Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678
Results 71 to 74 of 74

Thread: House Democrats propose $410B spending bill

  1. #71
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    11-28-17 @ 04:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,690

    Re: House Democrats propose $410B spending bill

    Quote Originally Posted by ARealConservative View Post
    only one politician ran for POTUS with an actual plan to reduce the size of the federal government.
    Governor Romney spoke about reforming the nation's entitlement program and reining in entitlement spending growth during his campaign. However, all of that occurred prior to the onset of the acute phase of the ongoing economic crisis.

    It should be noted that Governor Romney would likely have supported some kind of fiscal stimulus, as well. However, his stimulus package might have been more heavily weighted in the direction of tax cuts. The one issue associated with such an approach is that it would increase the structural deficit if the cuts were made permanent and those cuts would need to be offset by either closing tax loopholes/eliminating deduction (in exchange for lower rates) or cutting spending elsewhere afterward to be budget-neutral in the long-run.

    Overall, once the economy has been stabilized and is again growing, the federal government should make it a priority to begin addressing its long-term fiscal imbalances. The added debt accumulated in recent years, both before and after the current economic crisis, adds to the urgency of that task.
    Last edited by donsutherland1; 02-26-09 at 10:52 AM.

  2. #72
    cookies crumble
    ARealConservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    04-21-17 @ 09:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,518

    Re: House Democrats propose $410B spending bill

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    Governor Romeny spoke about reforming the nation's entitlement program and reining in entitlement spending growth during his campaign. However, all of that occurred prior to the onset of the acute phase of the ongoing economic crisis.
    Romney also spoke of spending federal funds to aid Michigan and showed no signs of streamlining our massive foreign expenditures (which take up the lions share of our annual budget).

    I recall a report from the NTU attempting to show the overall cost of the various politicians plans - Guliani was the second closest in overall cost of programs outlined, but his still showed a net gain in expenditures.


    edit - here is a link summarizing the report - I was incorrect in that Guliani also showed a net reduction

    Study: Presidential Frontrunners Would Boost Budget by Range of $7 Billion to $287... | Reuters
    Last edited by ARealConservative; 02-26-09 at 10:57 AM.

  3. #73
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura California
    Last Seen
    11-15-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,706

    Re: House Democrats propose $410B spending bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Lerxst View Post
    This thread is the epitome of partisan politics and a good example of this forum. You almost never see someone place blame on the system, it's always on a particular President. The reality is that Congress spends like drunken sailors...Democrat and Republican alike. They have done so for decades. Complaining about a spending bill and trying to fix blame over the damaged economy to a specific president or party is just plain ignorant.

    And 9/11 didn't cause us to spend hundreds of billions of dollars and run us into monumental debt. Irresponsible decision making and a lack of effective oversight did that. Both parties are guilty for this incredibly ****ty situation this nation is in.
    What an amusing definition of Bush's spending; "monumental." Considering where we are with Democrats in charge, the highest budget deficit the Republicans ran was about $350 billion. Contrasted with over $2 TRILLION and counting being spent by Democrats, I would say you need to re-work that desperate partisan rhetoric.

    Monumental would be an apt description of the current spending being proposed and passed every week by Democrats who have YET to debate how we are going to pay for it all. All the taxes on every rich person in the nation won't be enough at this pace.

    What is even more amusing was the desperate partisan rhetoric we saw when Bush passed tax cuts and the Liberals railed how irresponsible that was with a looming deficit; now suddenly with a deficit hitting levels unheard of before, tax cuts make perfect sense.

    You just cannot fabricate the level of willful denial, ignorance and hypocrisy it takes to be a Democrat these days.

    And what is the clown like response from the Left when confronted with this irresponsible level of spending without funding? Bush did it too!

  4. #74
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,264

    Re: House Democrats propose $410B spending bill

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    Governor Romney spoke about reforming the nation's entitlement program and reining in entitlement spending growth during his campaign. However, all of that occurred prior to the onset of the acute phase of the ongoing economic crisis.

    It should be noted that Governor Romney would likely have supported some kind of fiscal stimulus, as well. However, his stimulus package might have been more heavily weighted in the direction of tax cuts. The one issue associated with such an approach is that it would increase the structural deficit if the cuts were made permanent and those cuts would need to be offset by either closing tax loopholes/eliminating deduction (in exchange for lower rates) or cutting spending elsewhere afterward to be budget-neutral in the long-run.

    Overall, once the economy has been stabilized and is again growing, the federal government should make it a priority to begin addressing its long-term fiscal imbalances. The added debt accumulated in recent years, both before and after the current economic crisis, adds to the urgency of that task.
    I don't think reducing entitlement growth is enough. With entitlements making up about 50% of the budget, I think a lot more needs to happen. 50% is just plain insanity. Lefties always want to cut defense which IS the function of the federal government, and only about 20% of the budget; but never ever ever want to touch entitlements. Not surprising since that's their ticket to power. But letting this Great Society bloat up to 50%, and then blaming defense and deficits is idiocy IMHO.

    You can't just dump loopholes in a vacuum, which is what Congress has done up to now. The entire housing economy is built on these things, and people count on them. There has to be some other incentive in plase to stimulate home ownership. Example: It's just like when they dumped the tax deduction for credit cards in the 80's and failed to reign in the credit card industry. I understand the need to reduce the dependence on credit cards, but you just don't remove the benefit to the consumer while not aiming at the credit card companies and their immoral practices. It's bad enough the the average American is not taught in public school how to survive in a capitalist society, but to put them in financial danger without changing the fundamental business of credit cards is insane. The public in general is gullible, otherwise you wouldn't receive mountains of credit card prequals in the mail each week. That practice should be outlawed because most of those deals are preditory.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678

Posting Permissions

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