First Democrat Budget In 4 Years!

[Lithium381]

as if "deficit reduction" over a ten year span means shit

 

[cybrsage]

That's why I ignored him. Him trying to insult my lack of knowledge on something is like a armless 8 year old claiming he could school Michael Jordan in basketball when he was at his prime... Also the 8 year old is chained to the bleachers.

Ouch, I would not say his knowledge level is akin to Michael Jordan's basketball ability, but you are spot on about your own knowledge being like an armless 8 year old chained to the bleachers.

You set yourself up for it...

 

[Double Trouble]

Can't say that I'm surprised at all. If your core philosophy is "more taxes, more government services", then it's not surprising that their budget proposal is just a giant tax increase without significant reduction in spending.

 

[Jhhnn]

One side's failings does NOT make it OK for the other side to do the same thing. Enough with that sad excuse already.

One of your (many) problems is you make the wrong assumption that all republicans agree with what the party as a whole or (even a select few) does. Just because you may blindly follow your party doesn't mean everyone else does.

In quoting eskimospy, I agreed that "Budgets" are pointless political theatre, intended to impress the gullible. weak minded outrage addicts merely seize on the lack of one to get their fix. Their leadership realizes this, keeps them occupied with the new & shiny, like toddlers, so that they won't find their own amusements out there in the far reaches of Glenbeckistan.

Appropriations are what matter, along with honesty. What's the point of a budget if it's not followed, other than creating illusions?

 

[PokerGuy]

Cut spending? No way, we need to take more money from the gullible fools....errrr... I mean, the voters.

Absolutely typical, propose huge tax increases, continue to increase spending and call it "a balanced approach". Idiots.

 

[Socio]

The budget would dedicate $100 billion to economic stimulus in the form of infrastructure spending and job training.

Translation; $100 billion in pork spending payoffs for our supporters.

 

[nehalem256]

The GWB admin & Repub Congress had "budgets", then financed 2 wars with "Off Budget" appropriations.

Go figure, huh?

So they financed normal government operations with a budget, and then financed extraordinary government operations with appropriations.

That certainly seems a lot more reasonable than not being able to come up with a budget for even the normal operations huh?

 

[thraashman]

Ouch, I would not say his knowledge level is akin to Michael Jordan's basketball ability, but you are spot on about your own knowledge being like an armless 8 year old chained to the bleachers.

You set yourself up for it...

I would say not really because I was comparing his blustering to the blustering of an armless kid. Those blustering would be the same. But I can't fault you for taking the shot at me, I probably wouldn't leave it alone were the roles reversed.

 

[Incorruptible]

I would say not really because I was comparing his blustering to the blustering of an armless kid. Those blustering would be the same. But I can't fault you for taking the shot at me, I probably wouldn't leave it alone were the roles reversed.

I was just speaking the truth and its not my fault that you cant accept that.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

your own quote says spending cuts vs tax increases in 50-50

Here's an interedting article on Murray's "spending cuts".

http://www.redstate.com/2013/03/14/the-democrat-budgets-spending-cut-hocus-pocus/

 

[ivwshane]

Here's an interedting article on Murray's "spending cuts".

http://www.redstate.com/2013/03/14/the-democrat-budgets-spending-cut-hocus-pocus/

I'm just curious would you consider that article biased at all?


Anyway, a tit for tat budget plan.

It would be nice if there was a budget out there that did take a balanced approach and did have real cuts in waste in it and did raise revenues by eliminating needless subsidies and or loopholes.

I wonder who would ever propose such a thing.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

I'm just curious would you consider that article biased at all?


Anyway, a tit for tat budget plan.

It would be nice if there was a budget out there that did take a balanced approach and did have real cuts in waste in it and did raise revenues by eliminating needless subsidies and or loopholes.

I wonder who would ever propose such a thing.

Of course I consider that source biased. However, do you have any issues with the facts they presented?

Agree...I would love to see a balanced approach.

Here's an interesting graph showing a comparison of the Ryan and Murray budgets from a spending perspective (see link below...can't link directly to chart). I would love to see one that shows increased revenues as well.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business...he-senate-democrats-budget-in-1-graph/274025/

 

[Sonikku]

It's obviously more than what they expect to get. The same with Ryans' offer. Compromise negotiation in Congress is a lot like negotiating with a crooked car salesman. You don't go in with your target price, you go in with a hilariously better deal than you can possibly imagine landing, then you "compromise" down from there to your "target" price. Except now both sides know their opponent is trying to do just that to move the final price point further in their parties direction, so they go for increasingly extreme and outrageous offers in their opening volley.

 

[ivwshane]

Of course I consider that source biased. However, do you have any issues with the facts they presented?

Agree...I would love to see a balanced approach.

Here's an interesting graph showing a comparison of the Ryan and Murray budgets from a spending perspective (see link below...can't link directly to chart). I would love to see one that shows increased revenues as well.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business...he-senate-democrats-budget-in-1-graph/274025/

Nope, I was just curious. Some people don't see the bias when they read and others can read past the bias. I just wanted to see where you fell😉

As to your second point. It's obvious neither side is being serious. Did you see where Ryan's cuts were? He might as well spit on the poor and elderly.
The dems proposal cuts military spending but its not extreme like Ryan's cuts are.

Even funnier, Ryan kills obamacare but keeps the taxes/revenues generated from it.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Nope, I was just curious. Some people don't see the bias when they read and others can read past the bias. I just wanted to see where you fell😉

As to your second point. It's obvious neither side is being serious. Did you see where Ryan's cuts were? He might as well spit on the poor and elderly.
The dems proposal cuts military spending but its not extreme like Ryan's cuts are.

Even funnier, Ryan kills obamacare but keeps the taxes/revenues generated from it.

Ryan's biggest savings is repealing Obamacare. Have you seen the application process for Obamacare? For a family of three, it's 15 pages long with complex info requirements....review and approval is required by 3 federal agencies! One might as well have spit on the poor and elderly.

 

[sm625]

Taxes go up regardless of what these clowns do. Every time the Federal Reserve prints more money it taxes away some of the value of all existing dollars. This means the Fed is effectively in charge of tax policy, rendering congress vestigial. And they certainly act the part. Why people put up with any of this crap is beyond me. The Roman Senate under Caesar had more significance than ours.

 

[ivwshane]

Ryan's biggest savings is repealing Obamacare. Have you seen the application process for Obamacare? For a family of three, it's 15 pages long with complex info requirements....review and approval is required by 3 federal agencies! One might as well have spit on the poor and elderly.

Lol sorry but a long application process doesn't mean it's a savings when it's removed in terms of dollars.

And again, the reasons Ryan's biggest savings is repealing obamacare is because he keeps the revenue from it while eliminating the services it provides.
It's like paying for a Costco membership but you aren't allowed to shop at Costco.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Lol sorry but a long application process doesn't mean it's a savings when it's removed in terms of dollars.

My point wasn't about savings generated by not having the application process expense. It was about how it's complexity and highly bureaucratic approval process effectively spits on the poor and elderly. If you happen to think it's difficult for them to get an ID card in order to vote...how much more difficult do you think this is to get healthcare?

And again, the reasons Ryan's biggest savings is repealing obamacare is because he keeps the revenue from it while eliminating the services it provides.
It's like paying for a Costco membership but you aren't allowed to shop at Costco.

This is Republicans "compromising" on the tax increase side. "You guys" are never happy! 😀

 

[ivwshane]

My point wasn't about savings generated by not having the application process expense. It was about how it's complexity and highly bureaucratic approval process effectively spits on the poor and elderly. If you happen to think it's difficult for them to get an ID card in order to vote...how much more difficult do you think this is to get healthcare?


This is Republicans "compromising" on the tax increase side. "You guys" are never happy! 😀

Just for clarification I'm not concerned with the difficulty of getting an ID, I'm concerned about voter ID laws that are unconstitutional and are essentially a poll tax. If reasonable accommodations are made to receive a FREE ID then I'm fine (reasonable as in a person that lives 200 miles away from a license issuing authority can apply online or via a pre paid letter).



And for the record I'm for a single payer system, with private, electronic records that can be accessed by your doctor and by emergency response personnel.

 

[chucky2]

Just for clarification I'm not concerned with the difficulty of getting an ID, I'm concerned about voter ID laws that are unconstitutional and are essentially a poll tax. If reasonable accommodations are made to receive a FREE ID then I'm fine (reasonable as in a person that lives 200 miles away from a license issuing authority can apply online or via a pre paid letter).



And for the record I'm for a single payer system, with private, electronic records that can be accessed by your doctor and by emergency response personnel.

How many people could possibly live 200 mi away from their state DMV?

 

[ivwshane]

How many people could possibly live 200 mi away from their state DMV?

If I said just one person meets that criteria would that be ok?

 

[chucky2]

If I said just one person meets that criteria would that be ok?

No.

 

[First]

My point wasn't about savings generated by not having the application process expense. It was about how it's complexity and highly bureaucratic approval process effectively spits on the poor and elderly. If you happen to think it's difficult for them to get an ID card in order to vote...how much more difficult do you think this is to get healthcare?

Healthcare is far more important and far more worthy of their time than voting. Voting has historically been considered a very low tolerance threshold for engaging and completing. There's no direct economic benefit. Unlike healthcare, of course, making your comparison odd and mostly poor.

Of course, there is also no evidence that Obamacare's application process is long and complicated, and any responsible articles that suggest as such are merely regurgitating preliminary findings. Nothing particularly surprising for a brand new gov't program, which for those always opining how gov't should be like business, this should come as no surprise; it's common knowledge that new businesses face initial hurdles in both efficiency, complexity and hiring. By the same standard, so would Obamacare.

 

[cybrsage]

I would say not really because I was comparing his blustering to the blustering of an armless kid. Those blustering would be the same. But I can't fault you for taking the shot at me, I probably wouldn't leave it alone were the roles reversed.

It was just too easy not to do it - kinda like the one girl everyone did in high school...

 

[cybrsage]

Ryan's biggest savings is repealing Obamacare. Have you seen the application process for Obamacare? For a family of three, it's 15 pages long with complex info requirements....review and approval is required by 3 federal agencies! One might as well have spit on the poor and elderly.

Don't forget the tax Obama placed on the poor and elderly. The only ones who have to pay the lack of insurance tax are those who do not have insurance - ie, the poor and elderly.