Author Topic: Bush pushes for deficit reduction (Read 583 times)

Sandman · « **on:** August 17, 2002, 10:24:34 AM »

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&u=/ap/20020817/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_45

Didn't he have a $5.6 TRILLION surplus when he took over?

How many days left before this bellybutton is out of office?

Toad · « **Reply #1 on:** August 17, 2002, 10:28:34 AM »

How much has the entire 9/11 and afterward situation cost the Federal government? Any idea?

Kieran · « **Reply #2 on:** August 17, 2002, 10:30:18 AM »

Now Toad, don't go applying common sense here.

Sandman · « **Reply #3 on:** August 17, 2002, 10:37:09 AM »

Who knows... bail out of the airline industry... federal payment to survivors... this little skirmish in Afganistan... oh... and tax refunds.

yeah... it all adds up...

Of course... disclosure isn't one of the Bush administration's strong points.

Yeah... we're digging a nice hole and on top of that Bush wants to poke sticks in Hussein's face.

Wonder how much further our deficit will go for that....

Kieran · « **Reply #4 on:** August 17, 2002, 10:42:58 AM »

Quote

Who knows... bail out of the airline industry... federal payment to survivors... this little skirmish in Afganistan... oh... and tax refunds.

I assume you are against all these? I could understand a Leftie being against a tax cut, but under the circumstances I can't understand the others. Well, ok, there is that war thing too, but where does one draw the line and use force?

How would President Sandman have coped in similar circumstances?

Sandman · « **Reply #5 on:** August 17, 2002, 11:03:40 AM »

Didn't quite follow the logic of passing out federal $$$ to family survivors of the 911 attacks.

Granted... If there ever was a good case for government charity, that was it. Still... I don't care for it. Hell... I pay for life insurance, health insurance, auto insurance, dental insurance... Do they not do this in NYC?

I especially don't like the government easing the burden of insurance companies. They're in it for profit and the moment the hammer falls, they cry about money.

I also didn't see the point of the tax refund. I considered it a political ploy to gain public approval. Still... I'm hypocrite enough to spend it.

We don't know and I doubt we will know what the 911 attacks cost us, directly and indirectly. Like I said... disclosure isn't a big item on the Bush agenda.

Toad · « **Reply #6 on:** August 17, 2002, 11:18:38 AM »

Agree on the insurance companies totally. Their business is risk management; they're forever telling eveyone how good they are at it. Your kid gets a ticket... wham, risk management, his rates go up.

However, if THEY miscalculate, WE have to bail them out.. every time. Look at the Florida hurricanes. People in the New Mexican desert are still paying for that.

Tax Refund? My take on it is that it is MY MONEY... not theirs. That surplus... THAT'S OUR MONEY. Yeah, we need to have a little reserve. We did. After 9/11, we spent it all and more.

But you let a big pile of money just sit around in untroubled times and politicians will go into a feeding frenzy trying to find ways to spend it. Good spending, bad spending.. don't matter. Just SPEND!

So, quite obviously, NOW we need to raise taxes to cover the cost. The big pile is gone. The trick now will be to raise the taxes, pay down the debt and ONLY spend on things that REALLY NEED DOING. No more $2 million dollar grants to study the mating habits of the US citizen or whatever. No more pork fat... just the lean muscle.

Lastly, disclosure. I'd be interested to know which administrations out of the last 5 or 6 you consider to be "open" and "transparent". The Bush bunch is doing business in the traditional "Washington Way"; just like all the others before them.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #7 on:** August 17, 2002, 11:25:39 AM »

Well, one thing they could do is trim the fat, begin with over-paid Civilians working at the defense dept. Get a regular GI to do twice the work in half the time.

Maverick · « **Reply #8 on:** August 17, 2002, 12:41:43 PM »

If there had been a $trillion + surplus when Bush took over, why was there still a deficit when he took over????

Gadfly · « **Reply #9 on:** August 17, 2002, 01:23:26 PM »

Actually, the projections were wrong, that is all that changed.

Gadfly · « **Reply #10 on:** August 17, 2002, 01:25:20 PM »

And, I have seen nothing to indicate that revenues are down, though expenses associatated with 9-11-01 and the war have risen.

AKIron · « **Reply #11 on:** August 17, 2002, 01:32:11 PM »

Here's a chart of the Federal Budget and a link to the where I found it. No idea how credible this data is or the political leanings of the site.

Federal Budget

senna · « **Reply #12 on:** August 17, 2002, 02:14:07 PM »

"Department of Education". Well theres the problem right there.

Kieran · « **Reply #13 on:** August 17, 2002, 02:19:34 PM »

Damn right, too many teachers in this country.

Sikboy · « **Reply #14 on:** August 17, 2002, 02:25:51 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
Didn't quite follow the logic of passing out federal $$$ to family survivors of the 911 attacks.

I would agree with you except (and I'm going from memory here) didn't acceptance of the fedaral cash preclude family members from binging lawsuits against the Airlines? In that case this makes more sense if you ask me.

-Sikboy