White House Find $20 Billion In Cuts....

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,329
126
Ha.



The PJ partisan dictionary explains "debatable" means "somethign clearly shows PJ disagrees with so he can't quite just say the wrong thing. For example, whether Saddam had WMD threatening us is debatable.

The Bush tax cuts returned 22% on the dollar, I've seen.

Yes, it was another matter lowering the top 90% rate to 70%, as JFK did following the depression/WWII era, than it is today with the much lower rates post-Reagan.

It's not 'debatable' whether the Bush-type debt-increasing tax cuts pay more back in taxes.

They're theft from future taxpayers, at the least.

It's as is a parent could take cash out of his baby's bank account his child has to pay back decades later plus interest.

Nice chart here on some payback rates:

http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2008104427/tax-cuts-ineffcient-stimulus


Ahh, now I see.

Republican tax cuts = They're theft from future taxpayers, at the least.

Democrat tax cuts + record spending = is the basis for the prosperity needed to get the money so we can do better things and end the deficit when the economy is better.


Until someone actually spends less or equal to our revenue we will continue stealing from our children. Current tax payers haven't paid a dime of that money back and I seriously doubt they will in their lifetimes. And no, Clinton did not spend less than we made although I do give him a lot of credit for not having insane deficits but the debt did grow along with accounting games (social security for example).
 

conehead433

Diamond Member
Dec 4, 2002
5,569
901
126
Reminds me of the movie Dave. Finding cuts to provide something useful. We all know how that works out. We'd all be better off if DC could just disappear off the face of the earth with all the politicians in it when it does.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Ahh, now I see.

Republican tax cuts = They're theft from future taxpayers, at the least.

Democrat tax cuts + record spending = is the basis for the prosperity needed to get the money so we can do better things and end the deficit when the economy is better.


Until someone actually spends less or equal to our revenue we will continue stealing from our children. Current tax payers haven't paid a dime of that money back and I seriously doubt they will in their lifetimes. And no, Clinton did not spend less than we made although I do give him a lot of credit for not having insane deficits but the debt did grow along with accounting games (social security for example).

For the stimulus, ya. The Dems are guilty of some bad spending too in general. You say Clinton didn't spend less than we made - he balanced the budget in 2000, having reduced it every year.

That includes the $200B+ he borrowed from Social Security from the 'trust fund' set up by Reagan that's borrowed every presiednt since it was created.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,705
6,261
126
it's kinda like getting a diet coke when ordering a super-sized double whopper with cheese + fries.

You might think so, but this is at least 3(by my count) Cuts so far each over $10billion. There seems to be a trend developing of New Cuts to be announced and with $30billion(est) announced so far it won't take long for some real significance is built up.
 

Zargon

Lifer
Nov 3, 2009
12,218
2
76
You might think so, but this is at least 3(by my count) Cuts so far each over $10billion. There seems to be a trend developing of New Cuts to be announced and with $30billion(est) announced so far it won't take long for some real significance is built up.


hes still ~500B from not spending more than last year, at 10 bill a pop thats A LONG time before hes spending less than he did last year, in which he printed 1t+ in new money to pay for stuff.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,705
6,261
126
hes still ~500B from not spending more than last year, at 10 bill a pop thats A LONG time before hes spending less than he did last year, in which he printed 1t+ in new money to pay for stuff.

That "stuff" he Paid for wasn't even really "stuff" at all. Not $1(IIRC) was actually Spent on what he or the Democrats Campaigned for and what Americans Voted for. So far it's all a direct result of the shambles of an Economy he inherited.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
hes still ~500B from not spending more than last year, at 10 bill a pop thats A LONG time before hes spending less than he did last year, in which he printed 1t+ in new money to pay for stuff.

Imagine what he'd spend if the econonmy had any big problems needing government stimulus!
 

Zargon

Lifer
Nov 3, 2009
12,218
2
76
That "stuff" he Paid for wasn't even really "stuff" at all. Not $1(IIRC) was actually Spent on what he or the Democrats Campaigned for and what Americans Voted for. So far it's all a direct result of the shambles of an Economy he inherited.


what do you mean it wasnt stuff?

I spent 70K of the stimulus money at stuff at work already. We are trying to acquire the rest of the million dollars from a stupid waste of a project that servers no purpose than 'creating jobs' that will last one month and put it to tangible use.

Imagine what he'd spend if the econonmy had any big problems needing government stimulus!

you mean like doubling the problem he inherited with record spending?

90% of the stimulus is a joke :rolleyes:

Its a trillion dollars of pork projects. Its a damn scam and a half. Most of it is going to utter shit. The government on all levels has shown an utter inability to make correct decisions or spend wisely on anything. So its great we gave them another trillion dollars to waste. THey what, averaged spending 200K to create a job that paid.....one quarter of that at best? BRILLIANT!
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,705
6,261
126
what do you mean it wasnt stuff?

I spent 70K of the stimulus money at stuff at work already. We are trying to acquire the rest of the million dollars from a stupid waste of a project that servers no purpose than 'creating jobs' that will last one month and put it to tangible use.



you mean like doubling the problem he inherited with record spending?

90% of the stimulus is a joke :rolleyes:

Its a trillion dollars of pork projects. Its a damn scam and a half. Most of it is going to utter shit. The government on all levels has shown an utter inability to make correct decisions or spend wisely on anything. So its great we gave them another trillion dollars to waste. THey what, averaged spending 200K to create a job that paid.....one quarter of that at best? BRILLIANT!

"Stuff", meaning New long term Government Programs. "Stuff" that would have been done if the Economy had been stable.
 

child of wonder

Diamond Member
Aug 31, 2006
8,307
176
106
The government is too damn big and too damn wasteful. I'm a tad more liberal than conservative and, to me, it's pretty obvious this country is in a financial tailspin that we may never recover from if we don't start changing our ways. We can't operate in massive deficits year after year after year and expect that some magical prosperous fairy tale is just over the next hill if we only spend, spend, spend to get there!
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,979
0
76
what do you mean it wasnt stuff?

I spent 70K of the stimulus money at stuff at work already. We are trying to acquire the rest of the million dollars from a stupid waste of a project that servers no purpose than 'creating jobs' that will last one month and put it to tangible use.



you mean like doubling the problem he inherited with record spending?

90% of the stimulus is a joke :rolleyes:

Its a trillion dollars of pork projects. Its a damn scam and a half. Most of it is going to utter shit. The government on all levels has shown an utter inability to make correct decisions or spend wisely on anything. So its great we gave them another trillion dollars to waste. THey what, averaged spending 200K to create a job that paid.....one quarter of that at best? BRILLIANT!

Got a link to back up that 90% statement? I'm guessing not. Wasn't ~ 40% of the stimulus tax cuts? Yes, yes it was... LINK
 

Hacp

Lifer
Jun 8, 2005
13,923
2
81
Got a link to back up that 90% statement? I'm guessing not. Wasn't ~ 40% of the stimulus tax cuts? Yes, yes it was... LINK

Not tax cuts. They are handouts plain and simple. A tax cut is a reduction in the tax rate. What Obama did was give free money to his chosen donators.
 

Zargon

Lifer
Nov 3, 2009
12,218
2
76
Got a link to back up that 90% statement? I'm guessing not. Wasn't ~ 40% of the stimulus tax cuts? Yes, yes it was... LINK


you are implying those tax breaks werent mostly a waste?

of COURSE I was generalizing.

http://www.propublica.org/ion/stimu...drought-stimulus-obligations-bounce-back-0125

half of it hasnt been dispersed. and thats going to grind to a halt as PARS is shut down for the month of february, which basically means no $$ is going from the fed to the states from this past Friday through probably mid march.