I'd reverse that to read spend and borrow.
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.
Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play
- Thread starter FreshFish
- Start date
I'd reverse that to read spend and borrow.
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play
There's also a fallacy that must be included, and it's pretty much applicable to both sides: It must be a short term solution. Anything long-term won't work, most of the time because people aren't willing to wait for it.
Taking a look at previous budgets, we are now up to the same revenue levels that we saw in 2006. It looks like the long pole in the tent is the amount of spending, and the last time I checked, it wasn't Dubya who did that. In fact, at 2007, the deficit level was the same as 2002, and it hasn't been any lower. Basically, the country hasn't recovered from the attack yet.
Here is what I would propose to wring in the budget, my version of a balanced budget amendment:
1. The allocated expenditures for the United States federal budget shall be no greater than:
a. The actual revenue amount collected by the United States Treasury in the previous year, OR;
b. The actual expenditure amount for the United States federal budget in the previous year.
2. Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
There's also a fallacy that must be included, and it's pretty much applicable to both sides: It must be a short term solution. Anything long-term won't work, most of the time because people aren't willing to wait for it.
Taking a look at previous budgets, we are now up to the same revenue levels that we saw in 2006. It looks like the long pole in the tent is the amount of spending, and the last time I checked, it wasn't Dubya who did that. In fact, at 2007, the deficit level was the same as 2002, and it hasn't been any lower. Basically, the country hasn't recovered from the attack yet.
Here is what I would propose to wring in the budget, my version of a balanced budget amendment:
1. The allocated expenditures for the United States federal budget shall be no greater than:
a. The actual revenue amount collected by the United States Treasury in the previous year, OR;
b. The actual expenditure amount for the United States federal budget in the previous year.
2. Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play
And the last part, I could write up something like that for the liberals, but you know the drill by now.
You were doing ok there for awhile. Of course the liberals don't want to just keep existing programs, but expand them whenever possible. Obama is proposing increased spending on something it seems like every day.
And the last part, I could write up something like that for the liberals, but you know the drill by now.
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play
We cant tax enough to pay this crap off without some serious cuts to go alongside it. Neither side will make the cuts necessary so lets not pretend they we can blame the left or the right. Until each side cuts their pet programs we are screwed.
And if you think one side is worse than the other you need to wake up and smell the feces on your face. (because your head is fully up your ***)
The next thing people need to start realizing is that the housing crisis didnt cause this...this moment was inevitable going back a lot farther than that. Blaming it on the bubble bursting is like blaming getting lung cancer on the last cigarette you smoked.
We cant tax enough to pay this crap off without some serious cuts to go alongside it. Neither side will make the cuts necessary so lets not pretend they we can blame the left or the right. Until each side cuts their pet programs we are screwed.
And if you think one side is worse than the other you need to wake up and smell the feces on your face. (because your head is fully up your ***)
The next thing people need to start realizing is that the housing crisis didnt cause this...this moment was inevitable going back a lot farther than that. Blaming it on the bubble bursting is like blaming getting lung cancer on the last cigarette you smoked.
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play
The point is: Spend and tax might work. Don't spend and don't tax might work. The one thing that will not work is spend and don't tax. So let's not do that anymore.
The point is: Spend and tax might work. Don't spend and don't tax might work. The one thing that will not work is spend and don't tax. So let's not do that anymore.
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play
Obama should have backed Simpson-Bowles from the very beginning. Some variation of it will eventually be adopted, sooner if Dems pick up seats, later after we rack up even more debt if Republicans pick up seats. That's where this has been headed since we took the wrong fiscal fork 32 years ago.
So I can count on your vote for the Dems? (Because the GOP has signed in blood to never, ever, ever tax their biggest donor-, er, patriots.)
Obama should have backed Simpson-Bowles from the very beginning. Some variation of it will eventually be adopted, sooner if Dems pick up seats, later after we rack up even more debt if Republicans pick up seats. That's where this has been headed since we took the wrong fiscal fork 32 years ago.
Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play
I've said it before and I'll say it again. I'd vote for a Democrat in a heart beat if I thought they'd seriously address the budget deficit.
None of it works. Because when we spend and tax, we spend more than we tax. When we spend and don't tax, we maybe spend less, but we still spend more and tax less. Under every scenario we spend more than we tax, and somehow those two need to come together. I understand the partisan angle you're working, but it takes away from the message when it's given a partisan flavor.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. I'd vote for a Democrat in a heart beat if I thought they'd seriously address the budget deficit.
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play
You know what's funny? You had a mandate in 2009-2010, and you still didn't raise taxes. The Dems encouraged it.
How about we dump both parties and start fresh?
You know what's funny? You had a mandate in 2009-2010, and you still didn't raise taxes. The Dems encouraged it.
How about we dump both parties and start fresh?
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play
Yeah, that's my agenda, alright. I know if I can hypnotize a couple more people on the USCHO Forum I can sway this election...
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play
when you are trying to keep from falling into a depression/recession you don't raise taxes. even they know that.
when you are trying to keep from falling into a depression/recession you don't raise taxes. even they know that.
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play
Excuses, excuses. They're also Keynesians who don't understand the definition of "stagflation", which we are currently in.
Excuses, excuses. They're also Keynesians who don't understand the definition of "stagflation", which we are currently in.
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play
Hahahaha...no. The day I believe the Dems will tax and NOT spend is the day I am too drunk to function in society permanently. That you think the Dems are going to fix this or that they have the policies to do so proves your lack of any objectivity on the subject. Considering you went to Cornell (and love to pontificate and show us how smart you supposedly are) you would think you would know how big a folly that line of thinking will get you.
I dont trust anyone to fix this, collapse is the only way out now. Time for both sides to pay the piper.
Hahahaha...no. The day I believe the Dems will tax and NOT spend is the day I am too drunk to function in society permanently. That you think the Dems are going to fix this or that they have the policies to do so proves your lack of any objectivity on the subject. Considering you went to Cornell (and love to pontificate and show us how smart you supposedly are) you would think you would know how big a folly that line of thinking will get you.
I dont trust anyone to fix this, collapse is the only way out now. Time for both sides to pay the piper.
Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play
Yes, but the "somthing" the fed will have to do will be "quantitative ease-a-geddon," A.K.A. inflate our way out of debt. If you think that will be a walk in the park, then YOU are all wet.
Hogwash. Right now the deficit is around 8% of GDP. If you took away deficit spending, the economy would shrink faster than Alice on mushrooms. Imagine if 8% of companies (by revenue) shuttered their doors tomorrow - I think that would be a little more important than "some effect."
Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play
I've heard stranger things around here!
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play
Why are we looking towards QE3? Do these bankers not understand we're currently in a period of stagflation? Or are they all Keynesians who think stagflation is impossible?
Oh, Milton Friedman, how I wish you were still alive...
Why are we looking towards QE3? Do these bankers not understand we're currently in a period of stagflation? Or are they all Keynesians who think stagflation is impossible?
Oh, Milton Friedman, how I wish you were still alive...
Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play
They are not mutually exclusive. You can have it all, collapse and civil war. Look at Syria.Nope. Civil War is the answer.
FlagDUDE08
Banned
Re: Obama XXIV: Forward ... pause ... rewind ... play
I heard that while driving in listening to America's Morning News (John McCaslin presents). That's probably also in response to the Martial Law preparations, such as tanks being exercised on residential streets or arming federal agencies.
Nope. Civil War is the answer.
I heard that while driving in listening to America's Morning News (John McCaslin presents). That's probably also in response to the Martial Law preparations, such as tanks being exercised on residential streets or arming federal agencies.