Total Posts:44|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Debt debate for economic morons.

sadolite
Posts: 8,839
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 7:36:26 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
OK kiddies here is what is going to happen and is happening with regard to the debt the debt ceiling .

The number one thing you need to focus like a laser on is that govt will not spend one penny less than it is spending now, as a mater of fact it will spend even more, trillions more. It will set the new "base line" for spending at what they raise the debt ceiling to. Then after each subsequent year it will spend even more under the auspices of "COLA" (cost of living allowance).

Now here is where the average economic dumb a## gets sand pounded up his a##.
The "spending cuts" that you will hear about will be cancellations of "past proposed spending increases" What this means is that they are counting money that hasn't even been spent yet as a cut from the "current" budget. This of course is complete balderdash. No money has been cut from the budget. Not one gov't agency will get one less penny. Not now or in the future.

A true budget cut is when you add up the amount an agency or agencies gets and it gets less than it did the previous year or gets canceled completely. You will not see any of this. What you will see is grandiose claims of saving 4 5 6 7 8 9 trillion dollars over the next 5 6 7 8 9 10 years. All they are doing is adding up "past proposed spending increases" and multiplying it by the number of years. This makes you think "WOW that's alot of money" It isn't money it's called political math.

Bend over you are about to get sand pounded up your a## yet again and you are going to fall for it hook line and sinker you politicly partisan economic dumb a@@es.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,313
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 7:41:21 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
You could still call it a relative cut if the spending increases are less than the revenue increases....dumb***$$

I mean .. you sweet sweet forum contributor.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 7:43:09 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 7:41:21 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
You could still call it a relative cut if the spending increases are less than the revenue increases....dumb***$$

I mean .. you sweet sweet forum contributor.

True, if revenue increases $200 billion, and spending only increases $50 billion, that is acceptible (not necessarily good, but acceptible).
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
sadolite
Posts: 8,839
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 7:56:38 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 7:45:08 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
I just get peeved when people parrot talk show hosts without giving what they say a second thought.

In all sincerity I didn't know Rush Limbaugh talked about this, but he is right. Just goes to show that other people understand this fact without having to hear it from someone else. I've been saying this for years to anyone who would listen, which isn't many because their eyes glaze over and don't get it.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 7:58:31 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 7:56:38 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 7/18/2011 7:45:08 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
I just get peeved when people parrot talk show hosts without giving what they say a second thought.

In all sincerity I didn't know Rush Limbaugh talked about this, but he is right. Just goes to show that other people understand this fact without having to hear it from someone else. I've been saying this for years to anyone who would listen, which isn't many because their eyes glaze over and don't get it.

It might partially be because of the tone (very insultive towards the readers). That tends to make people automatically take a defensive stance and poise themselves against you.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 8:01:18 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 7:36:26 PM, sadolite wrote:
OK kiddies here is what is going to happen and is happening with regard to the debt the debt ceiling .

The number one thing you need to focus like a laser on is that govt will not spend one penny less than it is spending now, as a mater of fact it will spend even more, trillions more. It will set the new "base line" for spending at what they raise the debt ceiling to. Then after each subsequent year it will spend even more under the auspices of "COLA" (cost of living allowance).

Now here is where the average economic dumb a## gets sand pounded up his a##.
The "spending cuts" that you will hear about will be cancellations of "past proposed spending increases" What this means is that they are counting money that hasn't even been spent yet as a cut from the "current" budget. This of course is complete balderdash. No money has been cut from the budget. Not one gov't agency will get one less penny. Not now or in the future.

A true budget cut is when you add up the amount an agency or agencies gets and it gets less than it did the previous year or gets canceled completely. You will not see any of this. What you will see is grandiose claims of saving 4 5 6 7 8 9 trillion dollars over the next 5 6 7 8 9 10 years. All they are doing is adding up "past proposed spending increases" and multiplying it by the number of years. This makes you think "WOW that's alot of money" It isn't money it's called political math.

Bend over you are about to get sand pounded up your a## yet again and you are going to fall for it hook line and sinker you politicly partisan economic dumb a@@es.

And obviously, the best way to decrease the budget is to decrease tax revenue.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,313
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 8:03:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 8:01:18 PM, Wnope wrote:

And obviously, the best way to decrease the budget is to decrease tax revenue.

That is the best way to default your obligations. Hi California!
sadolite
Posts: 8,839
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 8:16:48 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 7:58:31 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/18/2011 7:56:38 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 7/18/2011 7:45:08 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
I just get peeved when people parrot talk show hosts without giving what they say a second thought.

In all sincerity I didn't know Rush Limbaugh talked about this, but he is right. Just goes to show that other people understand this fact without having to hear it from someone else. I've been saying this for years to anyone who would listen, which isn't many because their eyes glaze over and don't get it.

It might partially be because of the tone (very insultive towards the readers). That tends to make people automatically take a defensive stance and poise themselves against you.

So people will disagree with a position even though they know it to be true and correct and in essence portray themselves as ignorant, moronic and uneducated if they don't like the tone in which the message was delivered. Incredible.

Anyone who believes that stopping proposed spending increases proposed for the future that haven't even taken place yet, "is a budget cut" is an economic moron on every sense
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,313
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 8:22:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 8:16:48 PM, sadolite wrote:


Anyone who believes that stopping proposed spending increases proposed for the future that haven't even taken place yet, "is a budget cut" is an economic moron on every sense

You still don't get my counter-argument. Fascinating.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 9:24:13 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 8:03:08 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 7/18/2011 8:01:18 PM, Wnope wrote:

And obviously, the best way to decrease the budget is to decrease tax revenue.

That is the best way to default your obligations. Hi California!

In that case, we should follow the GOP: tax cuts for everybody!

I'm sure the thread creator agrees.
sadolite
Posts: 8,839
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 9:44:12 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 9:24:13 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/18/2011 8:03:08 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 7/18/2011 8:01:18 PM, Wnope wrote:

And obviously, the best way to decrease the budget is to decrease tax revenue.

That is the best way to default your obligations. Hi California!

In that case, we should follow the GOP: tax cuts for everybody!

I'm sure the thread creator agrees.

I would prefer 100% entitlement cuts for anyone who isn't retied or crippled or permanently disabled in some way. A 20 something able bodied person collecting welfare is just pathetic. So is paying for someone else to go to college. Get your own damn money. do it the same way hundreds of thousands before you did "earn it" Govt is a waste of life, everyone's life.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 9:52:35 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 9:44:12 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 7/18/2011 9:24:13 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/18/2011 8:03:08 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 7/18/2011 8:01:18 PM, Wnope wrote:

And obviously, the best way to decrease the budget is to decrease tax revenue.

That is the best way to default your obligations. Hi California!

In that case, we should follow the GOP: tax cuts for everybody!

I'm sure the thread creator agrees.

I would prefer 100% entitlement cuts for anyone who isn't retied or crippled or permanently disabled in some way. A 20 something able bodied person collecting welfare is just pathetic. So is paying for someone else to go to college. Get your own damn money. do it the same way hundreds of thousands before you did "earn it" Govt is a waste of life, everyone's life.

That's your view on spending.

What do you think lowering taxes would do to government revenue?
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 11:05:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 9:44:12 PM, sadolite wrote:
I would prefer 100% entitlement cuts for anyone who isn't retied or crippled or permanently disabled in some way. A 20 something able bodied person collecting welfare is just pathetic. So is paying for someone else to go to college. Get your own damn money. do it the same way hundreds of thousands before you did "earn it" Govt is a waste of life, everyone's life.

I think you really underestimate how hard it is to find steady work right now.

Also, the only realistic way for a young guy to go to college right now is if he is crammed in a really cheap place with a bunch of other people(who are working) who help pay the bills.

If you are one person without a piece of paper that says you know crap, you are barely going to make enough money to live, let alone go to school.

Also, it is a lot different than it used to be. Back in the day, a guy could walk into a shop, and get a machining job or whatever with little to no experience. They'd take a gamble, and train you. Nowadays, they won't even look at you unless you've been to college.

Things are pretty screwed up right now, and contrary to what seems to be popular opinion, not everyone who is poor and disadvantaged is a on drugs, stupid, lazy, etc.

Also, for the record, If the government stopped giving out welfare, there would be massive riots. I know a lot of people who rely on the government for basic things like food and even housing.

Chicago is practically a giant slum right now. I'm seriously considering moving out of this place just because of the fact that nearly everyone I know is unemployed, and it doesn't seem like it matters if I'm the only one going in once a week to check up on a business that is hiring, no one even gives me an interview. In the past 3 months, 3 businesses told me that I was the only one who checked in, that I practically had the job, and they even knew me by name when I walked in the door. Yet, they hire some dame over me, probably because of some affirmative action BS.

Course, I have no idea where to go. Sh1t, if I knew I had a job waiting for me out of state, and all I have to do is get there, I'd find a way.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/18/2011 11:49:50 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I'm perfectly ok with spending as long as it's being used for services instead of killing people and if we are actually paying for it instead of growing the debt.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2011 12:05:37 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 11:49:50 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I'm perfectly ok with spending as long as it's being used for services instead of killing people and if we are actually paying for it instead of growing the debt.

Reply: The current monetary system can only produce debt. That's how it's setup.
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2011 12:14:52 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/19/2011 12:05:37 AM, Tiel wrote:
Reply: The current monetary system can only produce debt.
That's a contradiction. It's impossible to only produce debt, i.e. to have a debtor party without a creditor party.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2011 12:17:38 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/19/2011 12:05:37 AM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/18/2011 11:49:50 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I'm perfectly ok with spending as long as it's being used for services instead of killing people and if we are actually paying for it instead of growing the debt.

Reply: The current monetary system can only produce debt. That's how it's setup.

Every economist of the past century disagrees. Monetary policy can effect an economic system in different ways.

You can argue all you like that society doesn't buy into it, but that doesn't mean a money system "can only produce" debt.

Consider the surplus of the 90s.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2011 1:06:18 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/19/2011 12:17:38 AM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/19/2011 12:05:37 AM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/18/2011 11:49:50 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I'm perfectly ok with spending as long as it's being used for services instead of killing people and if we are actually paying for it instead of growing the debt.

Reply: The current monetary system can only produce debt. That's how it's setup.

Every economist of the past century disagrees. Monetary policy can effect an economic system in different ways.

You can argue all you like that society doesn't buy into it, but that doesn't mean a money system "can only produce" debt.

Consider the surplus of the 90s.

Tiel wasn't clear enough. I know what he's referring to. He's talking about internal debt to the federal reserve, not debt to foreign nations. Money actually IS debt, in a literal sense.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Tiel
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2011 1:31:15 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/19/2011 1:06:18 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 7/19/2011 12:17:38 AM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/19/2011 12:05:37 AM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/18/2011 11:49:50 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I'm perfectly ok with spending as long as it's being used for services instead of killing people and if we are actually paying for it instead of growing the debt.

Reply: The current monetary system can only produce debt. That's how it's setup.

Every economist of the past century disagrees. Monetary policy can effect an economic system in different ways.

You can argue all you like that society doesn't buy into it, but that doesn't mean a money system "can only produce" debt.

Consider the surplus of the 90s.

Tiel wasn't clear enough. I know what he's referring to. He's talking about internal debt to the federal reserve, not debt to foreign nations. Money actually IS debt, in a literal sense.

Reply: Exactly. You are right, that's what I was referring to.
"Only the inner force of curiosity and wonder about the unknown, or an outer force upon your free will, can brake the shackles of your current perception."
baggins
Posts: 855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2011 2:30:50 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I am not an expert in economics. I don't have strong opinion on governments, banks, and the best philosophy regarding taxation. I look upon them as reality.

However from what I have heard about US situation, the solution seems to be obvious.

Banks are quite stable now. Everyone knows they will be bailed out if anything goes wrong. Finance should not be a problem for any business. Problem is, demand is low - which makes expanding any business nonviable. Demand is low because one in ten person is out of job. Many have lost houses. Others have been forced to take drastic cuts in salaries. Everyone is worried about saving what they have for foods and other necessities later on rather than spending it now.

The simple solution is for government to artificially create jobs. Government can do this by investing in infrastructure projects which employ large number of people. This will also increase demand in several key industries. As people begin to earn more, demand will pick up and other industries will begin to invest.

The problem with above is: government is heavy in debt. To manage it there are two ways. First is to decrease spending. Other is to increase tax. Spending cannot be decreased, because actually increase in spending is needed.

Tax can be easily increased. Taxes are anyway low by historic standards.

Please note, I am not saying high taxes are good in general. I believe that taxes should be as low AS POSSIBLE. Taxes should be high enough to ensure government does not run in loss. This happens to be a fit situation for increasing taxes. Once demand picks up, the US gov should again consider decreasing the taxes.
The Holy Quran 29:19-20

See they not how Allah originates creation, then repeats it: truly that is easy for Allah.

Say: "Travel through the earth and see how Allah did originate creation; so will Allah produce a later creation: for Allah has power over all things.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2011 1:47:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/19/2011 1:31:15 AM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/19/2011 1:06:18 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 7/19/2011 12:17:38 AM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/19/2011 12:05:37 AM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/18/2011 11:49:50 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I'm perfectly ok with spending as long as it's being used for services instead of killing people and if we are actually paying for it instead of growing the debt.

Reply: The current monetary system can only produce debt. That's how it's setup.

Every economist of the past century disagrees. Monetary policy can effect an economic system in different ways.

You can argue all you like that society doesn't buy into it, but that doesn't mean a money system "can only produce" debt.

Consider the surplus of the 90s.

Tiel wasn't clear enough. I know what he's referring to. He's talking about internal debt to the federal reserve, not debt to foreign nations. Money actually IS debt, in a literal sense.

Reply: Exactly. You are right, that's what I was referring to.

Are you suggesting, then, some monetary system which has no form of credit? If not, are you suggesting we get rid of fiat money and revert to the gold standard?

Neither is a good idea.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2011 2:00:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 7:36:26 PM, sadolite wrote:
OK kiddies here is what is going to happen and is happening with regard to the debt the debt ceiling .

The number one thing you need to focus like a laser on is that govt will not spend one penny less than it is spending now, as a mater of fact it will spend even more, trillions more. It will set the new "base line" for spending at what they raise the debt ceiling to. Then after each subsequent year it will spend even more under the auspices of "COLA" (cost of living allowance).

Now here is where the average economic dumb a## gets sand pounded up his a##.
The "spending cuts" that you will hear about will be cancellations of "past proposed spending increases" What this means is that they are counting money that hasn't even been spent yet as a cut from the "current" budget. This of course is complete balderdash. No money has been cut from the budget. Not one gov't agency will get one less penny. Not now or in the future.

A true budget cut is when you add up the amount an agency or agencies gets and it gets less than it did the previous year or gets canceled completely. You will not see any of this. What you will see is grandiose claims of saving 4 5 6 7 8 9 trillion dollars over the next 5 6 7 8 9 10 years. All they are doing is adding up "past proposed spending increases" and multiplying it by the number of years. This makes you think "WOW that's alot of money" It isn't money it's called political math.

Bend over you are about to get sand pounded up your a## yet again and you are going to fall for it hook line and sinker you politicly partisan economic dumb a@@es.

You're a real sweet talker.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2011 8:12:38 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/19/2011 1:47:17 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/19/2011 1:31:15 AM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/19/2011 1:06:18 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 7/19/2011 12:17:38 AM, Wnope wrote:
At 7/19/2011 12:05:37 AM, Tiel wrote:
At 7/18/2011 11:49:50 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I'm perfectly ok with spending as long as it's being used for services instead of killing people and if we are actually paying for it instead of growing the debt.

Reply: The current monetary system can only produce debt. That's how it's setup.

Every economist of the past century disagrees. Monetary policy can effect an economic system in different ways.

You can argue all you like that society doesn't buy into it, but that doesn't mean a money system "can only produce" debt.

Consider the surplus of the 90s.

Tiel wasn't clear enough. I know what he's referring to. He's talking about internal debt to the federal reserve, not debt to foreign nations. Money actually IS debt, in a literal sense.

Reply: Exactly. You are right, that's what I was referring to.

Are you suggesting, then, some monetary system which has no form of credit? If not, are you suggesting we get rid of fiat money and revert to the gold standard?

Neither is a good idea.

There are two ways to get make money non-debt, abolish it or nationalize it. I prefer both to what we have now.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2011 11:55:56 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
The "spending cuts" that you will hear about will be cancellations of "past proposed spending increases" What this means is that they are counting money that hasn't even been spent yet as a cut from the "current" budget. This of course is complete balderdash. No money has been cut from the budget. Not one gov't agency will get one less penny. Not now or in the future.

Were you under the impression at some point that 2012 budget talks involved cutting spending that was budgeted for the 2011 fiscal year?

Quite a bit of vulgarity for such an ultimately self-evident point. No sleight of hand has been involved.
jat93
Posts: 1,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/20/2011 3:39:03 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 7:36:26 PM, sadolite wrote:
Bend over you are about to get sand pounded up your a## yet again and you are going to fall for it hook line and sinker you politicly partisan economic dumb a@@es.

Why are you hating on everyone reading the post? Most of the active members here are smart enough to avoid the political sand pounded up their a$$es anyway. I imagine many of the people who end up reading this could own your @$$ in a debate on the topic or know more about it than you do. Either way what's up with your apparent anger and resentment of the DDO community....
Man-is-good
Posts: 6,871
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/20/2011 12:54:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/18/2011 7:36:26 PM, sadolite wrote:
OK kiddies here is what is going to happen and is happening with regard to the debt the debt ceiling .

The number one thing you need to focus like a laser on is that govt will not spend one penny less than it is spending now, as a mater of fact it will spend even more, trillions more. It will set the new "base line" for spending at what they raise the debt ceiling to. Then after each subsequent year it will spend even more under the auspices of "COLA" (cost of living allowance).

Now here is where the average economic dumb a## gets sand pounded up his a##.
The "spending cuts" that you will hear about will be cancellations of "past proposed spending increases" What this means is that they are counting money that hasn't even been spent yet as a cut from the "current" budget. This of course is complete balderdash. No money has been cut from the budget. Not one gov't agency will get one less penny. Not now or in the future.

A true budget cut is when you add up the amount an agency or agencies gets and it gets less than it did the previous year or gets canceled completely. You will not see any of this. What you will see is grandiose claims of saving 4 5 6 7 8 9 trillion dollars over the next 5 6 7 8 9 10 years. All they are doing is adding up "past proposed spending increases" and multiplying it by the number of years. This makes you think "WOW that's alot of money" It isn't money it's called political math.

Bend over you are about to get sand pounded up your a## yet again and you are going to fall for it hook line and sinker you politicly partisan economic dumb a@@es.

Some of those kiddies happen to be well over age. And they're already attending universities and colleges.

Such a nice man, sadolite. I have an affinity, propensity, to adoring your niceness in front of the 'kiddies'.
"Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto." --Terence

"I believe that the mind can be permanently profaned by the habit of attending to trivial things, so that all our thoughts shall be tinged with triviality."--Thoreau
sadolite
Posts: 8,839
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/20/2011 9:56:30 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/20/2011 12:54:27 PM, Man-is-good wrote:
At 7/18/2011 7:36:26 PM, sadolite wrote:
OK kiddies here is what is going to happen and is happening with regard to the debt the debt ceiling .

The number one thing you need to focus like a laser on is that govt will not spend one penny less than it is spending now, as a mater of fact it will spend even more, trillions more. It will set the new "base line" for spending at what they raise the debt ceiling to. Then after each subsequent year it will spend even more under the auspices of "COLA" (cost of living allowance).

Now here is where the average economic dumb a## gets sand pounded up his a##.
The "spending cuts" that you will hear about will be cancellations of "past proposed spending increases" What this means is that they are counting money that hasn't even been spent yet as a cut from the "current" budget. This of course is complete balderdash. No money has been cut from the budget. Not one gov't agency will get one less penny. Not now or in the future.

A true budget cut is when you add up the amount an agency or agencies gets and it gets less than it did the previous year or gets canceled completely. You will not see any of this. What you will see is grandiose claims of saving 4 5 6 7 8 9 trillion dollars over the next 5 6 7 8 9 10 years. All they are doing is adding up "past proposed spending increases" and multiplying it by the number of years. This makes you think "WOW that's alot of money" It isn't money it's called political math.

Bend over you are about to get sand pounded up your a## yet again and you are going to fall for it hook line and sinker you politicly partisan economic dumb a@@es.

Some of those kiddies happen to be well over age. And they're already attending universities and colleges.

Such a nice man, sadolite. I have an affinity, propensity, to adoring your niceness in front of the 'kiddies'.

HMM I've been on this site for almost 3 years and have been insulted and ridiculed in the most vulgar and offensive ways possible. What's the matter you can dish it out but can't take it. This is to every one. I'm not mad. I'm just proving a point. You are more concerned about your feelings than the economic disaster that forth comes this nation. Most of you will vote for the same dumb a@@ ignorant people for the same dumb A@@ partisan indoctrinated reasons. So many people still live in that dinosaur era of left and right Democrat and Republican. It is you people that are ruining this nation. You can't think for yourselves. It's the people vs the gov't.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/20/2011 10:11:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/20/2011 9:56:30 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 7/20/2011 12:54:27 PM, Man-is-good wrote:
At 7/18/2011 7:36:26 PM, sadolite wrote:
OK kiddies here is what is going to happen and is happening with regard to the debt the debt ceiling .

The number one thing you need to focus like a laser on is that govt will not spend one penny less than it is spending now, as a mater of fact it will spend even more, trillions more. It will set the new "base line" for spending at what they raise the debt ceiling to. Then after each subsequent year it will spend even more under the auspices of "COLA" (cost of living allowance).

Now here is where the average economic dumb a## gets sand pounded up his a##.
The "spending cuts" that you will hear about will be cancellations of "past proposed spending increases" What this means is that they are counting money that hasn't even been spent yet as a cut from the "current" budget. This of course is complete balderdash. No money has been cut from the budget. Not one gov't agency will get one less penny. Not now or in the future.

A true budget cut is when you add up the amount an agency or agencies gets and it gets less than it did the previous year or gets canceled completely. You will not see any of this. What you will see is grandiose claims of saving 4 5 6 7 8 9 trillion dollars over the next 5 6 7 8 9 10 years. All they are doing is adding up "past proposed spending increases" and multiplying it by the number of years. This makes you think "WOW that's alot of money" It isn't money it's called political math.

Bend over you are about to get sand pounded up your a## yet again and you are going to fall for it hook line and sinker you politicly partisan economic dumb a@@es.

Some of those kiddies happen to be well over age. And they're already attending universities and colleges.

Such a nice man, sadolite. I have an affinity, propensity, to adoring your niceness in front of the 'kiddies'.

HMM I've been on this site for almost 3 years and have been insulted and ridiculed in the most vulgar and offensive ways possible. What's the matter you can dish it out but can't take it. This is to every one. I'm not mad. I'm just proving a point. You are more concerned about your feelings than the economic disaster that forth comes this nation. Most of you will vote for the same dumb a@@ ignorant people for the same dumb A@@ partisan indoctrinated reasons. So many people still live in that dinosaur era of left and right Democrat and Republican. It is you people that are ruining this nation. You can't think for yourselves. It's the people vs the gov't.

You started a topic consisting of you swearing and saying it's a big conspiracy that the 2012 budget talks reflect money that will be spent in 2012 and not money that was already spent.

What kind of response do you expect?