Chavez Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 I've got a Brett Favre Big Head I could send. If you wrap that around a duffle bag it could make a nice scarecrow. It would also keep Jenn Sterger's out of your garden. I want the Jenn Stergers in my garden, it's the rabbits I want to keep out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 (edited) Since you're so good at building straw men, I could use a scarecrow for the my vegetable garden. Strawmen? Really? The current President's self-proclaimed solution to our financial crisis in this country is to increase taxes on any person whose income is greater than $200k or any couple whose income is greater than $250k. Simple question - is that true or false? That's in the name of what he calls "fairness" despite those income earners paying a significantly disproportionately greater portion of Federal taxes than the rest of the country already. But given the rate this administration is spending money far in excess of its revenues, the Federal government couls strip the upper 1% of income earners in this country of every penny of income that they have and it wouldn't come anywhere close to closing the annual deficit. And once that money is gone, who invests in businesses? Who provides the capital that allows businesses to startup and then grow? More importantly, who does the Federal government turn to afterwards to fund its wildly outrageous excess spending? Pretty fundamental questions. I'll wait to hear your answer. Edited September 5, 2012 by Bronco Billy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 I'm guessing the answer is going to be me. I think I will be required to work harder, to produce more, so that it can be taken. I Boxer will have to pull harder on my wagon while remembering that two legs are bad and four are good, and that while all are created equal, some are more equal than others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 I'm guessing the answer is going to be me. I think I will be required to work harder, to produce more, so that it can be taken. I Boxer will have to pull harder on my wagon while remembering that two legs are bad and four are good, and that while all are created equal, some are more equal than others. Freakin' teachers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 Strawmen? Really? The current President's self-proclaimed solution to our financial crisis in this country is to increase taxes on any person whose income is greater than $200k or any couple whose income is greater than $250k. Simple question - is that true or false? That's in the name of what he calls "fairness" despite those income earners paying a significantly disproportionately greater portion of Federal taxes than the rest of the country already. But given the rate this administration is spending money far in excess of its revenues, the Federal government couls strip the upper 1% of income earners in this country of every penny of income that they have and it wouldn't come anywhere close to closing the annual deficit. And once that money is gone, who invests in businesses? Who provides the capital that allows businesses to startup and then grow? More importantly, who does the Federal government turn to afterwards to fund its wildly outrageous excess spending? Pretty fundamental questions. I'll wait to hear your answer. You may not be right, but at least you're loud. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 You may not be right, but at least you're loud. and open-minded.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 You may not be right, but at least you're loud. I may not be right, but I'd sure like you to point out what of the above is wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 So I guess Az is arguing for high paying benefited union jobs instead of republican utopian cheap labor. Who woulda thunk it? It's no secret that real wages for the low and middle class have stagnated while income and wealth creation for the upper class has grown considerably. That's been happening to varying degrees since the 90s. There's probably a dozen or more factors that have contributed to that reality - its not something that can be explained or solved with bumper sticker logic. The only thing I'm certain of in this regard is that it won't really matter who is elected president. For those eager to place blame I believe the three main culprits are: (1) Congress' inability to get anything done; (2) the "job creators" are better at getting more work out of fewer employees; and (3) America's middle class labor market has been slow to pick up the skills and eduction necessary for today's good jobs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 If only we had passed that jobs bill the Republicans put forward... Oh, that's right, they were too busy trying to rule America's 'poon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 If only we had passed that jobs bill the Republicans put forward... Oh, that's right, they were too busy trying to rule America's 'poon. Obama is absolutely relying on people like you for his re-election bid. The GOP's "jobs bill" is pretty simplistic: Get the Federal government off of the private sector's back and jobs will be a byproduct of the recovery. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 I may not be right, but I'd sure like you to point out what of the above is wrong. Let's start with your two most egregious comments. First, your comment that "The current President's self-proclaimed solution to our financial crisis in this country is to increase taxes on any person whose income is greater than $200k or any couple whose income is greater than $250k. Simple question - is that true or false?" Please locate the proclamation by President Obama in which he stated that this tax increase is the "solution to our financial crisis." Second, let's focus on your comment about how "this administration is spending money far in excess of its revenues." Perhaps you would care to educate us on which administrations in the past 50 years *haven't* spent more than it took in. While national spending has grown under President Obama, he has successfully slowed that growth better than any modern president, including Reagan. Yes, the deficit has grown but that is because the deficit is the result of two forces - spending and revenue. And revenue is way down for two reasons, namely: (1) taxes are at historic lows; and (2) the global economy sucks. Those things were true when Obama took office and there is no rational economist that I am aware of suggesting that Obama (or any other president) had the means to fix the economy in just a couple of years. We're likely on a 10+ year path to a slow, slogging recovery and that's going to be true regardless of who sits in the White House. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted September 5, 2012 Author Share Posted September 5, 2012 US Slips Down the Ranks of Global Competitiveness The United States has slipped further down a global ranking of the world's most competitive economies, according to a World Economic Forum (WEF) survey released on Wednesday. The world's largest economy, which was placed 5th last year, fell two positions to the 7th spot - marking its fourth year of decline. A lack of macroeconomic stability, the business community’s continued mistrust of the government and concerns over its fiscal health were some of the reasons for the downgrade, according to the annual survey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 Mcpwn'd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SayItAintSoJoe Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 US Slips Down the Ranks of Global Competitiveness So who do you blame the political deadlock on? It seems to be a big part of the reason in the linked article. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted September 5, 2012 Author Share Posted September 5, 2012 So who do you blame the political deadlock on? that is easy. our elected leaders in government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEC=UGA Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 Let's start with your two most egregious comments. First, your comment that "The current President's self-proclaimed solution to our financial crisis in this country is to increase taxes on any person whose income is greater than $200k or any couple whose income is greater than $250k. Simple question - is that true or false?" Please locate the proclamation by President Obama in which he stated that this tax increase is the "solution to our financial crisis." Second, let's focus on your comment about how "this administration is spending money far in excess of its revenues." Perhaps you would care to educate us on which administrations in the past 50 years *haven't* spent more than it took in. While national spending has grown under President Obama, he has successfully slowed that growth better than any modern president, including Reagan. Yes, the deficit has grown but that is because the deficit is the result of two forces - spending and revenue. And revenue is way down for two reasons, namely: (1) taxes are at historic lows; and (2) the global economy sucks. Those things were true when Obama took office and there is no rational economist that I am aware of suggesting that Obama (or any other president) had the means to fix the economy in just a couple of years. We're likely on a 10+ year path to a slow, slogging recovery and that's going to be true regardless of who sits in the White House. Well, I hate to argue with a Forbes writer, but, dude is wrong. From the sources I have seen, the 2012 budget is 3.79 trillion (not the 3.58 the author is quoting and 2013 is estimated to be 3.80 trillion) So, we have a baseline of 3.456 trillion in 2010 and that has moved up to an estimated 3.80 trillion in 2013... That is an increase of 347 BILLION which equates to a +/- 9% increase from your base line of 2010. Yes, this is better than Bush, Clinton, Bush and Regan (actually, it seems all of the authors numbers are skewed due to the way he chooses to view them.) but this is hardly "thrifty" considering a few facts. A large portion of the spending increases during the Bush admin were to fight two illegal wars against sovereign nations. These wars have been supposedly, for the most part, ended..;. where are the savings? Secondly, there was a large amount of govt. spending that went toward establishing new national security measures, essentially, new government bureaus were created at monumental costs, so that added to the budget. Then, the first stimulus was carried by the Bush admin, adding considerably to the budget. So, you cn look at it however you want, but in total $$ Obama is not nearly as frugal as one may think. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 So, you cn look at it however you want, but in total $$ Obama is not nearly as frugal as one may think. My point is that he's a more frugal president than most people give him credit for. The Bronco Billy's of the world think he spends like a drunken sailor but it just isn't true, especially when you considering that much of his budgetary spending is attributable to wars he didn't start and one-time stimulus spending that isn't a recurring item in the budget. As far as the "security measures" he's damned if he does (because he spent money) damned if he doesn't (because he isn't "securing our borders). At least that spending employed some Americans and made us all a little safer - there are certainly worse things we could have done with that money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 that is easy. our elected leaders in government. And their political opponents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted September 5, 2012 Author Share Posted September 5, 2012 And their political opponents. who are also elected leaders in government, thus redundant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted September 5, 2012 Author Share Posted September 5, 2012 speaking of blame for fiscal stalemate and gridlock, I just recently read an interesting piece on that, detailing a lot of the inside baseball that went down between obama and boehner when they were actually incredibly close to a far-reaching debt deal before it fell apart at the last minute. it's a very balanced piece, and either side can find plenty of grist for their partisan mill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 who are also elected leaders in government, thus redundant. Tongue, meet cheek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsfan Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 So who do you blame the political deadlock on? It seems to be a big part of the reason in the linked article. The American people. We have only ourselves to blame for electing these idiots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 (edited) My point is that he's a more frugal president than most people give him credit for. The Bronco Billy's of the world think he spends like a drunken sailor but it just isn't true, especially when you considering that much of his budgetary spending is attributable to wars he didn't start and one-time stimulus spending that isn't a recurring item in the budget. As far as the "security measures" he's damned if he does (because he spent money) damned if he doesn't (because he isn't "securing our borders). At least that spending employed some Americans and made us all a little safer - there are certainly worse things we could have done with that money. You have no clue how the Bronco Billys of the world think. That line of reasoning is completely foreign to you. We know that almost 60% of current Federal spending goes to entitlement programs - SS, Medicare & Medicaid, Federal pensions, and welfare predominantly. We also know that just under a quarter of spending goes to Defense. 6% goes to interest payments on the national debt. 4% goes to Education. The interest payments will do nothing but go up, since we keep increasing the national debt every year. Entitlements as scheduled also do nothing but go up. Defense figures to be about the same. So the only rational ways to make a meaningful impact on reducing the future deficits is to have the whole of the world get along better - unlikely - or to completely renovate entitlements. There's only one party right now even willing to think about doing that and proposing alternatives - the other party is constantly using changes in entitlements as a scare factor to continue getting voted into office. I'll await your response. Edited September 5, 2012 by Bronco Billy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 The American people. We have only ourselves to blame for electing these idiots. I concur. Vicious cycle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 McMisniformed in McDenial Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.