Keystone Pipeline

[carlfense]

I would say at this point neither party has a firm grasp of reality. But hey.

What's the Democratic equivalent of pretending like Keystone XL is a monumentally important "jobs bill"?

[carlfense]

 

I don't get why we're suddenly talking about a fictional novel in this thread.

 

I'm not hung up on the word 'precedent' because wrong is wrong whether this is the first or the 81st time this has happened, but I'd be genuinely interested to know if this has happened before, that a foreign national corporation has been able to successfully use Eminent Domain against U.S. citizens and their property.

 

 

 

EDIT - I typed this while the above response was being sent. Ignore my first statement. Still would be interested in knowing the answer to the last part, though.

According to that Forbes article Transcanada has used eminent domain in 2% of land acquisition.

 

In an email after the publication of this article, TransCanada said it has reached voluntary agreements to secure 100% of the private easements required for the pipeline in Montana and South Dakota. It has 76% of the easements required for the route in Nebraska, it said. In general, the company said it has had to use eminent domain with only 2% of landowners.

 

Does "voluntary agreements" include the letters that they sent to landowners saying that they can accept Transcanada's "offer" or they will take the land through the courts?

 

If so, I suppose that we could say that people voluntarily agree to give money to muggers every day.

[NUpolo8]

 

I would say at this point neither party has a firm grasp of reality. But hey.

 

What's the Democratic equivalent of pretending like Keystone XL is a monumentally important "jobs bill"?

I was speaking more to the premise of their main platforms not being founded in reality. Which they are not. Gratis post high school education, for example.

[carlfense]

 

 

I would say at this point neither party has a firm grasp of reality. But hey.

What's the Democratic equivalent of pretending like Keystone XL is a monumentally important "jobs bill"?

 

I was speaking more to the premise of their main platforms not being founded in reality. Which they are not. Gratis post high school education, for example.

 

I don't know . . . the whole two years paid tuition after high school seems a hell of a lot more reality based than acting like 35 permanent jobs would energize the American economy.

[NUpolo8]

 

 

 

I would say at this point neither party has a firm grasp of reality. But hey.

What's the Democratic equivalent of pretending like Keystone XL is a monumentally important "jobs bill"?

I was speaking more to the premise of their main platforms not being founded in reality. Which they are not. Gratis post high school education, for example.

I don't know . . . the whole two years paid tuition after high school seems a hell of a lot more reality based than acting like 35 permanent jobs would energize the American economy.

Your opinion. Because I'm damn sure someone's going to be paying for that education. Fundamental economic lessons dictate nothing is free.

 

Off topic, but I feel it's important that if it's reality we demand, admission that both sides are failing miserably at it.

[carlfense]

 

 

 

 

I would say at this point neither party has a firm grasp of reality. But hey.

What's the Democratic equivalent of pretending like Keystone XL is a monumentally important "jobs bill"?

I was speaking more to the premise of their main platforms not being founded in reality. Which they are not. Gratis post high school education, for example.

I don't know . . . the whole two years paid tuition after high school seems a hell of a lot more reality based than acting like 35 permanent jobs would energize the American economy.

Your opinion. Because I'm damn sure someone's going to be paying for that education. Fundamental economic lessons dictate nothing is free.

I tried to carefully avoid calling it "free."

 

Wonder how many kids we could put through school if we ended the F35 boondoggle?

[NUpolo8]

 

 

 

 

 

I would say at this point neither party has a firm grasp of reality. But hey.

 

What's the Democratic equivalent of pretending like Keystone XL is a monumentally important "jobs bill"?

I was speaking more to the premise of their main platforms not being founded in reality. Which they are not. Gratis post high school education, for example.

I don't know . . . the whole two years paid tuition after high school seems a hell of a lot more reality based than acting like 35 permanent jobs would energize the American economy.

Your opinion. Because I'm damn sure someone's going to be paying for that education. Fundamental economic lessons dictate nothing is free.

I tried to carefully avoid calling it "free."

 

Wonder how many kids we could put through school if we ended the F35 boondoggle?

I would hope zero. Our government has a pretty crappy history of money ending up in good places when it's allocated for education.

[Abdullah the Butcher]

 

 

 

 

 

I would say at this point neither party has a firm grasp of reality. But hey.

 

What's the Democratic equivalent of pretending like Keystone XL is a monumentally important "jobs bill"?

I was speaking more to the premise of their main platforms not being founded in reality. Which they are not. Gratis post high school education, for example.

I don't know . . . the whole two years paid tuition after high school seems a hell of a lot more reality based than acting like 35 permanent jobs would energize the American economy.

Your opinion. Because I'm damn sure someone's going to be paying for that education. Fundamental economic lessons dictate nothing is free.

I tried to carefully avoid calling it "free."

 

Wonder how many kids we could put through school if we ended the F35 boondoggle?

 

I'm sure you smart people will correct me but isn't Obama screwing over college savings plans in order to help the community college plan?

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/01/20/heres-what-you-need-to-know-about-obamas-new-plan-to-help-families-afford-college/

 

 

Strip away 529 college savings plan benefits

 

In order to expand education tax credits, President Obama would roll back tax breaks on one of the most popular college savings plans. If the president has his way, families would no longer be able to withdraw earnings from 529 plans without paying taxes on them.

 

The advantage to 529 plans, named for a section of the tax code, is that families can invest through these accounts without the earnings being taxed as long as the funds are used to pay for college expenses. President Obama would treat the earnings on new contributions to 529 plans as ordinary income subject to taxes, stripping away a key benefit of the savings plans.

 

Families could still defer paying taxes on the plans as the earnings grow, but that ends once they start drawing down the account, according to the White House. Earnings will be treated as student income, which would be taxed at a lower rate, but that could hurt a student's chances of receiving financial aid.

[carlfense]

I'm sure you smart people will correct me but isn't Obama screwing over college savings plans in order to help the community college plan?

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/01/20/heres-what-you-need-to-know-about-obamas-new-plan-to-help-families-afford-college/

 

 

 

Strip away 529 college savings plan benefits

 

In order to expand education tax credits, President Obama would roll back tax breaks on one of the most popular college savings plans. If the president has his way, families would no longer be able to withdraw earnings from 529 plans without paying taxes on them.

 

The advantage to 529 plans, named for a section of the tax code, is that families can invest through these accounts without the earnings being taxed as long as the funds are used to pay for college expenses. President Obama would treat the earnings on new contributions to 529 plans as ordinary income subject to taxes, stripping away a key benefit of the savings plans.

 

Families could still defer paying taxes on the plans as the earnings grow, but that ends once they start drawing down the account, according to the White House. Earnings will be treated as student income, which would be taxed at a lower rate, but that could hurt a student's chances of receiving financial aid.

 

Obama is foolishly proposing to pay for it. These things are a lot easier if you just pretend they are free.

 

The 529 savings plans are sometimes considered to be tax shelters for the wealthy; the less than 3 percent of families that have them have a median income of $142,400 a year. But eliminating the central tax benefit of the plan could lead more families to take on more debt to pay for college.

[NUpolo8]

 

I'm sure you smart people will correct me but isn't Obama screwing over college savings plans in order to help the community college plan?http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/01/20/heres-what-you-need-to-know-about-obamas-new-plan-to-help-families-afford-college/

Strip away 529 college savings plan benefitsIn order to expand education tax credits, President Obama would roll back tax breaks on one of the most popular college savings plans. If the president has his way, families would no longer be able to withdraw earnings from 529 plans without paying taxes on them.The advantage to 529 plans, named for a section of the tax code, is that families can invest through these accounts without the earnings being taxed as long as the funds are used to pay for college expenses. President Obama would treat the earnings on new contributions to 529 plans as ordinary income subject to taxes, stripping away a key benefit of the savings plans.Families could still defer paying taxes on the plans as the earnings grow, but that ends once they start drawing down the account, according to the White House. Earnings will be treated as student income, which would be taxed at a lower rate, but that could hurt a student's chances of receiving financial aid.

Obama is foolishly proposing to pay for it. These things are a lot easier if you just pretend they are free.

The 529 savings plans are sometimes considered to be tax shelters for the wealthy; the less than 3 percent of families that have them have a median income of $142,400 a year. But eliminating the central tax benefit of the plan could lead more families to take on more debt to pay for college.

Obama has called it "free" a great many times. Just taking the man at his word, as some here are with people backing the keystone project as "job creation"

[carlfense]

 

 

I'm sure you smart people will correct me but isn't Obama screwing over college savings plans in order to help the community college plan?http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/01/20/heres-what-you-need-to-know-about-obamas-new-plan-to-help-families-afford-college/

Strip away 529 college savings plan benefitsIn order to expand education tax credits, President Obama would roll back tax breaks on one of the most popular college savings plans. If the president has his way, families would no longer be able to withdraw earnings from 529 plans without paying taxes on them.The advantage to 529 plans, named for a section of the tax code, is that families can invest through these accounts without the earnings being taxed as long as the funds are used to pay for college expenses. President Obama would treat the earnings on new contributions to 529 plans as ordinary income subject to taxes, stripping away a key benefit of the savings plans.Families could still defer paying taxes on the plans as the earnings grow, but that ends once they start drawing down the account, according to the White House. Earnings will be treated as student income, which would be taxed at a lower rate, but that could hurt a student's chances of receiving financial aid.

 

Obama is foolishly proposing to pay for it. These things are a lot easier if you just pretend they are free.

The 529 savings plans are sometimes considered to be tax shelters for the wealthy; the less than 3 percent of families that have them have a median income of $142,400 a year. But eliminating the central tax benefit of the plan could lead more families to take on more debt to pay for college.

 

Obama has called it "free" a great many times. Just taking the man at his word, as some here are with people backing the keystone project as "job creation"

 

But his proposal includes a budget neutral way to fund it, correct?

[NUpolo8]

 

 

 

I'm sure you smart people will correct me but isn't Obama screwing over college savings plans in order to help the community college plan?http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/01/20/heres-what-you-need-to-know-about-obamas-new-plan-to-help-families-afford-college/

Strip away 529 college savings plan benefitsIn order to expand education tax credits, President Obama would roll back tax breaks on one of the most popular college savings plans. If the president has his way, families would no longer be able to withdraw earnings from 529 plans without paying taxes on them.The advantage to 529 plans, named for a section of the tax code, is that families can invest through these accounts without the earnings being taxed as long as the funds are used to pay for college expenses. President Obama would treat the earnings on new contributions to 529 plans as ordinary income subject to taxes, stripping away a key benefit of the savings plans.Families could still defer paying taxes on the plans as the earnings grow, but that ends once they start drawing down the account, according to the White House. Earnings will be treated as student income, which would be taxed at a lower rate, but that could hurt a student's chances of receiving financial aid.

Obama is foolishly proposing to pay for it. These things are a lot easier if you just pretend they are free.

The 529 savings plans are sometimes considered to be tax shelters for the wealthy; the less than 3 percent of families that have them have a median income of $142,400 a year. But eliminating the central tax benefit of the plan could lead more families to take on more debt to pay for college.

Obama has called it "free" a great many times. Just taking the man at his word, as some here are with people backing the keystone project as "job creation"

But his proposal includes a budget neutral way to fund it, correct?

Boy there's a meaningless phrase, "budget neutral".

 

According to that article, which obviously isn't gospel, sure, it's not an added expenditure, but it appears to take away from households earning more than $100000 and funneling it elsewhere.

 

I don't think I want the Keystone XL project moved ahead btw.

[carlfense]

Boy there's a meaningless phrase, "budget neutral".

Meaningless unless it isn't budget neutral . . . and then it's characterized as exploding the deficit, "THE DEBT!!," irresponsible spending, and "we need to tighten the belt".

 

According to that article, which obviously isn't gospel, sure, it's not an added expenditure, but it appears to take away from households earning more than $100000 and funneling it elsewhere.

Yep. Boogeyman aside . . . I'm not sure how people can look at stagnating middle and lower class wages coinciding with the incredible gains made by the wealthiest Americans and conclude that we don't need wealth redistribution. In fact, take the government and the big, mean, scary phrases out of it and I'd bet that most Republicans would agree.

 

I don't think I want the Keystone XL project moved ahead btw.

Frankly, I don't think that the GOP does either. It's far more valuable as cover for the fact that they don't have an economic plan or a jobs plan than it is as an actual infrastructure project. When it's approved they will have to come up with a real plan or a new distraction.

[NUpolo8]

Boy there's a meaningless phrase, "budget neutral".

Meaningless unless it isn't budget neutral . . . and then it's characterized as exploding the deficit, "THE DEBT!!," irresponsible spending, and "we need to tighten the belt".

 

No it's pretty meaningless. I could rob five banks and launder the money into my business, I'd increase revenue in my business in a budget neutral manner, but it's still not a good thing.

[carlfense]

No it's pretty meaningless. I could rob five banks and launder the money into my business, I'd increase revenue in my business in a budget neutral manner, but it's still not a good thing.

. . . uh . . . yeah. I don't think that's comparable.