GOP party of fiscal responsibility?

[DiamondDave]

GOP party of fiscal responsibility?

Nope.

Never has been never will be.

And you think the DEMs have been??
Both parties have been horrible on spending and that is why a change is needed (not fake change like Obamalama) and government spending must be SLASHED, followed by an eventual change to the tax code that gets every citizen earning at least $1 back into paying federal income tax

 

[Dorkazoid_Jones]

Republicans will say that even if you took all the money from the top 1% and put it towards the debt or towards running the country, it would only last a short time.

THEN

Turn around and insist "Twinkle Down" is a viable economic policy.

If ALL their money does no good, they how does the the tiny bit they poop out help?

It's because the GOP base thinks in very simplistic terms. Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan don't believe in "Twinkle Down". Their policies are designed to screw the middle class and poor. Because they are greedy bastards paid by big corporations and billionaires to work to redistribute the wealth of the nation to the top 1%. They could care less about "rebuilding America". It's about the money NOW. What they can get NOW. During the month of the election, Mitt Romney was moving one of his companies from Freeport, Illinois to China. And he expected to win while squatting on Americans at the same time of the election.

Sensata employees in Freeport reach out to Mitt Romney for help in saving their jobs | The Rock River Times

"Republicans will say that even if you took all the money from the top 1% and put it towards the debt or towards running the country, it would only last a short time. THEN
Turn around and insist "Twinkle Down" is a viable economic policy. "

You mean capitalism? OH GOD THAT CLEARLY DOESN'T WORK! Why do liberals always focus only on money? Hilarious, Marx kept bleating on and on about money when money in a lot of ways IS the great leveler. For instance, some computer dweeb who was a social outcast, not very attractive, and had a lot of disadvantages growing up, forms a computer company and becomes wealthy. Now some money obsessed lefty wants his money while leaving the privileged beautiful people and great atheletes and anyone with some special talents exempted from having their playing field levelled. Bud, you need to stop being obsessed with others money and start seeing that money is part of equalizing things. Or you can be like most lefties, and live in your pretend world where everyone starts the same at birth...

 

[California Girl]

Neither party is fiscally responsible. Deal.

You can look at every available source and they show the same thing again and again. The last three Republican presidents exploded the Debt.

The right insists it was Obama. We know George spent money on wars, big pharma, tax cuts, and so on. What did Obama spend money on? A stimulus package that over a hundred Republican congressmen took credit for and was between a third and half tax cuts? Everything else was inherited.

I see you still struggle with basic interpretation - or even sourcing - of your 'facts'. Aren't you even a little bit embarrassed? Such a stupid person supporting Obama - you do your 'side' no favors.

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

From the presidencies of Harry Truman to that of Jimmy Carter the national debt was paid down in terms of gross domestic product. During Bill Clinton's second term the national debt was paid down in absolute terms.

The national debt only became a problem during the Reagan administration when Reagan said it was possible to cut taxes, raise defense spending, and balance the budget without cutting popular middle class entitlements.

The Republican Party caused the debt crises with their dogma that it is always a good idea to cut taxes and never a good idea to raise them. Now they are using the debt for which they are responsible in an effort to cut or eliminate popular domestic programs they have never liked, but which are popular with the voters.

This is, of course, what passes for liberal fantasy land. It is also why our children don't know anything about this country. Rewriting history is a favored pastime of the wannabe dictators and tyrants of the world.

You left out "nutball sheeple", a group apparently too beaten down by corporations and/or too illiterate to understand simple facts in evidence. Read it and weep, chief. Your reality sucks in that everything you claim to believe is a provable lie, but look at what honest, decent Republican presidents MIGHT have accomplished carefully because what could have been makes all honest decent Americans sick to their stomachs. And there is zero question which presidents are to blame.

 

[Erand7899]

From the presidencies of Harry Truman to that of Jimmy Carter the national debt was paid down in terms of gross domestic product. During Bill Clinton's second term the national debt was paid down in absolute terms.

The national debt only became a problem during the Reagan administration when Reagan said it was possible to cut taxes, raise defense spending, and balance the budget without cutting popular middle class entitlements.

The Republican Party caused the debt crises with their dogma that it is always a good idea to cut taxes and never a good idea to raise them. Now they are using the debt for which they are responsible in an effort to cut or eliminate popular domestic programs they have never liked, but which are popular with the voters.

This is, of course, what passes for liberal fantasy land. It is also why our children don't know anything about this country. Rewriting history is a favored pastime of the wannabe dictators and tyrants of the world.

You left out "nutball sheeple", a group apparently too beaten down by corporations and/or too illiterate to understand simple facts in evidence. Read it and weep, chief. Your reality sucks in that everything you claim to believe is a provable lie, but look at what honest, decent Republican presidents MIGHT have accomplished carefully because what could have been makes all honest decent Americans sick to their stomachs. And there is zero question which presidents are to blame.

You blew all the credibility you had on economics by posting your thumbnail idiocy as if it really had some meaning beyond an example of how to chart nonsense.

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

From the presidencies of Harry Truman to that of Jimmy Carter the national debt was paid down in terms of gross domestic product. During Bill Clinton's second term the national debt was paid down in absolute terms.

The national debt only became a problem during the Reagan administration when Reagan said it was possible to cut taxes, raise defense spending, and balance the budget without cutting popular middle class entitlements.

The Republican Party caused the debt crises with their dogma that it is always a good idea to cut taxes and never a good idea to raise them. Now they are using the debt for which they are responsible in an effort to cut or eliminate popular domestic programs they have never liked, but which are popular with the voters.

This is, of course, what passes for liberal fantasy land. It is also why our children don't know anything about this country. Rewriting history is a favored pastime of the wannabe dictators and tyrants of the world.

This is, of course, what passes for liberal fantasy land. It is also why our children don't know anything about this country. Rewriting history is a favored pastime of the wannabe dictators and tyrants of the world.

You left out "nutball sheeple", a group apparently too beaten down by corporations and/or too illiterate to understand simple facts in evidence. Read it and weep, chief. Your reality sucks in that everything you claim to believe is a provable lie, but look at what honest, decent Republican presidents MIGHT have accomplished carefully because what could have been makes all honest decent Americans sick to their stomachs. And there is zero question which presidents are to blame.

You blew all the credibility you had on economics by posting your thumbnail idiocy as if it really had some meaning beyond an example of how to chart nonsense.

No.
Not at all.

It is laugh out loud funny that nutball halfwits publicly brag about their lack of ability to understand simple algebraic charts - like the one above, containing two ABSOLUTELY FACTUAL baselines; one from unadjusted federal data, and the other used to form a simple scenario a monkey could teach a nutball child to do in minutes.

Try a little more reviewing before proving what a complete no-doubt-about-it idiot you are to anyone with a decent high school education. Here, try again...

 

[NYcarbineer]

[
As far as policy, the GOP has put forth various proposals to cut spending. Where are the Democrat proposals? Oh yeah. They dont have any. Their solution is more tax increases now in exchange for talking about spending cuts in the "out" years. Out years are when Obama will be OUT of office. That isn't governance. That's politics as usual.

One day you guys are blaming Obama for the sequester, which is nothing more than a big spending cut, the next you're saying the Democrats don't have any spending cut proposals. Which is it?

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

Neither party is fiscally responsible. Deal.

You can look at every available source and they show the same thing again and again. The last three Republican presidents exploded the Debt.

The right insists it was Obama. We know George spent money on wars, big pharma, tax cuts, and so on. What did Obama spend money on? A stimulus package that over a hundred Republican congressmen took credit for and was between a third and half tax cuts? Everything else was inherited.

I see you still struggle with basic interpretation - or even sourcing - of your 'facts'. Aren't you even a little bit embarrassed? Such a stupid person supporting Obama - you do your 'side' no favors.

Bzzzzt!

As long as factual charts like the one above elicit hysterical emotions like those evident in Calgal's childish riposte, there is no reason for the crazy left to fear the gaggle of lamos most accurately described as nutballs.

A. For rational America it isn't about "sides", it is about America.

B. Jesus wept.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

From the presidencies of Harry Truman to that of Jimmy Carter the national debt was paid down in terms of gross domestic product. During Bill Clinton's second term the national debt was paid down in absolute terms.

The national debt only became a problem during the Reagan administration when Reagan said it was possible to cut taxes, raise defense spending, and balance the budget without cutting popular middle class entitlements.

....And....as usual....a Dem had to come-in & clean-up....after a Bush.​

"Like most people in Washington, Clinton understood that Ronald Reagan was a figurehead and that it was really the Bush Cabal, which was running things for all of those 12 years. He also understood that the Bush Cabal had perpetrated the greatest fraud ever committed against the American people and that the Bush Cabal had essentially destroyed the economy of the United States - which in fact they had."

BU$HCO I Economy​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Neither party is fiscally responsible. Deal.

You can look at every available source and they show the same thing again and again. The last three Republican presidents exploded the Debt.

The right insists it was Obama. We know George spent money on wars, big pharma, tax cuts, and so on. What did Obama spend money on? A stimulus package that over a hundred Republican congressmen took credit for and was between a third and half tax cuts? Everything else was inherited.

I see you still struggle with basic interpretation - or even sourcing - of your 'facts'. Aren't you even a little bit embarrassed? Such a stupid person supporting Obama - you do your 'side' no favors.

Stand-aside, Calibimbo.....


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VOE6JRfDs8]Rachel Maddows Factually Shows GOP hypocrisy - Vote against stimulus and policy they support - YouTube[/ame]​

 

[bripat9643]

They can't even manage their own party debt, yet they want us to trust them with the whole nation?

By word or deed?

By word they're very fiscally responsible.

By deed? Not so much.

Democrats aren't even fiscally responsible by word. They have made it perfectly crystal clear that they are opposed to any cut in any social program. Their naked ambition to rape the taxpayers couldn't be more obvious.

 

[bripat9643]

Democrats don't claim that the budget should be balanced with just tax increases. They support a balanced approach of raising taxes and spending cuts which is also supported by the public.

actions speak louder that words. Democrats have opposed all spending cuts that have ever been proposed, even cuts in the military.

It's Republicans who see only one solution; reduce spending.

That is the only reasonable solution. The idea that I don't pay enough in taxes is too preposterous for words.

This plays well with the Tea Party, but not the public.

Really? You think the public is eager to pay more taxes? What you really mean is that it doesn't play well with the state controlled media. Then they bamboozle the public into believing it's necessary, which it isn't.

As the effects of sequester hit the media in coming weeks and months, Republicans are not going to be able to stand up against rising public opinion and this is going to hurt them in next election.

You partly admitted the truth. The media will make it sound as dire as they possibly can. It won't have a thing to do with reality, however. Whether the public will be fooled remains to be seen.

 

[nitroz]

Extremist or not, they don't seem to do a very good job of managing their money, do they? Yet, they'd like the voters to trust them with the state budget when they can't even manage their own.

Nope, they do not.
But that new governor has shown signs of big improvement. Oh, did I mention that he's a liberal who actually understands finances?

Jerry Brown Creates California Surplus Miracle, But Can It Last?

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/07/us/millionaires-consider-leaving-california-over-taxes.html?_r=0

One thing is that most of the rich are pinned, since California is the base of many global industries and businesses. What will Hollywood do? Move?
Same with the actors, directors, producers, etc?
What about companies like Apple? And the engineers?
And the upper class in LA?

Lots of things revolve in California and moving could have catastrophic effects on them.
The majority won the battle.

 

[nitroz]

You can look at every available source and they show the same thing again and again. The last three Republican presidents exploded the Debt.

The right insists it was Obama. We know George spent money on wars, big pharma, tax cuts, and so on. What did Obama spend money on? A stimulus package that over a hundred Republican congressmen took credit for and was between a third and half tax cuts? Everything else was inherited.

I see you still struggle with basic interpretation - or even sourcing - of your 'facts'. Aren't you even a little bit embarrassed? Such a stupid person supporting Obama - you do your 'side' no favors.

Stand-aside, Calibimbo.....


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VOE6JRfDs8]Rachel Maddows Factually Shows GOP hypocrisy - Vote against stimulus and policy they support - YouTube[/ame]​

They don't believe in facts, remember?

Also spending + tax cuts = deficit.
If you want a surplus, you need an income thats bigger than your budget. Otherwise, you will end up with a deficit.
Making miserable spending cuts with tax cuts won't solve the problem. It's been proven over and over.
You need to make reasonable cuts while maintaining an income.

 

[uscitizen]

Say what? You think a campaign debt has something to do with the National debt? $800,000 is chump change. Obama tips his caddies more than that.

Liar.

 

[Flopper]

The dirty little secret is that the administration can tax the rich until they drive them into the poor house and the confiscated money won't finance government operation more than a couple of months. It's all about class warfare, dabbling in socialism and stroking the ignorant and hate filled radical left wing. A country cannot tax itself into solvency. We are already in hock to the country that is accused of hacking into our cyber system. It's crazy to play the cheap commie game of punishing the rich while our energy prices are sky high and unemployment is stagnant. Republicans have the right idea but they are fighting the incredible force of George Soros tax exempt propaganda machine and the entire left wing media.

Democrats don't claim that the budget should be balanced with just tax increases. They support a balanced approach of raising taxes and spending cuts which is also supported by the public. It's Republicans who see only one solution; reduce spending. This plays well with the Tea Party, but not the public. As the effects of sequester hit the media in coming weeks and months, Republicans are not going to be able to stand up against rising public opinion and this is going to hurt them in next election.

Democrats call for a balanced approach, right up until it's time to actually cut spending. Then it's always put off to the out years. I didn't see a whole lot of interest in a balanced approach when they forced the repubs to accept expiration of tax cuts on the top 2%. They talk the talk but don't walk the walk.

400 billion in spending cuts and tax increase proposed in Nov. Republicans said not enough cuts so they ended up with no cuts and more taxes. This has become typical of Republicans in the House. Shot for moon and get nothing.

 

[Flopper]

I think Lyndon Johnson's "Guns and Butter" budget really kicked us into deficiet spending overdrive.

And then they started diluting the currency so badly that the Bretton-Woods Gold standard disintegrated and now 50 years later the world's economic system is so riddled by dubious debt counted in fiat money, we don't know if we're coming or going.

Remember WIN pins? Whip inflation Now?

Our economic system has been broken for half a century, folks.

Johnson left office with a surplus, something we wouldn't see again for 40 years.

 

[The Rabbi]

Say what? You think a campaign debt has something to do with the National debt? $800,000 is chump change. Obama tips his caddies more than that.

Liar.

Wrong.
Obama's caddies are the idiots in Detroit, CHicago, Cleveland and Cincinnati that voted for him. He's given them much mroe than 800k.

 

[The Rabbi]

I think Lyndon Johnson's "Guns and Butter" budget really kicked us into deficiet spending overdrive.

And then they started diluting the currency so badly that the Bretton-Woods Gold standard disintegrated and now 50 years later the world's economic system is so riddled by dubious debt counted in fiat money, we don't know if we're coming or going.

Remember WIN pins? Whip inflation Now?

Our economic system has been broken for half a century, folks.

Johnson left office with a surplus, something we wouldn't see again for 40 years.

Wrong.
$27B deficit in 1968. The highest since WW2 to that point.

 

[Flopper]

I think Lyndon Johnson's "Guns and Butter" budget really kicked us into deficiet spending overdrive.

And then they started diluting the currency so badly that the Bretton-Woods Gold standard disintegrated and now 50 years later the world's economic system is so riddled by dubious debt counted in fiat money, we don't know if we're coming or going.

Remember WIN pins? Whip inflation Now?

Our economic system has been broken for half a century, folks.

Johnson left office with a surplus, something we wouldn't see again for 40 years.

Wrong.
$27B deficit in 1968. The highest since WW2 to that point.

Actually Johnson left office in 1969 and submitted the 69 budget to congress in the spring of 1968.
The 1969 surplus in nominal dollars was 3.2 billion, 20 billion adjusted for inflation.

History of Deficits and Surpluses In The United States