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 has everything to do with it. Republicans literally campaign on cutting spending, yet do nothing but increase spending. It's hypocrisy.
Each party firmly believes its spending was just, needed, benevolent and the spending of the other teams was wasteful, disasterous and selfish. Oddly though, both teams support most all the same schemes
How do you so-called “conservatives” and MAGAs justify this?
4D chess, I guess.
"In just the first half of the year, our government has spent $2.2 trillion, 13.7 percent more than the first half of FY 2016, the final year of Obama’s presidency, when Republicans were railing against the unconscionable rise in debt. The gross national debt is now $2.6 trillion higher than when the GOP drafted its new platform. More importantly, roughly 86 percent of that $2.6 trillion increase is composed of the public debt, not the so-called intra-governmental debt from Social Security (the money we “owe ourselves”)
In absolute dollars, $2.2 trillion is the most we’ve ever spent for the first six months of a fiscal year, and adjusted for inflation, it is roughly on par with what we spent during the first six months of 2009. That was at the pit of the Great Recession and included Obama’s massive spending binge, unemployment benefits, and a surge in welfare spending. It’s truly unprecedented to be racking up such high levels of spending and debt during a period of 3.8 percent unemployment."
We have a duopoly. The two parties put on a charade of being 'polarized' over trivia, and over stuff with no chance such as the 'green new deal.' But on the actual issues of significance, they work together.
Stop with the false narrative. We do NOT have two irresponsible parties. We have ONE.
Paying for the things you buy is not irresponsible. It may not be your preferred method of squaring your finances, but it is responsible.
We only have one party that does not advocate paying for what they purchase. Only. One.
Exactly how I see it Travis.
Eddie, its hardly a false narrative. Both parties are irresponsible in my book. You can argue one of the parties is worse then the other but they are both part of the problem.
You say "we only have one party that does not advocate paying for what they purchase. Only one." I assume you mean the Democrats, they do make endless promises using tax dollars to buy votes. They made it into an art form. An art form that will eventually bankrupt us into Greece or even Venezuela.
Sadly, you can see already them making unaffordable promises with the current crop of Democratic Presidential candidates.
But not you say the Republicans? Do they pay for everything? I don't think so. Do you think cutting taxes on the super rich while we have huge deficits, always cutting domestic spending but then borrowing money to increase defense spending is responsible? How long do people think we can keep that up, let the domestic economy hollow out while we spend every last dime on the military?
It has everything to do with it. Republicans literally campaign on cutting spending, yet do nothing but increase spending. It's hypocrisy.
everytime they "try' to cut spending (on the big ticket items), the spin is "republicans sending grandma in wheelchair over a cliff"
FY17(last budget under Obama) SS outlays was 939 billion, yet receipts was only 851 billion... a difference of 88 billion...that's 88 billion in the hole (deficit)
this year FY19 SS 1.046t in outlays, 905b in receipts... a DEFICIT of 141 billion.........what are they (either party) supposed to cut????
projected is for fy22..1.243 trillion in outlays, yet 1.049t receipts (194b deficit)
projected is for fy27..1.652 trillion in outlays, yet 1.361t receipts, so for FY27, nearly 300 (291) billion deficit just for the line item of SS
Each party firmly believes its spending was just, needed, benevolent and the spending of the other teams was wasteful, disasterous and selfish. Oddly though, both teams support most all the same schemes
Stop with the false narrative. We do NOT have two irresponsible parties. We have ONE.
Paying for the things you buy is not irresponsible. It may not be your preferred method of squaring your finances, but it is responsible.
We only have one party that does not advocate paying for what they purchase. Only. One.
Well we had a spending binge under W Bush and his GOP-controlled congress in the early 2000s. And we had a massive spending binge under Obama and his D-controlled congress from 2009-11.
If you are saying we have one party in the sense that the duopoly often effectively acts as one party, I agree. If you're saying that either the Democrats or Republicans are irresponsible (but not both), I would disagree.
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.
