[Pail Ail (Banned)]

Again, shouldn't you be commending the GOP for doing that? They're essentially practicing democratic policies without leftist rhetoric. Why shouldn't you like it?

Oh that's right you're partisan and the left is always right/right is always wrong.

[Iamamartianchurch]

Originally Posted by Pail Ail

Hurr I dislike the GOP just as much as I dislike the Democrats.

Nice job exposing how extremely partisan you are after my first post.

lrneconomics ER guy. Tax increases have historically led to higher deficits/more debt, whilst the opposite can be said for spending cuts.

http://www.economics.harvard.edu/fac...ber_200 9.pdf

Hurr only lefties currr bout bein' part-ih-san.

<3

[Eric the Fish]

Yeah they increased the deficit tremendously, but who got the F@@@ing money? wasn't the middle class nor the poor. There's your difference bub. The ruling Republicans ( note I did not say conservatives) for the last 30 years have not given a rats a@@ about the common American.

[rnauman821]

Originally Posted by Pail Ail

Again, shouldn't you be commending the GOP for doing that? They're essentially practicing democratic policies without leftist rhetoric. Why shouldn't you like it?

Oh that's right you're partisan and the left is always right/right is always wrong.

Ohi kettle, I'm pot.

[Iamamartianchurch]

Originally Posted by Eric the Fish

Yeah they increased the deficit tremendously, but who got the F@@@ing money? wasn't the middle class nor the poor. There's your difference bub. The ruling Republicans ( note I did not say conservatives) for the last 30 years have not given a rats a@@ about the common American.

Why should the wealthy worry about the common folk? We are reckless self centered class who will destroy society if left unchecked. Of course they are going to horde what they can and seal themselves off from the lot of us. We outnumber them, when things go bad we blame them and send em all to the guillotine for our own failures.

[drgonzo]

Originally Posted by Eric the Fish

Yeah they increased the deficit tremendously, but who got the F@@@ing money? wasn't the middle class nor the poor. There's your difference bub. The ruling Republicans ( note I did not say conservatives) for the last 30 years have not given a rats a@@ about the common American.

Yeah just a tiny difference lost on too many people these days. A strong working class means a strong demand base (and therefore tax base), which weathers world events so, so much better than having money in the hands of a few who can move markets on whims.

[Not2FFU]

You're looking at the wrong side of the equation. The spending is what needs to be cut. Politicians can not be responsible with what we give them now so why trust them with more.

[AlphaNeo36]

Our deficit to GDP ratio during WWII was around 30%. In other words, our budget deficit would have to be north of $4T/yr to be equal. Let's not get too excited.

[drgonzo]

Originally Posted by licence_to_kill

actually we really don't even need to reduce the debt (we do need to reduce the deficit eventually), our growth will offset the true cost of it in time.

There is a lot of truth to this. The nation's "mortgage" right now is less than 1 year of the nation's "income."

Check your own (or ask your parents about their) mortgage and see how many years of income it represents.

[EpShot]

Originally Posted by Pail Ail

Again, shouldn't you be commending the GOP for doing that? They're essentially practicing democratic policies without leftist rhetoric. Why shouldn't you like it?

Oh that's right you're partisan and the left is always right/right is always wrong.

only if you are so daft you think "spend more" is an actual policy. The thing is left/liberal policies are not polar opposite of right/conservative policies. While many(not all) conservatives have the one line policy of "spend less" there is no comparable liberal policy of "spend more".

[StellarKnight]

Originally Posted by EpShot

While many(not all) conservatives have the one line policy of "spend less" there is no comparable liberal policy of "spend more".

Leaving aside the obvious hilarity concerning conservative association with the policy of "spend less," liberal policies don't explicitly dictate a "spend more" philosophy but they certainly state so by implication. Even more so as of late, because the general philosophy is generally one of "lets throw more money at [the problem] using the same mechanisms that are not currently producing the results we desire" rather than the "lets consider another avenue" approach.

[madgoat]

Originally Posted by StellarKnight

Leaving aside the obvious hilarity concerning conservative association with the policy of "spend less," liberal policies don't explicitly dictate a "spend more" philosophy but they certainly state so by implication. Even more so as of late, because the general philosophy is generally one of "lets throw more money at [the problem] using the same mechanisms that are not currently producing the results we desire" rather than the "lets consider another avenue" approach.

yup. In the liberal mind, its never a question of the quality of the program, its always the quantity of money.

[Pail Ail (Banned)]

Originally Posted by StellarKnight

Leaving aside the obvious hilarity concerning conservative association with the policy of "spend less," liberal policies don't explicitly dictate a "spend more" philosophy but they certainly state so by implication. Even more so as of late, because the general philosophy is generally one of "lets throw more money at [the problem] using the same mechanisms that are not currently producing the results we desire" rather than the "lets consider another avenue" approach.

Thank you. You're seriously one of the better posters here, and I hope you can actually influence public policy since you seem to be on that road

[EpShot]

Originally Posted by madgoat

yup. In the liberal mind, its never a question of the quality of the program, its always the quantity of money.

Complete bull**** and you know it, but if it makes you feel better to frame the people you don't like in such simplistic easy to demonize terms, fine.

Doesn't change the fact that many conservatives really do have the concept stuck in their head of spend less never mind the consequences, while i have yet to meet a liberal that actually thinks simply spending more is the solution.(although i'll admit that several want to spend many in way I 'personally' don't think are effective, but it has nothing to do with them thinking "throw money at the problem". Rather ironically it usually comes down to 'free-market' thinking.




ok, editors note, i'm actually drunk right now, i'll review this post tomorrow afternoon >_>

[Pail Ail (Banned)]

EpShot why do you continue to post in such a partisan matter? You're making an entirely semantics-based argument that has little substance. What have you proven? That conservatives act differently than their rhetoric, meanwhile liberals don't? Is it purposely ambiguous yet pitted against conservatism?

Meanwhile, what does conservatism have to do with one's economic philosophy? I know conservative keynesians and liberal monetarists...

[EpShot]

not all conservatives. just that there are a quite a few conservatives that really do have the mantra cut, cut, cut, and there is no comparable on the left, despite the claim of such. I've dealt with year of conservatives claiming that liberals really do want to just spend many, and its simply not true. quite frankly. its a retarded notion. While i can understand that some liberals want to spend money in... not very intelligent way, they do at the very least have some sort of concept behind the spending. its not "throw money at the problem" which i'm tired of hearing. the irony of which the greatest example is 'no child left behind'. but even that had a conservative concept(imho, money reward etc.and i'm not against those conservative concepts)

i'm don't love liberals, in the least, i would hope my previous posts allude to that. This was just one small concept that hit a nerve. Liberals are not the polar opposite of conservatives. As much as they are painted as such. (yes, I am more liberal than I am conservative, however in my experience both side s the me so..




editors not.. still drunk.

[Pail Ail (Banned)]

Okay sorry but the idea that there is no liberal equivalent of your caricature of cognitively dissonant conservatives is total bull****.

And no, money reward isn't a conservative concept. You must be really drunk or someone who has never read any conservative literature by, yano, conservatives.

[EpShot]

tell you what, find me the liberal comparative for cutting spending. I'll check it out in the morning.

[Spock]

Eliminate Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security (without eliminating the taxes).

That would balance the budget, just barely.

[MrsAndo]

Originally Posted by licence_to_kill

you could cut, like, EVERYTHING...i guess

well yeah in theory

but assuming draconian cuts are impractical

and, like, reducing the debt at the expense of having a government is probs not the sharpest idea the libertarians in congress have ever come up with

[Iamamartianchurch]

Any time you call out a liberal on something their response is, "Yeah well conservatives........"