Okay, I know I said I was trying to not talk about politics so much, but the president's new budget is for 2.9 Trillion dollars!!!! Is he insane? Remember, the government doesn't produce and sell products in order to make their income. They take their money from you and I. He wants to suck 2.9 trillion dollars from our pockets! Does he not understand why the GOP was run out of town? For going along with stuff like this.
And you know what? The Dem's in congress won't bat an eye at that figure. Instead, I bet you, they will complain that he is not spending enough! They'll say the rich are getting off (silly, silly, silly --only proving their ignorance about where these huge amount of tax dollars come from --wait, they're not ignorant, they have their own motives).
Forget the parties, forget the politics. Our government doesn't need that much of our money! Period. Privatise everything and run the bums out of town!
There, I got that off my chest. I feel better.
:)
7 comments:
So Bush puts in a whopper of a budget, and by paragraph 2 you are already blaming the democratics for their hypothetical response?
It was the Republican controlled House and Senate that didn't blink an eye for 6 years.
The budget, when combined with his tax cuts, makes him the least fiscally responsible politician I have ever seen. If you want to cut taxes, you have to reflect that in your spending.
Wizard, you're missing this. I know what the dems are. I know they'll complain about too much spending on military, not enough spending on whatever. This isn't blame. I'm just not a punk who believes the democratic pr. They will say this budget is too small, filled with cuts, starving the poor, all the same old lies they tell all the time. I just wanted to say it before hand so that when they did it, I was on record.
as for tax cuts, I know you don't care about the many economists, like MIlton Friendman, Walter Williams, et al, who rightly point out that cutting taxes will normally increase government revenues --I know they would have gone up anyway in your mind, that's because giving Bush credit would make you go into convulsions, I guess -- but tax cuts are not the issue. Can we just deal with facts, just once? Government revenues are at an all time high. it's just a fact, no matter how you spin it. so tax cuts, even if you don't credit them with helping, are not the major factor here.
as for bush, yes, you are right, the gop didn't bat an eye. I acknowledged that. thank you for agreeing wiht me on at least that.
P.S. Wizard, in thinking more on what you said, I guess I ought to at least commit to this: if I am wrong, and the dems don't complain that this is spending too little on their stuff, and if they do react to the overall number as too high, then I will come on this very blog and humble myself with a proper groveling.
(Anyway, it hardly matters what Bush submits as a budget. Like Reagan after his first two years, whatever he sends will be DOA.)
okay. It's really like monopoly money, or paying $375,000 for a 77 square foot flat in London. If you can afford the monthly payments and the flat is going to appreciate at 20% per year, then everything is fine. So if it's 2.9 trillion or 45 trillion, it makes no difference to me. We have to have the revenues to cover it. (Just like a African family may look at your household budget and say, that's ridiculous no one should have to spend that much money.) But I see and agree with you overall point. We want less government and less goverment spending. We need to cut out the pork, reduce spending, make sure that no service or agency is getting funded by more than the rate of inflation, and above all else just like our own personal budgets, we cannot spend more than we earn, and we certainly want to reduce taxes, not increase them.
You know my dad, an economist, had an interesting way of looking at National Debt. It depends on who you're borrowing it from. If a father borrows from his children, and then he dies, then that is not nearly as bad as if he dies, but his debt is owed to someone else outside of the family. Nationally our problem is that our debt is increasingly becoming foreign debt. And that is very bad.
As far as the dems and gops go. Here's the problem. Gops don't mind going into debt for things they deem as necessary (like fighting a war on terror). Dems will let the Gops spend as long as they can get their pork in too. When the spending gets out of control, the dems want to solve it by raising taxes. Bad dems, bad, bad, bad dems....
Mr Papisir, great to hear from an economist family with a sense of humor.
thanks for the lesson on the number overall. I guess it just seems like such a big, stinking number. Wait, it IS a big stinking number!!!
:)
Taking a "fact", removing it from its context, and using it then to support your point of view, is called "intellectual dishonesty." I'll leave it at that.
I'd rather not have a spiraling deficit. I don't care who we are borrowing it from.
When we wish to discuss the economy in its true context, and not cherry pick data to make us feel better, I'll rejoin the "debate."
"You're killing me, Smalls!"
okay. I give.
peace.
Post a Comment