People have to forget about the old model: public funding via bonds and taxes, with attendant cost overruns and defaults.

    One problem is that too many people think a P3 is the same as privatization.  It is not: it's public sector oversight of private-sector funded projects.

    Another problem: gov't partnering with the private sector = crony capitalism.  Just not so. Transparency is the rule.  

    The private sector is sitting on billions of dollars that could jump-start infrastructure build/rebuild and deliver worthwhile returns.  And comes equipped with the requisite experience and expertise to get the work done efficiently.  

    P3s are at the heart of other first-world economies.  Obama proposed a National Infrastructure Bank (NIB) years ago.  High-speed rail to nowhere.  

    There are P3 solutions out there if people and pols would rip off the blinders and see clearly.

  •  I don't think it is about taxes. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mwm341, EastcoastChick, sethtriggs

    It is something much more personal with the Republicans.  I think they do know how much the repairs and improvements to our infrastructure are needed.  I believe they do not want to give Obama credit for fixing it or creating jobs.  They are waiting for a white make Republican to become president before they will approve anything.

  •  Repugs just want to privatize infrastructure (5+ / 0-)

    Then they can charge fees and tolls for infrastructure that once was public for all.

    But their main goal is just to "blacktrack" the guy in the White House.

  •  "How do you reconcile the disconnect there?" (3+ / 0-)

    The questioned posed:

    "we sit here in an economy where corporate profits are up, but the money's not being spent, where the jobs that are being created are low-wage, low-skill jobs. How's that supposed to work? How do you reconcile the disconnect there?"
    Obama opens his response with:
    Well, there's some things we could be doing right now that would make a huge difference.
    I understand he wanted to speak to infrastructure, but what a lousy response and segue.

    Paraphrasing, the questionasked was: corporations are sitting on record piles of money but only low paying, low skill jobs are being created. What gives?

    What Obama should have said was:

    "TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMIC HAS FAILED THIS COUNTRY. It has performed as intended and made the rich much richer, but the promise of lifting all boats never materialized. And with the resulting decline in the middle class, the shrinking safety net, the dramatic rise of student debt, and everything else that has eroded our middle class, this is not going to change unless we change what we have been doing.

    Or words to that effect. Then he could have talked about infrastructure. Sadly, Obama is a horrible messenger for economic change specifically and change in Washington in general.

    •  With all due respect to Obama, tho..... (0+ / 0-)

      the repubs are creating shitstorms on a daily basis and Obama is forced to waste his time stomping out one fire after another.

      Repubs are simply out in front of Obama, forcing him to play defense.

      Despite all this defense, Obama HAS gotten some amazing things done. No more war, no more chemical weapons in Syria, nuclear Iran has quieted down, 288K jobs last month, deficit continues to plummet, people seeing doctors for first time in a long time, and on and on.

      Given the hand he has been dealt, I believe he is doing a wonderful job on the whole, with all due respect to certain circumstances.

      "I did not have sex with that bridge"

      by Scottsdalian on Fri Jul 04, 2014 at 08:06:02 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  2009 stimulus was a missed opportunity as it di... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Grabber by the Heel, Roger Fox

    2009 stimulus was a missed opportunity as it didn't go anywhere near far enough. Just like TARP failed the distressed homeowners yet helped the banks.

    We used to be a can-do country. I believe that we can again. But we have to want it and fight for it!

    How to do that and grab the media attention and the attention of those people that are supposed to be representing us in the federal city? I wish that I knew...

  •  Privatizing … (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Grabber by the Heel, starduster

    Yes, this is the ultimate goal of the  corporatists of this country. It is a revival of the robber barons from the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

    Since 2000, we have seen an acceleration of the march away from a free, capitalist economy to a strict following of fascism.  SCOTUS is merely supporting the new status quo by finding that corporations have more rights than actual human beings.

    What we need to decide as a country is whether we will allow a tyrrany of the minority to override the will of the majority.

    •  I suspect this will be the Dems' platform (0+ / 0-)

      in both 2014 and 2016:

      What we need to decide as a country is whether we will allow a tyrrany of the minority to override the will of the majority.
      I still believe the People are gonna wake up, take stock of their own situation, and then figure out who's gonna help them more - Dems or TP'ers. l continue to have confidence that Obama and the Dems are playing this correctly.

      "I did not have sex with that bridge"

      by Scottsdalian on Fri Jul 04, 2014 at 08:09:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  This is what we all hope (0+ / 0-)

        At least, those of us who believe that in the founding ideals of this country.  For far too long, we have tolerated the incessant whining of reactionary forces to decide our country's destiny.  It is time for us to reclaim our country and our future by raising our voices and getting out the vote on a regular basis.  As that one quote goes, "Vote early and vote often."

        •  Yeah. It always amazes/frightens me when I hear (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          AKBear

          historians say 'yeah, this election/Congress/atmosphere is nasty......but nothing like (insert Year here), when things were REALLY fucked up.

          Cause I happen to think things are really fucked up NOW!!!

          "I did not have sex with that bridge"

          by Scottsdalian on Fri Jul 04, 2014 at 08:49:21 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Historically speaking, (0+ / 0-)

            this SCOTUS is one of the most politically active, theologically driven Courts this country has ever seen.  Having them weigh in on an election in 2000, the constant and chronic reactionary rulings by 4 justices with one swing vote in favor of corporate interests over personal freedoms, the constant erosion of a woman's right to self-determination, the impingement of voting rights in some of the most reactionary states in this Union . . . sometimes I have to check the dates on the rulings!   They seem to come out of the 19th century!

            Yes, our legal system has not actually entered the 21st century but entered some kind of weird time shift to throw us back into the beginning of the 19th century.

  •  Here in Chicago (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CentralCoaster

    there's plenty of infrastructure work going on. The water pipes on my block were laid in the 1880s. They just ripped up the street and re-did them. It's going on all over the city. And they're re-doing El and subway tracks. Can't go anywhere without street or utilities workers detouring traffic. It's pretty amazing. But then, Rahm Emanuel is mayor. Don't like a lot he's done, but he's getting the infrastructure and greening the city right.

    •  Yep. Richie Daley was the guy who copyrighted (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MillieNeon

      that blueprint of infrastructure improvements (which he got from his dad). He did a lot to upgrade city facilities.

      In his many international travels as mayor, Richie discovered and brought back to Chicago many great ideas from major cities around the world, which is one reason why Chicago is considered a world-class city. After the Chicago Fire in the 1800's, when the city was rebuilding, city/private investors specifically designed Chicago's street system after the Paris system, especially the boulevards for which Paris is famous for.

      Emanuel is simply carrying on that business plan, no disrespect whatsoever to him (in fact - Kudos!).

      Laugh at Chicago politicians all you want, but the City of Chicago works.

      "I did not have sex with that bridge"

      by Scottsdalian on Fri Jul 04, 2014 at 08:19:56 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  2 trillion: NOPE, try 3.6 trillion (0+ / 0-)

    http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/

    Always low balling this very imprortant issue of jobs...... DUDE come on.

    Theres well over 20 million people looking for full time year round work. When can we talk about the actual numbers when discussing problems.

    .................expect us......................... FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

    by Roger Fox on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 12:15:19 PM PDT

  •  The Grid is changing fast. (0+ / 0-)

    Given the rise in Micro grids, renewable energy
    and Solar PV, Grid loads should start declining 2-5%/year
    for the next 20 years.  

    I think that part is likely true.

    As for roads, maybe we are better off investing into High Speed rail and Mass transit.

    We will need to keep working on bridges, but i would require
    bridges to be redone to match a corrolary of lane width.

    The bridge should be a minimum of 14' unless it's 2 lanes then it should be 2 lanes high  and if it's 3 lanes, then make it 2.5 lanes high, until you peak out at 3 lanes clearance.

    we would get a lot of advantage from being able to move larger equipment around the country with less misery.

    i'd do something similiar in railroad tunnels.  Slowly start
    upgrading the clear spans so you can move taller stuff.

    •  Are you suggesting double-deck highways? (0+ / 0-)

      Upper lane be the express lanes, the bottom lanes be the local lanes??? I like it, but is it cost-effective?

      Or are you just asking for more bridge-clearance room overhead?

      "I did not have sex with that bridge"

      by Scottsdalian on Fri Jul 04, 2014 at 08:24:12 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  we need more clearance. (0+ / 0-)

        There is a lot of larger equipment getting moved.

        the old overhead clearance standard was set to 13'6 minimum because Ike asked his generals, what would be the largest military missile they could foresee in 1953.

        Texas sets all the modern bridges to 22', it lets you haul
        an oil drilling rig statewide without breaking  a sweat, and
        it lets you hump big wind turbines in larger pieces.

        If we had a nationwide 22' bridge standard, and trust me,
        it would take 25 years to get there. we could hump
        lots of big stuff.  Chemical reactor vessels, storage tanks,
        plant sections.  Modern refineries are built in modules,
        if you could make the modules now 16x16 cubes, it would
        really help in getting them setup.

        •  Sounds like an excellent idea. (0+ / 0-)

          I presume the roads will be engineered/built to carry this weight?

          "I did not have sex with that bridge"

          by Scottsdalian on Fri Jul 04, 2014 at 08:45:00 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  most of it's pretty fluffy (0+ / 0-)

            and the usual issue isn't total weight but axle load.

            http://bosstruck.co.uk/...

            and when it's real big it's travelling with escorts.

            Keep the travel speed down to 30 MPH, cross bridges at 5 MPH,  put multiple axles,  it's pretty tolerable.

            but trying to get something like that up on a sideroad to route around a low bridge?  Talk about a nightmare.

            http://kwes.images.worldnow.com/...

            •  Hope they aren't driving in daytime! (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              patbahn
              Keep the travel speed down to 30 MPH, cross bridges at 5 MPH,
              Nighttime travel at that speed would be way more efficient. Uninterrupted driving, won't fuck up too many roads that way by moving huge loads.

              "I did not have sex with that bridge"

              by Scottsdalian on Fri Jul 04, 2014 at 10:09:33 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  when you are moving oversize it's all permit (0+ / 0-)

                stuff.

                If it's a real problem, then they make you pay for state police escort.

                Typically a wide load past 10 feet requires escort vehicles
                and if you are 2 lanes, wide, you will have troopers with you.

                It's not cheap, but that's the way to do it.

                when you stack up too much traffic, then you pull over and let it past, then get rolling again

                Most of those big escort jobs roll from 11 PM to 5 AM.

                it's all state by state, and road by road, you need specialty
                firms to help you out.

  •  With the crappy returns ordinary savings make (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Juliann

    perhaps the President can issue an Executive Order (since we know that the House won't do anything constructive) to direct the Treasury Department to create Infrastructure Bonds, similar to Savings Bonds.  Then make sure that the bonds themselves are highly decorated pieces of "art" with tons of USA and Guns to draw in the gullible patriotic Teabaggers money.

    -9.88, -7.44 Social Security as is will be solvent until 2037, and the measures required to extend solvency beyond that are minor. -- Joe Conanson

    by wordene on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 01:05:15 PM PDT

  •  Also this... (0+ / 0-)

    In Colorado at least, some private companies now want to own the road--yes, someone really will "own" the damn road. I couldn't believe it's happening, much less a Democratic governor is ok with it. Please, check this out because it could be coming to you. This is another reason I suspect the Repubs don't want infrastructure spending.

    http://blogs.westword.com/...

  •  Republicans are waiting to get into the WH (0+ / 0-)

    and then propose all this work we need done now and then take credit for putting all those folks to work.

    "The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubt." Bertrand Russell I'm very certain that is true. 10−122

    by thestructureguy on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 02:36:34 PM PDT

  •  Republisquat Teastools (0+ / 0-)

    Republicans are the stools that keep on stinking.

  •  We have Proof.. #GOP want USA to Fail (0+ / 0-)

    YEP, We have more PROOF everyday #GOP #KOCHbots want #MiddleClass AMERICANS to become 3rd world PEONS to them. no cars no houses no jobs no unions no equality no roads no bridges no schools no PostOffice no net neutrality no womens rights no noting rights no civil rights
    ... UNLESS THEIR WHITE 'CHRISTIAN' Leaders say so.

    Proud to be part of the 21st Century Democratic Majority Party of the 3M's.. Multiracial, Multigender and MiddleClass

    by LOrion on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 04:52:41 PM PDT

  •  I listened to that interview and ... (0+ / 0-)
    That's an excellent summation of how ridiculous it is that Republicans are blocking infrastructure spending:
    you, not Obama, identified the Repubs as the problem as I recall.  I listened in vain hoping he would and he didn't.  He rarely blames the Repubs explicitly.  He referred to the ideology that prevents things getting done, but didn't say the Repub ideology.  

    When it comes to calling like it is, Obama is a pathetic, continuing disappointment.  One might think it would be a service to the American people to actually tell them who are making their lives worse and holding them back.  It's sickening how much of a break he gives the Repubs especially now that this is his swan song.  Actually, more like chicken cluck when you think of it.

    The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. Bertrand Russell

    by accumbens on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 04:53:27 PM PDT

    •  Maybe HRC should start bashing repubs. (0+ / 0-)

      Let her start campaigning now.

      If I want a Prez in 2016 who will take a baseball bat to the heads of the repub ("vast right-wing conspiracy"). I will be voting for Hillary. She frightens me! I would've luved seeing her grab Cantor by the balls and give him a good squeeze.

      I tried compromise in '08 and '12 by voting for Obama.

      Next time around - baseball bat time.

      Besides, my local Ace Hardware doesn't carry any pitchforks or torches.

      "I did not have sex with that bridge"

      by Scottsdalian on Fri Jul 04, 2014 at 08:32:10 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Too bad (0+ / 0-)

    Obama wasted his first two years trying to make Republicans like him.  He should have been bolder at the beginning but, instead, he lost the mandate he had.  It is too late for him now, he knows it, and his words are great but just too late.

    Not only do Republicans not respect him, but Democrats are also disappointed.

    Time for Obama to start working on the library; I'm sure he will have a great life after the White House.  Doubt that the rest of us will.

    President Obama needs to be more liberal.

    by jimgilliamv2 on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 05:04:08 PM PDT

    •  Lighten up, Francis: (0+ / 0-)
      Obama wasted his first two years trying to make Republicans like him
      A little history reminder here.....the World was in the midst of a global financial meltdown when Obama showed up in DC.

      Repubs, who has just decided to obstruct EVERYTHING this black president does, obstructed bailouts, financial rescue packages, etc.

      The world was engulfed in financial flames.

      The black guy had a ton of republican shit to clean up.....YESTERDAY.

      Remember?

      "I did not have sex with that bridge"

      by Scottsdalian on Fri Jul 04, 2014 at 08:37:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Asked for infrastructure spending @ 10% (0+ / 0-)

        the scale needed.

        .................expect us......................... FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

        by Roger Fox on Fri Jul 04, 2014 at 12:00:36 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  You're right. Thank the repubs for that flaccid (0+ / 0-)

          response.

          If you recall, Obama was fighting to keep police, firemen, teachers employed during meltdown.

          Local governments everywhere were slashing payrolls during the meltdown.

          Repub governors were nearly begging for Fed funding. But there was that 'black man' thing that toned down the begging and the repub guvs instead said "fuck you" to cops, firemen & teachers and forced Obama to come in and rescue their jobs.

          So yeah, you're right that infrastructure spending was abysmal. But at least acknowledge the existing realities of those hours and days.

          "I did not have sex with that bridge"

          by Scottsdalian on Fri Jul 04, 2014 at 12:49:42 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  The reality is the WH didnt want to appear to lose (0+ / 0-)

            so they never asked for what was really needed, and they continue to follow this credo well past "those hours and days" its now 5 years later and the WH still behaves as it did in 2009.

            So its obvious that the conditions of 2009 were not the reason the WH behaved in that manner, when the behavior has continued through the tenure to this day.

            .................expect us......................... FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

            by Roger Fox on Fri Jul 04, 2014 at 01:02:27 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  All this talk amounts to nothing. If the republ... (0+ / 0-)

    All this talk amounts to nothing. If the republicans refuse to look out for the interests of everyone, then they should loose their jobs, which should be working along side the Dems to make sure everyone can prosper. Hell! There shouldn't be two parties, there should only be people working to make sure this entire country is prosperous.

  •  This saddens me. (0+ / 0-)

    We have become so divided that even when a politician/government official makes an accurate statement, those of the opposing party will dispute it.

    Now, my bias is that I am a progressive Dem.  I am left of whatever radical left that you come from.

    I can only mourn for the ignorant, selfish, hateful, racist red necks who deny reality every day to their own detriment.

    I come from humble roots, but I was blessed with at least the minimal intelligence and social/monetary values to have prospered over the years.

    I have no horse in the current economic well being race.  I simply marvel at the stupidity of redneck teabaggers who shoot themselves in the foot.  I honestly wonder if it is really important to worry about their sorry azzes.

    Wish that it were otherwise, but if they want to contribute to the shallow end of the gene pool, then who am I to stop them.

    "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win". Mohandas K. Ghandi

    by Randolph the red nosed reindeer on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 05:06:16 PM PDT

  •  What is stopping Dems from drafting? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Scottsdalian, Roger Fox

    Besides the Rebublican blockage for actually voting or even debating, that is.

    But seriously, couldn't Democrats draft bills and policy ala Works Progress Act with a mission to rebuilding and build infrastructure?

    Then Obama could bully pulpit it and mid-term candidates could run on it - "ELECT ME FOR JOBS, FOR INFRASTRUCTURE, FOR THE FUTURE!"

    Having bills/policy drafts in hand would be alot better than just whining and moaning about the Just Say No squad.

    I don't think FDR waited very long for Congress to originate the policies and bills.

  •  Dear Mr. President, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sethtriggs

    They hate you, mainly because you're black.

    I know you know this, and I know you know that this do-nothing congress will continue to do nothing, because they are more concerned with hurting you than with serving their country and their constituents.

    You're stuck, and so are we. I don't envy your job. At all.

    Odds and ends about life in Japan: 1971wolfie.wordpress.com

    by Hatrax on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 08:50:51 PM PDT

  •  Needs to stop blaming "congress" (0+ / 0-)

    and put the blame where it belongs:  Congressional Republicans.

    When the president blames "congress," it gives the media a stepping stone to blame "both sides" in congress.  

    "When I was an alien, cultures weren't opinions" ~ Kurt Cobain, Territorial Pissings

    by Subterranean on Fri Jul 04, 2014 at 12:47:59 AM PDT

  •  Racism coupled with.... (0+ / 0-)

    hefty 'financial incentives' as offered by Koch-financed super PACS is a potent cocktail....
    Difficult for congressional republicans to resist.
    The American people, our infrastructure, financial and environmental future be damned.
    We didn't arrive at this place overnight,and reclaiming the country, sanity will also not be achieved overnight...
    In fact it will require many election cycles, the better part of a  generation.
    It must start this November.
    We must get out the vote as if our lives depended on it, which actually really is the case.

  •  What do corporate taxes have to do with (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Roger Fox

    infrastructure spending? Why are the Dems torpedoing any chance of infrastructure spending by insisting on increased taxes?

    Surely, they must understand that the Govt's budget does not work like a household budget. Households must earn or borrow money before they can spend, but the Govt issues the dollar, meaning they spend simply by crediting bank accounts on the Fed's computer.

    Is inflation too high? Do we need to remove excess money from the economy before we spend on infrastructure because the economy is overheating? Last time I checked, we are at negative growth for the first half of 2014 (otherwise known as a recession).

    "The Earth is my country and Science my religion" Christiaan Huygens. The gold standard ended on August 15, 1971, its time we start acting like it. If we can afford full employment killing Germans, we can afford full employment during peace-time.

    by Auburn Parks on Fri Jul 04, 2014 at 06:55:43 AM PDT

  •  Infrastructure is the key to the future (0+ / 0-)

    economic well-being of any culture. To deliberately ignore the neccesity of infastructual mainainance is sabotage.

    43 House Republicans want to sue Barack Obama for being President.

    by Geardup on Fri Jul 04, 2014 at 08:36:14 AM PDT

Meteor Blades, Duckman GR, Angie in WA State, Bill in Portland Maine, oofer, mwm341, mimi, newjeffct, Fabienne, donna in evanston, eeff, polecat, MarkInSanFran, dpeifer1949, Doctor Who, onig, rasbobbo, psnyder, NYFM, lcrp, Brian82, zerelda, mungley, Sybil Liberty, Armand451, bahaba, Gowrie Gal, Ohkwai, marina, ichibon, ChemBob, Gary Norton, fixxit, dansk47, Steve in Urbana, Savvy813, bunsk, Alan Arizona, Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse, DrSpalding, cookseytalbott, fou, Lefty Coaster, MBNYC, AllDemsOnBoard, markthshark, out of left field, dotsright, Cronesense, camlbacker, ksp, ColoTim, Matt Z, Back In Blue, gchaucer2, Ralphdog, MKinTN, mconvente, Roger Fox, JeffW, GAS, OleHippieChick, NewDealer, smrichmond, elwior, Calamity Jean, pamelabrown, home solar, Karen Hedwig Backman, JamieG from Md, billybam, Diogenes2008, maggiejean, Sun dog, pileta, bfitzinAR, papahaha, ArthurPoet, GWinkler, jfromga, Tommymac, nocynicism, SmartRat, LOrion, Polly Syllabic, renzo capetti, gosoxataboy, ericlewis0, science nerd, nosleep4u, slice, Front Toward Enemy, I love OCD, Liberal Capitalist, slowbutsure, implicate order, vahana, Mr MadAsHell, FarWestGirl, asterkitty, Mr Raymond Luxury Yacht, Hatrax, Haf2Read, cyberpuggy, thomask, BarackStarObama, tardis10, RMForbes, poliwrangler, VTCC73, ratcityreprobate, ParkRanger, allergywoman, Azazello, Laurel in CA, tweeternik, IndieGuy, Eric Nelson, a2nite, Deep Texan, Steve Masover, northstarbarn, jan4insight, belinda ridgewood, doroma, arizonablue, AverageJoe42, stvnjon, Glen The Plumber, Greenfinches, nomandates, Linda1961, remembrance, HedwigKos, unfangus, unkadan, Patango, starduster, skepticalcitizen, Dodgerdog1, eagleray, khanenburg, Will Stark, Lennykat, hbk, benamery21, CJB2012, CentralCoaster, BMScott, BlueDuPage, coyote66, DaveElder, spiritdem

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site