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.
Where were they while George W. Bush was borrowing six trillion...nearly a trillion from Communist Chinese banks? When Bush's two terms were completed he had doubled the national debt from $5.7 trillion to more than $11 trillion and that caused the annual interest to double. The only annual expense our government has which is larger than the interest on the debt is the military/defense budget.
Foreign debt paid for the Revolutionary War. I wonder if Beck will teach that in his classes(sic).
Intresting, drawing a parallel with deficit spending on social justice programs, corporate bailouts and two wars on foreign soil to the debt incurred to win our freedom.
Looking more so all the time like we taxpayers need another revolution to gain our freedom back from the Federal government.
Intresting, drawing a parallel with deficit spending on social justice programs, corporate bailouts and two wars on foreign soil to the debt incurred to win our freedom.
Borrowing for wars has always been OK. The marginal tax rates got up to 91% after the big one. The problem ever since Reagan started is that they all spend but nobody wants to belly up to the bar and pay for it...especially those who are filthy rich. We've gone in debt about $9 trillion under Reagan and the Bushes and during it all the wealthy had low tax rates.
Borrowing for wars has always been OK. The marginal tax rates got up to 91% after the big one. The problem ever since Reagan started is that they all spend but nobody wants to belly up to the bar and pay for it...especially those who are filthy rich. We've gone in debt about $9 trillion under Reagan and the Bushes and during it all the wealthy had low tax rates.
So spending on unconstitutional policies is is OK so long as the "filthy rich" pay for it?
Sounds like that liberal math again wrong+wrong=right.
So spending on unconstitutional policies is is OK so long as the "filthy rich" pay for it?
Sounds like that liberal math again wrong+wrong=right.
Both parties are full of BS on the subject of spending. I've heard that crap harped ever since Eisenhower about cutting spending and not once has either party cut spending. The closest they have ever come is a few times when they did not adjust for inflation. They have never cut spending. Money is their power. As long as they can accomodate the electorate with projects, especially defense related monsters which employ millions across all states they can continue to get reelected. Term limits absolutely enforced is the only thing which might help us.
When the forebears set up our government they expected ordinary spokesmen from every part of America to come and perform an inconvenient service as a patriot. Patriot my arse. The bunch of greedy, self centered elitists up there now are as far from the original intent that it's an outright shame. I read that anytime a bill of any substance is being debated there are about 2500-3000 lobbyists roaming the halls of congress sporting $2000 suits, imported shoes and an agenda. Ordinary people do not have spokesmen up there any longer.
Where were they while George W. Bush was borrowing six trillion...nearly a trillion from Communist Chinese banks? When Bush's two terms were completed he had doubled the national debt from $5.7 trillion to more than $11 trillion and that caused the annual interest to double. The only annual expense our government has which is larger than the interest on the debt is the military/defense budget.
Borrowing for wars has always been OK. The marginal tax rates got up to 91% after the big one. The problem ever since Reagan started is that they all spend but nobody wants to belly up to the bar and pay for it...especially those who are filthy rich. We've gone in debt about $9 trillion under Reagan and the Bushes and during it all the wealthy had low tax rates.
maybe, just maybe the answer is CUT SPENDING
we spend over 1.3 trillion a year on social programs
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.
