2012 GOP Nomination

#451
#451
volinbham said:
Damn, sounds like I missed a wild one - good to hear that Perry bombed again.

How'd Cain survive the 999 attacks?
Click to expand...

The first 10 minutes were a 999 feeding frenzy. Some piggybacked on a report that was released a couple of hours before the debate saying the middle class would see a tax increase, but Romney and Perry tried to frame it as a massive sales tax increase . . . without acknowledging the savings on the federal side. Overall, he did OK but it's clear that they are going to try and beat him to death with his own plan . . . without really articulating one of their own.
 
#452
#452
volinbham said:
Damn, sounds like I missed a wild one - good to hear that Perry bombed again.

How'd Cain survive the 999 attacks?
Click to expand...

Yeah man you missed a wild one. Cain did ok I guess, but the media and others are really about to look into his plan.
 
#454
#454
Romney and Gingrich both gave Cain kudos for offering a solution. However, until Cain offers more specifics on certain parts of his 9-9-9 plan it is fair to expect others to continue to criticize it. It's Cain's plan... he should be able to provide more detail to prove other analysis incorrect if that is the case.
 
#460
#460
It's believed that Ron Paul is actually a KGB operative. He will cut military funding by 99% and allow the Soviets to invade.
 
#463
#463
smith1019.jpg


eternalvigilence.jpg
 
#464
#464
Ron Paul on Meet the Press with his plan to cut $1 trillion in spending. The haters have to admit, he was sharp as a tack. Especially about Iran (which seems to be the #1 concern about him).

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrJxnZkMk6o[/youtube]
 
#469
#469
and would prevent Ron Paul or any other Republican from getting elected for a long time. Communists would probably take over.

I think in the end we need to make drastic cuts, but they need to get phased in - especially in this economy.

If it were a booming economy, drastic cuts would be easier to swallow.
 
#470
#470
golfballs03 said:
and would prevent Ron Paul or any other Republican from getting elected for a long time. Communists would probably take over.

I think in the end we need to make drastic cuts, but they need to get phased in - especially in this economy.

If it were a booming economy, drastic cuts would be easier to swallow.
Click to expand...

That's the problem with Keynesianism, in practice. We'll never do this, and that's why the system is broken.

IMO, Keynesian economics is not the optimal approach, but if done properly, it's not as bad as it has proven to be. Everyone knows that the point of Keynesian economics is to spend your way out of recessions, but what people don't know is that in in boom periods government is supposed to cut spending while creating surpluses in tax revenue. We don't do that part. We don't attempt to do that part. We don't acknowledge that that part exists.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#471
#471
nbakerld said:
That's the problem with Keynesianism, in practice. We'll never do this, and that's why the system is broken.

IMO, Keynesian economics is not the optimal approach, but if done properly, it's not as bad as it has proven to be. Everyone knows that the point of Keynesian economics is to spend your way out of recessions, but what people don't know is that in in boom periods government is supposed to cut spending while creating surpluses in tax revenue. We don't do that part. We don't attempt to do that part. We don't acknowledge that that part exists.
Click to expand...

we don't acknowledge that the failure to draw back has been the failure of the approach. Once a government program or entitlement is begun, it's essentially permanent.
 
#472
#472
BigPapaVol said:
we don't acknowledge that the failure to draw back has been the failure of the approach. Once a government program or entitlement is begun, it's essentially permanent.
Click to expand...

yep. "We are entitled" is a better description of our population now than "we are free". If we continue to support 35% of our population with only 47% of them taxed - well...
 
#474
#474
They need to pass the payroll tax cut extension, even if it means a tiny surtax on millionaires. Sell it on trickle up economics, which is definitely what has been happening in this country for the last 30-40 years.
 
#475
#475
BigPapaVol said:
we don't acknowledge that the failure to draw back has been the failure of the approach. Once a government program or entitlement is begun, it's essentially permanent.
Click to expand...

Agreed with both. I don't think Keynesian is flawed logic. But with an inefficient government beauracracy not capable of putting money to work and too greedy, incompetent, or stuck in wars to save, it's not practical. When you reach this point, it's best just to get government out.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top