What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vacante

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

Putting taxes at Clinton era rates means no excuses. If the budget could be balanced under those rates, it can be again. Meaning, the revenue those rates bring in. That's what the gubmint has to spend. Now, you are correct (did I say that?) in that there will need to be spending reductions.

that's fine. we can agree on that, on both sides.

we remain stuck with the "Lucy paradox." The Dems have promised "if you increase taxes now, we'll cut spending later" several times. The Repubs have gone along with it. The taxes went up, the spending did not go down.

With the resurgence in economic conservatism, the battle cry has been reversed: "if you want to increase taxes, you first have to cut spending as a good faith down payment, after which we can then increase taxes."

For me personally, it seems to me that both of those positions are off target. It seems more important that the tax system be rational, simple, and promote growth as its higher priorities. I don't mind using a wealth tax for redistribution; it seems counter-productive however to use an income tax with redistribution as a primary objective.

I agree with most of the goals of the progressive agenda, it is merely the methods that I find problematic. A big part of the problem is that there are plenty of things people will do voluntarily that they will resist doing if they feel they are being forced. Paradoxical, perhaps, yet that appears to be how human nature works.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

Conservatives theme song for Romney-Ryan ticket.

"Don't you get to lost now, in all I say. I bet at the time you know I really felt that waayyy. But that was then and now you know, its today." - Joe Cocker "Feelin' Alright".
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

Yeah but you think Paul Ryan is the answer to this issue even though he spread his legs faster for Bush than a $2 whore. Fiscal responsibility no longer exists no matter how much you close your eyes, plug your nose and pray your idol means what he says.
I at least appreciate your honesty that you're in the live for today, forget about tomorrow crowd, which is the dominant thinking in our decisionmaking circles and has been for awhile now.

Ryan questions it, even though I doubt he can get anything substantive changed. Too many vested interests that'll see the ship sink before helping bail out a bucket of water.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

I at least appreciate your honesty that you're in the live for today, forget about tomorrow crowd, which is the dominant thinking in our decisionmaking circles and has been for awhile now.

Ryan questions it, even though I doubt he can get anything substantive changed. Too many vested interests that'll see the ship sink before helping bail out a bucket of water.
He didn't question it in Congress, he voted for every big ticket item Bush threw his way
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

He didn't question it in Congress, he voted for every big ticket item Bush threw his way

Shhh...Bob doesnt care. Ryan SAYS he is a fiscal conservative so Bob believes him. Bob won't let the facts get in the way of his own delusions...he never has :D
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

I at least appreciate your honesty that you're in the live for today, forget about tomorrow crowd, which is the dominant thinking in our decisionmaking circles and has been for awhile now.

Ryan questions it, even though I doubt he can get anything substantive changed. Too many vested interests that'll see the ship sink before helping bail out a bucket of water.

Ryan questions what?
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

How did Dubya? Remember you voted for him because he had an MBA how exactly did he and his Cronies pay for their bailouts? Remember it wasnt Obama that nationalized Fannie and Freddie or bailed out the banks it was your boy who learned economics at Yale and got that all important MBA. :D

Someone didn't read, "Either one, it doesn't matter which."
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

With the resurgence in economic conservatism, the battle cry has been reversed: "if you want to increase taxes, you first have to cut spending as a good faith down payment, after which we can then increase taxes."
What planet do you live on? The new battle cry is that taxes will NOT BE INCREASED under any circumstances. "We don't care if we piled on two wars, a federal education mandate, and a new prescription entitlement. You will not increase taxes UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES."...The Republican Party.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

What planet do you live on? The new battle cry is that taxes will NOT BE INCREASED under any circumstances. "We don't care if we piled on two wars, a federal education mandate, and a new prescription entitlement. You will not increase taxes UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES."...The Republican Party.

Let me ask you an honest question... From a standpoint of your own fiscal being, and I'm only referring to fiscal decisions that are completely under your direct control, what do you do when prices go up, but your allotment of money remains the same?
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

MBA's are worthless.
If you can't get into grad school go to med school. If you can't get into med school go to law school. If you can't get into law school go to business school.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

Let me ask you an honest question... From a standpoint of your own fiscal being, and I'm only referring to fiscal decisions that are completely under your direct control, what do you do when prices go up, but your allotment of money remains the same?

I cut or I borrow. It depends on what I'm trying to cover an whether I'm willing to give it up or its not a necessity. Same as anyone else I imagine. I'm lucky in that I haven't gone through a job loss for either myself or my spouse.

If you can't get into grad school go to med school. If you can't get into med school go to law school. If you can't get into law school go to business school.

Exactly.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

I cut or I borrow. It depends on what I'm trying to cover an whether I'm willing to give it up or its not a necessity. Same as anyone else I imagine. I'm lucky in that I haven't gone through a job loss for either myself or my spouse.

Or you take on another job to increase your income, but none of the "household finances = government finances" crowd like to talk about that because it might make people think that increasing taxes to pay for things is a good idea.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

Or you take on another job to increase your income, but none of the "household finances = government finances" crowd like to talk about that because it might make people think that increasing taxes to pay for things is a good idea.

Yeah, we've actually done that occasionally to help cover things.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

Someone didn't read, "Either one, it doesn't matter which."

No I read, I was just curious what your MBA having Messiah did to pay off his bailouts that is all. You dont need to be a Yale grad to understand my point :D
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

Funny, Bush's deficits were never near every year has been under Obama. I wonder when Obama get reelected and he's in his 8th year office, if he (and his supporters) will start taking responsibility for their fiscal irresponsibility. I criticized Bush for his $400-$500 billion deficits. I'll criticize Obama even more for his $1.2 trillion plus deficits. The charade you Obama supporters are putting on is just so hollow. He talks out of both sides of his mouth time and again. He proposes and pushes through more and more spending, then gives a perfunctory remark about reigning in the deficit, never does a thing about it, and you all buy it hook, line, and sinker.

Obama is like a manager that takes over in July at 10 GB, ends up 40 GB at the end of the season, and claims things got better. And some people actually buy it, even though the numbers starkly go the opposite direction. But, such is why we're heading for fiscal disaster at an ever faster clip.

It's all so simple when you don't understand how numbers work.

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/06/romney-wrong-on-deficits-auto-bailout/
As we have written twice before, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected the fiscal year 2009 deficit at $1.2 trillion two weeks before Obama took office. That fiscal year started Oct. 1, 2008. The fiscal year was already nearly one-third over when Obama took office on Jan. 20, 2009. After Obama took office, the deficit increased to $1.4 trillion for fiscal year 2009. At the end of the fiscal year, the CBO largely blamed the 2009 deficit on the recession, specifically a sharp decline in tax revenues and an increase in spending in response to the economic crisis — first by Bush and later by Obama.

Under Obama's watch, federal spending has remained at or near that level. In an April 2011 report, the CBO said (table 1-1) the actual deficit for fiscal year 2010 was nearly $1.3 trillion and the estimated deficit for the current budget is $1.4 trillion.

Republicans frequently make the argument that deficit spending should have returned to pre-recession levels by now, and that's an opinion that we leave for you to judge. But even if you go back to fiscal year 2008 — the last full year of the Bush administration — Romney's claim that Obama increased deficits "by a factor of four or five" would be way off base.

A better analogy to yours would be Obama taking over a team 10GB, losing a key player, and having people ***** that's only 7GB now.
 
Let me ask you an honest question... From a standpoint of your own fiscal being, and I'm only referring to fiscal decisions that are completely under your direct control, what do you do when prices go up, but your allotment of money remains the same?

Democratic household approach. I can work more hours while also reducing spending to pay for what I want.

Republical approach. I'll take a job for less money (akin to a tax cut) but increase my spending on expense toys (defense spending) and finance it with multiple credit cards (national debt).
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

Democratic household approach. I can work more hours while also reducing spending to pay for what I want.

Republical approach. I'll take a job for less money (akin to a tax cut) but increase my spending on expense toys (defense spending) and finance it with multiple credit cards (national debt).
What a pant load. A majority of Dems are on welfare
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

A majority of Dems are on welfare

Link?

Also, answer this question. How is it that the Blue States send more to the Federal Treasury than they receive back?

Thanks.
 
Re: 2012 Presidential Election Part II -- Charlotte, a National Treasure or sede vaca

It's all so simple when you don't understand how numbers work.

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/06/romney-wrong-on-deficits-auto-bailout/


A better analogy to yours would be Obama taking over a team 10GB, losing a key player, and having people ***** that's only 7GB now.
So the budget deficit is going higher each year under Obama and my $1.2 trillion reference was lowballing it. Got it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top