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.
Tax cuts are unfunded by definition. That's why they cause government revenue to decline.
Quote:
Originally Posted by texdav
Its the spending they did and now the democrats are tripling in one year.
The deficits have resulted from major declines in revenue resulting from the Great Bush Recession, and from emergency spending made necessary by the Great Bush Recession. In the two annual budgets he has prepared to date, Obama's increases in non-emergency spending have been at rates of 2-3.5%. That's less than half of the rate of growth in spending that Bush averaged. Like Clinton, Obama is a fiscal moderate when the times will allow him to be.
Tax cuts are unfunded by definition. That's why they cause government revenue to decline.
The deficits have resulted from major declines in revenue resulting from the Great Bush Recession, and from emergency spending made necessary by the Great Bush Recession. In the two annual budgets he has prepared to date, Obama's increases in non-emergency spending have been at rates of 2-3.5%. That's less than half of the rate of growth in spending that Bush averaged. Like Clinton, Obama is a fiscal moderate when the times will allow him to be.
You must be Jimmy Carter revisted, where up is down, left is right and forward is backward.
Nobody is swallowing your Kool Aid anymore, so you might was well stop embarrasing yourself.
It varies. Last week, there was no mucho discussion forum. Mucho, mucho work. People also sometimes underestimate the degree to which technology has made time and place irrelevant to intellectual work, and some who don't have much or any of it can't understand the impact of having control over your own hours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melvin.George
I worked 41 years for Union Carbide/Martin Marietta and retired in 1993 when I was 59. Damn it's good to be clear of all that obstruction.
I'm coming up on forty. My real problem is I still love the work and the people. But it's getting to where I just can't do the pace any more. I'm no John Paul Stevens, I'm afraid...
Ultimately, it is Congress that spends money, not Presidents. Reagan had little to do with the vast spending of his Democratic Congress. And Clinton had little to do with the Republican Congress under his watch. A good President is a veto stamp, a bad President is a rubber stamp.
EEEXXXXAAAACCCCCTTTLLLLLYYYY.
Hey Kool-Aid Chugging, Obama, Reid, Pelosi (Triad of Gluttonous Government) supporters, the truth is before you courtesy of irspow.
Yeah, there are those who thought he meant even state secrets would be out in the open. Then there are those who knew he didn't mean that, but feign otherwise in cheap partisan discourse. The simple facts are that there is a night-and-day difference in the openness of this administration as compared to the last one. No one complained that Bush was on TV all the time (except maybe when "clearing brush" at "the ranch"). There weren't articles about differences or nuances in contemporaneous staff reports and statements because there weren't any contemporaneous staff reports and statements. There wasn't nearly the same WH website either, and certainly no Iraq.gov website where you could access uncensored information on the progress being made in that endeavor. About the only thing really that the Bushies did a good job of making public was Valerie Plame...
And another pitcher of grape Kool Aid goes down the gullet of the naive, ill-informed supporters of the Triad of Gluttonous Government (Obama, Reid, Pelosi).
Actually, Plame was not an operative needing cover, and during the time she, she was outed by her Finace.
So get a fresh glass of ice, and guzzle some more of Guyana Grape.
You must be Jimmy Carter revisted, where up is down, left is right and forward is backward. Nobody is swallowing your Kool Aid anymore, so you might was well stop embarrasing yourself.
Feel free to dispute anything I've said if you can. Of course you can't, first because you wouldn't know where or how to go about it, and second because if you did, all you would actually find was the very same numbers that prompted me to say what I did to begin with. You're kind of SOL on this one, I would say...
It's not who benefits...it's future generations of Americans who will be around when the thing crashes.
It's what I was saying before. I was a man who worked and voted for the Republican party for the first two thirds of my life. Then they stood for small government, balanced budgets and individual rights. After they began to cut tax rates, increase spending and borrow the difference from Japan, Canada and China I made up my mind to vote against them. I'll never vote Republican in a national election again as long as I live. They support corporations and the wealthy...nothing else.
Sorry to hear your vision has deteriorated so much over the years.
When money is taxed away (from anyone), it is not available for legitimate economic purposes. Instead, it is squandered on worthless things that only enrich the special interests of the party running Congress. I oppose NOT taxing the rich at much higher rates than the poor, not because I want to protect them, but because 1. It is unfair to do so - denies their equal protection under the law to have higher rates for some, and not for others, and 2. Keeping the money in the economy is far better for America.
EEEXXXXAAAACCCCCTTTLLLLLYYYY. Hey Kool-Aid Chugging, Obama, Reid, Pelosi (Triad of Gluttonous Government) supporters, the truth is before you courtesy of irspow.
The President sets the agenda. He writes the Budget and transmits it to Congress. Then they haggle over it for some months until they end up passing authorization and appropriation bills that provide very nearly what the President asked for. Maybe you could get some low-paid intern job in your Congressman's office and come learn how this all works for yourself. I'm serious if you're a young one. You'll be broke the whole time your here, but interning is one of the most enlightening and enriching things a young person can take on. Food for thought...
Actually, Plame was not an operative needing cover, and during the time she, she was outed by her Finace.
She was very much under non-official cover, and blowing that cost the CIA her further services and also Brewster Jennings, one of its more important and successful front companies. Many dozens of lives were put in jeopardy by that recklessness, including those of US handlers and the foreign agents they were working with. An anonymous star representing a death in the line of duty went up at CIA headquarters a few months after Plame's cover was blown. Nothing says it was related. Nothing says it wasn't.
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.
