It apparently wasn't the intent of the stimulus either.

Deflection, I love it.......

Bottom to the top redistribution...you are operating off the idea that money belongs to the government. Tax cuts mean only the government is taking less than before.

What we need is a law that any spending will be payed for. Pay as you go!

What we need is a law that any new spending will be payed for. Pay as you go!

We need at least two such laws.

Bottom to the top redistribution...you are operating off the idea that money belongs to the government. Tax cuts mean only the government is taking less than before.

#3 | Posted by andyuhenet at 2010-01-29 11:47 PM | Reply | Flag

The answer to every problem is a tax cut for the wealthy.

Rinse. Repeat. Bitch about the debt only when a Democrat is President.

Rinse. Repeat.

Very logical argument, Betel. It really is good hearing intellectual insights like yours.

BRAVO!!

Andy-
That's why we need a "paygo" rule in there. also.

Don't you agree?

It's just common sense conservative principle, doncha know, Andy? "Paygo" is the way to go, Andy!

I agree. Pay as you go is great. I also think that if DC wants to either raise or lower taxes, either direction, they have to have a corresponding cut in spending in relation to the projected increase or decrease in money coming back into the government from the tax rate change.

There is so much waste in ALL spending (don't leave the military spending out of it) that a decrease has to increase.

Andy-
re: I agree. Pay as you go is great.

Which is why Republicans ended it in 2002 (when they were in power), and even voted against it, like, yesterday:

The Senate took a vote on requiring Congress not to pass legislation that it can't pay for. All 40 Republicans voted no.

Do you think I'm happy about that? Will it be brought back by President Obama?

That's all that really matters.

The Republican Party has done a lot of shit I'm not happy with. That doesn't mean I have to agree with them and defend them.

With the huge majorities he has, he has done very little.

The paygo vote was especially ridiculous. The idea is to "impose a requirement that key parts of the budget must be paid for with spending cuts or tax increases to prevent the federal deficit from increasing." It's known as the pay-as-you-go approach, or "paygo" -- if policymakers are going to increase spending or cut taxes, they have to figure out a way to pay for it at the time.

A wonderful idea.

Do you think I'm happy about that? Will it be brought back by President Obama?

Gee. Maybe if Obama got ONE FUCKING REPUBLICAN VOTE!

I'm gone, Andy.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. The party out of power is just that. It's up to the party in power to get shit done. A Republican vote would be nice though.

I'm gone, Andy.

Peace, yo.

ANDY

Obama tried to get 'pay/go'. As Betlg pointed out it didn't get a single Republican vote. I thought they were all 'fiscally conservative'.

On topic of this thread, read "Two Santa Clauses". Very enlightening - run up massive debt so you can cut social programs. It's no accident we have massive debt. Reagan quadrupled it, W more than doubled it. The only time the GOP whines about deficits is when Democrats come into office.

MOTTO: Working like a charm for the GOP since 1981

The entire national debt when Carter left office was 1/3 what the deficit was in Bush' 2009 budget. The national debt was on a downward trajectory when Reagan and W took office. $700 Billion a year to service the debt is half the deficit...

The entire national debt when Carter left office was 1/3 what the deficit was in Bush' 2009 budget.

LOL that is so irrelevant. In 1982, my parents sold their first house for $60,000. Today that house is worth $400,000-$450,000

Relevent in the sense if we didn't HAVE a national debt we wouldn't be shelling out $700 BILLION a year - half the annual deficit - to service it. Duh.

AU I agreed with him that pay as you go is good and should have been passed with Republican support, I don't know what else you guys expect me to say.

Tax cuts usually are bad for the wealthy. The rich don't give a fuck about the poor. Need creates more jobs not tax cuts for the rich. Tax these bastards at a 50% Tax rate or higher and you will see real growth.