• 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!

United States loses its AAA Credit rating from S & P

Status
Not open for further replies.
Conservative said:
Is there anything that a bureaucrat in D.C. shouldn't provide you? So much whining and so little action on your part
Click to expand...

People in that situation don't give a rat's ass about your ideological platitudes.
 
winston53660 said:
People in that situation don't give a rat's ass about your ideological platitudes.
Click to expand...

No but people in that position always bitch and whine about what they don't have instead of taking personal responsiblity when they had a chance but chose not to handle personal responsiblity issues earlier in life. Sounds a lot like those invincable 20 somethings that chose not to buy insurance.
 
Conservative said:
No but people in that position always bitch and whine about what they don't have instead of taking personal responsiblity when they had a chance but chose not to handle personal responsiblity issues earlier in life. Sounds a lot like those invincable 20 somethings that chose not to buy insurance.
Click to expand...

They could have gotten sick, lost their job, lost their insurance.
Illness goes way beyond personal responsibility.
 
v
winston53660 said:
They could have gotten sick, lost their job, lost their insurance.
Illness goes way beyond personal responsibility.
Click to expand...

Yep, and that is what the local community is to handle not the Federal Govt. You don't know each individual situation regardless of what you believe but it is always easier for you to blame someone else and look to the big nanny state Federal Govt. to handle personal responsibility issues for you. Somehow you believe that a taxpayer in Idaho is responsible for your healthcare in TX.
 
Conservative said:
v

Yep, and that is what the local community is to handle not the Federal Govt. You don't know each individual situation regardless of what you believe but it is always easier for you to blame someone else and look to the big nanny state Federal Govt. to handle personal responsibility issues for you. Somehow you believe that a taxpayer in Idaho is responsible for your healthcare in TX.
Click to expand...

And you advocating a nanny community, sheeesh.

And I have not blamed any one for any thing.

The fact is that catastrophic illness is catastrophic in more than one way.
 
ksu_aviator said:
Why would that even been important? The question isn't how the money was gained, but whether the government should have the right to penalize people that haven't committed a crime.
Click to expand...

Let's try a logical exercise. Let us answer "no, the government should not have the right to penalize people that haven't committed a crime," and take your point as far as it can go. If , as you imply, taxation is a penalty, then no one, AT ALL should pay taxes. Except... criminals? Probably not a lot of revenue there...

So... are you advocating an anarchist utopia with no public police, roads, sewers, etc? Or...
are you advocating a system of prison-slave labor, since only criminals can be penalized by your proposed moral code?

Either way, I'll pass.
 
Polotick said:
This should be fun.

You will have to bring it here though.

Eris Bar & Grill

I strongly disagree with the latest infraction I have received and have chosen to leave this place where the admins actually allow people to talk.

To those who provided interesting conversation, thank you very mush.
Click to expand...

On the day I said it would not take much this is the site my initial search led me to.
But you are gone?
Pity.
 
AdamT said:
David Stockman, Reagan's economic advisor, says that tax cuts do not pay for themselves. Alan Greenspan has said that tax cuts do not pay for themselves. In short, there is no credible economist who maintains that tax cuts have or will pay for themselves.
Click to expand...
People who believe that reductions in tax rates need to be paid for appear to believe that all wealth belongs to the government. Awesome. I love statists. And Big Brother is watching...
 
AdamT said:
Raising the debt ceiling does not increase the deficit when you are borrowing to pay for already-committed spending. Failing to raise the debt ceiling would send the deficit into a death spiral, however.
Click to expand...
I think we should cut spending on the government's two million or so busybody bureaucrats. Then we could begin lowering the debt ceiling.
 
Misterveritis said:
People who believe that reductions in tax rates need to be paid for appear to believe that all wealth belongs to the government. Awesome. I love statists. And Big Brother is watching...
Click to expand...

I think you nailed it. That is why they believe tax cuts are an expense to the govt. since all wealth belongs to the govt. Liberal logic 101. That explains Donc and Adam well.
 
pbrauer said:
s.
Paragraph 4 of the 14th Amendment says the debt of the U.S. can't be questioned.
Click to expand...
Super. Let's start closing down those extra-constitutional departments and agencies. We can save half of what the government spends and rid ourselves of about two million busybody bureaucrats. Win. Win.
 
pbrauer said:
What strawman? A budget, whether it is yours, or the Federal government, it just a plan. According to the following most states don't really have a balanced budget even though they say they do.
Click to expand...
It would make sense to use a rolling average of the revenues of the previous five years or so. Combine that with a requirement to spend not more than 90% of that average and I think the brakes on uncontrolled government growth and expenses would be appropriately applied.
 
Conservative said:
I think you nailed it. That is why they believe tax cuts are an expense to the govt. since all wealth belongs to the govt. Liberal logic 101. That explains Donc and Adam well.
Click to expand...


What do you have against paying for unfunded wars ?
 
Last edited:
winston53660 said:
Here is another nifty little trick they used:
The reason: State lawmakers have locked away the money to deal with the budget shortfall. The state is now spending only half as much as it did to help the poor and elderly get through the summer a decade ago.
Click to expand...
Sounds good. Responsible. I like it.
 
donc said:
What do you have against paying for unfunded wars ?
Click to expand...

Did you ever figure out that keeping your money wasn't an expense to the govt. unless you believe all revenue belongs to the govt? Nothing against paying for wars but what does that have to do with paying for tax cuts?
 
donc said:
What do you have against paying for unfunded wars ?
Click to expand...
When wars occur one must shed all unnecessary government workers. We should have started with the extra-constitutional Education department.
 
Conservative said:
Did you ever figure out that keeping your money wasn't an expense to the govt. unless you believe all revenue belongs to the govt? Nothing against paying for wars but what does that have to do with paying for tax cuts?
Click to expand...


Like I said prior to the new formatting, it was pure idiocy cutting taxes while we are at war. Drove us into the downgrade from AAA to AA+. Now lets hear your latest spin on that…yet again.:2wave:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom