Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

U.S. Budget Deficit Down, Lowest in 5 Years

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • alkemical
    replied
    That's a lazy response, and also illustrates you believe things without facts.

    Leave a comment:


  • BroncoBeavis
    replied
    Originally posted by alkemical View Post
    You have supported those policies. What's make believe? Prove the data is flawed.
    Prove we don't spend 16 times as much on corporate subsidies as on defense? Do you know how completely impossible that is?

    Leave a comment:


  • alkemical
    replied
    Originally posted by BroncoBeavis View Post
    Never said anything about supporting subsidies. Just about diving into an argument with fantasmical amounts of exaggeration and hyperbole.

    Government is a balancing act. Its impossible to strike a decent balance with people keeping score based on make-believe numbers.
    You have supported those policies. What's make believe? Prove the data is flawed.

    Leave a comment:


  • BroncoBeavis
    replied
    Originally posted by alkemical View Post
    You're the one supporting government subsidies which lead to the demand of public welfare programs, refusing to even examine data based upon your illusory fallacy of a presumed ideological position. You've been conned and you don't even see it, then you doublespeak yourself creating your own hypocrisy. You're a shining example of the Idiocracy and why fascism is winning.
    Never said anything about supporting subsidies. Just about diving into an argument with fantasmical amounts of exaggeration and hyperbole.

    Government is a balancing act. Its impossible to strike a decent balance with people keeping score based on make-believe numbers.

    Leave a comment:


  • houghtam
    replied
    Originally posted by alkemical View Post
    You're the one supporting government subsidies which lead to the demand of public welfare programs, refusing to even examine data based upon your illusory fallacy of a presumed ideological position. You've been conned and you don't even see it, then you doublespeak yourself creating your own hypocrisy. You're a shining example of the Idiocracy and why fascism is winning.
    I'll put it more bluntly:

    Beavis is a rube.

    Leave a comment:


  • alkemical
    replied
    Originally posted by BroncoBeavis View Post
    "A Chicken in Every Pot and Toyota in every Driveway so long as we cut out those Eleventy Trillion Bajillion Katrillion Dollars in Corporate Welfare!"

    As usual, the easy fixes are too good to be true.
    You're the one supporting government subsidies which lead to the demand of public welfare programs, refusing to even examine data based upon your illusory fallacy of a presumed ideological position. You've been conned and you don't even see it, then you doublespeak yourself creating your own hypocrisy. You're a shining example of the Idiocracy and why fascism is winning.

    Leave a comment:


  • BroncoBeavis
    replied
    Originally posted by alkemical View Post
    You are full of logical fallacies. You don't fact check anything.

    Go 'Murica!
    "A Chicken in Every Pot and Toyota in every Driveway so long as we cut out those Eleventy Trillion Bajillion Katrillion Dollars in Corporate Welfare!"

    As usual, the easy fixes are too good to be true.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fedaykin
    replied
    Originally posted by Rohirrim View Post
    First, we must address the false religion of a "pure" capitalism. Capitalism, like any other system devised by man, is inherently flawed. We have enough history to know that laissez faire capitalism leads to the kind of income disparities that lead to social upheaval. In other words, no society can sustain it for long, at least without resorting to a police state. This is the bush we keep beating around. We have an entrenched, ideologically based political wing that is fanatically wedded to the dogma of laissez faire capitalism, and the majority of them are the dupes of corporate sharks who are getting reamed by the economics. They are the equivalent of modern ghost dancers.

    Look what happened within two years of the U.S. taking down Glass/Steagle? Now we have corporations laying off a third of their workforce, piling that work onto the shoulders of the two thirds left, reducing their wages, and then using the leftover money to buy back stocks and give themselves more money. Research? Zip. New equipment and building? Zip. This has become the basic workings of our economy.

    If you explained it to a third grader, they'd think you were insane.

    Laisez-faire == opposite side of the coin to communism. Both are fatally flawed ideas. Someplace in the middle, favoring capitalism (i.e. what we did from 1930-1980) is what has proved to be the best solution so far. Too bad even that center-right philosophy is now called "marxism" by the rabid right.

    Leave a comment:


  • houghtam
    replied
    Originally posted by Rohirrim View Post
    First, we must address the false religion of a "pure" capitalism. Capitalism, like any other system devised by man, is inherently flawed. We have enough history to know that laissez faire capitalism leads to the kind of income disparities that lead to social upheaval. In other words, no society can sustain it for long, at least without resorting to a police state. This is the bush we keep beating around. We have an entrenched, ideologically based political wing that is fanatically wedded to the dogma of laissez faire capitalism, and the majority of them are the dupes of corporate sharks who are getting reamed by the economics. They are the equivalent of modern ghost dancers.

    Look what happened within two years of the U.S. taking down Glass/Steagle? Now we have corporations laying off a third of their workforce, piling that work onto the shoulders of the two thirds left, reducing their wages, and then using the leftover money to buy back stocks and give themselves more money. Research? Zip. New equipment and building? Zip. This has become the basic workings of our economy.

    If you explained it to a third grader, they'd think you were insane.
    Actually my four year old has it down pretty well already, thanks to the good Doctor.

    "Business is business, and business must grow, regardless of crummies in tummies, you know."

    Leave a comment:


  • Rohirrim
    replied
    First, we must address the false religion of a "pure" capitalism. Capitalism, like any other system devised by man, is inherently flawed. We have enough history to know that laissez faire capitalism leads to the kind of income disparities that lead to social upheaval. In other words, no society can sustain it for long, at least without resorting to a police state. This is the bush we keep beating around. We have an entrenched, ideologically based political wing that is fanatically wedded to the dogma of laissez faire capitalism, and the majority of them are the dupes of corporate sharks who are getting reamed by the economics. They are the equivalent of modern ghost dancers.

    Look what happened within two years of the U.S. taking down Glass/Steagle? Now we have corporations laying off a third of their workforce, piling that work onto the shoulders of the two thirds left, reducing their wages, and then using the leftover money to buy back stocks and give themselves more money. Research? Zip. New equipment and building? Zip. This has become the basic workings of our economy.

    If you explained it to a third grader, they'd think you were insane.

    Leave a comment:


  • peacepipe
    replied
    you can actually expand SS. remove the cap on which higher earners make,once someone reaches 120,000(somewhere around there) they no longer pay the 6.2 into SS. get rid of that cap and most issues with SS go away.

    Leave a comment:


  • peacepipe
    replied
    Originally posted by SoCalBronco View Post
    Sure there is. More debt=need to finance it=share of federal budget tied up in dead money i.e. paying interest will increase which is an inefficient use of money and needlessly will result in higher taxes.

    Short term deficit not a huge issue.....long term SS and Medicare is the bigger issue due to demographic strains on funds. Really need to start cost shifting away from govt. Means testing, premium support/voucher, changing inflationary increases etc.
    cutting benefits is not going to happen. and shouldn't happen.

    Leave a comment:


  • SoCalBronco
    replied
    Originally posted by elsid13 View Post
    And why do they have to? This is public government, not your household or your business. There is no real need to balance the books annually.
    Sure there is. More debt=need to finance it=share of federal budget tied up in dead money i.e. paying interest will increase which is an inefficient use of money and needlessly will result in higher taxes.

    Short term deficit not a huge issue.....long term SS and Medicare is the bigger issue due to demographic strains on funds. Really need to start cost shifting away from govt. Means testing, premium support/voucher, changing inflationary increases etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • alkemical
    replied
    Originally posted by BroncoBeavis View Post
    Dude, $4k a ludicrous number on its face. Just juxtapose the $250 on defense vs $4,000 for "corporate subsidies"

    Proportionally, since $4k is 16x $250, and we spend roughly $700 billion on defense.... you'd have to be saying that we give out something like $11 trillion in "corporate subsides"

    That's laughable. Our entire national GDP isn't much larger than that. There's no sniff test (or laugh test) that could possibly pass.

    When the bull**** is that easy to spot on the surface, there's no reason to dig any further.
    You are full of logical fallacies. You don't fact check anything.

    Go 'Murica!

    Leave a comment:


  • BroncoBeavis
    replied
    Originally posted by alkemical View Post
    Or, posters like yourself when things contradict your perception - you call it bunk but can't back it up and make hypocritical statements.
    Dude, $4k a ludicrous number on its face. Just juxtapose the $250 on defense vs $4,000 for "corporate subsidies"

    Proportionally, since $4k is 16x $250, and we spend roughly $700 billion on defense.... you'd have to be saying that we give out something like $11 trillion in "corporate subsides"

    That's laughable. Our entire national GDP isn't much larger than that. There's no sniff test (or laugh test) that could possibly pass.

    When the bull**** is that easy to spot on the surface, there's no reason to dig any further.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X