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.
Both sides are pandering to the voters, telling us what we want to hear. We worse than Greece in the end becuause at least they took some action, all we have accomplished was to increase the deficit while promising spending cuts in the future.
David Stockman indicated someting to the effect of you could lock them in a room under penalty of death and they still couldn't come up with any meaningful tax cuts, I tend to agree with his assessment.
Why doesn't either party talk about cutting spending to help pay down the deficit?
Did we really need to send billions to Haiti,Chilie, Packistan, Israel and about a hundred other countries?
Do we really need to pay for the cars our elected reps drive given that they are paid 6 figure salaries?
The list of pork is endless as is the waste. Instead they focus on even more forms of waste.
Why doesn't either party talk about cutting spending to help pay down the deficit?
Did we really need to send billions to Haiti,Chilie, Packistan, Israel and about a hundred other countries?
Do we really need to pay for the cars our elected reps drive given that they are paid 6 figure salaries?
The list of pork is endless as is the waste. Instead they focus on even more forms of waste.
The answer to all of your questions is "no the politicians didn't need to spend OUR money that way!"
History isn't kind to your assessment.
Reagan was a "true" conservative and yet he tripled the deficits and then some. Bush senior continued this. The liberal/moderate did the opposite and got the deficit under control. The Conservatives under junior reversed the gains under Clinton and quickly redistributed the gains to the wealthy.
It would seem your dear Conservatives are simply not what you think they are. While you may agree with some stand they have, they simply do not cut spending in anyway. It would seem if you wanted that end you would run to the left as fast as possible.
let's see. In each of his first two years Obama tripled the deficit of Bush's last budget. We went from a national debt of a little over 9 trillion when Bush left office to now 14 trillion. And you think this is responsible stewardship of our nation's finances?
History isn't kind to your assessment.
Reagan was a "true" conservative and yet he tripled the deficits and then some. Bush senior continued this. The liberal/moderate did the opposite and got the deficit under control. The Conservatives under junior reversed the gains under Clinton and quickly redistributed the gains to the wealthy.
It would seem your dear Conservatives are simply not what you think they are. While you may agree with some stand they have, they simply do not cut spending in anyway. It would seem if you wanted that end you would run to the left as fast as possible.
In regards to your shot against Reagan, a couple points. First, every time a Republican follows a Democrat into the White House he has to rebuild the armed forces decimated by his predecessor. Carter gutted the defense budget, as did Clinton, with the result the military services suffered, as did our ability to defend ourselves. And that build up costs money.
The second point is that people don't mind deficit spending if it achieves the purposes to which the money is applied. Case in point: World War II. We won. The money was well-spent. Another example: the Cold War. We won. Reagan buried the Soviets with his arms build up. Money well-spent.
Why are you asking about Republicans justifying deficit spending? The Democratic deficit spending is 5 times as high as Republicans
Because the Republicans #1 issue is cutting the amount of federal revenues. It's good for the average man's paycheck - but of course the only result is going to be running the government into the ground.
I understand Republicans forcing taxes really low, but I don't get why they could care less about cutting spending.
You can't have one without the other. They just pander (well everyone does). Keep all the taxes really low, but then spend all you want to keep your voters happy.
Because the Republicans #1 issue is cutting the amount of federal revenues. It's good for the average man's paycheck - but of course the only result is going to be running the government into the ground.
I understand Republicans forcing taxes really low, but I don't get why they could care less about cutting spending.
You can't have one without the other. They just pander (well everyone does). Keep all the taxes really low, but then spend all you want to keep your voters happy.
Both parties told the voters exactly what they wanted to hear, lower SS payroll tax, keep the current tax brackets, more unemployment insurance all good news right. Unfortunately all this added a few hundred Billion onto the ever increasing deficit which means more borrowing. We are spending money we don't have and it is making our country weaker.
Still waiting to hear any meaningful spending cuts proposed by either side.
Talk to your Dems, they know nothing about Spending right! Don't think they could write a book, on being Spendthrift.
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.
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.
