U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-10-2012, 09:00 AM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,054 posts, read 28,285,210 times
Reputation: 7824

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
I'm hoping Congress cuts the **** out of the budget proposals presented by Obama in order cut balance the budget, but you'd be whining and crying like a little baby if that happened.
Actually I have no problem with letting the Bush tax cuts expire and cutting the budget across the board, especially with bloated programs like military spending. But when you mention cuts to the military budgets, the Cons begin to cry and act like we are taking away their favorite toy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-10-2012, 09:22 AM
 
30,902 posts, read 24,253,945 times
Reputation: 17792
Quote:
Originally Posted by pch1013 View Post
The tax increases and spending cuts in the "fiscal cliff" scenario, if they go through unchanged (which they will, since Boehner & Co. will never compromise on taxes), will cut the deficit to 1% of GDP by 2017 and will cut $7T from the cumulative deficit over the next decade.

If you're really serious about debt reduction, you will welcome this. Austerity is good, right?
so you like raising taxes in a soft economy? every time that has happened it has been a failure, witness the 1930s when taxes were raised several times and each time the economy got WORSE not better. why? because with higher taxes, people buy less because they have LESS money to spend. also with higher taxes come higher prices, and since the people are going to have less money to spend, they are going to be buying even less than they did before.

Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Lexus View Post
I will look back at the last 20 years and understand that Republicans either created the record deficit from a surplus or worsened the debt by their obstructionist policies.

It is also important to note that Republicans only care about the deficit when a Democrat is in the White House. In other words, when Bush was running up the deficit, Pubs were silent. Just shameful and pathetic.
the record deficits have come under obamas watch, not bush43s, sorry but you fail on that count. as for the "obstructionist" policies of the republicans, up to 2010 the republcans couldnt block anything the democrats wanted to do without help from democrats. after that it wasnt the republicans that were blocking things, is was one democrat in the senate, that being harry reid. you might want to do some research instead of drinking the left wing kool-aid.

as to being silent during the bush years, not true, in fact many of us republicans complained, but we also noticed that from 2001 to 2006 the deficits DROPPED from just over $400 billion to $160 billion. after that they started going back up again because the democrats took back control of congress.

as for the 2009 deficit, about half belongs to bush the other half belongs to obama, remember it was obama that signed the stimulus bill of $862 billion, and it was obama that signed the $410 billion omnibus bill.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2012, 09:25 AM
 
Location: Out in the Badlands
10,397 posts, read 8,356,451 times
Reputation: 7681
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Obamas own budget projections show we'll exceed $20T on his watch. Will you be whining 10x as much as you did under Bushs $250B yearly deficits? Or will you be celebrating all of the handouts he gave everyone while trying to place blame elsewhere?

You guys should be so proud.. $12T projected debt added in only 8 years.. Wow.. Lets go for more!!!
They don't know or care anything of Economics.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2012, 09:35 AM
 
Location: Miami, FL
58,518 posts, read 31,902,789 times
Reputation: 9412
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Obamas own budget projections show we'll exceed $20T on his watch. Will you be whining 10x as much as you did under Bushs $250B yearly deficits? Or will you be celebrating all of the handouts he gave everyone while trying to place blame elsewhere?

You guys should be so proud.. $12T projected debt added in only 8 years.. Wow.. Lets go for more!!!
What's a couple of "T"s between friends?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2012, 10:25 AM
 
1,512 posts, read 1,527,107 times
Reputation: 578
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
What the hell are you talking about?
I think that this Boeing defense layoff illustrates my point. Without the Republicans in power, military directed fascism is receding. Military fascism was what Romney's proposed military funding increase was about.

Quote:
The Democrats are the ones who engineered social engineering...
That's true, except for the phrase "are the ones", which mistakenly limits social engineering to Dems.

Seriously: the Republicans are the social engineers/eugenicists, and the Democrats are reactionaries to social engineering. This realization is the fundamental motivation for my shift from Right to Left, as a review of my post history will reveal.

It is the Republicans who support governmental recognition of marriage but limit to whom it may be granted.

It is the Republicans who opposed gays in the military, which gave to heterosexuals a financial advantage.

It is the Republicans who oppose corporations justifying their hiring practices, which gives a huge advantage to white people.

It is the Republicans who expand the prison system, which favors white people.

It is the Republicans who pour money into the economy through the military, which subsidizes the pay of engineers and electronics companies, which is a market manipulation in favor of those willing to participate in defrauding taxpayers.

It is the Republicans who are resisting the people's desire for decriminalized cannabis.

Quote:
...and you can't inject money into the country without first removing it. Republicans havent had control of Congress for decades...
You can inject money without removing it; that's what the Republicans did under Bush. And though the Republicans haven't had sufficient power for six years to do anything more than interfere with Democrats, I think that it's telling that the runner-up to the presidential nominee, Santorum, was part of the despicable, over-bearing, tyrannical reach of the Republicans into the Schiavo family and Bush's spending spree. And the nominee wanted to "reduce discretionary spending" except to increase military discretionary spending.


Didn't you listen to what Ron Paul was saying?

Last edited by The Homogenizer; 11-10-2012 at 10:37 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2012, 10:36 AM
 
76 posts, read 36,030 times
Reputation: 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Obamas own budget projections show we'll exceed $20T on his watch. Will you be whining 10x as much as you did under Bushs $250B yearly deficits? Or will you be celebrating all of the handouts he gave everyone while trying to place blame elsewhere?

You guys should be so proud.. $12T projected debt added in only 8 years.. Wow.. Lets go for more!!!
More double down. I guess some people never learn. Obama is not what you have tried to make him for the last four years,but please continue to help us. It can get rough on the front lines so we appreciate the support.

This attitude is what needs to go GOP if you want to come back.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2012, 11:45 AM
 
69,372 posts, read 53,632,414 times
Reputation: 9357
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
Actually I have no problem with letting the Bush tax cuts expire and cutting the budget across the board, especially with bloated programs like military spending. But when you mention cuts to the military budgets, the Cons begin to cry and act like we are taking away their favorite toy.
The Bush tax cuts increased revenues, so why would you expect more revenues by doing the opposite reaction? Its like you think people live in a vacuum. Do you have any idea how the real world works because it sure in hell doesnt sound like it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2012, 11:52 AM
 
Location: World
3,148 posts, read 3,214,015 times
Reputation: 2070
We can reduce deficit by removing Bush-era tax cuts for super-rich. Warren Buffet and Bill Gates do not need tax-cuts. We can also reduce deficit by reducing Defense budget. Remember-it was Bush and Cheney who wanted to help Oil companies and defense contractors by attacking Iraq. That useless war cost us trillions of dollars.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2012, 02:42 PM
 
69,372 posts, read 53,632,414 times
Reputation: 9357
Quote:
Originally Posted by munna21977 View Post
We can reduce deficit by removing Bush-era tax cuts for super-rich. Warren Buffet and Bill Gates do not need tax-cuts. We can also reduce deficit by reducing Defense budget. Remember-it was Bush and Cheney who wanted to help Oil companies and defense contractors by attacking Iraq. That useless war cost us trillions of dollars.
Here is the stupidity of the average american on display for all to see.

Warren Buffet and Bill Gates would not be affected if you increased the tax rate to 100%.. THEY HAVE WEALTH, NOT INCOME. Warren Buffet pays himself $100K a year for a reason...

Furthermore, there is a reason they donated all of their wealth to charity upon their death.. Its to keep the government, and people like you, from thinking its yours..

ITS NOT...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-10-2012, 03:30 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,054 posts, read 28,285,210 times
Reputation: 7824
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
The Bush tax cuts increased revenues, so why would you expect more revenues by doing the opposite reaction? Its like you think people live in a vacuum. Do you have any idea how the real world works because it sure in hell doesnt sound like it.
False, the bush tax cuts did not increase revenues, the housing bubble and short term, careless spending increased the revenues. I thought you wanted to reduce the debt? If you take in less money how do you pay down more of what you owe? It is simple economics.

Also you gave a vague example of what you would cut. It is easier to say one should cut just about everything than it is to say specifically what you would cut and how much.

Besides, getting rid of the Bush tax cuts would just return us to Clinton era taxes and the economy looked pretty good then. You Cons act like the government is still taking over 50% of your income.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top