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.
it's simple, when I run low on money, I spend less or cut somewhere. Maybe the government could try it too. The more they get the more they spend. Cut their wages, benefits, departments and people. Maybe 10% across the board...
Reagan’s budget director David Stockman on why taxes on the wealthy must be increased
Stockman, for those of you who don’t plan to watch the video, is of the opinion that our Republicans leaders of today, when they invoke lessons of the Reagan administration as a way of defending tax cuts for the rich, don’t really know what they’re talking about. Reagan, in his opinion, never would have suggested that tax cuts alone could eliminate a deficit. Here’s a quote from Stockman, who feels as though we need “a higher tax burden on the upper income”:
“I’ll never forgive the Bush administration and Paulson for basically destroying the last vestige of fiscal responsibility that we had in the Republican Party. After that, I don’t know how we ever make the tough choices.”
Reagan’s budget director David Stockman on why taxes on the wealthy must be increased
Stockman, for those of you who don’t plan to watch the video, is of the opinion that our Republicans leaders of today, when they invoke lessons of the Reagan administration as a way of defending tax cuts for the rich, don’t really know what they’re talking about. Reagan, in his opinion, never would have suggested that tax cuts alone could eliminate a deficit. Here’s a quote from Stockman, who feels as though we need “a higher tax burden on the upper income”:
“I’ll never forgive the Bush administration and Paulson for basically destroying the last vestige of fiscal responsibility that we had in the Republican Party. After that, I don’t know how we ever make the tough choices.”
Saying that a tax cut is "unpaid" is pure liberal idiot thinking, a tax cut means you'll have less to spend so you should spend less. Anyone with a check book knows that less in means less out. These tax cuts don't need to be paid for, they need to be matched with spending cuts.
Just this week a local talk radio host was calling them, "unfunded tax cuts". I never did figure out how you "fund" a tax cut.
Just this week a local talk radio host was calling them, "unfunded tax cuts". I never did figure out how you "fund" a tax cut.
It's easy really, when you think like a mentally unstable liberal politician you believe that tax payer's money all belongs to the government and it's their job to spend it as they see fit. It's our job to fund their projects even if we don't want them, they really believe they know what's best for us because according to them we aren't smart enough to handle money on our own... doesn't that sound a lot like the insane liberals here who claim that we aren't smart enough to vote if we don't like they want us to?
Gee, imagine that. The stupid primate of a president that could barely tie his own shoes to hear it from most liberals is still outmaneuvering the Democrats two years after he left office.
Bush didn't set the trap, the Democrats in the Senate did by demanding a sunset law in order to pass any tax cuts. If Dubya had his way, the current tax rates would have been permanent until otherwise acted on by Congress. So it's only fitting that it's an anchor around their own neck circa 2010.
This would be the intrinsic sickness of GOP thinking in sensaround sound. America exists to serve your agenda, no matter if America itself becomes collateral damage. No amount of long term damage from reckless deregulation could ever be your responsibility. The new definition of manhood- take all the credit for the good, and pass the blame to all others. The company fails, blame the employees. Your kids hate you, blame your wife.
I've got to hand it to Ayn Rand. She really did put your head up your behind pretty far. Taking lady liberty hostage, now the gloves are off.
This would be the intrinsic sickness of GOP thinking in sensaround sound. America exists to serve your agenda, no matter if America itself becomes collateral damage. No amount of long term damage from reckless deregulation could ever be your responsibility. The new definition of manhood- take all the credit for the good, and pass the blame to all others. The company fails, blame the employees. Your kids hate you, blame your wife.
I've got to hand it to Ayn Rand. She really did put your head up your behind pretty far. Taking lady liberty hostage, now the gloves are off.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,352 posts, read 54,520,826 times
Reputation: 40819
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drover
Gee, imagine that. The stupid primate of a president that could barely tie his own shoes to hear it from most liberals is still outmaneuvering the Democrats two years after he left office.
A broken clock is correct twice a day. And with Dr Strangelove Cheney and DoughBoy Rove in the mix, who knows?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drover
Bush didn't set the trap, the Democrats in the Senate did by demanding a sunset law in order to pass any tax cuts. If Dubya had his way, the current tax rates would have been permanent until otherwise acted on by Congress. So it's only fitting that it's an anchor around their own neck circa 2010.
I'd say what he did is akin to what management that signs bad labor contracts does. They know the long term costs may harm their companies but they also know they'll be comfortably retired on their bloated pensions when that happens.
A broken clock is correct twice a day. And with Dr Strangelove Cheney and DoughBoy Rove in the mix, who knows?
I'd say what he did is akin to what management that signs bad labor contracts does. They know the long term costs may harm their companies but they also know they'll be comfortably retired on their bloated pensions when that happens.
Yes, of course, the Machiavellian geniuses who really ran the Bush administration knew that they'd be hamstringing a future Democratic Congress and Democratic administration. And of course, doing so was their aim -- they were just that bloody clever. In fact they were so clever that they recruited the opposition party to assist in their own hanging. I feel sorry for anyone who hoped such a dimwitted party would competently represent their interests in Washington.
And don't talk to me about "long term costs" after the outrageous deficits and mandatory spending this administration has rammed through.
Well since you determined that they need to stay that way, I suppose that settles it. BTW...the monetary value of the cuts are unpaid for and big ass burden on the country.
There you go, running out of someone else's money. Congress and spending is the burden.
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.
