America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 21 years ago by usahog. 50 replies replies.
2 Pages12>
Republican pride and joy
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
doug_omaha Offline
#1 Posted: Wed, Feb 5 2003, 8:39 AM EST
Joined: 01-08-2002
Posts: 10
Does this tell you why we don't need republicans in the hot seat!!!!
72448.gif
Charlie Offline
#2 Posted: Wed, Feb 5 2003, 12:22 PM EST
Joined: 06-16-2002
Posts: 39,751
No it doesn't!

Charlie
rleaverton Offline
#3 Posted: Wed, Feb 5 2003, 12:36 PM EST
Joined: 09-11-2010
Posts: 273
No, Doug. It does, however, clearly indicate that, under Clinton, you and I and every other tax paying citizen had more of our hard earned money confiscated by the government than was needed. Is that what you want? And how can you ignore the spending by Congress during those periods, and which party was in control of congress?
jamesconnors Offline
#4 Posted: Wed, Feb 5 2003, 1:07 PM EST
Joined: 11-02-2002
Posts: 378
it is unfortunate that 9 months after bush came into office that terrorist flew 2 planes into the twin towers createing the stock market to close down for a record 5 days and cretae losses of over 50,000 jobs iin one day. that lead to people being scared to travel leading hotels and airlines to go bankrupt and the federal governtment bailing out thousand among thosands of jobs. the stock market then lost 30% of its total worth, and incase you havent noticed we have been have this thing called "war on terrorism" which costs us close to 1 billion day......on top of the fact that "our president" feels that not all of the beuracratic fools in washington should keep all our hard eanred money so he proposed one of the biggest tax cuts in history... see having a surplus means you have taken too much from the people.....hmmmmm i wonder why we are in a bit more debt.....stupidity sickens me! do your homework before you start talkin **** about things you obviously know nothing about!
Charlie Offline
#5 Posted: Wed, Feb 5 2003, 1:56 PM EST
Joined: 06-16-2002
Posts: 39,751
The economy is the only thing that the Democrats have to rave about and it is in part due to the events of 9/11 and the War on Terror!

Charlie
xrundog Offline
#6 Posted: Wed, Feb 5 2003, 2:14 PM EST
Joined: 01-17-2002
Posts: 2,212
The economy and the budget are intertwined yes. But they are still 2 seperate issues. I think it would have been smarter to keep the surplus and cut taxes. I said so at the time. Okay, we have unforseen expenditures. Homeland security is going to soak up dollars like a skid row drunk soaks up Ripple! Defense spending will increase, sure. But knowing all that, running a budget in the red, why cut more taxes? I'm going over ground from another thread, I know. But it's just fun to rehash this stuff! Will the budget be balanced once Saddam is in exile in .....France(they seem to like him)? It remains to be seen.
Spiny Norman Offline
#7 Posted: Wed, Feb 5 2003, 2:43 PM EST
Joined: 09-04-2002
Posts: 899
I dont give Clinton credit for the excess anymore then I give Bush the blame for the deficit. The markets were tanking before Bush took office not because of anything the Clinton adminastration did but because it was way overvalued and folks started to wise up to that fact. I judge the president's performance by what he does with the situation at hand. With Clinton, the markets were mostly good, the GDP was up and the value of the govt's assets were higher. Was a good time to pay off debt and cut taxes were possable. (He paid off some debt, did'nt do much on the tax front). This Adminastration has been unlucky enough to have the 9/11 tragedy and the corporate scandals hit the fan at about the same time. Right now the markets are down, the GDP is down and the govt's assests are lower, good time to reduce spending and leave taxes alone. Sad to say, Bush is spending at an alarming rate and trying to reduce taxes at the same time. I will however reserve judgement until the end of his term. I don;t judge politicians on what they promise but on what they deliver.
deathray Offline
#8 Posted: Wed, Feb 5 2003, 3:08 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2002
Posts: 64
lets see that same chart as a % of GDP (which is the real indicator), and you will see that this is just a modest deficit year, and in the long run will increase government revenue by increasing the overall economy.
osage Offline
#9 Posted: Wed, Feb 5 2003, 4:42 PM EST
Joined: 02-18-2001
Posts: 492
The economy was going into the toilet before Clinton got out from under the desk. No matter who has been in office the last two years, with all that has happened, it wouldn't have mattered. I'm surprised that you are on this site. Obviously you are one that thinks smoking should be banned from all public places.
Skatty2hotty Offline
#10 Posted: Wed, Feb 5 2003, 4:57 PM EST
Joined: 05-29-2001
Posts: 288
How come, every blames the President for the economy? He has nothing to do with it. Oh wait, its easier to blame one person than to accept the fact that our economy cycle has ups and downs regardless of whom our President is.
Skatty2hotty Offline
#11 Posted: Wed, Feb 5 2003, 5:00 PM EST
Joined: 05-29-2001
Posts: 288
Also, a budget deficit means the government is returning more money into the marketplace than it is taking away from us.

If we have a surplus, the government isn't spending all the money that they take from us.

Basic Economics
kurt_oly Offline
#12 Posted: Wed, Feb 5 2003, 7:48 PM EST
Joined: 01-09-2002
Posts: 7
Doug might need to do his home work but you need to practice your spelling and proper word choice. Didn't you say that "stupidity sickens you"? I guess you sicken yourself then...because you came accross as a pompas ass who doesn't know how to speak the language.
RICKAMAVEN Offline
#13 Posted: Thu, Feb 6 2003, 3:57 AM EST
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
doug_omaha

welcome to my world,
won't you come on in.
miracles i guess,
still happen now and then.


you are being and will continue to be personally smeared, speared and roasted personally because you are in never never land.

never say anything that might be construed as trying to help any one or group. that is defined as "bleeding heart liberal"

never say anything negative about the idiot in the white house. that is defined as "a clinton or gore lover", these two people being the only ones accepted by the bush lovers as viable alternatives to bush's presidency.

you are now a pariah.

or as ashcroft and o'rielly and limbaugh would say, unamerican and bordering on treasonous.

sit down and have a beer, let's talk.
xrundog Offline
#14 Posted: Thu, Feb 6 2003, 5:13 AM EST
Joined: 01-17-2002
Posts: 2,212
Skatty, you're not following your own thread. If the government is spending more than they are taking, they will eventually have to take more to make it up. If they are spending less than they are taking, that is tax cut time. Maybe that goes against basic economics, but it seems like basic common sense.
RICKAMAVEN Offline
#15 Posted: Thu, Feb 6 2003, 5:15 AM EST
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
aren't you suppossed to pay off the debt first to save intrest?
eleltea Offline
#16 Posted: Thu, Feb 6 2003, 5:59 AM EST
Joined: 03-03-2002
Posts: 4,562
Bring back Jennifer Flowers!
usahog Offline
#17 Posted: Thu, Feb 6 2003, 8:24 AM EST
Joined: 12-06-1999
Posts: 22,691
Ele did you know Jennifer got a nose job after taking Billy to court???

LMAO

yea the Statler Bro... don't matter Billy had her last LMAO!!

Hog
Skatty2hotty Offline
#18 Posted: Thu, Feb 6 2003, 9:55 AM EST
Joined: 05-29-2001
Posts: 288
As DeathRay mentioned. The best measure of economy is the GDP. Gross Domestic Product is made up of the sum of Consumer Spending, Business Spending, Government Spending, and Foriegn Spending.

When recession comes about, Consumer Spending declines. Business Spending can't increase if consumers aren't spending. Therefore (ignoring Foriegn spending) the Government has to pick up the slack. Budget Deficit is stimulating to the economy. It puts more money back into the stream of commmerce.

One of the major causes for our current recession was the period of budget surplus.

I'm not preaching "Republican, Republican" I'm just trying to straighten out the many misconstrued facts about deficit and surplus. I know it seems strange at first, but thats the way it is.
EI Offline
#19 Posted: Thu, Feb 6 2003, 12:24 PM EST
Joined: 06-29-2002
Posts: 5,069
All I noticed is that doug left a bomb here and then ranaway... I guess he cant reply to truthfull facts
He probably thinks were harrassing Iraq for their oil too
he must get his flawed information from the hollywood brain trust
Susan Sarandon for sec of state
Alex Baldwin for President
yeah he'd like that
xrundog Offline
#20 Posted: Thu, Feb 6 2003, 12:33 PM EST
Joined: 01-17-2002
Posts: 2,212
I understand the line of reasoning. It seems to me a fancy way of justifying deficit spending. Deficit spending increased from Reagan through Bush1. 12 years of economic sucess by your measure? I don't believe that good economic times are the cause of bad economic times. I understand the Laffer curve. Nobody really understands WHAT causes the curve to swing. Too many variables. Some guys a few years ago formulated a math. thoerem to predict stock market shifts. It worked for a while, they made lots of money. Then it failed to work. They lost it all. I understand Gov. spending will swing up and down. With all the smart guys in DC, I would think they could stay closer to equilibrium.
Skatty2hotty Offline
#21 Posted: Thu, Feb 6 2003, 12:37 PM EST
Joined: 05-29-2001
Posts: 288
Good economic times aren't synomous with surplus. Thats all I'm saying.

I mainly wanted to point out that the picture posted should be attributed to political party.
Spiny Norman Offline
#22 Posted: Thu, Feb 6 2003, 1:46 PM EST
Joined: 09-04-2002
Posts: 899
Skatty,

Problem with GDP is it only measures output and fails to measue depleation of resources. Both renewable and non-renewable. Doesnt really give you an accurate picture of the overall economy.
Skatty2hotty Offline
#23 Posted: Thu, Feb 6 2003, 2:09 PM EST
Joined: 05-29-2001
Posts: 288
Norman, I totally agree with you. My appologies on an incomeplete answer. Even so, I was just pointing out that the picture isn't representative of the economy.

Thanks for keeping me on my toes.
xrundog Offline
#24 Posted: Thu, Feb 6 2003, 2:59 PM EST
Joined: 01-17-2002
Posts: 2,212
Yeah, the pic. isn't accurate. The Reagan-Bush deficit was much, much greater. But your point is made. I may make more snide comments from time to time. However I am willing to concede that judgement should be reserved on this until the end of the next democratic administration. Can't really compare until then. Or until the republicans balance the budget. If that happens it'll be cool!
Hugh Jass Offline
#25 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2003, 8:29 AM EST
Joined: 02-07-2003
Posts: 4
Hmmm. Wasn't there a Republican controlled congress during the Klinton presidency?

It's not difficult to fathom what kind of person Rickmaven is. He idolizes Bill Klinton, one the slimiest, sleaziest, and morally corrupt presidents ever.
doug_omaha Offline
#26 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2003, 8:38 AM EST
Joined: 01-08-2002
Posts: 10
Guys I am here..
Yes I dropped the this picture here, and I'm just sitten back reading everyones views.. Thats what makes USA GREAT!!! we all have our own views...
Some people are more vocal about there own opinions then others..
doug_omaha Offline
#27 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2003, 8:39 AM EST
Joined: 01-08-2002
Posts: 10
BTW here is the link I got the picture from...
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20030204/pl_nm/economy_states_dc_3

xrundog Offline
#28 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2003, 8:42 AM EST
Joined: 01-17-2002
Posts: 2,212
Hugh, the Presidents administration submits the budget to Congress. They approve or disapprove. They disapproved plenty! That's why the Gov. was shut down a couple times.
qmechanics Offline
#29 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2003, 1:02 PM EST
Joined: 09-06-2002
Posts: 1,269
Hmm Hmmm
Note:A Republican controlled Congress and to a lesser extent Senate(less time in power)during Bill Clinton's term kept some of the spending in check.Do not expect this if Democrats take back everything.
Also the economy was doing well for many reasons during the Clinton era ;one major benefit was the computer boom and the internet.Alot of foolish speculation ,overinflated stocks, 9/11 etc... caused things to calm down a bit.Added to that Bush must now spend extra money to protect our great nation etc...
Q
Besides Clinton would have tanked the budget if he was able to pass one item Socializing Medical coverage.Overall Clinton did not too badly but so many other factors played a role then as now.
Cigarick Offline
#30 Posted: Mon, Feb 10 2003, 6:27 PM EST
Joined: 07-28-2002
Posts: 3,078
The so-called two-party system is a joke. They throw away billions of dollars in aid to countries that don't even like us and have no intention of repaying us, on frivolous departments and committees, on esoteric space exploration that produces little or nothing to benefit the public, not to mention the millions on their own salaries and perks, including a nice fat raise for themselves while the rest economy goes down the toilet, and it doesn't matter which party is in power--it just gets worse every year. I've had it. I'm voting Libertarian from now on. I don't see how a history teacher or janitor could do any worse than the band of crooks and idiots we've had in office for the last 60 years or so.
RICKAMAVEN Offline
#31 Posted: Mon, Feb 10 2003, 7:05 PM EST
Joined: 10-01-2000
Posts: 33,248
EI

get real.
jjohnson28 Offline
#32 Posted: Tue, Feb 11 2003, 2:46 AM EST
Joined: 09-12-2000
Posts: 7,914
Ha! Rick telling anybody in the real world to get real?
penzt8 Offline
#33 Posted: Tue, Feb 11 2003, 3:17 AM EST
Joined: 06-05-2000
Posts: 1,771
If you wan that red line to turn blue all we need is a little tax increase on everyone and everything. We could maintain a permanent surplus. Personally, I prefer to keep my own money. So I can send it to CBid.
Robby Offline
#34 Posted: Tue, Feb 11 2003, 7:50 AM EST
Joined: 10-30-2002
Posts: 5,067
I love it when morons like Doug drag this crap out... Doug? Can you tell me what Bill Clinton did that made the economy shoot up so high? Or was it just that we were all warm a cozy knowing he had an intern between his legs? Anybody with half a brain understands the following;

1. The economy is "cyclical" it undulates up and down. So every 5 to 10 years it's up, and then it's down. There are a number of factors at work that contribute to this.

2. It's not a zero sum game. In other words, if you actually give people a tax cut (yes, that means people who actually pay taxes "the evil rich"...), they typically spend and invest this money which fuels the economy and actually brings in more money. Ronaldus Magnus proved this in the 80s, unfortunately, the democrat congress spent the money like a drunken sailor in port...

Sorry, I know it was an ad-homonym attack… I COULDN’T HELP MYSELF! THE REPUBLICANS MADE ME DO IT!!
Robby Offline
#35 Posted: Tue, Feb 11 2003, 7:55 AM EST
Joined: 10-30-2002
Posts: 5,067
also, I have to give "some" credit to the dems. I mean after all, Gore invented the Internet. Without his wonderful invention, we would not have this forum :-)
xrundog Offline
#36 Posted: Tue, Feb 11 2003, 8:39 AM EST
Joined: 01-17-2002
Posts: 2,212
Robby you started your post with a personal attack by calling Doug a moron. That kind of invalidates your point. Basically, you are saying that because you are so intellectually superior to Doug, we should all agree with what you say. It's all been brought up before in this thread. Read it carefully. Yes Cinton is certainly no shining moral example. But even with a congress fighting him tooth and nail and people doing their level best to get him out of office, his administration balanced the budget. For the first time in 30 years. I think his was the first administration that really tried. And that is my real question. Does the Bush administration really care that there is a deficit and will they even TRY to provide a balanced budget. At this point I would say no. If he gets a second term he should relly do it. Wouldn't you all say so? Robby, I like your humidor!
Robby Offline
#37 Posted: Tue, Feb 11 2003, 8:54 AM EST
Joined: 10-30-2002
Posts: 5,067
hehehe his administration balanced the budget? Do you think for one second if they had a dem congress, they would have balanced the fudget? If I recall correctly, that was a plank in the contract with America (remember Newt? :-) The Executive branch was drug kicking and screaming in to this. In fact, by their own estimations, they projected defecites far in to the next century...

I think the GOP cares about the deficit, but there's a time and a place to run one. (Keynesian economics) Government Spending can help stimulate the economy. It's like jump-starting a car. My battery post is tingling just thinking about it.

But I agree, if things continue to suck really bad, then he'll be voted out rightly or wrongly. I hope for the country, things improve dramatically... Again, sorry for the invective, I get emotional about this stuff. JACKA$$! Oh damn there goes that Tou·rette's again! (just kidding) A$$HOLE!! :-) “Seriously” just kidding ;-)
uncleb Offline
#38 Posted: Tue, Feb 11 2003, 9:06 AM EST
Joined: 11-13-2002
Posts: 1,326
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/fed/2003-02-11-greenspan_x.htm
uncleb Offline
#39 Posted: Tue, Feb 11 2003, 9:07 AM EST
Joined: 11-13-2002
Posts: 1,326
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/fed/2003-02-11-greenspan_x.htm
E-Chick Offline
#40 Posted: Tue, Feb 11 2003, 9:47 AM EST
Joined: 06-15-2002
Posts: 4,877
I just want to know if Hugh Jass is really J-Lo....L-MY-hughjass-off!
Robby Offline
#41 Posted: Tue, Feb 11 2003, 9:55 AM EST
Joined: 10-30-2002
Posts: 5,067
Oh what does Greenspan know anyway. :-) I guess that seems to dispute some of the points I made. What they should do is keep the cut, cut the fat. No water slides in Puerto Rico. No bailouts. We pay upwards of 50% when all the taxes are added up, income, social security, Medicare, state, city, gas, Advalorm, death, etc. etc. etc.... WE'RE OVER F'ING TAXED! Alvin Lee said it best, tax the rich, feed the poor, till there are no rich no more. Or perhaps our old friend Karl Marx? From each according to his means, to each according to his needs?
Spiny Norman Offline
#42 Posted: Tue, Feb 11 2003, 10:23 AM EST
Joined: 09-04-2002
Posts: 899
Rolling the dice,

(with your children's future).

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/news/gambling.cfm

If it works, great. If it fails, were all screwed.
Robby Offline
#43 Posted: Tue, Feb 11 2003, 10:38 AM EST
Joined: 10-30-2002
Posts: 5,067
The Democrats are running around all over the place talking about a “trigger” on President Bush’s tax cut. Here’s the truth: Gephardt and the Democrats want a trigger that calls off any scheduled tax cut if the surpluses fail to materialize. What can Democrats do to kill the surplus? Spend it!
If they go on a spending spree, they wipe out the surplus, trigger the trigger, and there is no tax cut. That’s why they’re for it. The existence of a trigger, in essence, puts their finger on it. They can pull the trigger on the tax cut and kill it, simply by spending more money! You know what we need instead of a trigger? We need a trigger lock in this bill. If they’re going to put a trigger in, that cancels tax cuts if the surplus doesn’t materialize, then we need a trigger lock so they can’t pull the trigger and spend your money. In reality, the trigger should be on the spending, not the tax cut. The Democrats have it completely backwards.

Source: RushLimbaugh.com Feb 27, 2001
xrundog Offline
#44 Posted: Tue, Feb 11 2003, 1:01 PM EST
Joined: 01-17-2002
Posts: 2,212
I will ask this question again. Isn't a balanced budget mandated by law? I don't care who does it as long as it gets done. John Maynard Keynes is dead. So is his economic paradigm. I think the main reason for this is the speed of communication today. No one person can really stay on top of trends. Things change too quickly. Greenspan is making it up as he goes along. Everytime he changes the interest rate he crosses his fingers and hopes it works.
Spiny Norman Offline
#45 Posted: Tue, Feb 11 2003, 1:29 PM EST
Joined: 09-04-2002
Posts: 899
If it's H.J.RES.86 your talking about,it's dead in comittee.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d107:HJ00086:@@@X
Robby Offline
#46 Posted: Tue, Feb 11 2003, 1:58 PM EST
Joined: 10-30-2002
Posts: 5,067
I agree. We should balance the budget. What programs should be cut? The Gvmt tries to do too much for too many people. It needs to shrink. That would help. But it won't. It's like a rich kid with a crack habit... Trouble. They keep spending, when they run out of money, no problem, raise taxes? The golden rule, he with the gold makes the rules. But why are we arguing over politics and taxes!!?? This is a sea-gar web site! Barkeep, a round of Opus for the house!
xrundog Offline
#47 Posted: Tue, Feb 11 2003, 4:24 PM EST
Joined: 01-17-2002
Posts: 2,212
we argue politics 'cause it's fun! More of a debate as I see it. I don't get angry about it. I don't get out much and my Wife has minimal interest. Say! Greenspan was on the BBC news! Seems he thinks that a stimulus package under the current situation is unwise. No balanced budget huh? Why am I not surprised? Someone in congress would have to take some math classes then.
Tobasco Offline
#48 Posted: Tue, Feb 11 2003, 5:33 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2003
Posts: 2,809

Get used to it Robby. Politics are a main topic around here. Good points you made! Keep it up!

Mag
jjohnson28 Offline
#49 Posted: Wed, Feb 12 2003, 12:22 AM EST
Joined: 09-12-2000
Posts: 7,914
Mag thats because this is/was the political board.It is now the Misc board because of the now defunct(and rarely used !!!!) sports board, and the fact some whiny, sissy arsed,sticks in the mud couldn't handle having a little fun over on the cigars and related board from time to time.Hey guys,blame the whinners not the guys that want to talk politics,we used to have our own board.BTW I still wish you Libs would quit whinning so loud whenever someone calls you a poo poo headed moron or whatever.

Boo f_in hoo! I swear my next bomb is going to be a box of f_in Kleenex to the next cry-baby I deem worthy. Deal with it! :0)
E-Chick Offline
#50 Posted: Wed, Feb 12 2003, 7:37 AM EST
Joined: 06-15-2002
Posts: 4,877
I'm so proud of my lil' JJ! He says it just like it is (ususally takes the words right outta my mouth)!
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages12>
Back to Top