Get Your Dubbya Paper Dolls!!!
- Thread starter BDawg
- Start date
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Originally posted by: BDawg
Glad I wasn't the only one. I thought the rest of you had lost your sense of humor.
I like this one better
Get Your Playing Cards Here!
CkG
sMiLeYz
Platinum Member
- Feb 3, 2003
- 2,696
- 0
- 76
I'm a big fan of Mark Fiore, you'll have a blast with this one
http://www.markfiore.com/animation/taxcut.html
http://www.markfiore.com/animation/taxcut.html
sMiLeYz
Platinum Member
- Feb 3, 2003
- 2,696
- 0
- 76
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Actually that was pretty entertaining but as usual it is just the same fear mongering that we've become accustomed to, coming from liberals. The sky is falling, the sky is falling!
If the states would have had better fiscal discipline in the "boom" years then they won't have blown all their $ on money sucking social programs
Both Republican and Democrat are to blame for that - Not just Bush. Bush doesn't lay educators off - school systems do - because the state funds them - NOT the Feds. Bush's PROPOSED tax cut plans have nothing to do with the state's current budget problems!CkG
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Actually that was pretty entertaining but as usual it is just the same fear mongering that we've become accustomed to, coming from liberals. The sky is falling, the sky is falling!
If the states would have had better fiscal discipline in the "boom" years then they won't have blown all their $ on money sucking social programs
CkG
Have you ever heard of shared revenue or federal matching funds??
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Originally posted by: jahawkin
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Actually that was pretty entertaining but as usual it is just the same fear mongering that we've become accustomed to, coming from liberals. The sky is falling, the sky is falling!
If the states would have had better fiscal discipline in the "boom" years then they won't have blown all their $ on money sucking social programs
CkG
Have you ever heard of shared revenue or federal matching funds??
Yes I have
but it is still THE STATE making the decisions on funding.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
The best I've read today! ...and oh so true
Only in a right winger's head.
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
The best I've read today! ...and oh so true
I kinda like this one.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Originally posted by: BDawg
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
The best I've read today! ...and oh so true
I kinda like this one.
Ah, but that's where you are wrong
we aren't as a nation religious extremists. Are there some extremists who are american - yup. But I hardly think our gov't is a extreme religious one.SuperTool - You can't tell me Daschle and his cronies would like nothing more than to keep using a "sputtering" economy as a platform to bash Bush on. You can bet your @ss that all the Democratic contenders are just chomping at the bit to start directly attacking Bush about the economy(but they have to fend each other off first
)CkG
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: BDawg
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
The best I've read today! ...and oh so true
I kinda like this one.
Ah, but that's where you are wrong
SuperTool - You can't tell me Daschle and his cronies would like nothing more than to keep using a "sputtering" economy as a platform to bash Bush on. You can bet your @ss that all the Democratic contenders are just chomping at the bit to start directly attacking Bush about the economy(but they have to fend each other off first
CkG
His point is the members of the current administration are largely right-wing religious extremeists, who wish to push their beliefs on the rest of us.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Originally posted by: BDawg
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: BDawg
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
The best I've read today! ...and oh so true
I kinda like this one.
Ah, but that's where you are wrong
SuperTool - You can't tell me Daschle and his cronies would like nothing more than to keep using a "sputtering" economy as a platform to bash Bush on. You can bet your @ss that all the Democratic contenders are just chomping at the bit to start directly attacking Bush about the economy(but they have to fend each other off first
CkG
His point is the members of the current administration are largely right-wing religious extremeists, who wish to push their beliefs on the rest of us.
And he would be wrong
right-wing? i guess so; religious? yeah I suppose; Extremist? HahAhaAahhAhahhaahahaAhah *catches breath* AhahhahahahahaahaahaahhhhaahaahaahhahhAhahaAHAhh.CkG
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: BDawg
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
The best I've read today! ...and oh so true
I kinda like this one.
Ah, but that's where you are wrong
SuperTool - You can't tell me Daschle and his cronies would like nothing more than to keep using a "sputtering" economy as a platform to bash Bush on. You can bet your @ss that all the Democratic contenders are just chomping at the bit to start directly attacking Bush about the economy(but they have to fend each other off first
CkG
Nobody forced Bush to take responsibility for the economy by promising to stimulate it with taxcuts. But he did, and still is doing it. So now that we spent all this money and got ourselves into huge debts at Bush's urging, shouldn't we keep him accountable if there is nothing to show for it in terms what was actually promised, such as job creation and a stimulated economy?
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
When did we "spend" this money? I'm going to assume you are talking about the supposed "surplus" right? If so - let me point out to you that it was A PROJECTED SURPLUS!! They(gov't) never had the money - so how could they have already spent it? I think you are overestimating the size of that token tax rebate we got last year. THAT was tiny and could in no way even dent the supposed surplus that is now "gone". The reason for the disapperance of the "surplus" is that the economy tanked, not some small little tax rebate
Now I do have issues with Bush's PROPOSED "tax-cut" plan, and that is that it isn't BIG ENOUGH to do any real good.You see - it is the gov't responsibility that when times get rough - they need to curb spending not to just keep taxing and spending. It also needs to realize that if they are in rough times - obviously it's citizens are having rough times too - so giving them a tax break will ease the burden.
Do I have issues with Bush creating more bureaucracy? Damn right I do:| And I look for it to be dismantled as soon as enough people in Congress realize what a devastating affect it could have on our civil liberties. The best way would be for Congress to just cut the funding
That'd make some more "room" for Bush's tax cutsCkG
I am not talking about the surplus. I am talking about the 300+ Billion a year the government is borrowing to afford these taxcuts with nothing to show for it. That's 15% of the budget that you aren't paying for and that's being passed on as debt to future generations.
Now why do you feel entitled to give yourself a taxcut by borrowing money and passing the debt on to someone else? Can I have your credit card and buy myself a gift, and leave you with the bill?
So unless the government curbs spending, a taxcut is plain and simple theft. And since Bush is not pushing for spending cuts, but instead is getting us into expensive unnecessary overseas adventures, I don't see what moral right he has to ask for a tax cut.
Now why do you feel entitled to give yourself a taxcut by borrowing money and passing the debt on to someone else? Can I have your credit card and buy myself a gift, and leave you with the bill?
So unless the government curbs spending, a taxcut is plain and simple theft. And since Bush is not pushing for spending cuts, but instead is getting us into expensive unnecessary overseas adventures, I don't see what moral right he has to ask for a tax cut.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
I think this is funny because we actually agree(to a point). We need to curb government spending - PERIOD. But I take issue with calling a tax cut "theft" because "we don't have the money". So on the flip side - if there was a "surplus"
a tax cut would be OK? You see - there will never be a "surplus" because if there is one - they'll either actually spend it - or never collect it(via tax reductions)
CkG
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
But I take issue with calling a tax cut "theft" because "we don't have the money". So on the flip side - if there was a "surplus"
You see - there will never be a "surplus" because if there is one - they'll either actually spend it - or never collect it(via tax reductions)
CkG
If there was a surplus, ideally we would use it to pay down the debt. But if we gave it out as a tax cut, at least we wouldn't pass on any additional debt to future generations.
But if we just borrow money, spend it, and then pass on the debt and the interest to our children, that is theft. You are buying something now, and expect them to pay for it later. If over the course of your lifetime, the government spends more on your behalf than you pay in taxes, then one way or another the government is stealing on your behalf. The only difference between Democrats and Republicans is that the Democrats want to steal from the well off of today, while Republicans want to steal from the future generations. But neither of them wants to stop the stealing. It's very easy to go to constituents and say, we are going to give you all these government services, and we are going to buy all these wars gadgets and make ourselves secure,but you won't have to pay for them, because we'll either have someone else pay for them now, or just pass the debt to the kids.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
But I take issue with calling a tax cut "theft" because "we don't have the money". So on the flip side - if there was a "surplus"
You see - there will never be a "surplus" because if there is one - they'll either actually spend it - or never collect it(via tax reductions)
CkG
If there was a surplus, ideally we would use it to pay down the debt. But if we gave it out as a tax cut, at least we wouldn't pass on any additional debt to future generations.
But if we just borrow money, spend it, and then pass on the debt and the interest to our children, that is theft. You are buying something now, and expect them to pay for it later. If over the course of your lifetime, the government spends more on your behalf than you pay in taxes, then one way or another the government is stealing on your behalf. The only difference between Democrats and Republicans is that the Democrats want to steal from the well off of today, while Republicans want to steal from the future generations. But neither of them wants to stop the stealing. It's very easy to go to constituents and say, we are going to give you all these government services, and we are going to buy all these wars gadgets and make ourselves secure,but you won't have to pay for them, because we'll either have someone else pay for them now, or just pass the debt to the kids.
It is not "theft"
However, I do agree that we need to "pay down the debt" but I believe that it should actually be a budget item just like you or I would have to do with our budgets. We don't get to just pay interest on our mortgage payments so why should the gov't? The reason I say so is because "my generation" didn't create this debt but should do our part to help take care of it BUT NOT be responsible for carrying the burden of our parents and grandparents.
Example(these numbers come from HERE): Say we have 6.46Trillion in debts. lets say we want to pay it off like a 25yr mortgage. Seeing as our interest payment on that amount is currently roughly 167Billion We'd have to budget well over 600Billion a year to come close to paying it off in 25 years(assuming 8% interest) So that would take quite a chunk of our yearly budget to do so. Now I'd say 25yrs is quite an optomistic goal but it could be done - ESPECIALLY if we could ever get special interest money under control. If we could cut half of the pork out of the budget we'd be well on our way to "finding" the money to make our debt payments.
After looking over that site http://www.uwsa.com/uwsa-usdebt.html I am quite shocked as to the sheer size of our debt and the debt per family numbers:Q Now is the debt something that should be #1 on the priority list? Maybe - Maybe not but it still needs to be addressed and I think if they looked at the payment numbers I showed Congress would be forced to put spending bills under alot more scrutiny than they have in the past.
I'm not blaming "sides" here but someone needs to grow a set and take charge to end wasteful gov't spending.
CkG
Edit - and just so you know
I'd be willing to for-go my "tax-cut" IF Congress would layout a plan to end wasteful spending and to pay our debts - but until then I want them to get as little of my money as possible. If somebody spends the money and then doesn't pay his own bills and passes the debt on to you, I call that theft. You can call it what you want, but it's distinction without a difference. Our generation didn't create the debt, but it's adding to it, especially under Dubya.
And yes, paying down the debt should be a budget item. We can run surpluses and deficits in various year, but over time they should balance out.
And yes, paying down the debt should be a budget item. We can run surpluses and deficits in various year, but over time they should balance out.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter