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.
Brilliant. But why didn't you name any particular area in which Gore or Kerry would have done worse than Bush has? The claim was that common sense and reality indicated that things would have been worse under either one. Can't you come up with even one suggestion for how?
The thing is, if Gore or Kerry had been president, things would've been worse. As it is, the Congress has a lower rating than Bush. Maybe we need to clean house in the Senate and the Congress.
Please point me to a time when Congress had a higher rating than the President. Congress gets blamed for letting the President run amok. All of them should be ashamed for the almost 500 billion dollar deficit (which we will discover is higher once Bush is out of office). It will take a lot of pain points (higher taxes, cutting crucial spending) to clean up this mess.
Lower taxes brought in more revenue. Higher taxes will lower revenue.
Lower taxes brought in lower revenue than what would have been collected in an absence of the tax cuts. There is no serious economist anywhere who believes that tax cuts pay for themselves. That idea is all a right-wing pipe dream.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian.Pearson
We outspent the revenue, plus we have more inflation, now.
Despite rising food and energy costs, overall inflation remains moderate. We outspent revenue because of war spending combined with tax cuts, tax cuts that were even more costly than most in that they spurred much less new economic activity than what had been predicted.
This was what I was agreeing with. Ask the person who said it, why would you ask me instead of the one who said it?
You should have split the quote in two that way the first time then. That way, you could have agreed with the first part, and, as an added bonus, expressed your sharp disagreement with the second part...
You should have split the quote in two that way the first time then. That way, you could have agreed with the first part, and, as an added bonus, expressed your sharp disagreement with the second part...
I have no opinion on the other part. I don't believe the Presedent makes a big deal, the congress and senate are the problem.
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.
