Republicans have a poor understanding of economics. They should have no place in making policy

[Gadawg73]

Tax breaks for the rich are great things. They get to keep more of the $$ THEY EARNED. Free shit for the moocher class grows more moochers.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

...

There are a lot of factors involved in the deficit going down.

Ending ... tax giveaways

Said no valid economist, ever.

There's only one way to end deficits... and that is to only spend what is budgeted to be spent.

The only way to spend what is budgeted, is to not allow socialist to participate in governance.

Where Leftists are present in government, government will spend in deficit.

 

[Faun]

...

There are a lot of factors involved in the deficit going down.

Ending ... tax giveaways

Said no valid economist, ever.

There's only one way to end deficits... and that is to only spend what is budgeted to be spent.

The only way to spend what is budgeted, is to not allow socialist to participate in governance.

Where Leftists are present in government, government will spend in deficit.

At the federal level, that is complete and utter nonsense. For one thing, it doesn't matter how you budget, if tax revenues aren't there to cover the budget, you're gonna run a deficit. Furthermore, unexpected emergencies occur. Natural disasters, wars, etc... shot happens you can't foresee in the budget.

 

[The Rabbi]

I think after 119 pages we've learned that liberals are economic morons, unable to understand the simplest parts of Econ 101. Conservatives generally show a much better understanding.

 

[Faun]

I think after 119 pages we've learned that liberals are economic morons, unable to understand the simplest parts of Econ 101. Conservatives generally show a much better understanding.

that must explain why Conservatives in the 1920's destroyed the economy and Liberals had to fix it ... and then again in the 2000's.

 

[regent]

Seems our history has a few examples of depression/recessions beginning with Republicans and then Democrats elected to remedy.

 

[Dad2three]

Ronald Reagan’s First Term – $656 billion increase

Ronald Reagan’s Second Term – $1.036 trillion increase

Barack Obama’s First Term – $5.806 trillion increase

A lie. Shocking.

Yes, Ronnie tripled the debt that EVERY other US Prez created, Dubya doubled it and Obama will, even though Dubya handed him the worst economy since the GOP's great depression and Korean war levels of revenues (less than 15% of GDP), Obama will increase debt by only 70%

Barack Obama will have increased the national debt by more than all of the other Presidents that we've ever had COMBINED by the time he leaves office! When he took office the national debt stood at $10.6 trillion...it's now over 18 trillion with two years to go. When he leaves office it will be over 20 trillion dollars.

You think Reagan was a big spender when he spent less than 2 trillion in the same amount of time? Did you fail math at the elementary school level and then just give up trying to learn it after that?

You've got less than two trillion dollars and you've got more than 10 trillion. Now which person spent more? Duh?

So debt is equivalent to spending now, is it? How about, which one inherited the worst recession since the Great Depression?

Do you mean the recession that's officially been over since 2009? Dude...IT'S BEEN SIX FREAKING YEARS SINCE BARRY TOOK OFFICE!

And 11+ million PRIVATE sector jobs under Obama since passing the 'job killer' Obamacares. Go figure

 

[Listening]

Can we get any more excuses.

SO do you agree that the Republican House of Reps members did benefit from the redrawing of voter districts?
I know in Ohio that John Bohner and Mike Turner both benefited. How about your state. No?

There was no redistricting in my state.

Don't you live in Utah? we had the most blatant example of gerrymandering in the country when they split in avenues in half. And they had the gall to call it "One Utah".

Uh...no I don't.

That would be Jake the Fake.

Where I live (Kansas), we don't need to gerrymander. We own the place.

Why were you so offended by my comment a while back about the hayseed buffoons that Utahans tend to elect then?

Utah is about as red as they come.

Why don't you comment on all the black PhD's living in New Orleans.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Seems our history has a few examples of depression/recessions beginning with Republicans and then Democrats elected to remedy.

LOL! No... That's the myth you're responding to.

 

[Listening]

Republicans have their work cut out for them, I mean trying to write posts that indicate the economy has not improved and in fact gotten worse. Republican's should stick with the birth-certificate thing. This thread is just more evidence that the Republican concept of improving the economy means America's wealthy become more wealthy.

Yep, it's gotten better....did you miss the post that talked about how the rich are getting so much Richer ?

If it's better...why all the lip-flapping over a raised minimum wage ?

 

[Dad2three]

I think after 119 pages we've learned that liberals are economic morons, unable to understand the simplest parts of Econ 101. Conservatives generally show a much better understanding.

Sure, cut taxes and magic unicorns will bring in more revenues, lol

 

[Dad2three]

...

There are a lot of factors involved in the deficit going down.

Ending ... tax giveaways

Said no valid economist, ever.

There's only one way to end deficits... and that is to only spend what is budgeted to be spent.

The only way to spend what is budgeted, is to not allow socialist to participate in governance.

Where Leftists are present in government, government will spend in deficit.

"Said no valid economist, ever."


CBO: Bush Tax Cuts Responsible For Almost A Third Of Deficit In Last 10 Years (2001-2010)


Bush CEA Chair Mankiw: Claim That Broad-Based Income Tax Cuts Increase Revenue Is Not "Credible," Capital Income Tax Cuts Also Don't Pay For Themselves

Bush-Appointed Federal Reserve Chair Bernanke: "I Don't Think That As A General Rule Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Bush Treasury Secretary Paulson: "As A General Rule, I Don't Believe That Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."

Bush OMB Director Nussle: "Some Say That [The Tax Cut] Was A Total Loss. Some Say They Totally Pay For Themselves. It's Neither Extreme."


Bush CEA Chairman Lazear: "As A General Rule, We Do Not Think Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Bush Economic Adviser Viard: "Federal Revenue Is Lower Today Than It Would Have Been Without The Tax Cuts."


Bush Treasury Official Carroll: "We Do Not Think Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Reagan Chief Economist Feldstein: "It's Not That You Get More Revenue By Lowering Tax Rates, It Is That You Don't Lose As Much."

Feldstein In 1986: "Hyperbole" That Reagan Tax Cut "Would Actually Increase Tax Revenue."

Conservative Economist Holtz-Eakin: "No Serious Research Evidence" Suggests Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."

 

[The Rabbi]

Seems our history has a few examples of depression/recessions beginning with Republicans and then Democrats elected to remedy.

You mean like the recession of 1920?
No, history is filled with mild recessions that became Depressions after Democrats took power.

 

[emilynghiem]

Dear Billy000
Re: your comment about increasing demand not just supply

Do you realize the opposite argument is what Obama's cousin Dr. Milton Wolf said about the health care reform?

He criticized that it created millions more consumers
without creating the provisions for serving them.

So why not invest in the hospitals and medical education,
to produce more doctors nurses and public health workers.

So this is where I see investing in prison reform, converting into medical programs and schools,
and saving billions in resources currently wasted on failed justice systems that don't correct or treat effectively,
and investing that in research and services that will.

 

[Oldstyle]

Has the deficit gone down because of something Barack Obama has cut...or has it gone down because of Sequestration...the Sequestration that he's been very vocal about wanting to abolish because it's not letting him spend the money that he wants to?

There are a lot of factors involved in the deficit going down.

Ending Bush's wars and tax giveaways to the rich being the top two. Reforming Medicare and Medicaid as part of the ACA is another.

Yes, I will give Sequetration its credit as well. And I will give a growing economy credit.

How has Medicare and Medicaid been "reformed" by the ACA to save money? Come on, Joe...don't tell me you still believe THAT fairy tale!

 

[The Rabbi]

Has the deficit gone down because of something Barack Obama has cut...or has it gone down because of Sequestration...the Sequestration that he's been very vocal about wanting to abolish because it's not letting him spend the money that he wants to?

There are a lot of factors involved in the deficit going down.

Ending Bush's wars and tax giveaways to the rich being the top two. Reforming Medicare and Medicaid as part of the ACA is another.

Yes, I will give Sequetration its credit as well. And I will give a growing economy credit.

How has Medicare and Medicaid been "reformed" by the ACA to save money? Come on, Joe...don't tell me you still believe THAT fairy tale!

It was reformed by Obama cutting billions from Medicare and blaming Republicans for being stingy.

 

[Dad2three]

Surveys Republicans more open-minded better informed than Democrats The Daily Caller

Republicans are low-information voters, and much more likely, as seen in this very comments section, to hang on to failed policy, like trickle-down theory, and blatant racism than the average citizen. Even the so-called 'moderate Republicans' stay quiet and let the least-informed among them do all the talking, and posting.


“The Democrats are the party of government activism, the party that says government can make you richer, smarter, taller, and get the chickweed out of your lawn. Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work, and then get elected and prove it." - P.J. O’rourke

Conservative Politics, 'Low-Effort' Thinking Linked In New Study

Conservative Politics Low-Effort Thinking Linked In New Study

Why Republicans Deny Science: The Quest for a Scientific Explanation
Why Republicans Deny Science The Quest for a Scientific Explanation Chris Mooney

Want to Understand Republicans? First Understand Evolution
Want to Understand Republicans First Understand Evolution Chris Mooney

 

[regent]

Seems our history has a few examples of depression/recessions beginning with Republicans and then Democrats elected to remedy.

LOL! No... That's the myth you're responding to.

No, more like our history.

 

[Dad2three]

Has the deficit gone down because of something Barack Obama has cut...or has it gone down because of Sequestration...the Sequestration that he's been very vocal about wanting to abolish because it's not letting him spend the money that he wants to?

There are a lot of factors involved in the deficit going down.

Ending Bush's wars and tax giveaways to the rich being the top two. Reforming Medicare and Medicaid as part of the ACA is another.

Yes, I will give Sequetration its credit as well. And I will give a growing economy credit.

How has Medicare and Medicaid been "reformed" by the ACA to save money? Come on, Joe...don't tell me you still believe THAT fairy tale!

It was reformed by Obama cutting billions from Medicare and blaming Republicans for being stingy.

This brings us to the House Republican budget and its use of virtually the same $500 billion in Medicare savings.


Spokesmen for Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), the chief architect, insist there is a difference because Obama was using the savings for a new entitlement program (universal health care) and instead Ryan would use the money to help fund reforms in Medicare.

“The defenders of the new law explicitly say that the law reduces Medicare spending (and raises taxes) so that the government may spend an equivalent amount of money on something else,” said House Budget Committee spokesman Stephen Spruiell. “By contrast, we think that any current-law Medicare savings should actually go toward preserving the program and putting the government in a better position to fund Medicare for today’s seniors and to save it for future generations.”

Under the unified budget, this line of argument doesn’t make much sense. The Medicare savings will be spent however the government deems to use it; it will not be earmarked for Medicare.



In fact, House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) recently had the audacity to claim that “the only people in Washington, D.C., who have voted to cut Medicare have been the Democrats when they voted to cut $500 billion in Medicare during Obamacare.”

This is surely an example of having your cake and eating it too. The Republicans had a chance to repeal those cuts when they voted to repeal the health care law,

but instead they adopted “current law” (ie, the Medicare cuts) in their budget.

Fact Checking the GOP debate 500 billion in cuts to Medicare - The Washington Post

 

[Dad2three]

Seems our history has a few examples of depression/recessions beginning with Republicans and then Democrats elected to remedy.

You mean like the recession of 1920?
No, history is filled with mild recessions that became Depressions after Democrats took power.

lol, Yeah, FDR came into power in 1933??? lol

1920? Get serious