Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[mainiac]

And what is the President's plan for cutting spending?

Maybe the fact that he has already passed the largest single entitlement reform in history, a reform that republicans vow to repeal?  His plan is get re-elected and then don't intentionally explode the deficit by repealing laws he has already signed?

Wow, it's almost like you are completely ignorant about the facts that real adults use when they discuss the federal budget.  Oh wait, you already said you were a libertarian.

[Nadaka]

Note: The only reason the Ryan plan is falsely said to balance the budget is that it assumes that a future congress and president will commit to an even deeper but unspecified round of cuts at some point in the future.

It also presupposes that "tax cuts = economic growth" is so intrinsic that enacting Ryan's budget will lead to thirty years of uninterrupted 4% annual economic growth, a feat unattained by any nation in the history of the world.  Which is exactly why the list of people who insist Ryan's awesome budget will solve everyone's problems does not include the Congressional Budget Office.

Haha. You don't believe that tax cuts result in economic growth? You know nothing, Aquizzar. I could write up several pages enlightening you on economics, but it would be a waste of my time.

why don't you?

if you are so good at economics, prove it. prove that you understand the system far better than any man on earth, or any coordinated group of men that have tried to predict how an economy will turn out.

That's known as a 'straw man.' Shall I Google that for you?

You probably should google "straw man", because that wasn't one.

[Flying Dice]

So basically Kon has been grandstanding for what, six pages or so of bullshit? Yeah, I'm out. Not enough aspirin in the world.

[Descan]

Can we talk about something else? We don't need to talk to any tom, dick or harry that pops in here saying "HAHAH LULZ YOU ARE TEH STUPIEDS!" We're allowed to ignore them and say, "How's the weather, Aqizzar?" or "How you doing, Kai?"

It's one reason I'm actually annoyed at this forum. Well, one of the only reasons, but it's a fairly big one. Always jumping to say "WELL ACTUALLY!" to the obviously trolling and/or stupid people, always rising to the bait of trolltastic denizens.

I mean, has ANYTHING happened? New polls, new gaffes, tiny children saying "Politics make me sad. " ANYTHING but this annoying blithering idiot taking up the entire threads focus and energy!

[MaximumZero]

I'm sick enough of the political ads to puke into someone's brainpan. Does that count?

[Heron TSG]

These all happened, I guess.

[GlyphGryph]

Did it also wildly inflate government spending in several key areas?
Were there even net spending cuts at all? Completely discount the whole "decrease income" bit, just - did it even actually cut spending at all?

I don't recall exactly.

[...]

And what is the President's plan for cutting spending?

I, at least, wasn't saying anything about the President. Just disagreeing with the notion that he proposed a plan that would balance the budget... eventually. (If you don't increase income, and you don't decrease spending, and you aren't currently balancing the budget, it's not going to happen)

I'm pretty sure people didn't think it was 'extreme' in the way you implied. Rather, his methodology for a achieving what amounted to non-balanced budget was extreme. If I proposed to balance the budget by exploding orphans, I think one could quite reasonably be considered extreme. However, I don't think you could say it "obviously [...] did not go far enough.".

Again, there was the progressive caucus plan that went much further and actually DID balance the budget, but it clearly wasn't considered "extreme" by the liberals.

It just seems like a really nonsensical argument against the Democrats, anyway.

Also, there was a report posted TWICE since you showed up that effectively made the argument that tax cuts don't help the economy - you don't even NEED to google that!

[kaijyuu]

Not too bad, thanks Descan

[Flying Dice]

tiny children saying "Politics make me sad.

That was not newsworthy. 

[Nadaka]

The weather was terrible today.

The air was crisp and cool. The sky was deep blue and clear. The sun was warm with a gentle breeze. Just across the bay I am sure the palm trees were swaying gently over some of the most beautiful beaches in the world as emerald green waves crash against the sand and nubile young women in bikini's frolic in the serf.

Yes, this was terrible weather to be in my cubicle at work.

[MaximumZero]

These all happened, I guess.

If it means anything, the Redskins stomped the Vikings in their last home game.

[Leafsnail]

ummm... well...

has anyone blamed Obama for the hurricane yet? not the effects, the actual hurricane?

http://www.ibtimes.com/hurricane-sandy-caused-homosexuals-president-obama-evangelist-preacher-john-mcternan-says-855933

Well I guess he needed a bit of help from the gays.

[Shadowlord]

ummm... well...

has anyone blamed Obama for the hurricane yet? not the effects, the actual hurricane?

No, but Michael Bloomberg endorsed Obama for President because of his response to it.

Edit: I stand corrected. 

[Bohandas]

ummm... well...

has anyone blamed Obama for the hurricane yet? not the effects, the actual hurricane?

http://www.ibtimes.com/hurricane-sandy-caused-homosexuals-president-obama-evangelist-preacher-john-mcternan-says-855933

Well I guess he needed a bit of help from the gays.

This is Relevant

[Kon]

Note: The only reason the Ryan plan is falsely said to balance the budget is that it assumes that a future congress and president will commit to an even deeper but unspecified round of cuts at some point in the future.

It also presupposes that "tax cuts = economic growth" is so intrinsic that enacting Ryan's budget will lead to thirty years of uninterrupted 4% annual economic growth, a feat unattained by any nation in the history of the world.  Which is exactly why the list of people who insist Ryan's awesome budget will solve everyone's problems does not include the Congressional Budget Office.

Haha. You don't believe that tax cuts result in economic growth? You know nothing, Aquizzar. I could write up several pages enlightening you on economics, but it would be a waste of my time.

In other words, you know perfectly well that you can't find a damn thing to back up your assertions that isn't Breitbart Media, so you're not going to try.  I didn't even say tax cuts can't stimulate economic growth, although if actually read any posts in this thread you're posting in you'd see quite a few real economists explaining why the idea is bologna.

I'd love to see this enlightenment.  I know perfectly well that I'm not going to.

No need to quote other people. Trying using your own brain.

If we each get a $100 tax cut, we buy things. I'm not saying everyone will spend all of their $100, but much of it will be spent. The businesses whose products we buy will have more income, so they will pay more in taxes. Not all of them will pay more in taxes because some will not make enough to pay taxes, but much of that money will come back to the government in the form of increased corporate and personal income taxes (some file as individuals). Whether they pay more in taxes or not, they will have more money to hire people, to give pay raises, and to buy more stuff from other businesses. Those other businesses will pay more in taxes and have more money to hire people, give pay raises, and buy stuff from other businesses. It really isn't that complicated. You just need to try to think things through yourself. Haha, not likely.