Does This Hit Home

Meister

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Jan 15, 2009
64,907
39,569
2,605
Conservative part of the Northwest
Take away the politicians, doesn't this sound really rediculous?


$Mallard_Fillmore.gif (double click the comic...my apologies)
Mallard Fillmore
 
How many times to rw's have have it explained why and how our individual homes are not the same as the US government?

Never mind cuz it always falls on deaf ears.
 
Spending our way to prosperity is like either taking out a college loan for yourself in the hopes schooling will make you more money or as a business, advertising or getting a new product in the hopes of selling more.

Not totally foreign to a government investing in more infrastructure to make sure everyone is not unemployed at once or issuing more tuition grants to help the future.
 
Runaway deficit spending can be cured witha few amendments to the Constitution.

Term limits for Congress Critters.
A reasonable Balanced Budget Amendment (with exceptions for a declared war).
A plan to pay off the debt.
 
Spending our way to prosperity is like either taking out a college loan for yourself in the hopes schooling will make you more money or as a business, advertising or getting a new product in the hopes of selling more.

Not totally foreign to a government investing in more infrastructure to make sure everyone is not unemployed at once or issuing more tuition grants to help the future.

At 16 trillion plus, how is that working out for ourselves? :doubt:
 
Runaway deficit spending can be cured witha few amendments to the Constitution.

Term limits for Congress Critters.
A reasonable Balanced Budget Amendment (with exceptions for a declared war).
A plan to pay off the debt.

Good luck with that.
 
Spending our way to prosperity is like either taking out a college loan for yourself in the hopes schooling will make you more money or as a business, advertising or getting a new product in the hopes of selling more.
Except those "investments " are made in anticipation of a financial return, not a political return.

Not totally foreign to a government investing in more infrastructure to make sure everyone is not unemployed at once or issuing more tuition grants to help the future.
What's totally foreign you you is the broken window fallacy.
 
Runaway deficit spending can be cured witha few amendments to the Constitution.

Term limits for Congress Critters.
A reasonable Balanced Budget Amendment (with exceptions for a declared war).
A plan to pay off the debt.

I can accomplish all that without term limits or a balanced budget amendment very easily. And so can Congress if they really wanted to. But they don't want to.

1. Raise the Social Security and Medicare eligibility ages to 70 or index them to 6 percent of our population. We are living longer, we should be working longer. Raising the age means we pay in five years longer, and draw out five years less. Only 6 percent of Americans qualified for Social Security when it was enacted. Today, 13 percent do. We need to put it back to 6 percent, which means raising the eligibility age.

That alone would probably balance the budget. If it doesn't, the next part will:

2. Eliminate all tax expenditures. Uncle Santa gives away $1 trillion of loopholes, deductions, credits, and other gifts in our tax code every year. That very nearly matches our current budget deficit.

Ban all tax expenditures once and for all. This will maximize the width of the tax base, bringing a lot more people into the taxpayer tent, causing them to have skin in the game.

With a wider tax base, you can lower the tax rates.

So how does that solve the term limit problem, you may be asking.

If a Congressman cannot put and maintain a loophole in the tax code for a campaign donor, then his source of campaign funds will be greatly diminished, giving the competition for his seat a fighting chance. 40 years of 7 or 8 major campaign finance reforms have not put a dent in the 97 percent re-election rate of incumbents.

But do away with the ability to buy gifts from Uncle Santa with campaign cash, and voilà, no more need for term limits or campaign finance reform!


Which is exactly why you won't see Congress diminishing their chances of re-election with anything like tax reform.

Instead, they will conspire to keep the rubes in a froth over tax hikes and spending cuts.

ETA: Oh, I forgot number 3:

3. Reduce defense spending to the pre-war levels. One war is over, the other is winding down. There is no excuse to continue emergency war levels of spending when the emergency has passed. None. Zip. Zilch. Nada.

.
 
Last edited:
How many times to rw's have have it explained why and how our individual homes are not the same as the US government?

Never mind cuz it always falls on deaf ears.


I must have missed class that day. Please do enlighten me. Thanks!
 
The couple in the cartoon is more than $85,000 in debt if they are a typical couple.

The part such analogies invariably forget is mortgage debt.

That couple is carrying closer to $300,000 in debt. And that puts them proportionally at a much higher debt-to-GDP ratio than our government.

.
 
Take away the politicians, doesn't this sound really rediculous?


View attachment 22819 (double click the comic...my apologies)
Mallard Fillmore

did they intentionally cut their own income flow and then go on a spending binge?

now that would be really stupid.


If someone is spending recklessly they should have their money/credit source cut off or at least curtailed back especially if it is MY money they are pissing away like drunken fools.
 
The couple in the cartoon is more than $85,000 in debt if they are a typical couple.

The part such analogies invariably forget is mortgage debt.

That couple is carrying closer to $300,000 in debt. And that puts them proportionally at a much higher debt-to-GDP ratio than our government.

.

It's a fuckign cartoon, dude. It's meant to convey a point, not get all literal in semantics/analytics. Jesus.
 
Take away the politicians, doesn't this sound really rediculous?


View attachment 22819 (double click the comic...my apologies)
Mallard Fillmore

did they intentionally cut their own income flow and then go on a spending binge?

now that would be really stupid.


If someone is spending recklessly they should have their money/credit source cut off or at least curtailed back especially if it is MY money they are pissing away like drunken fools.

when the budget is set based on a certain income level, it would be irresponsible to cut one's available cash flow.

wouldn't it?

so before you get to cuts, shouldn't you restore your income flow?

or minimally engage in a combination of both?
 
The couple in the cartoon is more than $85,000 in debt if they are a typical couple.

The part such analogies invariably forget is mortgage debt.

That couple is carrying closer to $300,000 in debt. And that puts them proportionally at a much higher debt-to-GDP ratio than our government.

.

It's a fuckign cartoon, dude. It's meant to convey a point, not get all literal in semantics/analytics. Jesus.

It's a false premise, which leads the rube to an incorrect conclusion, which is what logical fallacies do.


.
 

Forum List

Back
Top