Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567
Results 61 to 66 of 66

Thread: Schwarzenegger hammers fellow Republicans over stimulus hypocrisy

  1. #61
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Schwarzenegger hammers fellow Republicans over stimulus hypocrisy

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    At least with tax and spend [wealthy people] assume the responsibility for the spending [politicians] do [while receiving a disproportionately small amount of the benefits when compared to the rest of Americans].
    Fixed it for you...

  2. #62
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Schwarzenegger hammers fellow Republicans over stimulus hypocrisy

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    .... so explain to me how public education does not fit "general welfare."
    Why does the Constitution even bother to enumerate certain authorities if the General Welfare Clause was meant to be an open-ended power-granting clause?

    Why do we have an Amendment process?

    What's the purpose of the Tenth Amendment?

    If "public education" is part of the "general welfare", why even bother mentioning that the Congress has the authority to operate a post office, wouldn't that just be part of the "general welfare"?

  3. #63
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Schwarzenegger hammers fellow Republicans over stimulus hypocrisy

    Quote Originally Posted by Telecaster View Post
    I understand that tax & spend is better than borrow & spend.
    Anyone who argues otherwise should not be allowed to handle their own finances.

    But your argument, as typically used by others in past debates, always fails to address the desire to control spending, aka limits on programs.
    But that's a failure of Congress rather then anything else. Besides, Congress has shown, independent of who is in power that it will spend period. If it has to leverage the childrens' piggy banks it will do so. I'd rather pay meet a dollar of expenditure with a dollar of revenue rather then saddle the generation with debt we were too cowardly to handle ourselves. The issue here is Congress more then anything else. We voted the bastards in Congress in who spent like sailors. We should take care of the mess they made. Not force our children and grandchildren to pay for a debt we lacked the responsibility to take care of.

    So as not to misconstrue your opinions any further, can you tell me which you prefer between a choice of growing federal government programs (and raising taxation appropriately), and limiting and/or cutting federal reach?
    Or, in an ideal world where there are no deficits, do you prefer tax rate hikes, or tax rate cuts for the tax paying public?
    Some programs need to be expanded, largely the ones that foster scientific research. The sheer number of medicines that were originally produced by the NIH is staggering. Not to mention the applied materials that NASA developed. Some programs need to be axed, like the funding for arts. Not the government's job. And Federal reach does need to be limited. The GOP in my mind lost all credibility when they voted to allow the Federal government into the Schavio case.

    In an ideal world, there shouldn't be debt financed deficits. What good government would do would be to accumulate surpluses which would be tapped for deficit spending. Thus, we'd get the benefit of a stimulus without the corresponding debt. The key problem I see is Congress using that money as it did Social Security, but that's another thread.

    Taxes don't need to go up if proper cuts can be made.

    Still, none of that matters until Congress changes its attitude about spending. That's the first and foremost problem here.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  4. #64
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Schwarzenegger hammers fellow Republicans over stimulus hypocrisy

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Fixed it for you...
    That's not necessarily true. Historical tax rates of tax and spend hit the middle class relatively heavily. Furthermore, states tend to jack up sales taxes which are regressive. Tax and spend at most levels of government is pretty harsh on everyone. But that's better then having to tax, spend and cut services to the bone in the future to barely make debt servicing payments.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  5. #65
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Schwarzenegger hammers fellow Republicans over stimulus hypocrisy

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Tax and spend isn't bad.

    Tax $1, Spend $4. That's bad.

    How's the rest of the nation feeling about paying more taxes to bail out California? This is the natural culmination of the Left's failed experiment with socialism. All you non-California lefties, start paying more taxes for the Left Coast.
    Uh, get your facts correct. California has been subsidizing other states for decades. California gets less in Federal then it sends out. Furthermore, California's revenue issue stems from its reliance upon capital gains tax. Basically, California was spending tax money derived from stock sales of silicon valley. Granted, I have no sympathy for the state that should have seen the gravy train ending far before any other state, but blaming "socialism" which you have no understanding of without getting the other side of the equation is highly ignorant.

    Remember that when California was awash in capital gains revenue, it was also spending huge amounts on welfare without problems. Blaming just welfare is one part of the issue. California never should have considered the capital gain tax gravy train as a railroad with infinite cars.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  6. #66
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    SoCal
    Last Seen
    07-07-11 @ 02:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    406

    Re: Schwarzenegger hammers fellow Republicans over stimulus hypocrisy

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Anyone who argues otherwise should not be allowed to handle their own finances.



    But that's a failure of Congress rather then anything else. Besides, Congress has shown, independent of who is in power that it will spend period. If it has to leverage the childrens' piggy banks it will do so. I'd rather pay meet a dollar of expenditure with a dollar of revenue rather then saddle the generation with debt we were too cowardly to handle ourselves. The issue here is Congress more then anything else. We voted the bastards in Congress in who spent like sailors. We should take care of the mess they made. Not force our children and grandchildren to pay for a debt we lacked the responsibility to take care of.



    Some programs need to be expanded, largely the ones that foster scientific research. The sheer number of medicines that were originally produced by the NIH is staggering. Not to mention the applied materials that NASA developed. Some programs need to be axed, like the funding for arts. Not the government's job. And Federal reach does need to be limited. The GOP in my mind lost all credibility when they voted to allow the Federal government into the Schavio case.

    In an ideal world, there shouldn't be debt financed deficits. What good government would do would be to accumulate surpluses which would be tapped for deficit spending. Thus, we'd get the benefit of a stimulus without the corresponding debt. The key problem I see is Congress using that money as it did Social Security, but that's another thread.

    Taxes don't need to go up if proper cuts can be made.

    Still, none of that matters until Congress changes its attitude about spending. That's the first and foremost problem here.
    Then you appear to say Congress cannot be controlled so we have to deal with it by continually increasing taxation to keep up with them?

    Re. "but that's another thread"; That is the problem. That thread seldom materializes, and when it does it doesn't get many posts.

Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567

Posting Permissions

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