WTG Georgie!

[Swager]

I extra money I got back in taxes this year goes into buying gas.  So it goes into Bush's pocket anyways!

[lasersailor184]

TDDV was right about there being inflation because of the increase in money supply from Monetary Policies in effect.  But it's very minor.


The inflation I was referring to starts to occur when the US starts to produce at above the full production level.  Everyone has more money and more demand, so the prices go up and inflation goes up.

[AKcurly]

Originally posted by Mini D
The funny thing about this thread is with a flat tax in place, Bush would have saved even more, and most here would have saw a drastic increase in their taxes.

Curly, if you payed closer to 30% in federal taxes, you either made more than GW or you're a bit rusty on the math skills from calculator overuse in college.  Research the tax cuts... what tax brackets were paying % wise before and after.  The wealthy are still paying a large % more than the poor (twice the % as a matter of fact).

Really... look at the numbers and present them.  Talk about those.  Posting this article and ranting the way you have is simply pathetic.

MiniD

Dj, read the entire thread dude.  I don't care if they cut or raise taxes.  My primary complaint is decreasing taxes, increasing federal expenditures and all with an increasing federal deficit.  It's called "Voodoo Economics" and the phrase was first applied to Reagan by George Bush, Sr (when he was a candidate running against Reagan.)

None of you wart hogs (including me and the rest of the known universe) know enough Economics to have any idea what's driving our economy.  Economics is not a science with a collection of rules.  Rather it's an ah-hoc collection of ideas where they use positive feedback to control an unstable system.  That is a certain formula for disaster.

If you guys want to believe that deficient spending coupled with budget cuts makes sense, why be my guest.  If you want to believe you can spend your way out of trouble, again, be my guest.  Both make no sense.

Pathetic?  Nah, just honest, but you wouldn't know anything about that.

curly

[Steve]

If you guys want to believe that deficient spending coupled  blah blah blah

Jimmy carter balanced the budget... and put us in the worst recession in years.  When are you going to learn that carrrying a deficit is not necessarily bad for the economy?

[AKcurly]

Originally posted by Steve
Jimmy carter balanced the budget... and put us in the worst recession in years.  When are you going to learn that carrrying a deficit is not necessarily bad for the economy?

Balancing the budget is sorta like making heroin users quit cold turkey.  There will be repercussions.  After all, there are so many contractors with their nose in the federal feed trough, yeah, things are going to slow down for a period of time.

Steve, you're old enough to have at least read Eisenhower's greatest concern as he left office.

Steve, you do understand the futility of trying to control an unstable device with positive feedback, right?

curly

[Mini D]

Wow curly, you adressed every issue I didn't bring up.  All the while ignoring the fact that you posted a stupid bellybutton anti-bush propaganda article in regards to his tax statement and somehow turned it into a state of the economy debate.

It's pretty damn funny curly.  I especially liked the implication that somehow you paid a larger % to the fed than someone who made more than you.  Especially the part where you pretend you weren't completely wrong with that assumption.

Read up on economics curly.  A little reading will go a long way.  If that's not enough for you, read up on history.  Look at the biggest depressions in U.S. history and what was done to pull out of them.

MiniD

[AKcurly]

Originally posted by Steve
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=568&u=/nm/20040414/bs_nm/economy_trade_dc_2&printer=1

Curly, how do you explain this if things are so terrible?

Well, it makes sense since the consumer price index is up for the 4th month in a row.  Is that good?  No.  Do they balance out?  Dunno.  Is it good to spend more money than you have revenue?  No.

curly

[AKcurly]

Originally posted by lazs2  
quote:

No country ever taxed itself into prosperity or taxed itself out of debt.

We need to spend less... that is the real solution. Tax cuts are an excellent way to start.

lazs

There ya go.  It's as simple as that.  It doesn't even require a complex statement of economics - it's just common sense.  Live within your means.

curly

[rpm]

You can not continue to spend more than you earn. I don't care how long you string the debt. Living off your Credit Cards will tell you that, the interest will eat you alive. Spending IS a good thing, if you spend it on the right things (i.e infrastructure, WPA) that will pay you back. This is not the type of spending we are seeing. I am all for lower taxes, but we need to lower the governments spending budget first.

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by rabbidrabbit
Curly,

You might want to pick up a book on economics some day.  When the economy sags it's best to drop interest rates and cut taxes to get the economy back in motion.

So says the Keynesians, the problem is that it simply initiates another boom/bust cycle.

I seem to recall Regan proceeded spending like a madman and to racking up debt like crazy.  Debt you haven't paid off yet, and indeed is growing.

[AKcurly]

Originally posted by rabbidrabbit
Curly,

You might want to pick up a book on economics some day.  When the economy sags it's best to drop interest rates and cut taxes to get the economy back in motion.  Spending more than income via debt to do so is considered advisable by most any economist since the more these 2 things are done the faster the economy recovers.  Once the economy is back to normal you let it run, as it starts to inflate you raise interest rates and taxes.  This serves to cool the economy off to lessen the impact of infaltion and can then be used to pay down national debt.

Yes, I've read a book or two on economics, even taught a course or three.

All of what you suggest makes sense if you forget federal expenditures are increasing due to causes other than tax cuts.

During sustained down cycles, sure, you jump start the economy.  However, if the feds are pouring money into areas outside the country, then it's complete nonsense.  It's like pouring gasoline on a fire in hope of quenching it.

It is lunacy at its greatest to legislate tax cuts when the federal deficit is climbing AND a substantial fraction of federal expenditures occur outside of the country .

You know, this is really ironic.  When I was a registered republican voter, the republican party was famous for 1) fiscal responsibility and 2) not starting wars.  The democrats were famous for 1) irresponsible spending and 2) starting wars.  Now the two have traded positions.  

Well, at least my politics have stayed consistent.  1) Responsible federal fiscal policies and 2) defend yourself, but don't start wars.

curly

[Westy]

"I make plenty of money and it is wrong of me to expect to amble up to the trough and eat for free. They took care of my apendicitis and I repaid the VA for the services rendered. Then went out and bought health insurance. I don't feel like I'm entitled to anything because I served for 6 years 22 years ago."


 
 AFAIK to get veterans benefits you have to retire after at least 20 years or have been disabled to some extent during your time on duty.  In other words you didn't have any veterans benefits to lose let alone experience a cut back on.

[Mini D]

Wow curly, I'm continuing to wonder what you just said has to do with you're original post.

A quick question for you (one you seem to be dodging):

Did you pay a higher percentage on your federal income tax than Bush did?

Baby steps here curly... you can do it.

MiniD

[storch]

Steve is correct, take as an example

A family that has a combined income of $70,000.00 in a stable work situation,  that is to say money is coming in regularly and is likely to continue to do so.

The liabilities are $130,000.00 in a mortgage
two car loans totalling $18,000.00
additionally there is $6000.00 in unsecured consumer debt.

Does this look like they are in bad shape?

Yet that is "a deficit" and there is nothing to fear.  the balance the budget troll is used shamelessly used by both parties to gain political points with us "the herd"

The US Gov't can operate well while carrying a "deficit" easier than you or I could.

There is no need to have a balanced budget.  Frankly that money we send to Washington needs to come back to us, moreso at times like these.

Er no Westy when I signed up even 6 years service granted you lifetime medical care at the VA.  GWB cut that back to what you are saying on Jan 1, 2003.  my appendix ruptured in Sept 2003.  prior to that I had never needed to see a Doctor.  Had I gone into the VA even once ever since my Honorable Discharge prior to Jan. 1, 2003 I would have those benefits for life, or if a liberal Dem. is elected I'm sure he will reverse the decision by GWB to suspend benefits to veterans that earn more than $25,000 annually.  that was an administration policy decision (an executive order) and can be reversed at any time.  not that it matters to me.

[Holden McGroin]

It is not a deficit, that is debt.  

The family would be in deficit if they spent more than 70K coming in that year, and their debt grew.

Incurring debt (deficit spending) is not bad, as long as you do not over do it and go into bankruptcy.