• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Poll: Voters Viewing Occupy Wall St. Unfavorably

It's not really open to argument. It's a fact.

Of course I don't think we should do that. How many times do I have to type that before you guys get a clue?
Gee I don't know, it just appears to be in your nature.
 
SS, Medicare, and military spending make up most of federal spending, and most Americans do not want significant spending cuts in any of those areas. Doesn't matter how you try to spin it. Those are the basic facts.


It is not going to be a choice should Keynesian lunacy remain in effect.

j-mac
 
Again, we simply have to wake up to reality. Reality is that we took a very bad turn when we elected George W. Bush and allowed him to slash tax rates. Reality is that we would actually be in decent shape even now if the Bush tax cuts had never been put in place. Reality is that we can still be in decent shape by doing nothing but rescinding the Bush tax cuts, which would reduce the deficit by over $5 trillion in the next 10 years. Of course we should also reduce spending.

The cause of our problem is so obvious it beggars the imagination that you can't see it. Take away the Republican tax cuts and the Republican war in Iraq and the world is much happier looking place.

Reality is not trying to blame the past but what to do in the present and future.

Most of what i see nowadays is trying to place blame elsewhere rather than trying to do something to resolve the situation, and that includes the present administration.

Let's do it your way and blame all the world's ill on George Bush. Now that that's been settled is the budget balanced and the debt cleared up? Are people back at work?

Rather than debating who's fault it is for what we see today why not find agreement on ways that might cut spending and balance a budget , eliminate the debt, how the market can create jobs, how the US might compete in a changing world, etc.

But all the liberals can do is whine that it's all the fault of George Bush and the Republicans. That's the stock answer to America's problems and it was old three years ago. This lack of imagination and foresight will not serve the country well.
 
Last edited:
it is personal with him(conservative) grant...you consider it 'speaking the obvious' because you agree with his world view...who gets the final say as to what 'reality' is? you? conservative? thomas sowell? are you the only ones capable of determing reality? is it 'reality' because you agree with it?

I do agree with what he is saying and that what is happening in the United States and Europe was entirely predictable because reality, and especially the reality of demographics and the consequences of social engineering, was ignored.

Now there is the reality of debt and unaffordable social programs and the poor Liberals have no idea what to do about it because the answer might lie in "right wing" solutions. Isn't that true?
 
It is not going to be a choice should Keynesian lunacy remain in effect.

j-mac

Keynes maintained that stimulus during down economies should be temporary. It should be paid for by contingency funds collected during periods of strong growth. Unfortunately it seems that the previous adminstration neglected that basic principle.
 
Reality is not trying to blame the past but what to do in the present and future.

Most of what i see nowadays is trying to place blame elsewhere rather than trying to do something to resolve the situation, and that includes the present administration.

Let's do it your way and blame all the world's ill on George Bush. Now that that's been settled is the budget balanced and the debt cleared up? Are people back at work?

Rather than debating who's fault it is for what we see today why not find agreement on ways that might cut spending and balance a budget , eliminate the debt, how the market can create jobs, how the US might compete in a changing world, etc.

But all the liberals can do is whine that it's all the fault of George Bush and the Republicans. That's the stock answer to America's problems and it was old three years ago. This lack of imagination and foresight will not serve the country well.

I'm sorry if it's uncomfortable for you -- I can see why it might be -- but in order to chart a course out of this mess it's necessary to understand how we got into it to begin with. Once you understand that our fiscal woes are primarily the result of ill-advised tax cuts and an ill-advised war, the way out becomes fairly obvious.
 
I'm sorry if it's uncomfortable for you -- I can see why it might be -- but in order to chart a course out of this mess it's necessary to understand how we got into it to begin with. Once you understand that our fiscal woes are primarily the result of ill-advised tax cuts and an ill-advised war, the way out becomes fairly obvious.

Some think its possible to just wave a magic wand and fix 30 years of debt created by too much spending on the military industrial complex while simultaneously cutting revenues, rather than taking the responsible fiscal response of addressing the cause of the debt.
 
I'm sorry if it's uncomfortable for you -- I can see why it might be -- but in order to chart a course out of this mess it's necessary to understand how we got into it to begin with. Once you understand that our fiscal woes are primarily the result of ill-advised tax cuts and an ill-advised war, the way out becomes fairly obvious.

If that is that obvious then why isn't the US leading Americans in that appropriate direction?

Were the findings of the "Super Committee" the same as yours? End the tax cuts and an ill-advised war and the debt will disappear and the budget will be balanced?
 
Some think its possible to just wave a magic wand

Not those living in reality Land. If there are you should quote them.

and fix 30 years of debt created by too much spending on the military industrial complex while simultaneously cutting revenues, rather than taking the responsible fiscal response of addressing the cause of the debt.

We have more than enough people "addressing the cause of the debt" and it's always the political opponents. What isn't possible at the moment, it seems, is finding leadership capable of fixing the debt.

Next time the American people go to the polls they should consider a candidate who has some experience in financial matters, not an unqualified poster boy designed to demonstrate how advanced a nation they have become.
 
Not those living in reality Land. If there are you should quote them.



We have more than enough people "addressing the cause of the debt" and it's always the political opponents. What isn't possible at the moment, it seems, is finding leadership capable of fixing the debt.

Next time the American people go to the polls they should consider a candidate who has some experience in financial matters, not an unqualified poster boy designed to demonstrate how advanced a nation they have become.

That is a great point and we can add the Simpson/Bowles Commission to that as well. Obama has no interest in solving the problem as his only interest is to find someone to blame for it. Like far too many leftwing radicals his actions speak louder than his words but supporters ignore the action and buy the words.
 
If that is that obvious then why isn't the US leading Americans in that appropriate direction?

Were the findings of the "Super Committee" the same as yours? End the tax cuts and an ill-advised war and the debt will disappear and the budget will be balanced?

As you may have heard, the "Super Committee" was a giant flop. That was completely predictable from the moment that the membership announced, as the GOP nominated members who were unlikely to negotiate in good faith.

Unfortunately our politicians, and in particular our Republican politicians, do not respond to obvious answers.

TaxCuts_Effect_Deficit.jpg
 
Last edited:
As you may have heard, the "Super Committee" was a giant flop. That was completely predictable from the moment that the membership announced, as the GOP nominated members who were unlikely to negotiate in good faith.

Unfortunately our politicians, and in particular our Republican politicians, do not respond to obvious answers.

TaxCuts_Effect_Deficit.jpg

Like with all liberals human behavior never impacts revenue tothe govt. Speculation is all that matters in the liberal world. What you cannot explain is how tax revenue grew after the Bush tax cuts were fully implemented but it is easy for you to say what would have happened even though you cannot prove it
 
Like with all liberals human behavior never impacts revenue tothe govt. Speculation is all that matters in the liberal world. What you cannot explain is how tax revenue grew after the Bush tax cuts were fully implemented but it is easy for you to say what would have happened even though you cannot prove it

debtnobush0607.png


Again you smash the irony meter to pieces, as you spend virtually all your time here arguing about what would have happened if Obama hadn't done x, y, or z. :rofl:

Of course we can't know exactly what would have happened, but there is very little evidence that the Bush tax cuts spurred economic growth.

Off the Charts Blog | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities | Blog Archive | Top 5 Charts on the Bush Tax Cuts
 
debtnobush0607.png


Again you smash the irony meter to pieces, as you spend virtually all your time here arguing about what would have happened if Obama hadn't done x, y, or z. :rofl:

Of course we can't know exactly what would have happened, but there is very little evidence that the Bush tax cuts spurred economic growth.

Off the Charts Blog | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities | Blog Archive | Top 5 Charts on the Bush Tax Cuts

So let me see if I have this correct, you don't believe that keeping more of your money stimulates economic growth and thus job creation and higher revenue to the govt? I have seen nothing from you other than charts about speculation. How do you know the economic activity would have been the same? How do you know that the jobs between 2003 and 2008 would have happened? What is your problem with keeping more of what you earn?

Employment January of each year. Looks to me like 9 million new taxpayers created between January 2003 and January 2008 all before Democrats took control of the Congress and Legislative process.

2003 137417
2004 138472
2005 140245
2006 143142
2007 146032
2008 146421
 
I'm sorry if it's uncomfortable for you -- I can see why it might be -- but in order to chart a course out of this mess it's necessary to understand how we got into it to begin with. Once you understand that our fiscal woes are primarily the result of ill-advised tax cuts and an ill-advised war, the way out becomes fairly obvious.

So, the government killing jobs and authorizing $4 trillion in wasteful spending didn't have anything to do with it?

I find that Libbo opposition to the wars conflicts with the whole, "government spending creates jobs", talking point we've been hearing.
 
So let me see if I have this correct, you don't believe that keeping more of your money stimulates economic growth and thus job creation and higher revenue to the govt? I have seen nothing from you other than charts about speculation. How do you know the economic activity would have been the same? How do you know that the jobs between 2003 and 2008 would have happened? What is your problem with keeping more of what you earn?

Employment January of each year. Looks to me like 9 million new taxpayers created between January 2003 and January 2008 all before Democrats took control of the Congress and Legislative process.

2003 137417
2004 138472
2005 140245
2006 143142
2007 146032
2008 146421

Nothing in this world is as black & white as you would like to think it is. Of course tax cuts have a stimulative effect, so you don't lose revenue at a 1:1 rate when you reduce tax rates. But it's also the case that tax cuts rarely, if ever, pay for themselves. It's also true that excess liquidity from tax cuts and a loose money supply can contribute to asset bubbles ... and busts, such as led to the Great Recession.
 
So, the government killing jobs and authorizing $4 trillion in wasteful spending didn't have anything to do with it?

I find that Libbo opposition to the wars conflicts with the whole, "government spending creates jobs", talking point we've been hearing.

Which jobs did the government kill, exactly? And what was that $4 trillion in wasteful spending?
 
Nothing in this world is as black & white as you would like to think it is. Of course tax cuts have a stimulative effect, so you don't lose revenue at a 1:1 rate when you reduce tax rates. But it's also the case that tax cuts rarely, if ever, pay for themselves. It's also true that excess liquidity from tax cuts and a loose money supply can contribute to asset bubbles ... and busts, such as led to the Great Recession.

Most people understand that we have a private sector economy that is driven by the consumer. Tax cuts put more money into the hands of the consumer which gives them choices and less need for that so called liberal help which creates debt. Tax cuts never have to pay for themselves because tax cuts aren't an expense. Amazing that you haven't learned that in school.
 
Most people understand that we have a private sector economy that is driven by the consumer. Tax cuts put more money into the hands of the consumer which gives them choices and less need for that so called liberal help which creates debt. Tax cuts never have to pay for themselves because tax cuts aren't an expense. Amazing that you haven't learned that in school.

Again, a simple-minded argument. If taken to its logical conclusion one would have to conclude that we should have no taxes. But in reality there is a always a balance that has to be struck between funding the government and bolstering growth.
 
Again, a simple-minded argument. If taken to its logical conclusion one would have to conclude that we should have no taxes. But in reality there is a always a balance that has to be struck between funding the government and bolstering growth.

We need a govt. just not a 3.7 trillion dollar one and that is something liberals ignore. I have given you the line items of the budget and asked you to tell me what we need and don't need. you didn't answer. Try again, here are the line items, you tell me what we need and don't need on budget and which can be handled by the states?

Defense
International Affairs
Gen. Science, Space
Energy
Natural resources/env
Agriculture
Commerce
Transportation
Community Dev
Education/Train/Social
Health
Medicare
Income Security
Social Security
Veterans Benefits
Justice
General Govt.
Net Interest
 
We need a govt. just not a 3.7 trillion dollar one and that is something liberals ignore. I have given you the line items of the budget and asked you to tell me what we need and don't need. you didn't answer. Try again, here are the line items, you tell me what we need and don't need on budget and which can be handled by the states?

Defense
International Affairs
Gen. Science, Space
Energy
Natural resources/env
Agriculture
Commerce
Transportation
Community Dev
Education/Train/Social
Health
Medicare
Income Security
Social Security
Veterans Benefits
Justice
General Govt.
Net Interest

We need all of those things, though we can obvioulsy reduce spending in some areas. Clearly defense needs to be cut and entitlements need to be reformed.
 
We need all of those things, though we can obvioulsy reduce spending in some areas. Clearly defense needs to be cut and entitlements need to be reformed.

No we don't need all those things funded at the federal level as many are funded at the state level. As for entitlement spending they need to be removed from the budget immediately.
 
As you may have heard, the "Super Committee" was a giant flop. That was completely predictable from the moment that the membership announced, as the GOP nominated members who were unlikely to negotiate in good faith.

Unfortunately our politicians, and in particular our Republican politicians, do not respond to obvious answers.

TaxCuts_Effect_Deficit.jpg

Hard to say how often this has been pointed out but the Democrats controlled the Senate, House and Presidency for two years and of course the debt rose, spending rose, the only budget presented by Obama was defeated 97-0, etc. The United States is leaderless, the President is flailing helplessly about for someone to blame and of course it's the opposition party who never even had a look-in for two years who he is trying to pin it on.

This is characteristic of the current administration and its supporters but is also indicative of the Left in general. They cannot and will not accept the consequences of their own actions. That is the liberal Wonderland that Sowell referred to and we can see the results of this adolescent behavior playing itself out every day.
 
Hard to say how often this has been pointed out but the Democrats controlled the Senate, House and Presidency for two years and of course the debt rose, spending rose, the only budget presented by Obama was defeated 97-0, etc. The United States is leaderless, the President is flailing helplessly about for someone to blame and of course it's the opposition party who never even had a look-in for two years who he is trying to pin it on.

This is characteristic of the current administration and its supporters but is also indicative of the Left in general. They cannot and will not accept the consequences of their own actions. That is the liberal Wonderland that Sowell referred to and we can see the results of this adolescent behavior playing itself out every day.

Even harder to forget that the Republicans controlled the WH, House and Senate for six years leading up to the worst recession since WWII, coupled with disastrous tax cuts that blew up the budget, and an idiotic war that cost us a trillion dollars and running. Pretty hard to ignore that those same Republicans have been fighting tooth and nail to prevent absolutely every proposed measure designed to address the aftermath of that devastation. And it's REALLY hard to ignore the completely mendacious attempts to pawn this disaster off on a powerless Democratic Congress that stepped in after the die was cast. That last part is particularly laughable.
 
Even harder to forget that the Republicans controlled the WH, House and Senate for six years leading up to the worst recession since WWII, coupled with disastrous tax cuts that blew up the budget, and an idiotic war that cost us a trillion dollars and running. Pretty hard to ignore that those same Republicans have been fighting tooth and nail to prevent absolutely every proposed measure designed to address the aftermath of that devastation. And it's REALLY hard to ignore the completely mendacious attempts to pawn this disaster off on a powerless Democratic Congress that stepped in after the die was cast. That last part is particularly laughable.

Keep re-writing history. Your outrage over the war has blinded you to reality. The war has cost 1.4 trillion dollars over 10 years or 140 billion a year so no war we would still have a debt wll over 13.6 trillion dollars. Further I know this is hard for you to understand but Democrats controlled the Senate in mid year 2001-2002 and then full control 2007-2008. Your lack of understanding of history is staggering. Regardless however since Obama took office with a Democrat Congress he has added 4.4 trillion to the debt in 3 years so I wouldn't be talking much about debt if I were you. Because Republicans spent too much does that give Obama a pass for putting spending on steroids?
 
Back
Top Bottom