Bush to propose sharp cut in budget growth

[DragonMasterAlex]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! Bush cut budget growth, oh HEHEHEHEHEHAHAHAHAHAHHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEEHHHEHEAHAHAHOOOO!!HEHEHEHEHAHAHAHAHAHHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEEHHHEHEAHAHAHOOOO!!!HEHEHEHEHEHAHAHAHAHAHHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEEHHHEHEAHAHAHOOOO!!!HEHEHEHEHEHAHAHAHAHAHHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEEHHHEHEAHAHAHOOOO!!!HEHEHEHEHEHAHAHAHAHAHHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEEHHHEHEAHAHAHOOOO!!!HEHEHEHEHEHAHAHAHAHAHHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEEHHHEHEAHAHAHOOOO!!!HEHEHEHEHEHAHAHAHAHAHHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEEHHHEHEAHAHAHOOOO!!!HEHEHEHEHEHAHAHAHAHAHHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEEHHHEHEAHAHAHOOOO!!!HEHEHEHEHEHAHAHAHAHAHHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEEHHHEHEAHAHAHOOOO!!!HEHEHEHEHEHAHAHAHAHAHHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEEHHHEHEAHAHAHOOOO!!!HEHEHEHEHEHAHAHAHAHAHHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEEHHHEHEAHAHAHOOOO!!!HEHEHEHEHEHAHAHAHAHAHHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEEHHHEHEAHAHAHOOOO!!!HEHEHEHEHEHAHAHAHAHAHHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEEHHHEHEAHAHAHOOOO!!!HEHEHEHEHEHAHAHAHAHAHHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEEHHHEHEAHAHAHOOOO!!!HEHEHEHEHEHAHAHAHAHAHHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEEHHHEHEAHAHAHOOOO!!!HEHEHEHEHEHAHAHAHAHAHHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEEHHHEHEAHAHAHOOOO!!!HEHEHEHEHEHAHAHAHAHAHHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEEHHHEHEAHAHAHOOOO!!!HEHEHEHEHEHAHAHAHAHAHHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEEHHHEHEAHAHAHOOOO!!!HEHEHEHEHEHAHAHAHAHAHHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEEHHHEHEAHAHAHOOOO!!!HEHEHEHEHEHAHAHAHAHAHHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEEHHHEHEAHAHAHOOOO!!!HEHEHEHEHEHAHAHAHAHAHHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEEHHHEHEAHAHAHOOOO!!!HEHEHEHEHEHAHAHAHAHAHHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEEHHHEHEAHAHAHOOOO!!!HEHEHEHEHEHAHAHAHAHAHHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEEHHHEHEAHAHAHOOOO!!!

This gets funnier every day First we shouldn't oppress people on the basis of Religion, but we should stop gay people from getting married through a constitutional amendment, and now we're going to cut --not spending, just spending GROWTH.

Ah, Bush, at least he's good for a laugh!

Jason

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: mfs378
So it was the minority party that inflated this spending bill to its rediculous proportions?

Which political party is power has nothing to do with the spending.

It is the fact that they )all pols) are not held accountable except for lip service :disgust:

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

SS isn't a part of the problem, it contributes a surplus to the general fund on a regular basis. Such "debts" are a large % of the total debt, and are a big part of the push to privatize SS before it needs to have those funds back...

Umm, this administration just increased the liability in Medicare in an attempt to curry favor with the geezers. Even Bush's original plan for SS "reform" would automatically create a deficit in the program. There's no free lunch to be had with SS . . . even with immediate privatization.

Tax cuts, military spending and so-called security are the Republican equivalent of Crack- they'll be running up your credit cards a little less RSN, honest... they'll be selling off national parks and monuments to satisfy their cravings before it's over...

I hear Norton wants to triple gas drilling in Wyoming. I wonder if the Republicans ever fixed the ridiculously low mining rights that companies pay for extraction on public land?

Which political party is power has nothing to do with the spending.

I'm not sure I buy that theory. They both spend excessively but I doubt many three year periods could compete with Bush carnage.

 

[Moonbeam]

The party of principle is in power so it's OK. Just a bit of time and the rich will run the government as a charity eliminating all taxes.

 

[Jhhnn]

Eaglekeeper-

"Which political party is power has nothing to do with the spending."

Pure malarkey. Republican administrations from Reagan forward have fostered increasing the debt seven-fold, from $1T to nearly $7T. Now that they control the legislative and the executive, the same people who beat up on Clinton to balance the budget are now gleefully cutting taxes and accelerating spending in an obvious effort to bring on a financial crisis. Being Rich is good, but apparently not as good as being rich when everybody else is poor, and the government is broke, too...

Eliminating the tax cuts for the top 1% of taxpayers would reduce the deficit by ~25%, bringing military and so-called "security" and international spending down to reasonable levels would largely eliminate the rest.

Now that they've porked up the budget sectors benefitting the public the least, they propose holding the line in those sectors that actually do some good. Meanwhile, the military supplier, big pharma, and energy corp giveaways accelerate, along with spending to prop up our so-called "friends" overseas...

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Originally posted by: charrison

Once again, dems complaining about defecits on one hand and not enough spending on the other.

Nice

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Originally posted by: LunarRay


and perhaps eliminating the departments of Labor, Treasury and Commerce.

ea-sy now...we're not going anywhere

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn



now gleefully cutting taxes and accelerating spending in an obvious effort to bring on a financial crisis

Yea, 8.2% economic growth is a crisis...quick, man the laser.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Once again, dems complaining about defecits on one hand and not enough spending on the other.

True enough but now they are joined by Republicans complaining about too much spending (despite writing and signing the bills) and essentially going tone deaf to the deficit. Could you imagine Bob Dole, Phil Gramm, or Alan Simpson saying our goal is to cut the $500B deficit in half in the next five years by growing the economy faster than spending?

Sentient Voter: Hmm so what happens as SS, Medicare expenditures explode after 2010?
GOP: We don't make budget projections that far out . . . they tend to be unreliable.
SV: Well how about a ballpark figure?
GOP: We don't like baseball . . . they use steroids.
SV: Huh?!
GOP: Just remember (borrowed from MoveOn.org) . . . terrorist, terrorist, terrorist, 9-11 . . . thanks for your support. And God bless America.

 

[Lucky]

Too little, too late. Sorry Bush, you've lost my vote on the runaway budget alone.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Eaglekeeper-

"Which political party is power has nothing to do with the spending."

Pure malarkey. Republican administrations from Reagan forward have fostered increasing the debt seven-fold, from $1T to nearly $7T. Now that they control the legislative and the executive, the same people who beat up on Clinton to balance the budget are now gleefully cutting taxes and accelerating spending in an obvious effort to bring on a financial crisis. Being Rich is good, but apparently not as good as being rich when everybody else is poor, and the government is broke, too...

Eliminating the tax cuts for the top 1% of taxpayers would reduce the deficit by ~25%, bringing military and so-called "security" and international spending down to reasonable levels would largely eliminate the rest.

Now that they've porked up the budget sectors benefitting the public the least, they propose holding the line in those sectors that actually do some good. Meanwhile, the military supplier, big pharma, and energy corp giveaways accelerate, along with spending to prop up our so-called "friends" overseas...

Regarding my comment about political party in power.

No matter which party is in control, there is/will be always a feeding frenzy. The only difference is those who control the gavel get blamed by the opposition.

When the Dems are in control, they angle the discressionary spending toward certain goals.
When the Repubs control, they cause a zigzag.

Both parties refuse to control there spending habits because they realize that the bill will arrive after they are no longer able to be held responsible.

One of the problems is that the best way to pull the economy out of a recession is deficit spending. The economy will recover, however, the debts will still be there. What caused the recession is forgotten, only that it was there and on who's watch. the economy has to recover long enough for the revenue of the government to start paying the back bills, before a slack period hits.

Also, balanced budgets are proposed based on projections of income over the next 3-5 years.
Example: Clintons projected budgets for 01 & 02 were based on revenue streams from the economic picture on the late 90's.

Voter's memory only lasts from job to job and election to election.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Too little, too late. Sorry Bush, you've lost my vote on the runaway budget alone.

But, but, but it wasn't me. It was 9-11, the War on Terror, Homeland Security, financial scandals, recession, and that damn overspending Congress (particularly the Democrats). Give me four more years and I guarantee I will use a smaller shovel to dig our country's future than I did 2001-2004.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx

Originally posted by: LunarRay
and perhaps eliminating the departments of Labor, Treasury and Commerce.

ea-sy now...we're not going anywhere

OK.. Maybe he'll keep Commerce but, Labor and Treasury will be function-less. In the new age of Economic entropy.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
now gleefully cutting taxes and accelerating spending in an obvious effort to bring on a financial crisis

Yea, 8.2% economic growth is a crisis...quick, man the laser.

Sigh... you should know better than anyone here that (1) the 8.2% economic growth was just a brief spurt in the 3rd quarter that did not sustain itself, and (2) it was due more to low interest rates than to tax cuts.

Considering that GW has already accelerated budget growth faster than any other President in history, I have a hard time believing that he will suddenly quit his spending addiction. I would argue, in fact, that that is what the office of President in this corrupt nation has become all about: control of the feeding frenzy in the public trough.

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Originally posted by: Vic


Sigh... you should know better than anyone here that (1) the 8.2% economic growth was just a brief spurt in the 3rd quarter that did not sustain itself, and (2) it was due more to low interest rates than to tax cuts. [/i]

...naturally that level of growth "did not sustain itself, " nor could it in the long-run. Some growth is better than none, I thought, but judging from your "sigh," I guess I am wrong again. We expect a 3 - 4.5% increase during 2004, barring no problems between now and X-Mas.

Personal consumption expenditures (PCE) increased 6.9% during Q3, and I would argue that the increase would have been well over 10% if we had another round of tax-cuts and more 'rebate' checks mailed to consumers...yes, low interest rates facilitated economic growth, but so, too, did the tax cuts...whether some people like it or not. I am just glad that government defense spending declined during this period of economic growth, otherwise we'd hear more whining and half-truths about the economy.

...oh, and please tell me when the last time growth and consumer spending took that big of a jump...then rethink your tax-cut assertion, sir.


[/quote]