• 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!

Boehner to Bring Debt Ceiling to Vote Without Policy Attachments

Conservative said:
Unlike like you who believe in a public sector economy the govt. cannot spend our way out way out of economic problems. this isn't Europe yet so how about addressing the issue of the 17.3 trillion dollar debt and the fact that Obama has added almost 7 trillion to it in less than 6 years?

What I see here is a total lack of understanding of the U.S. Economy and the reality that we are a private sector not public sector economy like Europe. There govt. spending is the major component of GDP, here it is a lesser component of GDP. One of these days you are going to understand or learn the difference
Click to expand...

So the answer is yes....
 
Threegoofs said:
So the answer is yes....
Click to expand...

To this question?

Oh. Is this the part of the fantasy where you imagine US spending actually can decrease year to year?
Click to expand...

where did I make such a statement. Tell me why we need a 3 trillion dollar Federal Govt let alone a 3.77 trillion dollar one that Obama proposed?
 
Conservative said:
The govt. always spends someone else's money unless they print it. The question is what do they spend it on and we have a Constitution that defines that. Suggest you read it especially the Preamble that states PROVIDE for the common defense meaning that fighting wars is everyone's responsibility. You don't like that then change the Constitution. As for the War on Drugs that was done by a Democrat controlled House but then that fact escapes people like you with an agenda.
Click to expand...

I have read it and you excuse spending YOU approve of. So don't slip on that soapbox you like to preach "responsible" spending from when you support social conservative spending like war on drugs. The war on drugs is constantly trumpeted by the right. Deal with it my liberal spending friend.
 
For those with no understanding of the budget here are the line items in it. Notice SS and Medicare which have no place in operating budget of the U.S. since they are self funding

Receipt
Individual Income tax
Corporate Taxes
Total
SS/Unemploy/Other
Excise Taxes
Other
Expenses
Defense
International Affairs
Gen. Science, Space
Energy
Natural resources/env
Agriculture
Commerce/Housing Cr
Transportation
Community Dev
Education/Train/Social
Health
Medicare
Income Security
Social Security
Veterans Benefits
Justice
General Govt.
Net Interest
Click to expand...

How many of those line items are duplicated at the state and local level. This just goes to show how liberals are getting their wish, more power at the federal level and thus more power for govt. bureaucrats.
 
TheNextEra said:
I have read it and you excuse spending YOU approve of. So don't slip on that soapbox you like to preach "responsible" spending from when you support social conservative spending like war on drugs. The war on drugs is constantly trumpeted by the right. Deal with it my liberal spending friend.
Click to expand...

I just gave you the line items in the budget, the defense budget is somewhere around 800 billion out of the 3.6 trillion dollar Federal Govt. Cut the entire defense budget and you still have an Obama deficit. Why? Because of social engineering and failure to implement policies to put 21 million unemployed/under employed/discouraged workers back to work full time. Obama and liberals have no understanding of the private sector economy and you fit that bill
 
Conservative said:
Exactly for it is about keeping power and running for the next election vs. doing their job. Whatever it takes to buy the votes necessary to stay in power. I am sick of both parties but realize that the only way to make change is from within, not on the outside. Build a third party from the ground up, not the top down as that will never happen.
Click to expand...

Third parties, in order to work (survive?), must be able to take, fairly equally, from both of the existing two parties. What typically goes wrong is that third parties take primarily from only one of them, thus simply handing the other a cheap victory.
 
Conservative said:
I just gave you the line items in the budget, the defense budget is somewhere around 800 billion out of the 3.6 trillion dollar Federal Govt. Cut the entire defense budget and you still have an Obama deficit. Why? Because of social engineering and failure to implement policies to put 21 million unemployed/under employed/discouraged workers back to work full time. Obama and liberals have no understanding of the private sector economy and you fit that bill
Click to expand...

You're not going to get an argument from me about Obama's spending, but YOU support idiotic spending as well. Just because the other side does it more, doesn't mean the spending you support is good. So yeah, you might want to watch from slipping on that soapbox you love to preach responsible spending from because the spending YOU support isn't good either.
 
TheNextEra said:
You're not going to get an argument from me about Obama's spending, but YOU support idiotic spending as well. Just because the other side does it more, doesn't mean the spending you support is good. So yeah, you might want to watch from slipping on that soapbox you love to preach responsible spending from because the spending YOU support isn't good either.
Click to expand...



There is idiotic spending on both sides but there is only one party spending less than the other and to me that is an improvement. You have to work within the party to make changes because one part is so organized and brainwashed that if you destroy the Republican Party you have permanent Democratic leadership and the march towards Europe

It would be a great exercise for you to fill in the line items I gave you and see what you come up with for a budget. Bet it isn't 3.77 trillion as Obama wants
 
Conservative said:
Falling from what? The highest deficits ever recorded? Wow, we had a 680 billion dollar deficit and you Obama supporters are taking victory laps. Such low standards you have. How much of that deficit reduction was due to elimination of the Payroll tax holiday or doesn't that count?

What is it about liberalism that creates your kind of loyalty and that of the 42 percent that still support Obama? It distorted information like you are posting that gives you zero credibility.
Click to expand...

The liberal mind is incredible in it's nonsensical functions. Only someone that refuses to think critically can possibly applaud actions like this. They are Obama's clapping seals.
Imagine an insurance company that triples your rates for several years, for no reason at all, then says they will cut your rate in half and claims that they are cutting insurance rates faster than any company in history. Do you know anyone with at least half a brain that would applaud this?
 
Conservative said:
There is idiotic spending on both sides but there is only one party spending less than the other and to me that is an improvement. You have to work within the party to make changes because one part is so organized and brainwashed that if you destroy the Republican Party you have permanent Democratic leadership and the march towards Europe

It would be a great exercise for you to fill in the line items I gave you and see what you come up with for a budget. Bet it isn't 3.77 trillion as Obama wants
Click to expand...

No what you have is the GOP wanting to reign in DEM spending, but not spending for things the GOP wants. If your bar is set so low to call that improvement, than you are the perfect Republican.

I have not approved of nor supported Obama's spending. However, I also don't approve of spending on idiotic things like the wars we have fought and social conservative issues such as the war on drugs. When I see a con or GOP member willing to drop the social conservative spending, then I'll take them seriously in them wanting responsible spending.
 
TheNextEra said:
No what you have is the GOP wanting to reign in DEM spending, but not spending for things the GOP wants. If your bar is set so low to call that improvement, than you are the perfect Republican.

I have not approved of nor supported Obama's spending. However, I also don't approve of spending on idiotic things like the wars we have fought and social conservative issues such as the war on drugs. When I see a con or GOP member willing to drop the social conservative spending, then I'll take them seriously in them wanting responsible spending.
Click to expand...

What exactly do you believe the role of the Federal Govt. is? I gave you the line items in the budget, here are the amounts. You complete them to your satisfaction then we will have something to discuss

Wouldn't it be great if we lived in a world where radical people didn't want us dead?

Receipt 2012

Individual Income tax 1132.2
Corporate Taxes 242.3

Total 1374.5

SS/Unemploy/Other 774.9

Excise Taxes 79.1
Other 150.2

2378.7

Expenses

Defense 680.4
International Affairs 47.2
Gen. Science, Space 29.2
Energy 14.8
Natural resources/env 41.8
Agriculture 19.7
Commerce/Housing Cr 40.3
Transportation 91.2
Community Dev 26.1
Education/Train/Social 89.1
Health 346.7
Medicare 471.8
Income Security 542.1
Social Security 773.3
Veterans Benefits 124.6
Justice 57.6
General Govt. 23.4
Net Interest 222.5


Total 3641.8
Click to expand...
 
Deuce said:
There are two y-axis scales, one for each timeframe. The magnitude of the 1928 range, in terms of percentage, was actually twice as big.
Click to expand...

Ok, so we only lose half of the market value in a crash equal to 1928. What does that look like today in the economy? Still pretty bad by anyone's standards right?
 
Conservative said:
What exactly do you believe the role of the Federal Govt. is? I gave you the line items in the budget, here are the amounts. You complete them to your satisfaction then we will have something to discuss

Wouldn't it be great if we lived in a world where radical people didn't want us dead?
Click to expand...

Radical people want us dead all over the world. It seems we are only interested in the spots where WE can gain something from it. So spare me the social conservative mantra. Drop the war on drugs, drop the social conservative initiatives and then we can have something to discuss.

The problem is you think government should interfere in morality.
 
TheNextEra said:
Radical people want us dead all over the world. It seems we are only interested in the spots where WE can gain something from it. So spare me the social conservative mantra. Drop the war on drugs, drop the social conservative initiatives and then we can have something to discuss.

The problem is you think government should interfere in morality.
Click to expand...

Great, fill out the budget and let's see what you have? Stop whining about the past and do something about the present and the future

By the way, radical people knocked down the WTC at a cost of over a trillion dollars and taking about 3000 lives. What would you have done about it?

You didn't like Iraq, so what? The money has been spent, the cost in lives and treasure counted, now what? Looking backward is what people like you always do assigning blame and never taking responsibility. You tell me that you didn't vote for Obama in 2008? You telling me you don't support his social initiatives?

As for the govt. interfering in morality, what do you think Obama is doing now?
 
Deuce said:
If you're able to stretch or squish the y-axis by any arbitrary amount, you can probably find a dozen other years that "match."
Click to expand...

Is there any reason to not trust the site in terms of reporting the trends?
 
Conservative said:
Depends on your definition of a skyrocket, adding 17 million jobs and doubling GDP certainly would qualify as a good skyrocket wouldn't you say?

Was Obama in office in 2007? Thought the Bush tax cuts were in effect that year?
Click to expand...

Clinton created more jobs than Reagan AND balanced the budget. Why isn't Clinton your hero?
 
iguanaman said:
Clinton created more jobs than Reagan AND balanced the budget. Why isn't Clinton your hero?
Click to expand...

Clinton didn't inherit a double dip recession but did inherit an economy growing at over 4%. You simply are too brainwashed to even discuss history with
 
j-mac said:
Is there any reason to not trust the site in terms of reporting the trends?
Click to expand...

LOL! If you trust a site that posts graphs like that. you fit the definition of 'gullible'. Man. I bet you bought a lot of gold a few years ago, too.
 
Threegoofs said:
LOL! If you trust a site that posts graphs like that. you fit the definition of 'gullible'. Man. I bet you bought a lot of gold a few years ago, too.
Click to expand...

You don't pay attention too much do you...? I have stated many times what I do, and even the income level I am at...But don't let that stop you from addressing my central question...
 
I dont actually care that they passed this without any changes. They obviously had the votes with all democrats and some republicans who dont care about debt. And its majority rule in the House, so it should pass. If people dont like that stop voting in democrats and fiscally irresponsible house members.

I am concerned that the bill was rammed through under some bill to name an airport, with no public comment. Whatever happened to allowing 3 days for people to read the bills?
 
j-mac said:
You don't pay attention too much do you...? I have stated many times what I do, and even the income level I am at...But don't let that stop you from addressing my central question...
Click to expand...

Do I read everything? No. Sorry to disappoint.

But I just can tell you that if you can't see what's wrong with that graph, and you make investment decisions based on goofy charts like that, you're what's known as an 'easy mark'.
 
Threegoofs said:
Do I read everything? No. Sorry to disappoint.

But I just can tell you that if you can't see what's wrong with that graph, and you make investment decisions based on goofy charts like that, you're what's known as an 'easy mark'.
Click to expand...

So now you're going to start repeating yourself....Tell me when you address the question.
 
Threegoofs said:
I have no idea what your question is. I was just laughing at the graph you were referencing!
Click to expand...


Ok first it was only about 10 posts back, here: http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...hout-policy-attachments-9.html#post1062912298

Second of all, how do you expect to debate anything if all you are going to do is launch personal attacks over and over, and not address any points? We get it, you think I am gullible, why? At least Deuce had the decorum to explain to me why he believes the graph to be off, and he has a point, which is why I asked the question after that I did...See, that is discourse. In many cases Deuce and I rarely get along, but there are those times when we do have pretty good conversations. You on the other hand, seem to only want to attack people....Do you think that scores you points or something? What do you win if you have the nastiest comment? Do you get some 'King of the jack ass award' or something? I am just trying to understand....
 
MMC said:
"What" is that the word you said 351, not surprising when theres a rush to the quick and easy.
burp.gif
.....you mean you have been confused about the Democrats and their thought concept of Using the Federal Civilian Sector as a means of reliance over the US Military? Now why is that not surprising at all. :lamo
Click to expand...
Fell for a conspiracy theory without proper context? Why is this not surprising at all?

Obama’s ‘National Security Force?’

Keep on the lookout for those black helis though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom