Someone please explain Bachmann's "reasoning'?
I agree with you that Bachmann is nuts.
However I think your "reasoning" that cutting spending automatically means more unemployment is also nuts.
Want To Create Jobs? Cut Government Spending
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Someone please explain Bachmann's "reasoning'?
Someone please explain Bachmann's "reasoning'?
I agree with you that Bachmann is nuts.
However I think your "reasoning" that cutting spending automatically means more unemployment is also nuts.
Want To Create Jobs? Cut Government Spending
Someone please explain Bachmann's "reasoning'?
I agree with you that Bachmann is nuts.
However I think your "reasoning" that cutting spending automatically means more unemployment is also nuts.
Want To Create Jobs? Cut Government Spending
Fair enough, I explained why cutting government means cutting employees which will increase the numbers of those on the UE Rolls. Explain where my reasoning is wrong.
You can make huge cuts in the military...That doesn't by extension make its personnel parasitic, as national defense is one of the legit functions of the feds.Nice strawman, dickweed.Parasites like... the Department of Defense?
I'm of course speaking of the parasites at the Departments of Education, Commerce, Labor, Energy, HHS & HUD, Fatherl...er...Homeland Security & TSA, CPB/PBS/NPR, BATF, DEA, ONDCP, and the rest of the Alphabet Soup Mafia.
But you already knew that, didn't you?
Now, where does the money to pay those stooges come from?.... Santa Claus?
Aren't you a libertarian Oddball? Why would you not want military might cut from the federal government? That would seem first and foremost wise in terms of fiscal responsibility, and in terms of federal government power.
And therein is you logical fallacy. That is not what has been called for. That is what will be snacted if the government in general comes up with the one thing that is worse than that: continued, unabaited increasing in spending.Should government be cut?. Probably, but not in one drop of the axe and not across the board, Suggesting so is stupid and based on emotion.
I already gave you something but here is a link for it:Someone please explain Bachmann's "reasoning'?
I agree with you that Bachmann is nuts.
However I think your "reasoning" that cutting spending automatically means more unemployment is also nuts.
Want To Create Jobs? Cut Government Spending
Fair enough, I explained why cutting government means cutting employees which will increase the numbers of those on the UE Rolls. Explain where my reasoning is wrong.
Bachmann attacked President Obama's speech yesterday and in part she proposed to massively cut government and to repeal job killing regulations.
If the cost of government is largely the cost of salary and benefits, then cutting government means cutting jobs.
Cutting jobs increases unemployment, so, I conclude, cutting government is a "job killing" proposition.
In my thought process, these government employees have bills to pay, children to raise and whether they are productive in the eyes of some or not, they still pay taxes. In addition they buy things: pizzas and pies, shoes and socks, books and bagels.
How will increasing the unemployment numbers stimulate our economy?
she is merely playing to her base
Nice strawman, dickweed.Parasites like... the Department of Defense?
I'm of course speaking of the parasites at the Departments of Education, Commerce, Labor, Energy, HHS & HUD, Fatherl...er...Homeland Security & TSA, CPB/PBS/NPR, BATF, DEA, ONDCP, and the rest of the Alphabet Soup Mafia.
But you already knew that, didn't you?
Now, where does the money to pay those stooges come from?.... Santa Claus?
Aren't you a libertarian Oddball? Why would you not want military might cut from the federal government? That would seem first and foremost wise in terms of fiscal responsibility, and in terms of federal government power.
Nice strawman, dickweed.
I'm of course speaking of the parasites at the Departments of Education, Commerce, Labor, Energy, HHS & HUD, Fatherl...er...Homeland Security & TSA, CPB/PBS/NPR, BATF, DEA, ONDCP, and the rest of the Alphabet Soup Mafia.
But you already knew that, didn't you?
Now, where does the money to pay those stooges come from?.... Santa Claus?
Aren't you a libertarian Oddball? Why would you not want military might cut from the federal government? That would seem first and foremost wise in terms of fiscal responsibility, and in terms of federal government power.
Oddball is a Corporate stooge. He doesn't want Defense cut because there are way too many high $$ private contracts directly tied to military spending. His priorities aren't for smaller government, it's for bigger business.
Been attending Sallow's hyperbole clinic, I see.
Santa is oh so bountiful on the taxpayers dime.
What ever happened to that list that showed all the waste and the multiple Depts doing the same thing??
Get rid of the useless Depts and the Fed employees that work in em.
Aren't you a libertarian Oddball? Why would you not want military might cut from the federal government? That would seem first and foremost wise in terms of fiscal responsibility, and in terms of federal government power.
Oddball is a Corporate stooge. He doesn't want Defense cut because there are way too many high $$ private contracts directly tied to military spending. His priorities aren't for smaller government, it's for bigger business.
I got a crazy idea, how about we go by what Oddball says rather than making a crazy prediction based on mind-reading and hoping its right, sound good?
Don't mind him...He's still all butthurt from having his ass handed to him, when it was pointed out that so-called "net neutrality" is a corporate crony capitalist's wet dream come to life.Aren't you a libertarian Oddball? Why would you not want military might cut from the federal government? That would seem first and foremost wise in terms of fiscal responsibility, and in terms of federal government power.
Oddball is a Corporate stooge. He doesn't want Defense cut because there are way too many high $$ private contracts directly tied to military spending. His priorities aren't for smaller government, it's for bigger business.
I got a crazy idea, how about we go by what Oddball says rather than making a crazy prediction based on attempted mind-reading and hoping its right, sound good?
Nice strawman, dickweed.
I'm of course speaking of the parasites at the Departments of Education, Commerce, Labor, Energy, HHS & HUD, Fatherl...er...Homeland Security & TSA, CPB/PBS/NPR, BATF, DEA, ONDCP, and the rest of the Alphabet Soup Mafia.
But you already knew that, didn't you?
Now, where does the money to pay those stooges come from?.... Santa Claus?
Aren't you a libertarian Oddball? Why would you not want military might cut from the federal government? That would seem first and foremost wise in terms of fiscal responsibility, and in terms of federal government power.
Oddball is a Corporate stooge. He doesn't want Defense cut because there are way too many high $$ private contracts directly tied to military spending. His priorities aren't for smaller government, it's for bigger business.
I agree with you that Bachmann is nuts.
However I think your "reasoning" that cutting spending automatically means more unemployment is also nuts.
Want To Create Jobs? Cut Government Spending
Fair enough, I explained why cutting government means cutting employees which will increase the numbers of those on the UE Rolls. Explain where my reasoning is wrong.
Cutting spending with a corresponding tax cut takes money from an inefficient government and puts in into a much more efficient capitalistic economy, hence more jobs than gov't can provide with the same $ amount.
Oddball is a Corporate stooge. He doesn't want Defense cut because there are way too many high $$ private contracts directly tied to military spending. His priorities aren't for smaller government, it's for bigger business.
I got a crazy idea, how about we go by what Oddball says rather than making a crazy prediction based on mind-reading and hoping its right, sound good?
Deal. Hence why I made the statement that I made.
Facts is Oddball has a raging hard-on for big business and would support just about anything if it meant private business could make a buck off of it. He's made that crystal clear in multiple threads on this site.
That's at best a theory. Not all business thrives and even those that do, do not necessarily benefit local or even our national economy. A government worker spending his earned income on food, shelter and durable goods stimulates our economy; a South Asian or Chinese Worker doesn't spend their income in small business America.
A contractor hiring American workers building and repairing our infrastructure keeps money moving by buying supplies, renting heavy equipment and making things which benefit commerce.
Suggesting government is inefficient and proving government is so are two very different things.