• 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!

Senate deal averts shutdown

lpast

lpast

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 18, 2011
Messages
13,663
Reaction score
4,633
Location
Fla
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
It's bull ****. Just more games. They all (most notably leadership all around) need to go. Not a one of them want to take a stand and take responsibility for anything.
 
1Perry said:
It's bull ****. Just more games. They all (most notably leadership all around) need to go. Not a one of them want to take a stand and take responsibility for anything.
Click to expand...

Im not sure what your upset about perry...you dont think they should have approved disaster relief for people ?
 
sawyerloggingon said:
Yup, just keep borrowing and spending, we are the next Greece.
Click to expand...
Or we could do away with the Bush-era tax cuts AND cut spending - and actually pay down the deficit during the good times like we once did. Not continuing to pay down the deficit as Clinton was doing when things were good and cutting revenue instead is one of the reasons that we are now in the shape we are in. Reagan / GWB financial policies are responsible for the mess we are in.
 
Frolicking Dinosaurs said:
Or we could do away with the Bush-era tax cuts AND cut spending - and actually pay down the deficit during the good times like we once did. Not continuing to pay down the deficit as Clinton was doing when things were good and cutting revenue instead is one of the reasons that we are now in the shape we are in. Reagan / GWB financial policies are responsible for the mess we are in.
Click to expand...

Live in the now and stay on subject. We are broke and dems want to go even more in debt, reps want to at least break even.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
Live in the now and stay on subject. We are broke and dems want to go even more in debt, reps want to at least break even.
Click to expand...

Really? Where did Republicans suddenly get religion on this? Cheney said "deficits don't matter." Republicans have certainly not governed with concern over the deficit in the past. How many budgets did Reagan and both Bushes balance?

We're reaching the point where as a nation we have to decide what we want, and make tax rates enough to pay for it consistently.
 
That's unfortunate. More spending = closer to collapse.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
Live in the now and stay on subject. We are broke and dems want to go even more in debt, reps want to at least break even.
Click to expand...

Thats fine...but when theres a disaster that no one can control and people need help...thats not the time to play lets pay for games after all the free money the teaparty gives to big oil and votes to keep giving it to them...whos BSin who
 
sawyerloggingon said:
Live in the now and stay on subject. We are broke and dems want to go even more in debt, reps want to at least break even.
Click to expand...
We may have to spend to fix several things before we can balance this budget and start paying down the deficit. This was the thinking that got us out of the great depression and back into prosperity. However, we do need to start ending the pork and trimming the size of govt. now IMO. I am to a limited extend a Libertarian and was once a GOP. Reagan and his failed economics model was what caused me to leave the GOP. The cuts the Tea Party endorses are irresponsible while the economy is this bad.
 
Last edited:
Frolicking Dinosaurs said:
We may have to spend to fix several things before we can balance this budget and start paying down the deficit. This was the thinking that got us out of the great depression and back into prosperity. However, we do need to start ending the pork and trimming the size of govt. now IMO. I am to a limited extend a Liberation and was once a GOP. Reagan and his failed economics model was what caused me to leave the GOP. The cuts the Tea Party endorses are irresponsible while the economy is this bad.
Click to expand...

I am trying to find something credible in your post .... and it just is not there.

All of the cuts proposed by such as the Tea Party, which have no official plan of cuts, btw, are not cuts in spending, but cuts in rate of increase. If we only increase spending by 1% per year, we are at a balanced budget in about four years, from a 1.5T deficit now. If we only increase by 2%, then its closer to 8 years.

Reagan's economy was a masterpiece. He fixed the boondoggle of the 70's, and paved the way for the 90's.

Clinton had no surplusses. Show me one year where the debt went down. Last time was 1957, btw. Eisenhower, not Clinton. Don't give me smoke and mirrors. Go to the debt. It does not lie. It is practiacally the only thing that does not lie. However, Clinton and the GOP did a marvelous job reducing growth in government, and I do not mean to belittle his efforts. Just claims that he ran any surplusses. He surely did not.

Not to be confused with Obama the inept jackass. Worst President even, and it ain't close.
 
Last edited:
Eighty Deuce said:
Not to be confused with Obama the inept jackass. Worst President even, and it ain't close.
Click to expand...

Cons need to study up on history. There were a couple of really bad ones in the 19th Century. Ever hear the name Andrew Johnson?? Must not have.

In fact, I'm guessing you've also never heard of Herbert Hoover, Richard Nixon, Warren Harding or Ulysses S. Grant. Next time you're going to make ridiculous claims, at least know what the hell you're talking about.
 
Last edited:
Eighty Deuce said:
Reagan's economy was a masterpiece. He fixed the boondoggle of the 70's, and paved the way for the 90's.

Clinton had no surpluses. Show me one year where the debt went down. Last time was 1957, btw. Eisenhower, not Clinton. Don't give me smoke and mirrors. Go to the debt. It does not lie. It is practically the only thing that does not lie. However, Clinton and the GOP did a marvelous job reducing growth in government, and I do not mean to belittle his efforts. Just claims that he ran any surpluses. He surely did not.
Click to expand...
FederalDeficit(1).jpg
Sure looks like Clinton had a surplus to me. And look at those figures during the Reagan and GWB presidencies and try to tell me with a straight face that Reagan did not start the deficit on its upward spiral.
 
lpast said:
Can we say bipartisanship ? nahhh lol....neither of them would dare take a chance being blamed for holding up disaster relief



Senate leaders struck a deal Monday that would avert a Sept. 30 government shutdown, a breakthrough that came after the Federal Emergency Management Agency determined that its disaster relief funds would not run out this week.



Senate deal averts shutdown - Manu Raju and Jake Sherman - POLITICO.com
Click to expand...

Congress seriously needs to stop waiting until the last minute to reach these deals. Maybe S&P was right about the brinkmanship.
 
sawyerloggingon said:
Live in the now and stay on subject. We are broke and dems want to go even more in debt, reps want to at least break even.
Click to expand...

The GOP is fine with running up debt when they're in office. It's only when the democrats are trying to do things that they feel the need to suddenly stand up and be obstructionist and do their very best to break the government.
 
Eighty Deuce said:
I am trying to find something credible in your post .... and it just is not there.

All of the cuts proposed by such as the Tea Party, which have no official plan of cuts, btw, are not cuts in spending, but cuts in rate of increase. If we only increase spending by 1% per year, we are at a balanced budget in about four years, from a 1.5T deficit now. If we only increase by 2%, then its closer to 8 years.

Reagan's economy was a masterpiece. He fixed the boondoggle of the 70's, and paved the way for the 90's.

Clinton had no surplusses. Show me one year where the debt went down. Last time was 1957, btw. Eisenhower, not Clinton. Don't give me smoke and mirrors. Go to the debt. It does not lie. It is practiacally the only thing that does not lie. However, Clinton and the GOP did a marvelous job reducing growth in government, and I do not mean to belittle his efforts. Just claims that he ran any surplusses. He surely did not.

Not to be confused with Obama the inept jackass. Worst President even, and it ain't close.
Click to expand...

Bull****. Reagan's policies caused the crash of the early 90's which got George the Elder tossed out on his ear, just like George the Younger's policies created the current mess. As for worst president ever, do you understand the difference between failing to make things better and actively making things worse? He's not a great president by any means, but I think the label of worst president could be more accurately attached to the guy who got us into this in the first place.
 
lpast said:
Thats fine...but when theres a disaster that no one can control and people need help...thats not the time to play lets pay for games
Click to expand...

Government is not insurance for your hard times. If you need insurance, buy insurance. If you can' afford insurance figure out a way to deal with your problems. Government is not insurance.

after all the free money the teaparty gives to big oil and votes to keep giving it to them...whos BSin who
Click to expand...

Care to give a example of someone that ran under the tag teaparty that is for big oil subsidies?
 
atrasicarius said:
Bull****. Reagan's policies caused the crash of the early 90's which got George the Elder tossed out on his ear, just like George the Younger's policies created the current mess. As for worst president ever, do you understand the difference between failing to make things better and actively making things worse? He's not a great president by any means, but I think the label of worst president could be more accurately attached to the guy who got us into this in the first place.
Click to expand...

And those polices are?

Tax cuts? I'm sorry but if that is all you got it's weaksauce.
 
Frolicking Dinosaurs said:
We may have to spend to fix several things before we can balance this budget and start paying down the deficit. This was the thinking that got us out of the great depression and back into prosperity.
Click to expand...


Spending didn't end the great depression. In fact, all of the big spending projects destroyed the economy every time they were tried. Just like when Obama did it, btw.
 
Eighty Deuce said:
I am trying to find something credible in your post .... and it just is not there.

All of the cuts proposed by such as the Tea Party, which have no official plan of cuts, btw, are not cuts in spending, but cuts in rate of increase. If we only increase spending by 1% per year, we are at a balanced budget in about four years, from a 1.5T deficit now. If we only increase by 2%, then its closer to 8 years.

Reagan's economy was a masterpiece. He fixed the boondoggle of the 70's, and paved the way for the 90's.

Clinton had no surplusses. Show me one year where the debt went down. Last time was 1957, btw. Eisenhower, not Clinton. Don't give me smoke and mirrors. Go to the debt. It does not lie. It is practiacally the only thing that does not lie. However, Clinton and the GOP did a marvelous job reducing growth in government, and I do not mean to belittle his efforts. Just claims that he ran any surplusses. He surely did not.

Not to be confused with Obama the inept jackass. Worst President even, and it ain't close.
Click to expand...

That is not the definition of a surplus. How many times must this be repeated.
 
Henrin said:
Spending didn't end the great depression. In fact, all of the big spending projects destroyed the economy every time they were tried. Just like when Obama did it, btw.
Click to expand...

Right...more Austrian orthodox bull**** that goes against empirical and historical evidence.
 
And how many times does it need to be repeated that his surplus was caused by taking money out of SS.
 
StillBallin75 said:
Right...more Austrian orthodox bull**** that goes against empirical and historical evidence.
Click to expand...

Look at the growth right after his plans. The economy crashed into the toilet.

Stimulus doesn't work, period. Its runs with the assumption that if people spend the money they get from their jobs people will hire. The problem is the jobs are temporary and it has no relationship that can cause people to hire.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom