HOw much credibility do the democrat mouthpieces have in deficit hawk status.

[Baruch Menachem]

Cheesewars has another inane poll up, so I want to replace it with one of mine.

But it really is an interesting question for everyone.

After nearly doubling the debt over the last two years, the Democrats are suddenly being deficit hawks about the Bush Tax cuts. How credible do you regard this argument in light of what they have done since they came in.

My personal arguments are that the tax cuts are stimulative and more effective than Democrat stimulus. YMMV of course. The tax cuts go to productive areas of the economy, rather than to areas that are just spending for its own sake, and recycling government money into politicly favored groups.

Tax cuts also have the positive of restricting government inanity. Always a positive.

Also, at current rates, in addition to be stimulative, lower rates do produce higher income. what with substation effects, folks dropping out of the economy because the game is not worth the candle, and the reality that profits mean that this is an area more business wants to get into, and more profits mean more jobs.


The real economy is the choices the people make for their own improvement. Government getting out of the way and allowing for greater freedom will lead to greater prosperity.
anyway, to the poll.

Cheesewars has been put on notice that his polls bug me a lot, and he is not going to do them with impunity any more.

Also, could a nice mod please remove the other thread? I made a bungle.

 

[sangha]

Cheesewars has another inane poll up, so I want to replace it with one of mine.

But it really is an interesting question for everyone.

After nearly doubling the debt over the last two years, the Democrats are suddenly being deficit hawks about the Bush Tax cuts. How credible do you regard this argument in light of what they have done since they came in.

My personal arguments are that the tax cuts are stimulative and more effective than Democrat stimulus. YMMV of course. The tax cuts go to productive areas of the economy, rather than to areas that are just spending for its own sake, and recycling government money into politicly favored groups.

Tax cuts also have the positive of restricting government inanity. Always a positive.

Also, at current rates, in addition to be stimulative, lower rates do produce higher income. what with substation effects, folks dropping out of the economy because the game is not worth the candle, and the reality that profits mean that this is an area more business wants to get into, and more profits mean more jobs.


The real economy is the choices the people make for their own improvement. Government getting out of the way and allowing for greater freedom will lead to greater prosperity.
anyway, to the poll.

Cheesewars has been put on notice that his polls bug me a lot, and he is not going to do them with impunity any more.

Also, could a nice mod please remove the other thread? I made a bungle.

If wingnuts didn't lie, they'd have nothing to say

The only President to come close to doubling the debt was bush*

 

[Full-Auto]

Cheesewars has another inane poll up, so I want to replace it with one of mine.

But it really is an interesting question for everyone.

After nearly doubling the debt over the last two years, the Democrats are suddenly being deficit hawks about the Bush Tax cuts. How credible do you regard this argument in light of what they have done since they came in.

My personal arguments are that the tax cuts are stimulative and more effective than Democrat stimulus. YMMV of course. The tax cuts go to productive areas of the economy, rather than to areas that are just spending for its own sake, and recycling government money into politicly favored groups.

Tax cuts also have the positive of restricting government inanity. Always a positive.

Also, at current rates, in addition to be stimulative, lower rates do produce higher income. what with substation effects, folks dropping out of the economy because the game is not worth the candle, and the reality that profits mean that this is an area more business wants to get into, and more profits mean more jobs.


The real economy is the choices the people make for their own improvement. Government getting out of the way and allowing for greater freedom will lead to greater prosperity.
anyway, to the poll.

Cheesewars has been put on notice that his polls bug me a lot, and he is not going to do them with impunity any more.

Also, could a nice mod please remove the other thread? I made a bungle.

If wingnuts didn't lie, they'd have nothing to say

The only President to come close to doubling the debt was bush*

LOL Brother do you have it bad. Obama is set to pass everyone like they were standing still. I see you also gave a pass to pelosi and her 5 trillion.

Meaning you are just a pathetic hack.

 

[sangha]

Cheesewars has another inane poll up, so I want to replace it with one of mine.

But it really is an interesting question for everyone.

After nearly doubling the debt over the last two years, the Democrats are suddenly being deficit hawks about the Bush Tax cuts. How credible do you regard this argument in light of what they have done since they came in.

My personal arguments are that the tax cuts are stimulative and more effective than Democrat stimulus. YMMV of course. The tax cuts go to productive areas of the economy, rather than to areas that are just spending for its own sake, and recycling government money into politicly favored groups.

Tax cuts also have the positive of restricting government inanity. Always a positive.

Also, at current rates, in addition to be stimulative, lower rates do produce higher income. what with substation effects, folks dropping out of the economy because the game is not worth the candle, and the reality that profits mean that this is an area more business wants to get into, and more profits mean more jobs.


The real economy is the choices the people make for their own improvement. Government getting out of the way and allowing for greater freedom will lead to greater prosperity.
anyway, to the poll.

Cheesewars has been put on notice that his polls bug me a lot, and he is not going to do them with impunity any more.

Also, could a nice mod please remove the other thread? I made a bungle.

If wingnuts didn't lie, they'd have nothing to say

The only President to come close to doubling the debt was bush*

LOL Brother do you have it bad. Obama is set to pass everyone like they were standing still. I see you also gave a pass to pelosi and her 5 trillion.

Meaning you are just a pathetic hack.

The fact remains that it was bush* who nearly doubled the national debt, and fact that 75% of the national debt was incurred under three Republican presidents - Reagan, GHWB, and bush*

 

[Truthmatters]

Dont bother them with facts.

 

[Oddball]

How much credibility do the democrat mouthpieces have in deficit hawk status.

Less than zero.

 

[The Rabbi]

How much credibility do the democrat mouthpieces have in deficit hawk status.

Less than zero.

How can you tell when a Democrat is lying? His lips are moving.

Democrats have no credibility because when you start asking about cutting the budget the first thing they get into is "we need to preserve funding for our children" and then vote another billion dollars on an airport to nowhere.

 

[JWBooth]

I don't put any more stock in bankster puppet Dimocraps claims to fiscal responsibility than I do the bankster puppet Repugnantcraps.

 

[Toro]

As much as Republicans.

 

[daveman]

Saw this on another board -- the poster got it in an email:

Got this in an e-mail, and while it has a couple of technicalities wrong, the overall gist is correct. Note that fiscal years for the federal government run from October 1 to September 30. So, at present, we are in fiscal year 2011 as far as the federal budget is concerned.

The Washington Post babbled again today about Obama inheriting a huge deficit from Bush. Amazingly enough,..... A lot of people swallow this nonsense. So once more, a short civics lesson.

Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from Congress, and the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democrat Party. They controlled the budget process for FY 2008 and FY 2009, as well as FY 2010 and FY 2011. In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases.

For FY 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the FY 2009 budgets..

And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete FY 2009. Let's remember what the deficits looked like during that period:

If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the FY 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets. If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself.

In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is I inherited a deficit that I voted for and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th, 2009.​

Technically, budgets do come from the White House, in the sense that the President submits his proposal for the next year's spending as well as a long-term outlook to Congress, who then go and make all sorts of changes and revisions and the like, and then it goes back to the President for a signature. But, it is often the case that the budget that comes back to the President for a signature bears little resemblance to the budget proposal that the President submitted in the first place. George Bush did indeed submit a budget proposal to Congress for Fiscal Year 2009. You can go look at it here, either as one gigantic document or broken down into smaller pieces. But guess what? The e-mail is actually true: that budget was never voted on and sent back to Bush for a signature:

The FY 2009 continuing resolution was a measure designed to allow Congressional leaders to work around the 2008 presidential election and deflect spending fights with President Bush during his last months in office. Foreseeing a repeat of budget fights over FY 2007 and FY 2008, the Democratic leadership in the House and Senate chose not to pursue several appropriations bills leading up to the 2008 summer recess. The only appropriations bill sent to President Bush for his signature was the 2008 Defense authorization bill​

And, indeed, it did fund the federal government through February of 2009.

So, yeah, the claims that Bush created the huge deficit that Obama inherited are false. The Democrats, to include then-Senator Obama, are responsible.

 

[kiwiman127]

Being deficit hawks during the GWB years, so they have had practice.
But then the GOP all of a sudden became deficit hawks after they were ousted.
I see hypocrisy on both sides of the aisle.
But in regards to this thread's poll, I voted; After what they did over the last two years, they think we should trust them a millimeter?
Of course I am as aware as the rest of you, that the last two budgets contain carry over expensive programs from the Bush years; Medicare Drug Program, Iraq and Afghanistanand interest on previous deficits per example.
But did the Dems take that in consideration when they put together their budgets? I doubt it.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

I find it amusing that both sides do this to some degree. Democrats see every penny of spending as necessary and relaxation of taxation as irresponsible. Republicans go Deficit deficit deficit, except when tax cuts are promoted as stimulative.

 

[uscitizen]

About the same amount of credibility as the republicans do.