U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
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)
 
Old 07-06-2009, 12:07 PM
 
Location: Chicagoland
41,313 posts, read 41,105,811 times
Reputation: 7108

Advertisements

washingtonpost.com

Quote:
Since the Reagan era, some conservatives have hoped to shrink government by "starving the beast." Refuse to raise taxes, they figured, and eventually spending would have to fall.

It's beginning to look as though the new team may have a similar strategy, in reverse: Increase spending, and eventually taxes will have to be raised.

No official has articulated that to me as a strategy. But look at the evidence.
That is why the rush to get everything passed, without even reading the bills - once the citizenry wake up - big trouble.

Quote:
"The systematic widening of budget shortfalls projected under CBO's long-term scenarios has never been observed in U.S. history," the CBO pointed out in its usual dry style. And: "All in all, the U.S. economy could contract sharply for a long period."
Just take a look at the CBO analysis of obama's budget and the truly frightening numbers. It's the budget, dummies!

Quote:
Obama's response has been to acknowledge the seriousness of the problem -- and make it worse. I'm not talking about his record-breaking stimulus plan, which was essential (if not ideally shaped) given the recession he also inherited. Rather, it is Obama's long-term budget that would more than double the projected deficit over the next 10 years, to $9 trillion, by extending most of the Bush tax cuts and limiting the alternative minimum tax while creating new programs and entitlements (to college tuition scholarships, for example) and refusing to cut back on existing ones.
Quote:
The bottom line is this: You cannot run a progressive government of the kind Obama favors by collecting only 18 percent of the gross domestic product in taxes, which has been the norm over the past 40 years. Nor can you increase the tax take to 24.5 percent of GDP -- which is what Obama proposes to be spending in 2019 -- simply by making the rich pay more.
The math just doesn't add up - which is what a lot of people have been saying.

Quote:
But rather than level with the American people about this, or lay out a plan to raise the needed taxes, the Obama administration and the Democratic Congress are putting the spending pieces of progressive government in place and apparently counting on the tax piece to fall into place later.
Hopefully, it won't be so easy. When the people see and understand just what a complete failure obama's stimulus is - maybe they will start demanding answers and accountability.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-06-2009, 12:28 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
33,463 posts, read 21,816,432 times
Reputation: 9663
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
washingtonpost.com



That is why the rush to get everything passed, without even reading the bills - once the citizenry wake up - big trouble.



Just take a look at the CBO analysis of obama's budget and the truly frightening numbers. It's the budget, dummies!





The math just doesn't add up - which is what a lot of people have been saying.



Hopefully, it won't be so easy. When the people see and understand just what a complete failure obama's stimulus is - maybe they will start demanding answers and accountability.



This is a post I put up in April.

"'79 was worse. 82 was worse. We had a budget surplus in the late '90s because the Republican Congress forced it onto Bubba. Where did you get the idea that they came to power at a time when the budget was balanced? The Republican Revolution occurred in 1994. During Bush's last year we had a 400 billion dollar shortfall during a recession. We'll add 3 trillion to the national debt just this year alone. The new administration is employing a reverse starve the beast tactic to get the tax increases they've been after all along. Tax and spend is the "change" for which you voted.

Since when has a tax increase been followed by an increase in revenue?"

I know exactly what you're talking about. A lot of people have been speculating that the Democrats are deliberately working to destroy the economy. I'm inclined to agree since that is the only way to force the tax and spend that has been repeatedly rejected by the American people back onto us again. The whole thing make me feel like we've been date raped.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:01 PM.

© 2005-2020, 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