Lucky... 0 #26 September 11, 2008 Quote Quote Out of control spending and less tax revenue...GWB FTW! Throw blame at Congress also! They are the ones who have to fund all the BS pork projects. I thought the Democrats said they were going to get the spending under control. I guess it was all lip service once again. New faces, same old shit! The new congress has overridden 4 Bush vetoes, so they are tring. Whereas the Repub congress ran the country for the 1st 5.5 years of Bush. So your same old shit is your own, don't bring us into it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #27 September 11, 2008 Quote on the interview last night with Obama on fox they said revenue was up 20 percent over Clinton's term. Doesn't matter, if spending is tripple, tax revenue must be 10 fold to pay for that. It's the bottem line after all indicators, GDP, tax rev, spending etc.... the government is a mess; disagree? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #28 September 11, 2008 Quote Think that's it? I think it will end up being more. Public debt has not decreased in a long, long time (yes, I know El Jefe Clintonista had a surplus; debt did not decrease - deal with it). Adding entitlement programs will not make the debt go down. Nor will making corporate taxes so draconian that multinationals are driven out of country taking jobs along with them. Social programs helped bring us out of the Reagan/Bush recession, hell, the helped us out of the Great Depression. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #29 September 11, 2008 QuoteQuoteAgreed. While I believe the primary blame lies with GWB Really? I put most with Congress. They are the ones who slip in spending bills and funnel money to their own litle projects. Seems pretty simple to me. If I dont have extra cash I dont go out and buy a $10,000 entertaiment system. Dont spend what you dont have. Congress acts like a college students with 10 credit cards in the back pocket. I will pay for this later. Makes me sick to think about it! The little checks/balances thing from the pres failed, he didn't veto in 5.5 years and even then it was BS about stem cell research, so until the Dems gained controll of congress, that lame congress ran the country unabaded. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #30 September 11, 2008 yes but you don't need to have tax increases to increase revenue. just make everyone work and pay their fare share of taxes. democrats have to many programs that favor the lazy and promote more people to collect welfare and these do not promote increase in tax revenue. IMO Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #31 September 11, 2008 Bush vetoed the budgets, eh? So because of Bush vetoes the Congress had no choice but to increase spending? I can see Senator Byrd now, "I tried to tell him that I didn't need any more buildings named after me, but he wouldn't listen. So I had no choice but to propose $300 million in earmarks, which I never would have done." You know, for being the idiot that the Left claims him to be, he seems to outsmart their every move. Either he's smarter than all congressional dems put together or there is no difference between them. I think the latter is more likely. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #32 September 11, 2008 Quote yes but you don't need to have tax increases to increase revenue. just make everyone work and pay their fare share of taxes. democrats have to many programs that favor the lazy and promote more people to collect welfare and these do not promote increase in tax revenue. IMO Must be why both Reagan's and Bush's tax cuts led in short order to record deficits. Yes, that's it!... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #33 September 11, 2008 QuoteAdding entitlement programs will not make the debt go down. Nor will making corporate taxes so draconian that multinationals are driven out of country taking jobs along with them. Hey what the hell.. the tax and spend and waste rePUBICans.. nice job security.. a couple more wars should get you to Captain or even Admiral. Admiral Anvil Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #34 September 11, 2008 I think that there is a lot of perspective of the sheer size of this number that is missing. There are maybe 5 or 10 companies on this planet with a market capitalization of over $400 billion and I don't think any are over $500 billion. Think about "big corporations." Our government's DEFICIT is bigger than all but a few companies are worth. Take the cash value of Microsoft and it wouldn't cover the deficit The numbers are shocking here, folks... My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #35 September 12, 2008 QuoteI think that there is a lot of perspective of the sheer size of this number that is missing. There are maybe 5 or 10 companies on this planet with a market capitalization of over $400 billion and I don't think any are over $500 billion. Think about "big corporations." Our government's DEFICIT is bigger than all but a few companies are worth. Take the cash value of Microsoft and it wouldn't cover the deficit The numbers are shocking here, folks... I believe you'll find I have been preaching about the debt and deficit for a number of years now. A pile of $1 bills equal in value to the national debt would extend far beyond the orbit of the Moon.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #36 September 12, 2008 Quote I think that there is a lot of perspective of the sheer size of this number that is missing. There are maybe 5 or 10 companies on this planet with a market capitalization of over $400 billion and I don't think any are over $500 billion. Think about "big corporations." Our government's DEFICIT is bigger than all but a few companies are worth. Take the cash value of Microsoft and it wouldn't cover the deficit The numbers are shocking here, folks... As a fiscally conservative American it appalls me that this country........WE THE PEOPLE......are in debt to the tune of nearly 10 Trillion dollars due to arrogance, gross mismanagement and GREED. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #37 September 12, 2008 Quotearrogance, gross mismanagement and GREED Exactly. Who has been arrogant? Congress and the POTUS. Who has grossly mismanaged? Congress and the POTUS. Who has been greedy? "We the People" have been greedy. All of us with our hands out. Where did those trillions go? Right to the American people - most of it. And plenty of American people want more. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #38 September 12, 2008 QuoteQuotearrogance, gross mismanagement and GREED Exactly. Who has been arrogant? Congress and the POTUS. Who has grossly mismanaged? Congress and the POTUS. Who has been greedy? "We the People" have been greedy. All of us with our hands out. Where did those trillions go? Right to the American people - most of it. And plenty of American people want more. We also have an enormous trade debt, mostly with China*. Exporting much of our manufacturing to Asia helped make a bunch of CEOs richer, but royally screwed the country. * to put this in perspective, we owe the equivalent to nearly $5,000 just to China alone for every man, woman and child in the USA.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #39 September 12, 2008 Quote yes but you don't need to have tax increases to increase revenue. just make everyone work and pay their fare share of taxes. democrats have to many programs that favor the lazy and promote more people to collect welfare and these do not promote increase in tax revenue. IMO Tax rev collections are but just 1 part of the picture. Furthermore, welfare to teh poor gets spent immediately, whereas corporate welfare often gets stashed away, slowing the economy, so your theory is incomplete at best. Let's look at what has had what kind of result over the last 3 decades and we can see that neo-con fiscal polices haven't worked; care to disagree? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #40 September 12, 2008 QuoteBush vetoed the budgets, eh? So because of Bush vetoes the Congress had no choice but to increase spending? I can see Senator Byrd now, "I tried to tell him that I didn't need any more buildings named after me, but he wouldn't listen. So I had no choice but to propose $300 million in earmarks, which I never would have done." You know, for being the idiot that the Left claims him to be, he seems to outsmart their every move. Either he's smarter than all congressional dems put together or there is no difference between them. I think the latter is more likely. Bush didn't veto anything for the first 5.5 years, so he is liable for it as well as the Republican Congress. Love when YOUR party tanks, you try to make it a systematic problem. Compare the fiscal outcome fromfascist Ronnie, GHW Bush, Clinton and the current turd and try to make me believe that it's everyone and it all comes out the same. Would you like me to post data for you? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #41 September 12, 2008 QuoteQuotearrogance, gross mismanagement and GREED Exactly. Who has been arrogant? Congress and the POTUS. Who has grossly mismanaged? Congress and the POTUS. Who has been greedy? "We the People" have been greedy. All of us with our hands out. Where did those trillions go? Right to the American people - most of it. And plenty of American people want more. Clinton raised taxes on the rich, and GHWB did at the end too, these worked. The other trash had their ass handed to them, or shoud I say they had our ass handed to them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #42 September 12, 2008 So in other words, it all went right to the People, and you want more to go to the People - more specifically those who aren't wealthy. We are at many trillions given to people, right? The deficit is from money paid that we don't have. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rookie120 0 #43 September 12, 2008 Quote As a fiscally conservative American it appalls me that this country........WE THE PEOPLE......are in debt to the tune of nearly 10 Trillion dollars due to arrogance, gross mismanagement and GREED. And according to you the only people at fault for that are peole with an R. The Dems had nothing to do with that.If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #44 September 12, 2008 Quote Quote As a fiscally conservative American it appalls me that this country........WE THE PEOPLE......are in debt to the tune of nearly 10 Trillion dollars due to arrogance, gross mismanagement and GREED. And according to you the only people at fault for that are peole with an R. The Dems had nothing to do with that. Well, the distribution of wealth in the US has been steadily shifting to the wealthy, to the point that now some 40% of the nation's wealth is in the hands of the top 1% of the population. I wonder how that top 1%, which has been greedily accumulating the goodies, votes? (No, I don't really).... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 197 #45 September 12, 2008 Quote Quote Quote As a fiscally conservative American it appalls me that this country........WE THE PEOPLE......are in debt to the tune of nearly 10 Trillion dollars due to arrogance, gross mismanagement and GREED. And according to you the only people at fault for that are peole with an R. The Dems had nothing to do with that. Well, the distribution of wealth in the US has been steadily shifting to the wealthy, to the point that now some 40% of the nation's wealth is in the hands of the top 1% of the population. I wonder how that top 1%, which has been greedily accumulating the goodies, votes? (No, I don't really). Imagine that ....the wealthy have a wealth of wealth. Are you suggesting some type of wealth redistribution?Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #46 September 12, 2008 Quote And according to you the only people at fault for that are peole with an R. The Dems had nothing to do with that. Uh.. you may want to look at this graph.. and compare and contrast the years where an R was making and signing the BUDGET.... and the years where there was a D making the budget. Please NOTE the rise in the last 20 years closely.. especially the rate of climb. http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.png This one is instructive as well. National Debt as % of GDP. http://zfacts.com/p/318.html There seems to be a little bit of a rise in the national debt since we first heard the trickle on America ecomonmic and voodo economic model became the norm for those with your R Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #47 September 12, 2008 QuoteWell, the distribution of wealth in the US has been steadily shifting to the wealthy, to the point that now some 40% of the nation's wealth is in the hands of the top 1% of the population. I wonder how that top 1%, which has been greedily accumulating the goodies, votes? (No, I don't really). Who? Like Gary Winnick? Or George Soros? How about Ron Burkle? Or Barbara Streisand? Or Warren Buffett? Or Bill Gates? Or... My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #48 September 12, 2008 Quote Who? Like Gary Winnick? Or George Soros? How about Ron Burkle? Or Barbara Streisand? Or Warren Buffett? Or Bill Gates? Or... I will see your list and raise you a few billionaires.. Billionaires who have donated to presidential candidate McCain include: Sheldon Adelson....Donald Bren....August Busch III....Pete Coors....Richard DeVos....Barry Diller....Charles Ergen....Steve Forbes....Ted Forstmann....Maurice Greenberg....Kirk Kerkorian....Richard Kinder....Robert Kraft....Henry Kravis....Leonard Lauder....William "Bill" Lauder....Lowry Mays....Mark Mays....Drayton McLane Jr....Charles Schwab....Stephen Schwarzman....Frederick Smith....Jack Taylor....Steve Wynn....and, Sam Zell. A considerable number of other Republican billionaire donors are expected to make donations after the REPUBLICAN NATIONAL CONVENTION is held and party members will be expected to show their support and loyalty to the party with donations. http://www.free-press-release.com/news/200805/1212256440.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #49 September 12, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Quote As a fiscally conservative American it appalls me that this country........WE THE PEOPLE......are in debt to the tune of nearly 10 Trillion dollars due to arrogance, gross mismanagement and GREED. And according to you the only people at fault for that are peole with an R. The Dems had nothing to do with that. Well, the distribution of wealth in the US has been steadily shifting to the wealthy, to the point that now some 40% of the nation's wealth is in the hands of the top 1% of the population. I wonder how that top 1%, which has been greedily accumulating the goodies, votes? (No, I don't really). Imagine that ....the wealthy have a wealth of wealth. Are you suggesting some type of wealth redistribution? No, I was commenting on the previous post and how the nation's wealth has shifted to the greedy wealthiest, who are most likely (R) voters.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #50 September 12, 2008 QuoteQuoteWell, the distribution of wealth in the US has been steadily shifting to the wealthy, to the point that now some 40% of the nation's wealth is in the hands of the top 1% of the population. I wonder how that top 1%, which has been greedily accumulating the goodies, votes? (No, I don't really). Who? Like Gary Winnick? Or George Soros? How about Ron Burkle? Or Barbara Streisand? Or Warren Buffett? Or Bill Gates? Or... Ran out after 6?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
