Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 91

Thread: IMF chief says U.S. needs blend of spending cuts, revenue raising

  1. #51
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:08 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,544

    Re: IMF chief says U.S. needs blend of spending cuts, revenue raising

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    it doesn't matte much to those who lose them. Unemployed is unemployed. And there is no evidence the private sector is bouncing back. Nor are regulations as much to blame as some like to pretend. The fact is people elsewhere work for a lot less. And they don't have healthcare attached to employment (They have UHC). So, as much as some like to think all would be fixed this way, it won't. Most those people are not leeches, but workers doing a job. You may not want that job done, but it is a job and requires work.
    Let us take the federal DOEd (ED) as an example. Its annual budget is $68.1 billion, and it "serves" 54 million students (all in state, local or private schools). That makes an annual average per student cost to taxpayers of $1,260 (not couting other federal education aid from HHS (head start) and Agriculture (school lunch program) departments. Measured another way, federal spending on K-12 education increased from 0.27 percent of gross domestic product in 1965 to 0.57 percent today. Needless to say, student performance did not improve due to that nearly 50% increase in federal funding.
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  2. #52
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    10-28-16 @ 07:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,526

    Re: IMF chief says U.S. needs blend of spending cuts, revenue raising

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    The 2008/2009 federal spending increase included the "one time", crisis, emergency TARP and stimulus 1 spending (and was 20% more than in 2007), that elevated level of federal spending has been maintained, by continuing reslolution, in each subsequent Obama year. Obama and the MSM can lie and state that Obama never "increased" federal spending but that does not make it so.

    Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

    Which is exactly why the Senate Democrats have refused to pass a budget. They utilize a continuing resolution to maintain current federal spending at Bush's original 2009 budget + the $900 billion in TARP money. Its the same stat used for the false claim that Obama has increased the federal budget by the lowest percentage in decades....which is absolute utter BS.

  3. #53
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    12-29-15 @ 10:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,747

    Re: IMF chief says U.S. needs blend of spending cuts, revenue raising

    Quote Originally Posted by Hairytic View Post
    Why bring up Greece and Spain? There are plenty of other countries that have a system like ours that are thriving, like Germany. I don't see that we over promised anything. There needs to be an adjustment made to social security to compensate for the baby boomers, and when the unemployment rate goes down, it will strengthen the SS system.

    When the government issues food stamps, that money gets spent on food which provides employment for stores that provide the food and in turn provides wealth for farmers. Everyone who makes money throug the process pays income taxes which brings the revenue back to the government. Take that spending away and you will see a higher unemployment rate and farmers will need higher substadies to stay in opperation.

    Before we had food stamps, a great number of people died during the great depression and dust bowl from starvation. No one starves now because we do have food stamp programs. My point is that if you end food stamps and free or reduced lunches for children in schools, families and children will suffer. Why would we want to let that happen?

    There are many ways to address the debt probloem in this country. Cutting out vital programs that people depend on to survive isn't a good policy. I believe we must take care of our own first. You put up an irrational argument. We can't solve the worlds problems before we solve our own first. Yes, it would be nice to end suffering world wide, but we can't do that. We have to start at home and that may inspire the rest of the world to do the same. But, we can't just sit back and watch US citizens starve or go without life saving medical care. IF we do that, then we have nothing to be proud of.
    This is one huge monument to stupid logic. While many of my conservative brethren are not against a safety net, the stark reality is that in the 70's, one in 50 Americans was on food stamps. Now it is one in six. Folks were not starving to death in the 70's, btw.

    I am not going to try to explain all the logic fail in your argument, much less your mind. But looking at the paragraph that I bolded, if the government providing funds for the populace to spend was the panacea that you paint it as, then the government giving every single American such as $1000 per month to be used for basic sustenance (food and shelter) would make us a guaranteed economic powerhouse by your logic. The good times would roll and roll.

    To further illustrate how retarded your logic and post were, see the paragraph that I italicized. The options are not the hunger of the Great Depression, or the status quo, as you attempt with your pathetic analogy. The analogy is as I illustrate, which is the food assistance that we had in such as the 70's, or what we have now ?

    As I advocate, its time to get the **** out of liberal la-la land before we bankrupt everything. Out of the pathetic arguments you attempt to make. If we stay as we are, and as you advocate, we will go off the cliff. In which case, the only satisfaction I will have is watching the parasites wallow in the dry-teat heaves first. That is not much to be thrilled about, btw.

  4. #54
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: IMF chief says U.S. needs blend of spending cuts, revenue raising

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    Let us take the federal DOEd (ED) as an example. Its annual budget is $68.1 billion, and it "serves" 54 million students (all in state, local or private schools). That makes an annual average per student cost to taxpayers of $1,260 (not couting other federal education aid from HHS (head start) and Agriculture (school lunch program) departments. Measured another way, federal spending on K-12 education increased from 0.27 percent of gross domestic product in 1965 to 0.57 percent today. Needless to say, student performance did not improve due to that nearly 50% increase in federal funding.
    And factors do you think effect that? The thing about numbers is that you have to know what they mean. Do you less teachers will make education better? Explain how you think that will work.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  5. #55
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    12-29-15 @ 10:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,747

    Re: IMF chief says U.S. needs blend of spending cuts, revenue raising

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    And factors do you think effect that? The thing about numbers is that you have to know what they mean. Do you less teachers will make education better? Explain how you think that will work.
    Do you have any credible statistics that more teachers, and more money thrown at them, has made education "better"? And if so, what was your measure ?

    Illustrate at your leisure

    Did you go to Jump School liberal ? Did you earn any basic wings ? Or do you just like to pretend ? Clearly you never made it to "senior" or "master", and I doubt you served. Do you know what that even refers to Boo ?

  6. #56
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: IMF chief says U.S. needs blend of spending cuts, revenue raising

    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty Deuce View Post
    Do you have any credible statistics that more teachers, and more money thrown at them, has made education "better"? And if so, what was your measure ?

    Illustrate at your leisure

    Did you go to Jump School liberal ? Did you earn any basic wings ? Or do you just like to pretend ? Clearly you never made it to "senior" or "master", and I doubt you served. Do you know what that even refers to Boo ?
    I don't think I've made that claim. But before we cut or spend shouldn't we identify what the problems are and what if, if any, connection to money and number of teachers contribute.

    As for serving, I served in the 82nd. Your mindless and uninformed opinion on what I have or haven't done has no place in this discussion. So do try to focus.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  7. #57
    Professor
    Hairytic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Mississippi
    Last Seen
    10-01-13 @ 04:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    1,592

    Re: IMF chief says U.S. needs blend of spending cuts, revenue raising

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    If most, if not all, of that "infrastucture" already existed then what is all of this new Obama spending about? The bulk of it was to bailout unions, state/local gov'ts, "invest" in green energy and support exactly what Obama blamed Bush for doing. Yes he did!
    The infrustructure has to be maintained and advanced. I don't know what you are talking about bailing out the unions. State and local governments asked for stimulus money to create jobs and strengthen the infrustrure and we need to invest in green energy because that is where the future is headed. A part of what has made America create is that we stayed at the cutting edge of technology. We have been lagging behind the past few decades. Obama blamed Bush for getting us into two very expensive wars with no plan to pay for them and the collapse of our economy happened on Bush's watch. Not to mention that Bush burned through the surplus Clinton left and added trillions to the debt.

  8. #58
    Professor
    Hairytic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Mississippi
    Last Seen
    10-01-13 @ 04:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    1,592

    Re: IMF chief says U.S. needs blend of spending cuts, revenue raising

    Quote Originally Posted by Born Free View Post
    Yes I see you could not answer this very basic question. I quote.

    "So good, Obama wants to raise the taxes on the rich which will generate around 800 billion over ten yrs. However Obama is borrowing 1.2 trillion a yr adding to our national debt. Thus if he gets his tax hikes he will only have to borrow 1.1 trillion a yr. Now where do you suppose to get all this money to eliminate Obama's over spending of 1.1 trillion a yr, and where are you going to get the money on top of that to start paying down our debt."

    The reason you can't answer it is because you have no clue. But the real reason is because liberals think there is no end to the money supply. What is ridiculous is you liberals have no clue how to pay for anything, except raise taxes, but the problem is that does not generate enough money to even make a dent in the 1.2 trillion a yr deficit.

    Yep another liberal with free stuff for everyone, who could care less how to pay for it.
    You conservatives love to worship Reagan, but Reagan raised taxes and spend our way out of recession. It's funny that when Obama accepts and brings conservative ideas forward, you conservatives pretend like it wasn't your ideas to begin with. Honestly, conservatives haven't proven themselves to be able to balance a budget and bring a surplus in like Clinton did. One way he did it was to raise taxes. Some spending increases revenue. It's a matter of being efficient on what to cut and what to spend on.
    Again, Conservatives haven't had a very good record of putting that practice into action in the recent past.

  9. #59
    Professor
    Hairytic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Mississippi
    Last Seen
    10-01-13 @ 04:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    1,592

    Re: IMF chief says U.S. needs blend of spending cuts, revenue raising

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    Neither political party wants to bankrupt it.

    Unless the problem has progressed to the point where they simply take the whole leg or arm or anything to keep the person from dying.
    The GOP has been trying to bankrupt social security for decades now. It seems you haven't been listening. As soon as Republicans gain ground in Washington DC, they start proposing to cut medicare and SS which causes them to lose ground. IT has been a visious cycle now for many decades.

  10. #60
    Professor
    Hairytic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Mississippi
    Last Seen
    10-01-13 @ 04:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    1,592

    Re: IMF chief says U.S. needs blend of spending cuts, revenue raising

    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty Deuce View Post
    This is one huge monument to stupid logic. While many of my conservative brethren are not against a safety net, the stark reality is that in the 70's, one in 50 Americans was on food stamps. Now it is one in six. Folks were not starving to death in the 70's, btw.

    I am not going to try to explain all the logic fail in your argument, much less your mind. But looking at the paragraph that I bolded, if the government providing funds for the populace to spend was the panacea that you paint it as, then the government giving every single American such as $1000 per month to be used for basic sustenance (food and shelter) would make us a guaranteed economic powerhouse by your logic. The good times would roll and roll.

    To further illustrate how retarded your logic and post were, see the paragraph that I italicized. The options are not the hunger of the Great Depression, or the status quo, as you attempt with your pathetic analogy. The analogy is as I illustrate, which is the food assistance that we had in such as the 70's, or what we have now ?

    As I advocate, its time to get the **** out of liberal la-la land before we bankrupt everything. Out of the pathetic arguments you attempt to make. If we stay as we are, and as you advocate, we will go off the cliff. In which case, the only satisfaction I will have is watching the parasites wallow in the dry-teat heaves first. That is not much to be thrilled about, btw.
    Calling my logic ignorant or retarded doesn't make your logic better. Honestly, can people like you have a conversation without insulting people who have a different point of view than you do?

    Have a good day.

Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •