Reagan insider: 'GOP destroyed U.S. economy'

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

Page 1 for 2008. Very first column.

---

I'm assuming you mean table #1. Page one doesn't have anything.

Ahhh..I got it. My bad. The first column is the aggregate of all of the tables. Doh! Man, that should be titled.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

The list I posted was ALL Federal procurement contracts which is the relevant number to use.

Texas is 2nd in size, 2nd in population and 6th in Federal Procurement.

Why is this an issue with you?

---

Bush and his cronies had ties to the defense and oil. It wasnt simply texas he was favoring.

Your defense of bush admin is misleading. You were the one that brought that shit out of nowhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

You didn't say composite totals either. Both are implied. That's why you have to agree on a metric before you get into a pissing match.

---

I disagree that they're implied. Ultimately, all he had to ask is what metric I was using before pulling the favoritism flag.

My original post had to do with Texas being regarded as a fiscal conservative state, when the state actually receives a shit load of federal money and still run a budget with deficits on it.

That's all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

Sure. But those checks didn't go to the state. They were issued by the IRS directly to individuals.



Did I ever say that there was no correlation?

---

Ok, so the fact that Texas received more aid during the Bush Presidency is a Non Sequitur. It's a meaningless stat.

Hey, Texas produced more mosquitoes in June than Colorado. Just as meaningful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

I think there are Democrats who are willing to cut spending and raise tax rates but I'm not so sure any member of the GOP is willing to raise taxes at this time.

Now, that being said, I completely agree that Democrats will need to find ways to cut spending.

---

One thing, though: if you cut spending by $1 billion, you've improved the budget by $1 billion. It's fairly straightforward. But if you raise taxes by a certain amount, there's a great deal of uncertainty about what that will do to revenues.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

I disagree that they're implied. Ultimately, all he had to ask is what metric I was using before pulling the favoritism flag.

My original post had to do with Texas being regarded as a fiscal conservative state, when the state actually receives a shit load of federal money and still run a budget with deficits on it.

That's all.

---

I still disagree with what I percieve as the logic behind your premise. Whether Texas is or is not fiscally conservative, is irrlevant to the shit load of federal money. States with the largest pops get the most money. States with the largest pops have the largest budgets. That Texas has withstood what the other 2 largest states have endured for much longer, should imply something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

I'm assuming you mean table #1. Page one doesn't have anything.

Ahhh..I got it. My bad. The first column is the aggregate of all of the tables. Doh! Man, that should be titled.

---

Right. It's kind of confusing, but it's there.

It's the Page 1 as marked on the document. Page 15 of the PDF.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

Right. It's kind of confusing, but it's there.

It's the Page 1 as marked on the document. Page 15 of the PDF.

---

:toast

Splitting hairs with El Nono makes me hungry. I gotta go eat.:lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parker2112

Bush and his cronies had ties to the defense and oil. It wasnt simply texas he was favoring.

Your defense of bush admin is misleading. You were the one that brought that shit out of nowhere.

---

Your reading comprehension CONTINUES to fail you.

ElNono brought up the Bush Favoritism. I simply proved he was a liar.

Since you clearly can't read charts I'll spell it out for you.

2008 breakdown of ALL federal spending per capita by state.

Retirement and disability payments: Texas ranks 47th

Direct Federal Grants: Texas ranks 36th

Federal Procurement: Texas ranks 6th

Federal Salaries and Wages: Texas ranks 25th

Overall ranking on spending per capita per state: 28th

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

Ok, so the fact that Texas received more aid during the Bush Presidency is a Non Sequitur. It's a meaningless stat.

Hey, Texas produced more mosquitoes in June than Colorado. Just as meaningful.

---

Well, if somebody is going to wave the flag that Texas is the prime example of a 'fiscally conservative' state, then you would think they wouldn't need/want the percentage of federal aid they get. IE: They would rank lower even though their population is among the biggest.

Basically, a reverse-New York, who doesn't have as much population as Texas, but actually receives more money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

Splitting hairs with El Nono makes me hungry. I gotta go eat.:lol

---

I'm eating as we speak.. :wakeup

:lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doobs

One thing, though: if you cut spending by $1 billion, you've improved the budget by $1 billion. It's fairly straightforward. But if you raise taxes by a certain amount, there's a great deal of uncertainty about what that will do to revenues.

---

Thats not true. Lets say we cut our military budget by 1 billion. Now, that is going to mean some people lose their jobs and certain contracts don't get filled which has a chain reaction as well. So yes, you have 1 billion less in expenditures on your budget but then you will also recover less tax revenue due to a reduction in spending.

Money put into the economy by the government does not simply disappear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

Well, if somebody is going to wave the flag that Texas is the prime example of a 'fiscally conservative' state, then you would think they wouldn't need/want the percentage of federal aid they get. IE: They would rank lower even though their population is among the biggest.

Basically, a reverse-New York, who doesn't have as much population as Texas, but actually receives more money.

---

Well, there is the little matter of Texas being #2 in population but receiving the 3rd largest portion. But, in the end, that's meaningless too as funding is often subject to the whims of elements outside of both the state and federal govt control. We've gotten a boat load of disaster funds in the last few years, which is part of that total. Disasters don't really figure into fiscal conservation.:lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

Your reading comprehension CONTINUES to fail you.

ElNono brought up the Bush Favoritism. I simply proved he was a liar.

Since you clearly can't read charts I'll spell it out for you.

2008 breakdown of ALL federal spending per capita by state.

Retirement and disability payments: Texas ranks 47th

Direct Federal Grants: Texas ranks 36th

Federal Procurement: Texas ranks 6th

Federal Salaries and Wages: Texas ranks 25th

Overall ranking on spending per capita per state: 28th

---

I missed ElNono's arg, but if thats the case...he missed the point too. You both do. Bush relationship with Texas dont go to all contractors state wide, just the industries that he and many of his admin had ties to, and who reaped benefits from his policies while in office.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

I'm eating as we speak.. :wakeup

:lol

---

Damnit! I wanted you to buy!:rollin

you continuing to hammer on that bullshit data is comical as well...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

I wrongly inferred ElNono brought up the Bush Favoritism. He simply proved I was wrong.

---

fify

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

fify

---

gotta watch CC...he gets a little shifty sometimes...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

Well, there is the little matter of Texas being #2 in population but receiving the 3rd largest portion. But, in the end, that's meaningless too as funding is often subject to the whims of elements outside of both the state and federal govt control. We've gotten a boat load of disaster funds in the last few years, which is part of that total. Disasters don't really figure into fiscal conservation.:lol

---

True. And I have no problems with the fine folks in Texas. I actually have family there and I'm going to visit next month.

But the state suffers from the same problems other states suffer as far as bloated budgets and deficits. Obviously Perry renting that residence he lives in doesn't help either. And it's a state that it's in a great condition to actually show other states how to do things right. They get plenty of federal funding, and it's chock full of conservatives (unlike Cali or NY).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

True. And I have no problems with the fine folks in Texas. I actually have family there and I'm going to visit next month.

But the state suffers from the same problems other states suffer as far as bloated budgets and deficits. Obviously Perry renting that residence he lives in doesn't help either. And it's a state that it's in a great condition to actually show other states how to do things right. They get plenty of federal funding, and it's chock full of conservatives (unlike Cali or NY).

---

Yeah, which was why I was saying it really waxes and wanes. Perry hasn't been much of a leader in that respect..and we certainly apportion our money poorly. To receive what we recieve and have one of the worst mental health programs in the nation is simply unforgiveable and is a good example of our legislatures' poor stewardship.
But goddamn, Perry sure has a nice pad.:bang

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parker2112

you continuing to hammer on that bullshit data is comical as well...

---

So when you are confronted with data that clearly refutes the claims pulled straight from your hemorrhoid infested ass it becomes "bullshit" data?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

So when you are confronted with data that clearly refutes the claims pulled straight from your hemorrhoid infested ass it becomes "bullshit" data?

---

I am telling you you are missing the point entirely, and the data you are hammering doesnt address the point at all

bush didnt favor texas he favored his business partners and his cronies business partners.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parker2112

I am telling you you are missing the point entirely, and the data you are hammering doesnt address the point at all

bush didnt favor texas he favored his business partners and his cronies business partners.

---

So your point is that politicians favor their cronies.

*gasp*

I am SO shocked and outraged!

How fucking old are you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

So your point is that politicians favor their cronies.

*gasp*

I am SO shocked and outraged!

How fucking old are you?

---

It just sucks when "favoring the cronies" BANKRUPTS THE FUCKING COUNTRY AT THE HAND OF UNNECESSARY WAR.