Gawd, that is one profoundly stupid woman!
Can we cut the bullshit about spending under Obama?
- Thread starter Billy000
- Start date
P@triot
Diamond Member
Well sure, in the mind of the libtard Dumbocrat it means "more borrowing".
However, for a rational person of common ****'n sense (immediately eliminates all Dumbocrats), less revenue simply means LESS SPENDING!
By the way, you're missing the most important part of this video. What happened to your "critical thinking"? If confiscating 100% of the wealth of 100% of the American people who have over $1 million dollars doesn't even cover the DEFICIT (forget about the entire federal budget, this doesn't cover what they over spent beyond the budget), how the **** can you draw the conclusion that we don't have a severe spending problem?!?!
- Thread starter
- #663
And so the simple solution is that you cut spending.
If revenue is "low", a person with an ounce of common ****'n sense makes their spending equally low.
If tax revenue is "16.7% of GP", then a person with an ounce of common ****'n sense makes their spending "16.7% of GDP".
God forbid we cut anything, right? I suggest we start with the over $1 trillion per year in waste, fraud, and abuse.
Yes but the government spending money was in reality the only way to save the economy. If people are getting laid off in record numbers, obviously you are going to provide them with a safety net (extension of unemployment ) When people actually have money to spend while unemployed, they spend it all on the bare necessities. That STIMULATES the economy. Without the help, they spend LESS on the market because they are BROKE. Not only that, but the economic growth is significantly higher than the expense of the tax payers.
Facts are fun.
Last edited:
P@triot
Diamond Member
And so the simple solution is that you cut spending.
If revenue is "low", a person with an ounce of common ****'n sense makes their spending equally low.
If tax revenue is "16.7% of GP", then a person with an ounce of common ****'n sense makes their spending "16.7% of GDP".
God forbid we cut anything, right? I suggest we start with the over $1 trillion per year in waste, fraud, and abuse.
Yes but the government spending money was in reality the only way to save the economy. If people are getting laid off in record numbers, obviously you are going to provide them with a safety net (extension of unemployment ) When people actually have money to spend while unemployed, they spend it all on the bare necessities. That STIMULATES the economy. Without the help, they spend LESS on the market because they are BROKE. Not only that, but the economic growth is significantly higher than the expense of the tax payers.
Facts are fun.
Facts are fun - which is why you should actually try them sometime!
Government spending is what collapsed the economy in the first place genius. The federal government (along with state and local) takes more than 60% of the middle classes income. How the **** are people supposed to "spend in the market" when the government takes so much?
Come on chief - give us one of those really clever bat-shit crazy liberal answers. I eagerly await.
- Moderator
- #665
Hey, why must it be a one way street? If you're so curious, look it up yourself, nitwit. If I could find corroborating links for this argument, I bet you could have as well. I don't need to ask a mod anything, since that rule only applies to plagiarized material and copy paste OPs.
Let me 'splain something to you boy, learning takes effort. If you aren't willing to apply the effort, don't ask for the links.
Last edited:
P@triot
Diamond Member
Seriously S.J. - I simply can't wrap my mind around the fact that there are adults walking around out there that are this stupid - much less that they can find people dumb enough to vote for them.
This woman takes dumb to unfathomable levels...
- Thread starter
- #667
And so the simple solution is that you cut spending.
If revenue is "low", a person with an ounce of common ****'n sense makes their spending equally low.
If tax revenue is "16.7% of GP", then a person with an ounce of common ****'n sense makes their spending "16.7% of GDP".
God forbid we cut anything, right? I suggest we start with the over $1 trillion per year in waste, fraud, and abuse.
Yes but the government spending money was in reality the only way to save the economy. If people are getting laid off in record numbers, obviously you are going to provide them with a safety net (extension of unemployment ) When people actually have money to spend while unemployed, they spend it all on the bare necessities. That STIMULATES the economy. Without the help, they spend LESS on the market because they are BROKE. Not only that, but the economic growth is significantly higher than the expense of the tax payers.
Facts are fun.
Facts are fun - which is why you should actually try them sometime!
Government spending is what collapsed the economy in the first place genius. The federal government (along with state and local) takes more than 60% of the middle classes income. How the **** are people supposed to "spend in the market" when the government takes so much?
Come on chief - give us one of those really clever bat-shit crazy liberal answers. I eagerly await.
So again, are you okay with the fact that we are in 17 trillion in debt? Much of that is because of the Bush tax cuts. Less revenue means more BORROWING which means MORE debt. Tax cuts do not pay for themselves.
Facts are fun - which is why you should actually try them sometime!
Government spending is what collapsed the economy in the first place genius. The federal government (along with state and local) takes more than 60% of the middle classes income. How the **** are people supposed to "spend in the market" when the government takes so much?
Come on chief - give us one of those really clever bat-shit crazy liberal answers. I eagerly await.
So again, are you okay with the fact that we are in 17 trillion in debt? Much of that is because of the Bush tax cuts. Less revenue means more BORROWING which means MORE debt. Tax cuts do not pay for themselves.
Uhm... but Bush did not reduce tax revenue, he reduced tax rates. Are you retarded?
- Thread starter
- #669
Facts are fun - which is why you should actually try them sometime!
Government spending is what collapsed the economy in the first place genius. The federal government (along with state and local) takes more than 60% of the middle classes income. How the **** are people supposed to "spend in the market" when the government takes so much?
Come on chief - give us one of those really clever bat-shit crazy liberal answers. I eagerly await.
So again, are you okay with the fact that we are in 17 trillion in debt? Much of that is because of the Bush tax cuts. Less revenue means more BORROWING which means MORE debt. Tax cuts do not pay for themselves.
Uhm... but Bush did not reduce tax revenue, he reduced tax rates. Are you retarded?
Wow you people just astound me. It just blows me away. Answer me this honestly. What do you think the government does with your tax money? Do you think they just stick it in a mattress somewhere? They USE it.
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
So you think it is a good thing we are 17 trillion in debt?
No, I think we should cut spending, a lot.
If the government cuts my taxes, and I have an extra $100 of my own income, how is the economy hurt?
Show me, step by step.
- Thread starter
- #671
Yes I agree. Let's cut spending. However we also need to generate more revenue to PAY for our government expenses.
Last edited:
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
If the government cuts my taxes, and I have an extra $100 of my own income, how is the economy hurt?
Show me, step by step.
- Thread starter
- #673
Because it means we go further into debt. That's how. How am I supposed to break it down simpler than that? Debt grows because of a drop in revenue.
Last edited:
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
Is $100 more government debt worse than $100 more private debt?
Listening
Gold Member
- Aug 27, 2011
- 14,989
- 1,650
- 260
Or a failure to cut spending.
- Thread starter
- #676
Yes as long as the right people are being taxed. Middle class and the wealthy. The poor are spared through their tax returns.
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
Why is government debt worse than private debt?
- Moderator
- #678
And so the simple solution is that you cut spending.
If revenue is "low", a person with an ounce of common ****'n sense makes their spending equally low.
If tax revenue is "16.7% of GP", then a person with an ounce of common ****'n sense makes their spending "16.7% of GDP".
God forbid we cut anything, right? I suggest we start with the over $1 trillion per year in waste, fraud, and abuse.
Yes but the government spending money was in reality the only way to save the economy. If people are getting laid off in record numbers, obviously you are going to provide them with a safety net (extension of unemployment ) When people actually have money to spend while unemployed, they spend it all on the bare necessities. That STIMULATES the economy. Without the help, they spend LESS on the market because they are BROKE. Not only that, but the economic growth is significantly higher than the expense of the tax payers.
Facts are fun.
Facts are not what you have my friend. I have already demonstrated how woefully misinformed you are, Billy. I was raised with no safety net, I never asked to be coddled, so this government can keep out, let me succeed or fail on my own.
- Thread starter
- #679
Oh my god dude. Less revenue means MORE SPENDING.
- Thread starter
- #680
And so the simple solution is that you cut spending.
If revenue is "low", a person with an ounce of common ****'n sense makes their spending equally low.
If tax revenue is "16.7% of GP", then a person with an ounce of common ****'n sense makes their spending "16.7% of GDP".
God forbid we cut anything, right? I suggest we start with the over $1 trillion per year in waste, fraud, and abuse.
Yes but the government spending money was in reality the only way to save the economy. If people are getting laid off in record numbers, obviously you are going to provide them with a safety net (extension of unemployment ) When people actually have money to spend while unemployed, they spend it all on the bare necessities. That STIMULATES the economy. Without the help, they spend LESS on the market because they are BROKE. Not only that, but the economic growth is significantly higher than the expense of the tax payers.
Facts are fun.
Facts are not what you have my friend. I have already demonstrated how woefully misinformed you are, Billy. I was raised with no safety net, I never asked to be coddled, so this government can keep out, let me succeed or fail on my own.
Here is the problem with the right: your political beliefs are based less on facts and more in emotion and philosophy. You refuse to accept facts that do not accommodate your bias.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
Israelian civilians being TARGETED with cluster munition missiles. Trump/Israel haters think that's just fine.- Started by MarathonMike
- Replies: 6
-
-
-
