Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-28-2011, 10:47 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,964 posts, read 44,771,250 times
Reputation: 13677

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post
there's no doubt in my mind that Bush was a big spender
Congress spends. This is more accurate. Note the last GOP budget:

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-28-2011, 10:51 AM
 
22,768 posts, read 30,717,462 times
Reputation: 14745
no comment on the OP's graph, I see? Just posting another one?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2011, 10:55 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,964 posts, read 44,771,250 times
Reputation: 13677
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post
no comment on the OP's graph, I see? Just posting another one?
Not just another one, a more accurate one. Congress spends. Did you not know that?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2011, 10:55 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,077,144 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post
no comment on the OP's graph, I see? Just posting another one?
There were comments made on the OP's graph, proven to be a LIE.. But that doesnt stop liberals from repeating the same old lies, like little lemmings..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2011, 10:56 AM
 
45,542 posts, read 27,146,343 times
Reputation: 23856
This is so stupid.

The financial house is on fire and you are arguing about who started it.

What do we do NOW? How do we reverse this? How do we get on the right track? And who is on board to get us on the right track?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2011, 10:57 AM
 
9,855 posts, read 15,199,322 times
Reputation: 5481
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC View Post
This is so stupid.

The financial house is on fire and you are arguing about who started it.

What do we do NOW? How do we reverse this? How do we get on the right track? And who is on board to get us on the right track?
Thank you! At least one person gets it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2011, 10:58 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,964 posts, read 44,771,250 times
Reputation: 13677
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC View Post
This is so stupid.

The financial house is on fire and you are arguing about who started it.

What do we do NOW? How do we reverse this? How do we get on the right track? And who is on board to get us on the right track?
Cut spending. No deficits. Flat tax - everyone pays an equitable share of the costs. Confine the Federal Government to Constitutional mandates only.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2011, 11:06 AM
 
31,387 posts, read 37,029,506 times
Reputation: 15038
The only ignorance is PG's logic and historical contextualization. By PG's logic, Obama should have vetoed the 2009 spending bill in the middle of the biggest financial meltdown since the Great Depression, requiring Congress to either override his veto or consume a great deal of political energy concerned with raising the debt while throwing financial markets into complete disarray. Brilliant.

Meanwhile on January 21st, Obama should have issued a order to almost 200,000 troops saying, "hey fellas, I know you've been fighting for 7 years just drop your weapons and come on home! Oh, that would have sat well with Republicans not to mention the logistical fact that it simply couldn't be done.

Now with regards to the PG's erroneous regurgitation of erroneous claims regarding the Bush tax cuts....

Sessions Wrong on Bush Tax Cuts | FactCheck.org
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2011, 11:15 AM
 
45,542 posts, read 27,146,343 times
Reputation: 23856
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Cut spending. No deficits. Flat tax - everyone pays an equitable share of the costs. Confine the Federal Government to Constitutional mandates only.
The solution is really not that difficult - you either bring in more, or spend less. We can't bring in enough to cover what we have spent and what we have planned to spend. So we have to cut spending. If you want to bring in more money, expand the tax base. Reduce unemployment - that will bring in more & reduce payout entitlements. I will compromise and raise the tax rate - with an equal decrease in corporate taxes to help businesses.

What the current plans will do is slow the growth. It cuts nothing.

Problems creep in when we move from the objective realm to the subjective realm. Class warfare and divisive politics. Entitlements. Politicians keeping their power. We need to stay away from these things.

IC - I am not opposing your post - just using it as a platform.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2011, 11:17 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,077,144 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
The only ignorance is PG's logic and historical contextualization. By PG's logic, Obama should have vetoed the 2009 spending bill in the middle of the biggest financial meltdown since the Great Depression, requiring Congress to either override his veto or consume a great deal of political energy concerned with raising the debt while throwing financial markets into complete disarray. Brilliant.

Meanwhile on January 21st, Obama should have issued a order to almost 200,000 troops saying, "hey fellas, I know you've been fighting for 7 years just drop your weapons and come on home! Oh, that would have sat well with Republicans not to mention the logistical fact that it simply couldn't be done.

Now with regards to the PG's erroneous regurgitation of erroneous claims regarding the Bush tax cuts....

Sessions Wrong on Bush Tax Cuts | FactCheck.org
um, there are 13 different federal budgets. not one, and the ones Obama signed in 2009 were so full of pork and massive federal spending increases, much of which had anything to do with the recession.

And as for Bushs tax cuts, creating revenues, lets go to the CBO for FACTS..
Federal Tax Revenues from 2003 to 2006

Had revenues grown at the same rate as the overall economy between 2003 and 2006, federal receipts would have increased by only $373 billion. The other $252 billion of the actual increase in revenues represents growth in excess of GDP growth

If you STOP LYING, I wont have to keep regurgitating FACTS..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:28 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top