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.
But again - none of these things have anything to do with the stimulus which hasn't all been spent and wasn't all spent in the first year. your original premise is still not correct.
my premise isn't all about the stimulus. the stimulus was just one of the many pieces of spending that increased the baseline. it was a mere tiny example that people may think "we spent a lot of money to boost the economy and it was my expectation that we would probably spend less after that" but clearly that didn't happen. of course, someone that supports big government will come up with great reasons why the spending didn't drop down. that is expected. you want to keep asking more questions and asking other people to dig deeper but that's not necessary. the spending keeps growing, that's all that really matters.
you want to spend money to repair bridges and roads? ok, but if you spend $100 billion to repair all the roads in new jersey; the year after all that work is done you will not see spending reduced afterwards. when expenses go away, politicians always have other people paying them off to find other places to spend that money that is now available.
I don't want to keep reading your post since both things you started with were wrong.
I didn't say it was impossible for those 3 things to make the difference. I said they don't. none of those 3 things went up by 31% over the timeframe. I added that including the military was silly since the military spending is discretionary and not mandatory. so that's corrupt spending and not based on automatic increases for promised benefits like medicare and social security (though those program could also be a part of the problem if politicians modify them to add cost).
I don't blame Obama alone. the premise is that government doesn't cut spending. spending didn't go down under bush either. politicians don't get bribed to cut spending. one problem with you guys is its all about defending Obama and not recognizing that the problem is a government one. it doesn't matter which party.
By all means continue to not read my posts in full and make statements proving the fact that you didn't if that is your goal.
you called out bradykp with the following:
Quote:
you are a master of the bs.
2011 United States federal budget – $3.8 trillion (submitted 2010 by President Obama)
2010 United States federal budget – $3.6 trillion (submitted 2009 by President Obama)
2009 United States federal budget – $3.1 trillion (submitted 2008 by President Bush)
2008 United States federal budget – $2.9 trillion (submitted 2007 by President Bush)
so from 2008 to 2011, our federal government's spending increased by $900 billion or 31% primarily because of increases in medicare, social security and defense?
I responded by pointing out spending did not increase by 31% but merely 20% and your statement indicated you did not believe that the increase could possibly be the result of primarily medicare, social security and defense spending. I showed, with facts taken from CBO reports, that these in fact did make up almost all of the increase in spending over those four years. It was pointed out that the stimulus bill did not spend all of its money in one year yet you continue to ignore that fact. If you do not believe it please look here on page 8. It gives a full break down of outlays and negative inflows as a result of the stimulus package. I also pointed out that a major reason for elevated spending continuing is the automatic stabilizers built into the economy that continue to impact the budget to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars. Yet you chose to ignore this as well.
I stated how I read your posts and if i am in fact incorrect in seeing you as an Obama basher than I sincerely apologize but like it or not it is not difficult to pick that up from your posts
I also pointed out why military spending has increased, I was not defending the increase of spending but showing you why it happened. If you read my post you would have seen that I am for slashing the military's budget but I guess you didn't make it that far.
I am not an Obama defender, I did not vote for the man, I will however use facts to take the partisanship out of political discussion. Too often, in todays world, political ideals trump what is good for the country and here we sit four years out of the recession with a huge deficit and a sluggish economy. I fully recognize the problems of government but blaming it for past spending is fruitless. There are reasons why spending is elevated due to the recession and it, in all likelihood, will not go down due to an increase in entitlement spending unless they are reformed. If you want to have an intelligent discussion I am more than happy to Captain but until then please save yourself the embarrassment
my premise isn't all about the stimulus. the stimulus was just one of the many pieces of spending that increased the baseline. it was a mere tiny example that people may think "we spent a lot of money to boost the economy and it was my expectation that we would probably spend less after that" but clearly that didn't happen. of course, someone that supports big government will come up with great reasons why the spending didn't drop down. that is expected. you want to keep asking more questions and asking other people to dig deeper but that's not necessary. the spending keeps growing, that's all that really matters.
you want to spend money to repair bridges and roads? ok, but if you spend $100 billion to repair all the roads in new jersey; the year after all that work is done you will not see spending reduced afterwards. when expenses go away, politicians always have other people paying them off to find other places to spend that money that is now available.
no, that's not all that really matters. what matters is how much of the spending increase was already set in motion. like i said...Medicare, Social Security, and Defense isn't something that sneaks up on us by surprise every year. they make up 2/3 of the budget, and are growing at very large clips every year. if you want to ignore that, that's fine.
i see your point about it being difficult to eliminate a new tax, if that's your point. but that's not necessarily what anyone here is even talking about. we currently do not take enough money in to maintain our infrastructure. if you're fine with that, then ok. but that's why we have the fiscal issues we have right now. 2nd credit downgrade under Chris Christie. very nice.
no, that's not all that really matters. what matters is how much of the spending increase was already set in motion. like i said...Medicare, Social Security, and Defense isn't something that sneaks up on us by surprise every year. they make up 2/3 of the budget, and are growing at very large clips every year. if you want to ignore that, that's fine.
i see your point about it being difficult to eliminate a new tax, if that's your point. but that's not necessarily what anyone here is even talking about. we currently do not take enough money in to maintain our infrastructure. if you're fine with that, then ok. but that's why we have the fiscal issues we have right now. 2nd credit downgrade under Chris Christie. very nice.
defense is corruption. so its growth is corrupt spending growth. that's the problem. the war in Iraq & Afghanistan will end and without sequestration and aggressive pushing of spending cuts; military spending would still keep growing. Obama tried to help that with Syria but luckily we now have some people in government that will fight for reduced spending.
we are taxed enough for the government to maintain and repair roads. the government just doesn't allocate properly or spend wisely. you cant look at one low tax and say that we need to raise that tax to be consistent with the rest of the country. you have to look at the overall tax burden.
Looks like the feds are going to raise it after the midterm elections. I wish they used more of the stimulus money on road and bridge repair instead of pissing it away. It would have created jobs AND fixed many roads. Instead they gave 2 years of unemployment funds out for a year or two, they should have gave them a shovel after 6 months and told them to report to the Pulaski Skyway at 0700 hours on monday morning.
Looks like the feds are going to raise it after the midterm elections. I wish they used more of the stimulus money on road and bridge repair instead of pissing it away. It would have created jobs AND fixed many roads. Instead they gave 2 years of unemployment funds out for a year or two, they should have gave them a shovel after 6 months and told them to report to the Pulaski Skyway at 0700 hours on monday morning.
stimulus isn't about jobs, its about corruption. jobs come after corruption, just look at the keystone pipeline.
Looks like the feds are going to raise it after the midterm elections. I wish they used more of the stimulus money on road and bridge repair instead of pissing it away. It would have created jobs AND fixed many roads. Instead they gave 2 years of unemployment funds out for a year or two, they should have gave them a shovel after 6 months and told them to report to the Pulaski Skyway at 0700 hours on monday morning.
a substantial portion of it was tax cuts. not enough was infrastructure. the extension of UE benies used some stimulus money, but not all that much. bottom line though, i agree, not enough of the stimulus bill went towards much needed infrastructure that could have benefited us by doing work that needed to be done and helping keep construction workers employed during a bad time for construction.
a substantial portion of it was tax cuts. not enough was infrastructure. the extension of UE benies used some stimulus money, but not all that much. bottom line though, i agree, not enough of the stimulus bill went towards much needed infrastructure that could have benefited us by doing work that needed to be done and helping keep construction workers employed during a bad time for construction.
You are absolutely right about that...it is usually about construction workers, both highway and home construction....but our infostructure all over this country is awful....really bad and dangerous....but our politicians for years have been spending monies allocated for this, and do not even realize it....and any tax they impose now, will also be forgotten when all the new politicians are voted in, it is unfortunately a vicious cycle, that we have to pay for all the time.
"New Jersey’s gas tax is the second lowest in the country after Alaska, and hasn’t gone up since the late ‘80s. But transit advocates says that low, low cost comes with consequences."
This should clear up some of the bull on this topic.
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.
