NightFox
Wildling
So your theory is that the Democrats have just been innocent bystanders to the deficit spending that's been going on since 1969? If that's the case, why do we even bother sending them to Washington if the Republicans have such pervasive control over the purse strings? They might as well stay at home.Democrats in which country? Because that certainly hasn't been the case for the Democrats in the United States for the last several decades, they've engaged in deficit spending with as much gusto as the drunken sailors on the Republican side of the aisle have, which probably explains why we haven't had a balanced budget since 1969.and do tell ,, what is the dem plan to balance the budget??The 152-member House Republican Study Committee (RSC) released its alternative budget last week, and it was both a doozy and a political gift to Democrats. In that vein, House Republicans are now proposing slashing spending by $14 trillion over the next decade in order to balance the federal budget. Apparently, House Republicans forgot they were also the party that helped Trump single-handedly add nearly $8 trillion to the national debt during his four years in office, which was also pretty unprecedented.
House Republicans—nearly three-quarters of whom signed off on this plan—definitely have electoral advantages heading into next year, their ideas aren't one of them.
House Republicans commit in writing to raising Medicare, Social Security eligibility to 69
The 152-member House Republican Study Committee (RSC) released its alternative budget last week, and it was both a doozy and a political gift to Democrats. As the Washington Post's Henry Olsen pointed out, the budget wasn't exactly brimming with fresh...www.dailykos.com
I'm sure plan B will be equally as inspiring.
To start with, no spending without taxation. Democrats have always taxed before they spend.
Democrats only held the House for the last 2 years of W's Administration, and the first 2 years of the Obama Administration, prior to 2018, and in both cases (2006, and 2018), they were saddled with MASSIVE Republican deficits when they walked in the door.
Under Bill Clinton, there were budget surpluses because of the success of the Clinton Agenda passed in the first two years of his Administration. Democrats held the House for 2 years before the Republicans took over, and Republicans held the House for the next 12 years, by which time, the fiscal gains of the Clinton Presidency were wiped out in unfunded programs like MediCare, Part D, two unfunded wars, and of course, the Bush tax cuts.
Bush's policies lead to the second Republican economic crash, and Democrats undid as much damage as possible before the Tea Party loons in the Gerrymandered House took over in 2012, and spent another 6 years refusing to tax, but spending on corporations continued unabated.
Obama reduced spending and increased taxes as best he could, created the most successful economic recovery in history, so of course Republicans had to crash that too.
You also still have not managed to demonstrate a single instance of Democrats "Taxing before spending" even though it's the Democrats that are at least half-responsible for the state of Federal Finances in the United States and allow me to give you a hint: simply listing Presidents and which party controlled which House of Congress isn't supporting your original argument.
If you had any integrity, you'd recognize that both the major crime families share responsibility for deficit spending and the cumulative operating deficit (aka the "National Debt") as well as the enormous pile of future unfunded liabilities we're collectively facing, but I already know that your integrity is questionable so I fully expect that you'll just slap together yet another pile of propaganda in the hopes that nobody will notice that it's just non-sequitur BS.
Maybe you're just trying to convince yourself that your perception has some sort of a connection to reality?
