Funny how Saddam's little turn of phrase has outlasted Saddam by a sizable margin.
Here it is. Read it and, instead of weeping, vote anything but Democrat next year.
Yoni, have you sent dubya your $7K+ check to pay your part of the your much-beloved Iraqi war?
If you really had to pay $7K for your Iraqi war, would you still support invading and occupying Iraq for decades?
$7K is only the first installment. Multiply it many times to cover many decades.
Iraq and Afghanistan are projected to total $2.4 trillion over the next decade.
How does Boner propose to pay for it?
so what's the problem?
Democrats don't understand economics.
They seem to understand that debts have to be paid somehow. I don't agree with every tax as listed (though I believe Boner as far as I throw him -- ok even less than that), but that's a pretty big bill we're running up.
i thought deficit spending was good thing?
No actuallu bush did a smart thing. he pushed paying for the war on a future generation. when the bill comes due yoni will blame the resident dem congress. see that is what i am tlking about!
You would.
Four irrefutable points.
1) The Bush Tax Cuts have increased federal revenues tremendously.
2) It's the spending, not the tax cut (which, see #1 above, resulted in increased federal revenues) that has resulted in deficit spending.
3) The deficit is shrinking not because Congress is spending less but, because the tax cuts have -- let's say it again -- resulted in increased federal revenues.
4) If you take more money from the rich, they'll buy fewer luxuries -- made by the decidedly not wealthy, fewer service -- provided by the decidedly not wealthy; they'll hire fewer decidedly not wealthy people to work in their businesses, and they invest fewer dollars in businesses owned by the decidedly not wealthy.
Here's a few debatable points.
The cost of the war has been more than covered by the increased revenues resulting from the Bush Tax Cuts.
If Congress -- Republicans and Democrats alike -- would quit spending like drunken sailors (apologies to drunken sailors everywhere) the deficit would shrink even faster and we'd enjoy a surplus -- even while prosecuting a war.
It's the spending, stupid.
If Congress would quit spending, it could be paid for by 2010.
I'll blame Congress.
So, if we hadn't gone to war in Iraq, we'd be swimming in money.
And acting like Congress passes the spending but not the tax cuts is stupid.
Why hasn't Bush vetoed all those spending bills?
he did silly. SCHIPS ..
Yeah, scaring us with $80k/per year households that actually didn't qualify for SCHIP under that bill. We need to cover all the missing funds and guns in Iraq.
American's favorite passtime is buying on credit.
Why would you government do otherwise?
"The Bush Tax Cuts have increased federal revenues tremendously.'
Absolute lie. Show at least one non-political economic proof that tax cuts pay for themselves.
Of course it's not Bush's fault that the federal government is spending itself (and us) into oblivion. After all, he didn't push for the largest en lement program expansion since the 60s and drag us into a very expensive invasion and occupation of Iraq.
Oh, wait...
"it's not Bush's fault that the federal government is spending itself (and us) into oblivion"
absolute lie. dubya started the bogus war in Iraq, and approved every ing spending bill for 6 years given to him by a Repug Congress.
The fed govt into oblivion, "drowned in a bathtube" is exactly where the Repugs and neo- s want it. And of course, that spending is going to Repugs/neo- s/corps/super-rich.
Consider yourself slapped, .
Yes, American education has failed many.
I love it when folks are so worked up, they don't realize someone just agreed with them.
You guys just watch. If Hillary gets elected, we will have a serious recession later, I'd say two to four years later, depending on when they raise taxes. Even if a republican is elected, and the tax reductions are allowed to expire, they will have a negative effect.
Raising taxes will decrease revenue. Sure, the immediate first year will show gains, but as the economy shrinks and the rich shelter their money in cheaper governments, we will lose jobs, wages, then revenues.
Not sure boutons desease can be fixed with education . . .
The Laffer Curve is a proven concept, and the Bush tax cuts have raised revenues. If we increase taxes again, we will reduce revenues.
Where are the curves for the twin deficits?
You guys should get taxed on your assets, like we do. Or better still, on every credit or debit on your checking account.
Eh, I'd be surprised if there wasn't a recession in the next year or two once the real pigs of the war costs and the housing bust stop being covered by interest rate change lipstick.
Hold on. Can we first agree that in 2003, the President's income tax relief was put in place and that federal revenues from income taxes rose to the highest level ever?
Can we agree on that one simple fact?
Everyone's effective tax rate is lower than it was in 2002 -- everyone's.
Federal revenues from INCOME TAXES is WAY, WAY, UP!
Explain it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
