Balance the Budget Using Romney/Ryan promises

[NYcarbineer]

Tax cuts were used to drive GDP and create record Federal tax receipts every time it has ever been tried by a POTUS.

Ultra-Uber-Libtard-Meme-Failure


ROTFL

Clinton got record tax receipts AND balanced the budget after raising taxes. No Republican president has ever accomplished that.

Gingrich made Clinton his little bitch and chopped capital gains taxes to free up those greedy rich people to take risks and drive the economy.

You can't win.


LOL

So you deny that Clinton raised taxes? You're an idiot. You're denying fact.

 

[georgephillip]

Good gawd, no.

As the American standard of living exploded in the last century, did standard of livings drop around the world?

Economic output is not a zero sum game.

We are only 5% of the world population and could never hope to have the number of bodies to service opportunities throughout a world as they gain disposable incomes.

But that takes leaders who don't hate and envy our wealth and job creators.

Do you believe the outsourcing of US jobs has been beneficial for the US middle class over the past four decades?

Cato does:

"Could outsourcing of U.S. jobs actually be good for Americans?

"The number of U.S. jobs lost to low-wage countries has never been officially calculated — U.S. companies are not legally mandated to report such statistics.

"Boston-based global research and advisory firm Forrester predicts that more than 400,000 service jobs have been moved offshore since 2000 — and that number will rise to 3.3 million by 2015. More than 2 million manufacturing jobs have been outsourced abroad since 1983.

"Economists estimate that the number of jobs leaving the U.S. ranges between 12,000 to 20,000 per month.

"Relocated U.S. jobs end up going to workers in developing nations like China and India, countries that pay their employees much less than their American counterparts.

"Michael Tanner, a senior fellow at the libertarian think-tank Cato Institute, argues that low-skill jobs (such as product assembly and call centers) are not cost effective for U.S..."

Outsourcing Is Good For America: Cato

Of course! The material standard of living has shot thru the roof for poor and middle class since 1980 - both enjoying about a 50% increase.

Are you talking about the US middle class since 1980?

How about since 2000?

"U.S. multinationals cut their work forces in the U.S. by 2.9 million during the 2000s while increasing employment overseas by 2.4 million, according to the U.S.

"Commerce Department. U.S. corporations employed more than 21 million people in the U.S. and 10.3 million workers abroad in 2009.

"Blue-collar jobs are not the sole casualty of outsourcing. The McKinsey Global Institute predicts white-collar offshoring will increase at a rate of 30 percent to 40 percent over the next five years; those jobs could include 'back office' jobs such as accounting and payroll processing."

Outsourcing Is Good For America: Cato

 

[SniperFire]

Do you believe the outsourcing of US jobs has been beneficial for the US middle class over the past four decades?

Cato does:

"Could outsourcing of U.S. jobs actually be good for Americans?

"The number of U.S. jobs lost to low-wage countries has never been officially calculated — U.S. companies are not legally mandated to report such statistics.

"Boston-based global research and advisory firm Forrester predicts that more than 400,000 service jobs have been moved offshore since 2000 — and that number will rise to 3.3 million by 2015. More than 2 million manufacturing jobs have been outsourced abroad since 1983.

"Economists estimate that the number of jobs leaving the U.S. ranges between 12,000 to 20,000 per month.

"Relocated U.S. jobs end up going to workers in developing nations like China and India, countries that pay their employees much less than their American counterparts.

"Michael Tanner, a senior fellow at the libertarian think-tank Cato Institute, argues that low-skill jobs (such as product assembly and call centers) are not cost effective for U.S..."

Outsourcing Is Good For America: Cato

Of course! The material standard of living has shot thru the roof for poor and middle class since 1980 - both enjoying about a 50% increase.

Are you talking about the US middle class since 1980?

How about since 2000?

"U.S. multinationals cut their work forces in the U.S. by 2.9 million during the 2000s while increasing employment overseas by 2.4 million, according to the U.S.

"Commerce Department. U.S. corporations employed more than 21 million people in the U.S. and 10.3 million workers abroad in 2009.

"Blue-collar jobs are not the sole casualty of outsourcing. The McKinsey Global Institute predicts white-collar offshoring will increase at a rate of 30 percent to 40 percent over the next five years; those jobs could include 'back office' jobs such as accounting and payroll processing."

Outsourcing Is Good For America: Cato

First, concede you have failed in the argument, and that - in fact - Cato is correct in pointing out that the material well-being of Americans has increased in the 'last four decades' - contrary to your lefty meme.




Then we shall continue.


'Kay?

 

[Seawytch]

I'm not in the Senate, so I'm not sure that would work even if I were inclined to attempt it. Regardless, I don't believe for one second that Romney intends to cap any spending whatsoever, however, what I stated was that Romney was not willing to cut baseline spending. Without which any talk of balancing the budget or cutting spending is hokum.

Well, Romney made balanced budgets happen as a Governor - just as promised, and proved to be a rock star in about every other fiscal challenge he undertook.

Your accusation is baseless and cynical.

No he didn't. In Massachusetts the legislature had a veto-proof Democratic majority. Romney did nothing that the Democrats in the legislature didn't want to do.

In fact Romney vetoed 800 bills in MA while governor and almost every one of them was overridden and passed.

As he sat behind velvet ropes with his private elevator.

 

[SniperFire]

I'm not in the Senate, so I'm not sure that would work even if I were inclined to attempt it. Regardless, I don't believe for one second that Romney intends to cap any spending whatsoever, however, what I stated was that Romney was not willing to cut baseline spending. Without which any talk of balancing the budget or cutting spending is hokum.

Well, Romney made balanced budgets happen as a Governor - just as promised, and proved to be a rock star in about every other fiscal challenge he undertook.

Your accusation is baseless and cynical.

No he didn't. In Massachusetts the legislature had a veto-proof Democratic majority. Romney did nothing that the Democrats in the legislature didn't want to do.

In fact Romney vetoed 800 bills in MA while governor and almost every one of them was overridden and passed.

Not sure how you really think we can have a discussion if you can't get the most basic of facts correct.

Romney balanced the budgets in Mass - just as he campaign promised.

 

[Seawytch]

People that say you can't raise taxes and experience economic growth are completely ignoring the 50s and the 90s.

When you rave about how JFK cut taxes and we experienced economic growth, they were at 70 fucking percent. We're at, what, 39%? Give me a break.

 

[SniperFire]

]People that say you can't raise taxes and experience economic growth [/COLOR]are completely ignoring the 50s and the 90s.

When you rave about how JFK cut taxes and we experienced economic growth, they were at 70 fucking percent. We're at, what, 39%? Give me a break.

And people who trot out strawman arguments are weak-minded fags.

 

[zeke]

Hey how could it not be good for the family who lost a job that paid 20 dollars an hour and replace it with a job paying 12 dollars an hour. Is that better or what Snipper?

And it has to be good that so many people that hung onto their houses, now owe more than the house is worth. Isn't that better for Americans Snipper?

And who cares that so many middle class people lost their asses on their meager investments 4 years ago. That was a LOT better for the middle class. Right snipper?

Fuking going back to 1980 to try and prove that the middle class and poorer people are doing so good is out and out fantasy land.

How much living in the past do you do Snip?

 

[zeke]

Hey snipper, I have noticed a definite trend with you lately. Any time someone brings up a subject or topic that you have no good defense of, it all of a sudden become a "straw man".

Funny shit snipper. Funny shit.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I'm not in the Senate, so I'm not sure that would work even if I were inclined to attempt it. Regardless, I don't believe for one second that Romney intends to cap any spending whatsoever, however, what I stated was that Romney was not willing to cut baseline spending. Without which any talk of balancing the budget or cutting spending is hokum.

Well, Romney made balanced budgets happen as a Governor - just as promised, and proved to be a rock star in about every other fiscal challenge he undertook.

Your accusation is baseless and cynical.

No he didn't. In Massachusetts the legislature had a veto-proof Democratic majority. Romney did nothing that the Democrats in the legislature didn't want to do.

In fact Romney vetoed 800 bills in MA while governor and almost every one of them was overridden and passed.

I don't believe Romney vetoed 800 bills while Governor. Gary Johnson vetoed around 750 bills in his two terms in New Mexico, and that was more than the other 49 Governors combined.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Have you ever heard of something called GDP?

If you can answer 'yes', we can continue.

If not, why not try the cooking forums?

GDP? Is that how Reagan and Bush and Bush balanced the budgets? lol

Go ahead, show us how Romney balances the budget under his OWN conditions.

Yeah. Reagan, for example, doubled GDP in just his 8 years. This almost DOUBLED Federal tax receipts.

But you know that, and just feign ignorance and stupidity, don't you?

GDP increased by about 35% in the 8 years of Reagan. Not 100%.

 

[SniperFire]

Hey snipper, I have noticed a definite trend with you lately. Any time someone brings up a subject or topic that you have no good defense of, it all of a sudden become a "straw man".

Funny shit snipper. Funny shit.

Who argued that taxes can't be raised and yet we can experience economic growth?

It is fairly normal for the pols to raise taxes when things are going well, until they choke it off again.

Strawman Fail.


LOL

 

[NYcarbineer]

Well, Romney made balanced budgets happen as a Governor - just as promised, and proved to be a rock star in about every other fiscal challenge he undertook.

Your accusation is baseless and cynical.

No he didn't. In Massachusetts the legislature had a veto-proof Democratic majority. Romney did nothing that the Democrats in the legislature didn't want to do.

In fact Romney vetoed 800 bills in MA while governor and almost every one of them was overridden and passed.

I don't believe Romney vetoed 800 bills while Governor. Gary Johnson vetoed around 750 bills in his two terms in New Mexico, and that was more than the other 49 Governors combined.

Did you consider taking 30 seconds to google it?


Romney As Governor: 800 Vetoes And One Big Deal : NPR

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

No he didn't. In Massachusetts the legislature had a veto-proof Democratic majority. Romney did nothing that the Democrats in the legislature didn't want to do.

In fact Romney vetoed 800 bills in MA while governor and almost every one of them was overridden and passed.

I don't believe Romney vetoed 800 bills while Governor. Gary Johnson vetoed around 750 bills in his two terms in New Mexico, and that was more than the other 49 Governors combined.

Did you consider taking 30 seconds to google it?


Romney As Governor: 800 Vetoes And One Big Deal : NPR

Oh I see the claim being made, but I still don't believe it.

 

[SniperFire]

I don't believe Romney vetoed 800 bills while Governor. Gary Johnson vetoed around 750 bills in his two terms in New Mexico, and that was more than the other 49 Governors combined.

Did you consider taking 30 seconds to google it?


Romney As Governor: 800 Vetoes And One Big Deal : NPR

Oh I see the claim being made, but I still don't believe it.

You are way, way out there, dude.


LOL

 

[Norman]

1. A tax cut that is revenue neutral. Therefore you get no new revenue towards lowering the deficit from tax policy;

you only break even.

2. Increase defense spending. Therefore you ADD to the deficit, you don't lower it.

3. Take Medicare off the table for 10 years. That's the Romney/Ryan promise. Therefore you get no savings on Medicare spending.

4. Take Social Security off the table for 5 years. That's an estimate based on Romney's promise not to touch SS for anyone retired or near retirement. Therefore you get no savings from Social Security.

...with all that as pre-conditions,

Tell us how Romney/Ryan balance the budget.

Yep, the politics of today is promising the moon from the sky. I don't understand how they can be so dishonest.


I think obama is even worse... or "better" depends on your viewpoint I suppose.


The fact is middle class will have to pay more taxes and the benefits need to be slashed down. How hard can it be for politicians to admit the truth?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

1. A tax cut that is revenue neutral. Therefore you get no new revenue towards lowering the deficit from tax policy;

you only break even.

2. Increase defense spending. Therefore you ADD to the deficit, you don't lower it.

3. Take Medicare off the table for 10 years. That's the Romney/Ryan promise. Therefore you get no savings on Medicare spending.

4. Take Social Security off the table for 5 years. That's an estimate based on Romney's promise not to touch SS for anyone retired or near retirement. Therefore you get no savings from Social Security.

...with all that as pre-conditions,

Tell us how Romney/Ryan balance the budget.

By cutting funding for Big Bird and women's reproductive health services.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Did you consider taking 30 seconds to google it?


Romney As Governor: 800 Vetoes And One Big Deal : NPR

Oh I see the claim being made, but I still don't believe it.

You are way, way out there, dude.


LOL

High praise.

 

[Katzndogz]

1. A tax cut that is revenue neutral. Therefore you get no new revenue towards lowering the deficit from tax policy;

you only break even.

2. Increase defense spending. Therefore you ADD to the deficit, you don't lower it.

3. Take Medicare off the table for 10 years. That's the Romney/Ryan promise. Therefore you get no savings on Medicare spending.

4. Take Social Security off the table for 5 years. That's an estimate based on Romney's promise not to touch SS for anyone retired or near retirement. Therefore you get no savings from Social Security.

...with all that as pre-conditions,

Tell us how Romney/Ryan balance the budget.

By cutting funding for Big Bird and women's reproductive health services.

I don't see Big Bird and reproductive health services as being so critical we need to borrow money for funding.

Romney is proposing a different allocation of available funding and stop the borrowing. It's like when you have a budget shortfall and pay the rent instead of going to the movies.

 

[SniperFire]

1. A tax cut that is revenue neutral. Therefore you get no new revenue towards lowering the deficit from tax policy;

you only break even.

2. Increase defense spending. Therefore you ADD to the deficit, you don't lower it.

3. Take Medicare off the table for 10 years. That's the Romney/Ryan promise. Therefore you get no savings on Medicare spending.

4. Take Social Security off the table for 5 years. That's an estimate based on Romney's promise not to touch SS for anyone retired or near retirement. Therefore you get no savings from Social Security.

...with all that as pre-conditions,

Tell us how Romney/Ryan balance the budget.

By cutting funding for Big Bird and women's reproductive health services.

Buy your own condoms, loser.