How Do Recidivist Supply Side Voting Deficit Hawks Reconcile Whining About Government Spending?

[Iceberg Slim]

Ha?

Yea...

Have you done the math?

 

[Iceberg Slim]

Administrations do not control spending, Congress does.

Can't say I didn't nail this..


what's the first step in the budget process?

 

[Iceberg Slim]

That's how trolls operate.

And with the eager gormless facilitation of "Moderation".

 

[it's just me]

Supply Side Administrations have averaged annual spending growth of 6.25% since 1980...

Democrats?

2.75%


When confronted with these numbers, they cry

"B..b...b..b..but Congress, bwaaaah!"

We have to clean up the messes you make. That costs money.

 

[Iceberg Slim]

We have to clean up the messes you make. That costs money.

Elaborate on that, would you?

 

[NWRatCon]

Elaborate on that, would you?

Really? Do you think there is any "there" there? It's a throwaway line for a throwaway opinion.

 

[NWRatCon]

The biggest problem of "supply side" economics is the stupidity of its proponents. From an "economics" standpoint, it's idiocy. And it has created enduring defects in our economy, including budget deficits.

The economy only works when demand is sufficient to absorb the supply. That is the basic structure of capitalism. Those that don't understand that muck up the economy and pursue stupid policies - like cutting budgets during a recession, or cutting taxes when the economy is in peril.

 

[Stinger]

Can't say I didn't nail this..


what's the first step in the budget process?

Under stautory law. A Presidents submits he budget suggestions.

What's the second step?

Congress ignores it.

 

[Stinger]

The person with final say over the bill. Have you learned how billls become law yet?

Says the one who believes expresidents can still veto bills.

That person is included in my statwment try again.

 

[Stinger]

The person with final say over the bill. Have you learned how billls become law yet?

The final say happens during budget negotiations. If a President solely controls spending then why even have Congress go through the motions?

 

[Stinger]

Who signs bills into law?

Who creates the s to sign? How do expresidents sign budgets?

 

[Stinger]

I'd say that's entirely a function of what happens when we reach the debt limit.....under Democratic presidents...

I don't recall the last shutdown threat under a republican president.

When we hit the debt limit no more debt can be acquired that is what happens. Do you support the Reps trying to cut back that spending or the Dems wanting to increase it?

 

[Stinger]

Please refrain from using hypotheticals...

Dodge noted. Which side did you support this last threatened shutdown the Reps or the Dems?

 

[Iceberg Slim]

Dodge noted. Which side did you support this last threatened shutdown the Reps or the Dems?

You hid behind the hypothetical because you cannot reconcile the facts with your faith.

All you need to know about debt limit theatrics is in the data.

 

[Iceberg Slim]

When we hit the debt limit no more debt can be acquired that is what happens. Do you support the Reps trying to cut back that spending or the Dems wanting to increase it?

It's not about me.

It's about Fiscal Facts.

I haven't cast a single vote for a POTUS under whom deficits rose.

 

[Iceberg Slim]

Under stautory law. A Presidents submits he budget suggestions.

What's the second step?

Congress ignores it.

That's a fiction.

 

[rahl]

Says the one who believes expresidents can still veto bills.

That person is included in my statwment try again.

 

[rahl]

The final say happens during budget negotiations. If a President solely controls spending then why even have Congress go through the motions?

So you still don’t know how bills become law

 

[rahl]

Who creates the s to sign? How do expresidents sign budgets?

If a president says no (veto) and the required amount for a vetoed majority is not met, is the bill law or not law?

 

[NWRatCon]

What's the topic, again?

 

[NWRatCon]

Dodge noted. Which side did you support this last threatened shutdown the Reps or the Dems?

Just a note: the "shutdowns" have nothing to do with fiscal anything.

 

[NWRatCon]

When we hit the debt limit no more debt can be acquired that is what happens. Do you support the Reps trying to cut back that spending or the Dems wanting to increase it?

Out of curiosity, do you have any idea what the history of the "debt limit" is, and how incompatible it is with the Constitution? That might be relevant to the discussion.

 

[mrjurrs]

Supply Side Administrations have averaged annual spending growth of 6.25% since 1980...

Democrats?

2.75%


When confronted with these numbers, they cry

"B..b...b..b..but Congress, bwaaaah!"

Supply side has never worked for anything other than increasing wealth disparity.

 

[mrjurrs]

Do you support government shutdowns?

If a Rep President wants to freeze spending but the Dems want to increase it 10% so a settlement of 5% is reached to avoid a shutdown who do you blame for any resulting deficit?

A president can want anything, but all spending begins in the House. The Congress (not a political party) is constitutionally responsible for funding the government.

 

[Iceberg Slim]

Supply side has never worked for anything other than increasing wealth disparity.

Pretty strong record of generating deficits....