Hey Tea Baggers

[balli]

Where are you getting your facts from?

youtube videos he sees in the blogosphere.

[CosmicCowboy]

Where are you getting your facts from? Fiscal Year 2009 was the last budget authorized by GWB and Congress, it amounted to $3.1 trillion in spending and $2.7 trillion in revenue. Fiscal Year 2010 was the first budget authorized by BO and Congress, it amounted to $3.4 trillion in spending and $2.3 trillion in revenue.

I wasn't a math major in college, but I'm pretty sure $3.1 trillion x 4 = $12.4 trillion.

Uhh...and THIS year they just said "aw to with it!" and we don't even HAVE a ing budget. Sweet.

[Findog]

Or, we can be like liberal Mecca, California, and just pay govt employees with IOU's.

California's problems are due to the composition of their tax base. Starting with Reagan's tenure as governor, they voted repeatedly in referendum after referendum to expand en lements at the state level without a hike in tax rates. That's fine when unemployment is 4 percent, but not now at 12 percent.

[Wild Cobra]

If I understand the Tea Bagger ethos correctly, they basically postulate that the US Government is on a path of extreme fiscal recklessness, with spending priorities that are unsustainable over the long run, and if we do not reverse course, this will have dire economic consequences on all of us, as well as future generations. So with that in mind, I have the following questions:

1. Do you support cuts in Social Security, and if you are over the age of 65, would you be willing to accept lower monthly payments?

2. Do you support cuts in Medicare, and if you are over the age of 65, would you be willing to accept less in Medicare benefits?

3. Do you support the immediate withdrawal of US military forces from Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as a significant scaleback in the number of American military bases overseas (over 700 in more than 120 countries)?

4. Should the government let the Bush tax cuts expire, and should the government consider implementing tax hikes at all?

5. If your answer to the first four questions is no, why should I take you seriously when you have no constructive solutions for the problems you complain about, and don't have a coherent understanding of these problems in the first place?

Because you left out areas that we should cut.

[Wild Cobra]

It really comes down to what you think the federal governments role in society should be. The answer IMHO is admitting that the government can't and shouldn't do everything and limit the spending accordingly. Flat tax, no deductions, no exceptions. Live within the budget, even if it means cutting en lements.

Dramatic cuts in en lements is the key. No more Nanny State.

[balli]

Dramatic cuts in en lements is the key. No more Nanny State.

lol idiotic, fraudulent math. What about the other 90% of the budget, autodidact?

[coyotes_geek]

Came across this a while back. Seems kinda topical for this thread.

http://crfb.org/stabilizethedebt/

[Findog]

Because you left out areas that we should cut.

I left out discretionary spending that even if eliminated entirely would not solve the problem.

[Drachen]

Where are you getting your facts from? Fiscal Year 2009 was the last budget authorized by GWB and Congress, it amounted to $3.1 trillion in spending and $2.7 trillion in revenue. Fiscal Year 2010 was the first budget authorized by BO and Congress, it amounted to $3.4 trillion in spending and $2.3 trillion in revenue.

I wasn't a math major in college, but I'm pretty sure $3.1 trillion x 4 = $12.4 trillion.

Quick question (I promise I am not trying to make a point, I am genuinely curious). Is it true that the budgetary numbers under the Bush admin did not include war funds and that BO brought the war budget into the federal budget?

[George Gervin's Afro]

Quick question (I promise I am not trying to make a point, I am genuinely curious). Is it true that the budgetary numbers under the Bush admin did not include war funds and that BO brought the war budget into the federal budget?

Yes. But don't bring up the past...!

[jack sommerset]

[Parker2112]

If I understand the Tea Bagger ethos correctly, they basically postulate that the US Government is on a path of extreme fiscal recklessness, with spending priorities that are unsustainable over the long run, and if we do not reverse course, this will have dire economic consequences on all of us, as well as future generations. So with that in mind, I have the following questions:

1. Do you support cuts in Social Security, and if you are over the age of 65, would you be willing to accept lower monthly payments?

2. Do you support cuts in Medicare, and if you are over the age of 65, would you be willing to accept less in Medicare benefits?

3. Do you support the immediate withdrawal of US military forces from Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as a significant scaleback in the number of American military bases overseas (over 700 in more than 120 countries)?

4. Should the government let the Bush tax cuts expire, and should the government consider implementing tax hikes at all?

5. If your answer to the first four questions is no, why should I take you seriously when you have no constructive solutions for the problems you complain about, and don't have a coherent understanding of these problems in the first place?

1. SS wont be there for me. I expect to have to work until I die.
2. see above
3. yes, bring em all home.
4. yes. yes.

Now about me:
A. I consider myself Libertarian.

B. I like the idea of turnover in elected officials, but 1. the movement is already corrupted, and 2. the Tea Party encompasses so many viewpoints, it is completely impotent, outside of ousting Repub in bents, which is ok by me.

C. Its not really about spending. Its about a select few unelected people printing money out of thin air without congressional oversight or having to answer to the voters. This is where you need to "bone up" on your studies, IMHO, Findog.

[Findog]

Quick question (I promise I am not trying to make a point, I am genuinely curious). Is it true that the budgetary numbers under the Bush admin did not include war funds and that BO brought the war budget into the federal budget?

.3 trillion would be approximately what we spend every year on the wars. I had not heard that before, regarding keeping the wars off the books.

[Findog]

C. Its not really about spending. Its about a select few unelected people printing money out of thin air without congressional oversight or having to answer to the voters. This is where you need to "bone up" on your studies, IMHO, Findog.

So why not let the Bush tax cuts expire in two years if one is concerned about simply printing digital dollars not backed by anything? That would be financing government by taxation instead of borrowing from China.

[Wild Cobra]

lol idiotic, fraudulent math. What about the other 90% of the budget, autodidact?

What do you mean? Isn't that about 1/3rd the budget?

Now I forget, but it's definitely more than 10%.

[Drachen]

.3 trillion would be approximately what we spend every year on the wars. I had not heard that before, regarding keeping the wars off the books.

I just remember them having to seperately vote for war funding every year outside of the federal budget. Then people would attach all sorts of disgusting riders to the war funding bills which no one could not vote for because then they don't support the troops. Then I hazily remember someone saying that BO was putting the war funding into the federal budget for transparency or something.

[Parker2112]

So why not let the Bush tax cuts expire in two years if one is concerned about simply printing digital dollars not backed by anything? That would be financing government by taxation instead of borrowing from China.

The sooner the better.

[Findog]

Then I hazily remember someone saying that BO was putting the war funding into the federal budget for transparency or something.

If that's true, then that restores some of the respect I have lost for him over the past two years.

[Parker2112]

Paul owns Bernanke

[CosmicCowboy]

I just remember them having to seperately vote for war funding every year outside of the federal budget. Then people would attach all sorts of disgusting riders to the war funding bills which no one could not vote for because then they don't support the troops. Then I hazily remember someone saying that BO was putting the war funding into the federal budget for transparency or something.

uhhhh...guys...they don't even HAVE a budget now. Stupid numbers don't mean anything anyway.

[Parker2112]

inflation is actually a disproportional tax on the lower and middle class.

[CosmicCowboy]

inflation is actually a disproportional tax on the lower and middle class.

We have a winner. The rich just demand a higher rate of return on their investments to keep up with inflation. It's the poor slugs paying interest on loans with a fixed paycheck that buys less every month that lose big time.

[Drachen]

uhhhh...guys...they don't even HAVE a budget now. Stupid numbers don't mean anything anyway.

You are right, we havent had a budget for a week. However you might remember that there were days before 7 days ago that happened and had a budget. Those are the days I was talking about. My memory isn't totally shot that I would only "hazily remember" events from a week ago . By the way, to answer the question of how much of the budget is "the big three" (SS, MC, DOD) it's 51.16% for FY2010, or last year's budget (your welcome CC.)

[Parker2112]

We have a winner. The rich just demand a higher rate of return on their investments to keep up with inflation. It's the poor slugs paying interest on loans with a fixed paycheck that buys less every month that lose big time.

well, gawww-dayum.

I'm a winner says CC. didnt see that coming...

[CosmicCowboy]

You are right, we havent had a budget for a week. However you might remember that there were days before 7 days ago that happened and had a budget. Those are the days I was talking about. My memory isn't totally shot that I would only "hazily remember" events from a week ago . By the way, to answer the question of how much of the budget is "the big three" (SS, MC, DOD) it's 51.16% for FY2010, or last year's budget (your welcome CC.)

It wasn't my question. Hows that memory again?