UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (22) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Author: NemesisToLibs Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 1947737  
Subject: Says it all! Date: 12/2/2012 4:32 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
http://reason.com/archives/2012/12/01/if-you-dont-think-spen...

"When Bill Clinton so famously "balanced the budget" with the Internet boom and all the taxes from those stock sales, the GOP and Newt Gingrich passed a budget (yes, Congress used to do that) of $1.7 trillion in expenditures. Adjusted for inflation, our federal government would be spending $2.3 trillion today and collecting $2.5 trillion in "revenues," resulting in a $200 billion surplus. But instead of increasing government spending in line with normal inflation, under Bush and Obama we are spending $3.8 trillion today. Democrats, who believe we have a "revenue" problem instead of a "spending" problem, must also think they have a bartender problem, not a drinking problem."
Print the post Back To Top
Author: TheDope1 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1841711 of 1947737
Subject: Re: Says it all! Date: 12/2/2012 4:50 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
That's a solid article that unfortunately won't get very much discussion here.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: NemesisToLibs Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1841712 of 1947737
Subject: Re: Says it all! Date: 12/2/2012 4:50 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
It also clearly says that the libs are delusional in their thinking that it is a revenue problem.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: NemesisToLibs Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1841713 of 1947737
Subject: Re: Says it all! Date: 12/2/2012 4:52 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
"That's a solid article that unfortunately won't get very much discussion here. "

Yep, facts are a stubborn thing that libs ignore every single fricking day!

Print the post Back To Top
Author: lowstudent Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1841714 of 1947737
Subject: Re: Says it all! Date: 12/2/2012 4:54 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
It also clearly says that the libs are delusional in their thinking that it is a revenue problem.
____________________________-

You do not like that delusion?

What about the one that government research is the road to all that is good and clearly the best path because a couple of major projects spawned off unrelated good results or were used in ways the government did not intend?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: NemesisToLibs Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1841715 of 1947737
Subject: Re: Says it all! Date: 12/2/2012 5:00 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
"What about the one that government research is the road to all that is good and clearly the best path because a couple of major projects spawned off unrelated good results or were used in ways the government did not intend?"

I guess according to libs those "unrelated good results" are worth defaulting on our debt or at least a major sovereign debt crisis that WILL cause more misery for more people then simply cutting spending today.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: NemesisToLibs Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1841739 of 1947737
Subject: Re: Says it all! Date: 12/2/2012 6:39 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
What do I hear? Crickets from the left. LOL

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jerryab Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1841766 of 1947737
Subject: Re: Says it all! Date: 12/2/2012 9:30 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 5
our federal government would be spending $2.3 trillion today and collecting $2.5 trillion in "revenues

So, what you saying is very simple.

Conservatives dramatically increased costs of govt starting in 2001 *without* corresponding increases in revenues. That resulted in massive and escalating govt deficits.

Tax cuts pay for themselves--right? Or not? LOL !!!

Companies will not allow markets to become unstable because it is bad for business. LOL !!!

Then conservatives lost control of govt. And now they are whining about the fact they caused the problem. They do not want to be held accountable.

ROFLMAO !!!

Print the post Back To Top
Author: xLife Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1841767 of 1947737
Subject: Re: Says it all! Date: 12/2/2012 9:36 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Adjusted for inflation, our federal government would be spending $2.3 trillion today and collecting $2.5 trillion in "revenues," resulting in a $200 billion surplus.

Do you realize that what you're saying is that had Bush not cut taxes, increased spending and abetted a deregulatory financial train wreck, he'd have left Obama with a significant surplus instead of an economy on the verge of depression?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: NemesisToLibs Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1841768 of 1947737
Subject: Re: Says it all! Date: 12/2/2012 9:40 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"Conservatives dramatically increased costs of govt starting in 2001 *without* corresponding increases in revenues. That resulted in massive and escalating govt deficits.
"

Nope, liberal policies. Conservative policies had zero to do with it.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: NemesisToLibs Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1841769 of 1947737
Subject: Re: Says it all! Date: 12/2/2012 9:40 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"Do you realize that what you're saying is that had Bush not cut taxes, increased spending and abetted a deregulatory financial train wreck, he'd have left Obama with a significant surplus instead of an economy on the verge of depression? "

Do you realize that you just MUS.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: xLife Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1841773 of 1947737
Subject: Re: Says it all! Date: 12/2/2012 9:59 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 21
"Do you realize that what you're saying is that had Bush not cut taxes, increased spending and abetted a deregulatory financial train wreck, he'd have left Obama with a significant surplus instead of an economy on the verge of depression? "
---
Do you realize that you just MUS.


Nope. Clinton left Bush with a surplus. Bush cut taxes, increased spending and contributed to the greatest financial crash since 1929, all of which caused the deficit to skyrocket. What of that is made up?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: NemesisToLibs Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1841775 of 1947737
Subject: Re: Says it all! Date: 12/2/2012 10:00 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"Nope. Clinton left Bush with a surplus. Bush cut taxes, increased spending and contributed to the greatest financial crash since 1929, all of which caused the deficit to skyrocket. What of that is made up? "

The whole If statement. Your conclusion is all made up, because you or anyone else can't answer it.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: xLife Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1841779 of 1947737
Subject: Re: Says it all! Date: 12/2/2012 10:20 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 37
Clinton left Bush with a surplus. Bush cut taxes, increased spending and contributed to the greatest financial crash since 1929, all of which caused the deficit to skyrocket. What of that is made up? "
---
The whole If statement.


Please join the reality-based community.

Clinton left Bush with a surplus: http://www.salon.com/2012/10/13/us_deficit_tops_1_trillion_f...

Bush cut taxes: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/background/bush...

Bush increased spending: http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/05/federal-deficit-b...

Bush policies contributed to the 2008 crash:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/business/21admin.html?page...

Okay, that last one is a matter of opinion, but which of those statements is untrue?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: NemesisToLibs Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1841785 of 1947737
Subject: Re: Says it all! Date: 12/2/2012 10:51 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Again here is what I said. Get it now? Your conclusion is all made up???

Jeesh!

"The whole If statement. Your conclusion is all made up, because you or anyone else can't answer it."

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1841871 of 1947737
Subject: Re: Says it all! Date: 12/3/2012 12:04 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Bush policies contributed to the 2008 crash:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/business/21admin.html?page......

Okay, that last one is a matter of opinion, but which of those statements is untrue?


Actually, that one is fact. You did say "contributed". And they did. Had you said "solely responsible", then I think we would have to question it. But you didn't. Another major contribution was Gramm-Bliley. It eviscerated Glass-Steagall, and basically let Big Finance go on a rampage as if they were using Monopoly™ money.

The person you are responding to should change his moniker to "nemesistoreality". It's more accurate (and descriptive).

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jerryab Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1841904 of 1947737
Subject: Re: Says it all! Date: 12/3/2012 1:30 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"Conservatives dramatically increased costs of govt starting in 2001 *without* corresponding increases in revenues. That resulted in massive and escalating govt deficits.
"

Nope, liberal policies. Conservative policies had zero to do with it.


Huh? Written and passed by a conservative Congress with GWB as President.

Which of those is "liberal"? Please tell us, as that was NOT the claim made "way back then". Or are you now using Orwell's "doublespeak"?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: NemesisToLibs Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1842025 of 1947737
Subject: Re: Says it all! Date: 12/3/2012 6:03 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"Huh? Written and passed by a conservative Congress with GWB as President.
"

I see you are incapable of breaking down what a conservative or liberal policy is irrespective who passed the legislation.

A politician calling oneself conservative does not mean they will not support liberal policies.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jerryab Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1842049 of 1947737
Subject: Re: Says it all! Date: 12/3/2012 7:32 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
A politician calling oneself conservative does not mean they will not support liberal policies.

Thus, Obama is a conservative (using your interpretations).

Print the post Back To Top
Author: NemesisToLibs Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1842052 of 1947737
Subject: Re: Says it all! Date: 12/3/2012 7:36 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
"Thus, Obama is a conservative (using your interpretations). "

you are clueless.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Windchasers Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1842069 of 1947737
Subject: Re: Says it all! Date: 12/3/2012 9:21 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I see you are incapable of breaking down what a conservative or liberal policy is irrespective who passed the legislation.

A politician calling oneself conservative does not mean they will not support liberal policies.


Would you consider Paul Ryan a conservative? He voted for all of these policies (Medicare Part D, the wars, the stimulus, tax cuts, etc.), but he's held up by the Republican party as the paragon of fiscal conservatism.

Honestly, there aren't a lot of fiscal conservatives in DC. And I don't see Obama as being any worse than Ryan or other Republicans, so I figured I might as well vote on social issues.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: NemesisToLibs Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 1842070 of 1947737
Subject: Re: Says it all! Date: 12/3/2012 9:23 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
"Would you consider Paul Ryan a conservative? He voted for all of these policies (Medicare Part D, the wars, the stimulus, tax cuts, etc.), but he's held up by the Republican party as the paragon of fiscal conservatism.
"

Boy, libs are letting the point fly right over their heads...too funny.

Print the post Back To Top
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (22) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Advertisement