BuffettNews.com

It is a well-known and easily verifiable fact that each time the nation's DEBT has risen dramatically it has been during Republican administrations.

The Republicans usually manage to dramatically increase the national DEBT by implementing tax cuts (which mainly benefit wealthy voters) coupled with increased military spending (which is also a form of welfare for the wealthy).

The ill-advised invasion of Iraq has cost us hundreds of billions of dollars.

Lots of folks scream when somebody in goverment wants to spend money on the "have-nots". It's considered a waste.

Conversely, nobody screams about the bloated Department of Defense budget and the fat contracts awarded to some of the wealthiest corporations in the world. Defense spending is apparently a "sacred cow" in this country.

I say it's time to start making hamburger.

captenuta wrote:

RinglingRingling wrote:

LIPH wrote:Cutting taxes and deficit spending are two different issues. If Congress could get their act together they would bring the deficit under control without raising taxes.

Wino you know wrote:

captenuta wrote:The deficit is under control any shrinking because of the tax cuts. I can't believe some of you are arguing for higher taxes!

I can.
These people b|tch if they don't get a pay raise, or if the price of gasoline (or anything else) goes up, but try to give them more of their OWN money (meaning-NOT the governments) back and they want no part of it.
IDIOTS!
G.D.M.F. IDIOTS!

a) I understand that taxes and deficit spending are two components to the same issue. However, neither side of the aisle is going to cut their spending, and the long-term effect is that either you do that, you raise taxes/twiddle with the tax formulas to better create the "sweet spot" where revenue matches outflow AND doesn't lay the burden (as a percentage of income) on one particular group or class, or you just give up.

b) I pay about 40% of my income in the form of federal, state, and local income taxes, state and federal gas taxes, license fees, and the like. If I have to pay 45%, with the extra 5% going for deficit retirement, fine. The long-term benefits of that outweigh the short-term pain.

Are you insane!!!!

no. just bright enough to see a bit more to it than "TAXES BAD!!!" and buying into the soundbyte mentality banging the drum behind it.

flyboy55 wrote:It is a well-known and easily verifiable fact that each time the nation's DEBT has risen dramatically it has been during Republican administrations.

The Republicans usually manage to dramatically increase the national DEBT by implementing tax cuts (which mainly benefit wealthy voters) coupled with increased military spending (which is also a form of welfare for the wealthy).

The ill-advised invasion of Iraq has cost us hundreds of billions of dollars.

Lots of folks scream when somebody in goverment wants to spend money on the "have-nots". It's considered a waste.

Conversely, nobody screams about the bloated Department of Defense budget and the fat contracts awarded to some of the wealthiest corporations in the world. Defense spending is apparently a "sacred cow" in this country.

I say it's time to start making hamburger.

Flyboy made 6 points. He is correct on each and every one of them.

The biggest "waste" of taxpayer's money is military spending - but God forbid if anyone criticizes waste in military spending. You'll be labeled a Communist or worse. But those people who would NEVER criticize military spending are usually the FIRST to criticize welfare spending.

You takes your choice - one is welfare for the poor & one is welfare for corporations. Waste in either one is wrong but unless you criticize waste in military spending - your rants against welfare waste are a joke.
It's snowing like h*ll here - I need a concert!

LIPH wrote:For what it's worth, there's a small article in this morning's Wall Street Journal about the budget deficit. The Treasury Department reports that for the first 6 months of the 2007 fiscal year the deficit is down 15% from from the first 6 months of fiscal 2006. The deficit for the entire 2006 fiscal year was down 22% from fiscal 2005. Fiscal 2006 was the second consecutive year the deficit declined, although the article doesn't say by how much it declined in fiscal 2005.

You know what a rag sheet the Wall Street Journal is. Of course this can't possibly be correct

Wino you know wrote:

LIPH wrote:For what it's worth, there's a small article in this morning's Wall Street Journal about the budget deficit. The Treasury Department reports that for the first 6 months of the 2007 fiscal year the deficit is down 15% from from the first 6 months of fiscal 2006. The deficit for the entire 2006 fiscal year was down 22% from fiscal 2005. Fiscal 2006 was the second consecutive year the deficit declined, although the article doesn't say by how much it declined in fiscal 2005.

If President Clinton (or her husband) were still in the white house, they'd be hailed as heroes for this.
And yes, Uncle Nancy (or ANYBODY, for that matter) is free anytime to send the I.R.S. more money to go into the general fund.
Let's all b|tch about a $1.00 A.T.M. fee, but no freaking way should they give us more of OUR money back that the seize from us.
IDIOTS!

Amen Wino.
Wino for President

Patriotic Phlocker wrote:Sounds like a pretty partisan argument that will only be debated, never solved. In the last election, I noticed there is a Pirate party. What do you say that we all defect over and nominate Jimmy as Pres. He definately has the popularity and is good with money.

But that means no concerts for four years- can't do it!

jackiesic wrote:Amen Wino.
Wino for President

I'm the LAST person these under-taxed socialists would want for a president.
I'll gurantee you ONE thing-they'd sure as hell quit bitching about President Bush within 30 minutes of me being sworn in.
THAT'S a promise.

Wino you know wrote:

jackiesic wrote:Amen Wino.
Wino for President

I'm the LAST person these under-taxed socialists would want for a president.
I'll gurantee you ONE thing-they'd sure as hell quit bitching about President Bush within 30 minutes of me being sworn in.
THAT'S a promise.

Well then........
Wino for President

jackiesic wrote:

Wino you know wrote:

jackiesic wrote:Amen Wino.
Wino for President

I'm the LAST person these under-taxed socialists would want for a president.
I'll gurantee you ONE thing-they'd sure as hell quit bitching about President Bush within 30 minutes of me being sworn in.
THAT'S a promise.

Well then........
Wino for President

READ ON:
http://www.buffettnews.com/forum/viewto ... t=#2608494

Suprisingly the military is trying to SAVE money... yes SAVE money. Its Congress that is spending what they are SAVING.