What is wrong with 'division'?

[bripat9643]

No you wouldn't have. Bush crashed the economy with his tax cuts and his wars, and the housing bubble. In order to balance the budget, you would have had to pull out of both wars, fully, stop spending on the military, and bring the troops home, and to what? An economy shedding 500,000 jobs a month?

In order to balance the budget, you would have to increase revenues, and/or cut spending. You spend during a recession, and cut during periods of growth. To increase taxes is unwise, as it tends to deepen a recession, as does cutting spending.

As an example, in the run up to the Canadian election last year, the Conservative government wanted to run on a balanced budget. Spending cuts would have balanced the budget by 2017, but the Conservative government was desperate to tell Canadians they had balanced the budget, so they made some very deep cuts to spending to achieve that goal. It put the country into a mild recession, and still failed to balance the budget because of reduced revenues caused by falling oil prices.

One has to wonder if Obama has been allowed to spend more to stimulate the economy, whether the recovery would have been quicker.

No, because none of DumBama's policies did anything for our economy. That's why our economy still sucks.

If you were in debt in your household, do you think you could spend your way out of it? It just doesn't make any sense. It's illogical.

DumBama is the most anti-business President of our lifetime. Had he just sat in the White House and did nothing the last seven years, our market forces would have driven our economy along the way and we'd be in much better shape today. But no. He burdened our businesses with more taxes. He inflicted his idiotic healthcare plan that not only stopped businesses from expanding, but prevented new businesses from starting. The people that lost their healthcare plans now have to pay for them with after-tax money. In many cases, that's a very expensive SUV or a small house payment. This is money that doesn't go into circulation in our society. The less money movement, the less economic activity. And to add insult to injury, we still have millions of people without healthcare and it's more expensive than before DumBama became President.

The only real bump we had in our economy was the results of fracking which DumBama and the Democrats are totally against. Lower fuel prices gives us more disposable income which has a stimulating effect. But people have to beware because at anytime, DumBama could send his henchmen in from the EPA to create regulations to burden that industry as well just like he did with our coal mining operations.

RE: "If you were in debt in your household, do you think you could spend your way out of it? It just doesn't make any sense. It's illogical"

Come on Ray, you know better. The economics of our national debt is completely different than a household debt. Don't spread those lies.

The only difference is that the Federal government can print money. When the fed does that, it screws all of us.

The majority of new money is created by the banks not the printing press

The Fed controls how much money private banks can create.

 

[bripat9643]

How we manage our stimulus spending is a good debate to have. Whether to spend during a recovery with interest rates as low as they are is basic economics, and comparing the national debt to a household debt is just ignorance or deception.

Not if you're spending money just for pure politics and not to stimulate anything it isn't. It's really the same thing. Nearly 10 trillion dollars spent the last eight years. Where did it all go? What do we have to show for it?

Government "stimulation" produces a phoney expansion, no matter how the money is spent. Economic reality eventually comes home to roost.

 

[deltex1]

I keep hearing this from the left and I want to know what is wrong with divisiveness? As a military commander I really did try to weed out divisive talk since it destabilized the military unit as a whole. I really don't know if that is good in society since individuals seem to want to operate as separate individuals who are free to choose what they want to be. Families really don't have any other consideration other than to themselves and not to the societal unit as a whole. It would just seem that if we applied the same military mentality to society we would have to weed out any kind of divisive talk and glorify unity because that strengthens our society.

Nothing. Division is built into human DNA. Just ask your wife.

 

[Dragonlady]

Ray, your understanding of economics is so wrong on every level. And you wonder why businessmen make such poor political leaders.

Government spending in a recession is like "priming the pump". (Those of you who have never done more than turn on a tap to get water may have to google that expression). And government spending and national debt are in NO WAY the same as household debt.

During a recession, both consumers and business stop spending, further reducing job creation and leading to layoffs as demand for goods and services decline. Let's use Ronald Reagan as an example.

In the 1980's, Ronald Reagan cut taxes, and then went on a spending spree the likes of which the country has seldom seen, all of it on the nation's credit card. He told people the tax cut would create jobs, and to this day, there are people who think that it did. It didn't. What created jobs, was his military spending spree. The military industrial complex made out like bandits. Reagan bought all of the new toys greenlit under Jimmy Carter, and created the modern fighting force which did such an amazing job in Desert Storm. By pumping all of that money into the economy, people forgot about the high interest rates and inflation of the Carter Administration, and with the economy apparently booming, Americans started spending again.

Had Obama done the same, it would have had a similar effect, but Republicans, who told everyone that "deficits don't matter" under Reagan and George W. Bush, suddenly said the deficit was the greatest evil the US had ever faced, and refused to pass the bills.

Sadly, Reagan didn't cut spending when the economy created these jobs, and doubled down on his "Star Wars" initiative, until Congress pulled the plug on the financing. Running a deficit is fine when you're trying to turn around a recession, but the government needs to cut the deficit when the stimulus is no longer needed, which is what Obama has done. The spending cuts must be gradual - cut too deep or too fast, and the recession returns. This happened in Canada when the Conservatives pushed the country into a mild recession trying to balance the budget before last year's federal election.

After 2008, every first world government in the world spent an enormous amount on stimulus, and their economies recovered more quickly than the US, which spent a small amount. Republicans wanted to sabotage the recovery. They didn't want Obama to be able to claim he turned Bush's mess around, and ride it to re-election, so as usual, it was party before country for Republicans. Had Obama made the cuts Republicans were demanding, it would have worsened the recession.

And here is another way that government finance is different than household finance. When the government spends money, buying from contractors, or through social spending, that money gets taxed. The businesses supplying the government pay taxes on their profits. Their employees pay taxes on their income. The stores where they make their purchases or who provide them with services also pay taxes on their income. Some programs have been found to return $1.50 in taxes paid, for every $1.00 spent. That doesn't happen at my house.

 

[Slade3200]

How we manage our stimulus spending is a good debate to have. Whether to spend during a recovery with interest rates as low as they are is basic economics, and comparing the national debt to a household debt is just ignorance or deception.

Not if you're spending money just for pure politics and not to stimulate anything it isn't. It's really the same thing. Nearly 10 trillion dollars spent the last eight years. Where did it all go? What do we have to show for it?

There has been much waste and also some good developments... Clean energy is one. A big chunk goes towards the military and national security as well

 

[bripat9643]

How we manage our stimulus spending is a good debate to have. Whether to spend during a recovery with interest rates as low as they are is basic economics, and comparing the national debt to a household debt is just ignorance or deception.

Not if you're spending money just for pure politics and not to stimulate anything it isn't. It's really the same thing. Nearly 10 trillion dollars spent the last eight years. Where did it all go? What do we have to show for it?

There has been much waste and also some good developments... Clean energy is one. A big chunk goes towards the military and national security as well

So-called "green energy" is a huge boondoggle. It will die the minute the government stops subsidizing it. The $10 billion all when to fund Obama's reelection slush fund.

 

[MaryL]

Years ago America was united. Nobody asked us if we want diversity. We didn't need it or ask for IT. No, liberals took it upon themselves to seed that thought as if it was to our betterment. It wasn't and that's what liberals do, jump to GIANT conclusions and fill in the blanks to their betterment. Diversity is a ruse nobody needed or asked for. And diversity, the root word is DIVISIVE. We need that?

 

[Slade3200]

How we manage our stimulus spending is a good debate to have. Whether to spend during a recovery with interest rates as low as they are is basic economics, and comparing the national debt to a household debt is just ignorance or deception.

Not if you're spending money just for pure politics and not to stimulate anything it isn't. It's really the same thing. Nearly 10 trillion dollars spent the last eight years. Where did it all go? What do we have to show for it?

There has been much waste and also some good developments... Clean energy is one. A big chunk goes towards the military and national security as well

So-called "green energy" is a huge boondoggle. It will die the minute the government stops subsidizing it. The $10 billion all when to fund Obama's reelection slush fund.

Yeah that's totally believable, go tell as many people as you can

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

There has been much waste and also some good developments... Clean energy is one. A big chunk goes towards the military and national security as well

DumBama cut our military, don't you remember?

And what clean energy are you referring to? Cutting coal production and forcing electric companies to try to do without is not funded by the government--it's funded by the consumers.

 

[Slade3200]

There has been much waste and also some good developments... Clean energy is one. A big chunk goes towards the military and national security as well

DumBama cut our military, don't you remember?

And what clean energy are you referring to? Cutting coal production and forcing electric companies to try to do without is not funded by the government--it's funded by the consumers.

I don't remember Obama cutting the military. Might want to check the facts on that one:

None

 

[bripat9643]

There has been much waste and also some good developments... Clean energy is one. A big chunk goes towards the military and national security as well

DumBama cut our military, don't you remember?

And what clean energy are you referring to? Cutting coal production and forcing electric companies to try to do without is not funded by the government--it's funded by the consumers.

I don't remember Obama cutting the military. Might want to check the facts on that one:

None

He's cut the military every year. Just look at the number of people in the military compared to when he was inaugurated.

 

[Slade3200]

There has been much waste and also some good developments... Clean energy is one. A big chunk goes towards the military and national security as well

DumBama cut our military, don't you remember?

And what clean energy are you referring to? Cutting coal production and forcing electric companies to try to do without is not funded by the government--it's funded by the consumers.

I don't remember Obama cutting the military. Might want to check the facts on that one:

None

He's cut the military every year. Just look at the number of people in the military compared to when he was inaugurated.

You prefer he send more troops overseas?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I don't remember Obama cutting the military. Might want to check the facts on that one:

None

Question: Do you even read your own links or do you just post them hoping nobody else will?

This article pretty much supports my claim.

 

[Unkotare]

Years ago America was united. ....?

Bullshit.

 

[Slade3200]

I don't remember Obama cutting the military. Might want to check the facts on that one:

None

Question: Do you even read your own links or do you just post them hoping nobody else will?

This article pretty much supports my claim.

I read every word... Lays out the cuts and investments made. You want to objective and acknowledge both or are you just going to focus on the cuts?

 

[owebo]

There has been much waste and also some good developments... Clean energy is one. A big chunk goes towards the military and national security as well

DumBama cut our military, don't you remember?

And what clean energy are you referring to? Cutting coal production and forcing electric companies to try to do without is not funded by the government--it's funded by the consumers.

I don't remember Obama cutting the military. Might want to check the facts on that one:

None

Link to budget under Obama? Thanks!!

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I read every word... Lays out the cuts and investments made. You want to objective and acknowledge both or are you just going to focus on the cuts?

Focus on the cuts because that was my claim.

DumBama is the one that put the sequester in the bill which was activated because again, he wanted to spend more money and Republicans wanted to spend less.

 

[saveliberty]

Division of labor is a good thing, it creates efficiencies, potentially higher quality and a unity of sorts as we exchange goods and services. Cell division allows for reproduction and healing. Division is not the problem, divisiveness is a whole another story.

 

[Slade3200]

There has been much waste and also some good developments... Clean energy is one. A big chunk goes towards the military and national security as well

DumBama cut our military, don't you remember?

And what clean energy are you referring to? Cutting coal production and forcing electric companies to try to do without is not funded by the government--it's funded by the consumers.

I don't remember Obama cutting the military. Might want to check the facts on that one:

None

Link to budget under Obama? Thanks!!

Huh? There is a link in my post

 

[Slade3200]

I read every word... Lays out the cuts and investments made. You want to objective and acknowledge both or are you just going to focus on the cuts?

Focus on the cuts because that was my claim.

DumBama is the one that put the sequester in the bill which was activated because again, he wanted to spend more money and Republicans wanted to spend less.

So republicans were also responsible for the cuts right? Obamas cuts were from bringing troops home... What about the other stats that show the investments made... Lowest rate of nuclear disarment? Budget increases in Obamas budget that got reduced by republicans, but still resulted in a 6% increase.... Those points mean anything to you?