Posted on 08/10/2005 11:15:11 AM PDT by SierraWasp
Aw hell Rem, you never let anyone get away with nothing around here.;-) Personally, I've never been a member of the "never a borrower or lender be" crowd. For me, a deficit about six percent gdp and a debt around 60 % shouldn't stand in the way of increasing real wages and wealth.
Yes, Huck, that table is tax receipts as a percentage of GDP. In dollars, the government is hauling in more than ever.
You and Congress are both having a high old time, aren't you? Tax cuts coupled with drunken spending sprees make for a grand old party (pun intended), and a whopping hangover.
If you are a Reaganite as you claim, you should be mortified by the present administration. Remember, Reagan vetoed a transportation bill in 1987 because there were 152 earmarks (special expenditures requested by individual congressmen). There are nearly 6,500 member-requested projects worth more than $24 billion in the transportation bill just signed off on by Bush (who apparently hasn't been told yet that he even has veto power).
You are incorrect. The last column on the right is % of GDP. The column labelled Total Receipts is just that: total receipts. Dollars. Go look again. They've gone down every year in dollars.
You aren't living up to your screen name. I should think someone who advocates verification would actually pay attention to data, and not just GOP spin.
At least you are honest about your advocacy of deficit spending. Most conservatives are in denial about it. They are not yet comfortable with their new found love of government debt.
All this dollars, gdp, employment, and wealth stuff sure is hard for a lot of people to follow. I got the energy to remember which is which, but having to keep explaining it to people over and over is making my head hurt.
Thank you, I do try to be.
One of these days, you've really got to put together an 'about' page so the rest of us could get a handle on where you're coming from. This thing you have on money lenders-- some people hate them on religious grounds, some because they're afraid of handling money, other's use credit cards and mortgages like everyone else but they don't think community groups should be allowed to.
'Just curious about where you are on this.
I have nothing against lending in and of itself. I have a home mortgage. But I am inclined against borrowing and do basically have a pay as you go mentality. The main thing I want to say on that, however, is that what a free person does with his own finances is not analogous to a federal government confiscating someone else's money and doing what THEY want with it. It's nowhere near apples to apples.
You want to provide the government with leverage in the form of the good old US taxpayer so that it can spend even more, grow the debt even bigger, and move even farther down the road without bothering to address some obvious budgetary problems on the horizon. I totally disagree with that mentality.
Do you remember the Contract with America? The Fiscal Responsibility Act? Balanced Budget Amendment? Just 10 years ago they were key GOP planks. Now the GOP is run by Keynesean deficit spenders, and the kool aid drinking grass roots appears to be along for the ride. Ross Perot brought the deficit issue to the forefront in 92, Gingrich picked it up, and the results were very positive. Far moreso than anything that GW has done. That's where I am coming from on it.
I've learned the hard way. Fiscal conservatives are considered dinosaurs. The chest-thumping "true conservatives" of the "new republican" party just can't be bothered with the silliness of budgets and deficits. After all, there's satanism in the Harry Potter books to be dealt with.
I hear ya. I believe it's the trappings of success. Bandwagoners who like the feel of winning. Hannity-types.
LOL! As if.
You weren't talking about "standing up" to anyone. You were assuming that because they're supposed to be working for you, they therefore actually are, and that you somehow have the power to make them do it if they're reluctant to. That's very naive wishful thinking. Feel free to indulge in it all you like, but don't expect anyone else to believe that you're "standing up" to the people in government by doing it.
You needn't bother going to all the trouble of telling me what I think. I can hear my thoughts any day of the week-- it's your thoughts that I'm interested in.
You oppose government borrowing-- soooo how's that? I mean, you want a zero deficit from now on? You want the national debt paid off, like, five years?
That's exactly it. The most important thing to these types is to make sure they vote for the guy who wins. It's not about making sure the guy they support wins; it's just about making sure the guy who wins has their support. They then get to delude themselves that they're "winners" because they got behind the winner.
It's like saying to a dog who's about to lie down, "Lie down! See? He does exactly what I tell him to."
What do you think of this: people have the power, and they give governments only the amount of power they see fit. Are we together so far?
.
We've got an $8 trillion dollar debt already. To say I oppose all gubmint borrowing is just retarded. We're already plenty in debt. That's the point. As to the other question, do I want balanced budgets? Yes. Used to be the GOP platform. That was before they got drunk with power. I suppose another 10 years we won't even recognize the GOP.
DEBT, DEFICIT, RECEIPTS, AND OUTLAYS (percent of GDP)
You're right, my bad. Good lord, our debt is 60% of GDP. That's ugly. But wait, you said the table on 250 had the real dollars you wanted. Let's go already. You said you wanted real dollars (which is funny cuz when GW started ringing up big deficits, all the GOP shills started saying "but you need to look at it as a % of GDP." Now that's not good either. That's spin, for ya.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.