The Myth of Republican Fiscal Responsibility

#51
#51
lawgator1 said:
We have different definitions of "pork," particularly as to your second paragraph. As to your first, our definitions overlap, but not completely.
Click to expand...

even by your definition of pork this bill is nowhere near only 5% pork. by your definition it's at least 40% pork.
 
#52
#52
GAVol said:
I'd love to see some numbers on this. The recession had pretty much ended in mid 1991 and the economy was growing again . . . despite what James Carville said.
Click to expand...

gdpannualized1_2.png
 
#53
#53
What did Clinton walk into?

Wisteme | Can anyone tell me more about the 1990-1991 recession?

The recession was officially over in 1991 (GDP returned to growth) and unemployment peaked in June of 1992 (15 months after the end of the recession and 6-7 months before Clinton took office, a good year prior to any of his policies being enacted). Hard to say that economy wasn't already bouncing back before he took office.
 
#54
#54
rjd970 said:
I don't know, but it isn't the wealthy. Small business employ a large number of people. What have the multi-million dollar bonus bank execs done for us the last 8 years?
Click to expand...

Define "small business" and "wealthy". I work for what I would describe as a "small business". The guy that signs my check isn't going to be getting any mulit-million dollar bonuses but he drives a Navigator and hunts/fishes and vacations pretty much where he wants when he wants. He is by no means a poor man. (good guy too, I like him a lot)
 
#56
#56
lawgator1 said:
They have gall claiming to be the ones who tighten the belt.
Click to expand...

how many time did conservative republicans have a republican majority in senate and congress. it was only during Bush years.

Law you seem to forget we have a senate and congress, they also have a say in the budget.
 
#57
#57
volinbham said:
Your chart has that number. I was showing what your chart doesn't. Every administration has added to the national debt.
Click to expand...


As a percentage of GDP, which is probably as good a measure as any with regard to our ability to pay the debt back, the Democrats over the last half century have been much better stewards of our tax money than have the Republican administrations.
 
#58
#58
joevol320 said:
how many time did conservative republicans have a republican majority in senate and congress. it was only during Bush years.

Law you seem to forget we have a senate and congress, they also have a say in the budget.
Click to expand...


Reagan pushed and pushed for higher spending.
 
#59
#59
Why do Democrats insist on living in the past? I'm in the here and now, and Obama is spending money like it's going out of style.
 
#60
#60
lawgator1 said:
As a percentage of GDP, which is probably as good a measure as any with regard to our ability to pay the debt back, the Democrats over the last half century have been much better stewards of our tax money than have the Republican administrations.
Click to expand...

i agree that % of gdp is the best measure as to regard to pay our debt back, but it takes many years for fiscal policy to have an effect on GDP. because of this lag effect i'm not sure using that years gdp number really accurately reflects fiscal responsibily.
 
#63
#63
rjd970 said:
I don't know, but it isn't the wealthy. Small business employ a large number of people. What have the multi-million dollar bonus bank execs done for us the last 8 years?
Click to expand...


Small business owners that employ people are considered wealthy by todays Dems.
 
#64
#64
lawgator1 said:
Reagan pushed and pushed for higher spending.
Click to expand...


Reagan believed in spending federal money on things the constitution actually gives the feds authority to spend money on - like national defense.

I think Star Wars was a bit silly but we were in this thing called the cold war back then. There was this gang, called the Soviet Union, and they wanted to kick our butts. They had all these things that could blow up cities - nuclear weapons I think they called them.
Some people believed that we needed to work out and get some of those nuclear weapons ourselves to deter the Soviets from walking over and handing us our ass.

You know the crazy thing...it apparently worked!

Now Reagan did not believe on robbing Peter to pay Paul.
 
#65
#65
truefan said:
Even Reagen didn't CUT taxes. He neutralized them. One of the great fallacies of the American public is many believe Reagen cut taxes. He just shifted them
Click to expand...

What the hell?
I for one know first hand that Reagan DID cut taxes and those tax cuts led to tremendous prosperity for a lot of people.
I can't believe that some people deny this!
Top marginal tax rate was 70% and he lowered it 38% (I think it was 38%)
That gave SMALL BUSINESS owners a lot more capital to invest in their companies. I know this happened from first hand experience.
Good Lord!!
 
#66
#66
gasguy98 said:
Reagan believed in spending federal money on things the constitution actually gives the feds authority to spend money on - like national defense.

I think Star Wars was a bit silly but we were in this thing called the cold war back then. There was this gang, called the Soviet Union, and they wanted to kick our butts. They had all these things that could blow up cities - nuclear weapons I think they called them.
Some people believed that we needed to work out and get some of those nuclear weapons ourselves to deter the Soviets from walking over and handing us our ass.

You know the crazy thing...it apparently worked!

Now Reagan did not believe on robbing Peter to pay Paul.
Click to expand...


Every administration has a reason for doing it. GW Bush's will probably, historically speaking, turn out to be the weakest. I do not disagree that as a policy tool it has some power and sometimes the consequences can be good.

I'm just saying that when the Republicans paint themselves as simply aghast at a spending bill like this it kind of rings hollow.
 
#67
#67
Every administration has a reason for doing it. GW Bush's will probably, historically speaking, turn out to be the weakest. I do not disagree that as a policy tool it has some power and sometimes the consequences can be good.

I'm just saying that when the Republicans paint themselves as simply aghast at a spending bill like this it kind of rings hollow.
Click to expand...

Please forgive lowly Republicans for rejecting a bill that, under the auspices of stimulating the economy, gives money to save an endangered mouse species and gives tax refunds to people who pay no income tax. This bill is simply a congolmeration of all the things Democrats have wanted passed for the past eight years. Worst of all, the Democrats try to pass it off as something that will help the economy.
 
#68
#68
Vol_4_Life said:
Please forgive lowly Republicans for rejecting a bill that, under the auspices of stimulating the economy, gives money to save an endangered mouse species and gives tax refunds to people who pay no income tax. This bill is simply a congolmeration of all the things Democrats have wanted passed for the past eight years. Worst of all, the Democrats try to pass it off as something that will help the economy.
Click to expand...


Be honest. Have you read it?
 
#70
#70
KB5252 said:
Who has the time? Serious question. even the people voting for it had a grasp of one third of what was in this bill.
Click to expand...


I think that's true. I've only read portions, myself. And not from the original source.

I think that's part of the reason why Obama needs to break things down a bit so that folks get a better sense of the ratios and where the dollars are going.
 
#72
#72
lawgator.

I give you props. You made a post in the Poly fourm without referencing Fox News as the devil.
 
#74
#74
lawgator1 said:
I think that's true. I've only read portions, myself. And not from the original source.

I think that's part of the reason why Obama needs to break things down a bit so that folks get a better sense of the ratios and where the dollars are going.
Click to expand...

But don't you see the obvious answer for the reason to push this bill through so quickly? So the American people, not to mention some of the democrats that would be voting for it, wouldn't have the chance to become outraged at where much of this money would be going.

Obama prioritizing the money to be geared toward those that supported him is no surprise, all politicians do this to some degree. The cause for the outrage is he did it under the guise of a stimulus plan and forced it through without a serious effort to be responsible with spending at this crucial time.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top