aceofspadeshq at gee mail.com
CBD:
cbd.aoshq at gee mail.com
Buck:
buck.throckmorton at protonmail.com
joe mannix:
mannix2024 at proton.me
MisHum:
petmorons at gee mail.com
J.J. Sefton:
sefton at cutjibnewsletter.com
New GOP Congress Pretty Much Like The Old Democrat One When It Comes To Spending
Remember when Republicans were running in November and they said, "Vote for us and we'll extend liberal spending programs like CHIP and add hundreds of billion in debt!"?
Neither do I but that's what happened last night.The rare bipartisan bill, which passed 92-8, marks one of the biggest achievements yet from the newly GOP-controlled Congress. It will now head to President Obama, who has promised to sign the bill.A couple of more victories like this and we're in real trouble. Congress got away with adding to the debt by exempting the bill from the "pay-go" law which requires offsetting cuts when new spending is added. Some Republicans tried to add that provision back in, which would have basically killed the deal but enough Republicans do what they do best, vote with Democrats to spend more, and the amendment failed. It only got 42 votes in fact. How's that GOP majority working out for ya? I had a good two week run of not beating up on the GOP but it's over. Strangely enough, that run coincided with Congress being out of session on Easter/Passover recess. Huh. But now they are back. It was fun while it lasted. Oh, in case you're wondering Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and Rand Paul voted for the amendment that would have forced the bill to be fully paid for. Paul for some reason broke with the others and voted with the majority to pass the bill even though it adds to the deficit and debt. Related: Both the House and the Senate passed budget resolutions which claim to balance in 10 years but there were differences so now they will go to conference. It's all a sham though. The doc fix money isn't in either so "balance" is already total bull. But hey, the GOP is in charge so sit back and enjoy the show!
Obama praised the doc fix bill and said he "will be proud to sign it into law."
"It’s a milestone for physicians, and for the seniors and people with disabilities who rely on Medicare for their health care needs," he said in a statement.
“It’s another reminder of a new Republican Congress that’s back to work,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said in a statement.
Comments
(Jump to bottom of comments)Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at April 15, 2015 01:49 PM (kff5f)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at April 15, 2015 01:49 PM (kff5f)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at April 15, 2015 01:49 PM (kff5f)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at April 15, 2015 01:50 PM (kff5f)
Really, man, lay off the heavy espresso.
Posted by: Inspector Cussword at April 15, 2015 01:50 PM (S8V5R)
Posted by: Citizen X at April 15, 2015 01:50 PM (7ObY1)
Remember when Republicans were running in November and they said, "Vote for us and we'll extend liberal spending programs
----
Drew, you must have missed Thad Cochran's ads, because that is exactly what he ran on in the primary runoff, using RNC money.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at April 15, 2015 01:51 PM (YgotP)
Posted by: Marmo at April 15, 2015 01:51 PM (QW+AD)
Posted by: Citizen X at April 15, 2015 01:51 PM (7ObY1)
And that the trucons ruin everything by not supporting big spending R's.
Care to continue that convo with the rest of us unenlightened idiots?
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 01:52 PM (AkOaV)
#BangingThatPromQueen
Posted by: weft cut-loop at April 15, 2015 01:52 PM (P55y/)
When TFG is praising your proposed law, you're doing it wrong.
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at April 15, 2015 01:52 PM (kff5f)
Posted by: hello, it's Me Donna ....again at April 15, 2015 01:53 PM (Bn6aD)
We'll just print the money.
It's been done before, you know. But this time, we'll get it right.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at April 15, 2015 01:54 PM (659DL)
Serious question: How do you fix medicare / medicaid?
close to 50% of all healthcare spending in this country is government spending via those two programs.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 01:54 PM (AkOaV)
Posted by: RobertM at April 15, 2015 01:54 PM (H2FoK)
1) I'm liking Cruz's record more and more.
2) Marco Rubio is already dead to me.
3) Wasn't Paul's main selling point (I mean, besides MOAR WEED!) his Fiscal Conservatism?
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at April 15, 2015 01:54 PM (kff5f)
Posted by: Navycopjoe betting on Da Cubbies at April 15, 2015 01:54 PM (3sozU)
Posted by: wooga at April 15, 2015 01:54 PM (38Xg+)
Posted by: eleven at April 15, 2015 01:55 PM (IPzoI)
Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at April 15, 2015 01:55 PM (/kI1Q)
Posted by: People Corp at April 15, 2015 01:55 PM (TzeLs)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at April 15, 2015 01:54 PM (kff5f)
Yeah, I'm curious as to his explanation for this one.
Maybe because he's a doctor and didn't want to deal with the "Dr Paul only cares about rich people and rich patients, and wants poor children to die in the streets" ads that the dems and GOPe were working on.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 01:55 PM (AkOaV)
Posted by: eleven at April 15, 2015 01:55 PM (IPzoI)
Now that we all know what we hate, what do we like and why? Who do we like and why?
I'll go: I like Walker. Why? Because he stuck to his guns through one heck of a mess, when there were people camped out in the same building who would gleefully have murdered him. He didn't loss his calm or his balance and he won, he outlasted them and broke them.
Every maneuver his opponents tried - and they threw everything they had at him - he deflected and defeated.
That's why I like him.
Posted by: Mikey NTH - Internecine Squabbles Coming to the Outrage Outlet! at April 15, 2015 01:56 PM (hLRSq)
Here's the thing about math: it's racist, and always ends up with "women, minorities, and children hardest hit"
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 01:56 PM (AkOaV)
Since "nuke them from orbit" would go over like a lead balloon...
Start with nuking SSDI from orbit. That will fix a lot (not enough, but a lot) of the problem.
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at April 15, 2015 01:56 PM (kff5f)
But there is a chance here that a behind doors deal was made so that some of them could act like conservatives knowing that that amendment would get shot down.
Posted by: Denton Baxter at April 15, 2015 01:57 PM (wlDny)
Posted by: eleven at April 15, 2015 01:57 PM (IPzoI)
Posted by: eleven at April 15, 2015 01:57 PM (IPzoI)
Damn you math!!!11!!
Posted by: Navycopjoe betting on Da Cubbies at April 15, 2015 01:58 PM (3sozU)
Posted by: Denton Baxter at April 15, 2015 01:58 PM (wlDny)
Ya know, maybe the only "responsible" [yeah that] way left is to recognise this and game out where you want the world to fall apart first.
When I consider that, I'm almost at the point where I start thinking Obama's eff ups in the ME are in some way fortuitous. Almost.
Posted by: Warden Hazen at April 15, 2015 01:58 PM (3ZtZW)
Posted by: rickb223 at April 15, 2015 01:58 PM (v6tPi)
That's a damn good question. I'm not sure it is fixable, nor do I come close to having the knowledge to offer a suggestion.
But I do have a feeling that the problem Medicare was put in place to address was not solved by a huge government program.
Posted by: Marmo at April 15, 2015 01:58 PM (QW+AD)
Me too. But he was also the executive with a majority legislature, there was a lot of pissing and moaning but he had the votes (remember the flee baggers).
Posted by: JackStraw at April 15, 2015 01:59 PM (g1DWB)
Posted by: Bigby's Pinkyswear at April 15, 2015 01:59 PM (3ZtZW)
Those go without saying. Like cake girl, but with whipped cream on top.
Posted by: Mikey NTH - Internecine Squabbles Coming to the Outrage Outlet! at April 15, 2015 01:59 PM (hLRSq)
Posted by: Mikey NTH - Internecine Squabbles Coming to the Outrage Outlet! at April 15, 2015 02:00 PM (hLRSq)
I could readily, gladly support Scott Walker.
Unless Perry pulls some rabbit out of his had, I'm probably going to support Cruz in the primary.
Why? Because of things like this. I'd like it better if he'd won some while in the Senate, but with the GOPe he did as well as could be expected- stuck to his guns. He has had few, if any (I can't think of any off the top of my head) problematic votes.
He has been an immigration hawk (well, as close as the GOP ever gets), and is good on *both* social and fiscal issues.
And he drives the other side absolutely nuts, which is a nice bonus.
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at April 15, 2015 02:00 PM (kff5f)
Man has been promoted beyond his competency. Democracy is the god that failed - as the founders knew it would be.
The ax is at the roots. (Matt 3:10)
Posted by: another fred at April 15, 2015 02:00 PM (o2Z7Y)
Posted by: pookysgirl can almost walk at April 15, 2015 02:00 PM (MKXiS)
Posted by: Bigby's Pinkyswear at April 15, 2015 02:01 PM (3ZtZW)
No it's ok guys!
*giggle*
We used "dynamic scoring"
*tee hee*
and it all balances.
*guffaw*
In the out years.
*hahaha*
Posted by: The Fiscally Conservative GOP
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at April 15, 2015 02:01 PM (kdS6q)
He still could have folded under all of the screaming and he didn't. A lot of people would have melted at the first protest, let alone the weeks along festival of hatred that took place in the same building. I like that determination.
Posted by: Mikey NTH - Internecine Squabbles Coming to the Outrage Outlet! at April 15, 2015 02:01 PM (hLRSq)
Well, I just looked at a chart. It looks like SSDI is about 200 billion a year.
SS is about 1 trillion a year.
Medicaid / Medicare is over a trillion a year, although some of thats picked up by the states (for medicaid).
So, uh...
Even getting rid of SSDI all together is only a short term bandaid.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:02 PM (AkOaV)
screaming and he didn't. A lot of people would have melted at the first
protest, let alone the weeks along festival of hatred that took place
in the same building. I like that determination.
Posted by: Mikey NTH - Internecine Squabbles Coming to the Outrage Outlet! at April 15, 2015 02:01 PM (hLRSq)
He ain't seen nothing yet.
Posted by: The Nashunal MFM at April 15, 2015 02:03 PM (iVjJr)
I can help you with your medical costs if you will just send me your bank account and routing numbers. We here at the Bank have more money than we know what to do with and for only a 5% fee, we will pay all of your medical costs for life.
Crystlab Grup Mail
Posted by: Zephyer Springhill at April 15, 2015 02:04 PM (l+4pP)
Let me know if you need my help. I'll be over here in the corner with my 12-pack of Natty Light.
Posted by: Larry Reid, Ready to Party at April 15, 2015 02:04 PM (UlJ3l)
Posted by: Moderate Salami at April 15, 2015 02:04 PM (/Ho8c)
Posted by: tu3031 at April 15, 2015 02:04 PM (YFFpo)
Well my point is basically that it's not fixable.
When you socialize a LARGE part of an industry, then costs run out of control and quality suffers... I mean, there's no amount of tweaking that can fix socialism.
It's kind of our whole economic argument against socialism -- it's incredibly inefficient, and ends up doing the exact opposite of its so-called intended goals.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:05 PM (AkOaV)
I think some guy in Zimbabwe coined that phrase.
Posted by: Roy at April 15, 2015 02:05 PM (VndSC)
Posted by: Citizen X at April 15, 2015 02:05 PM (7ObY1)
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:02 PM (AkOaV)
It's what we call "a start."
Honestly, though, there is no political will to fix any of Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security. People don't care about Math and the Gods of the Copy Book Headings; they care about their "free" stuff.
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at April 15, 2015 02:06 PM (kff5f)
Posted by: Moderate Salami at April 15, 2015 02:04 PM (/Ho8c)
I like whipped cream on my pie.
Posted by: Mikey NTH - Internecine Squabbles Coming to the Outrage Outlet! at April 15, 2015 02:06 PM (hLRSq)
1. Get the economy going with a zero capital gains rate for productive investment (Screw you, Soros.), drill, baby drill, and a major new commitment to beefing up defense (caveat: No stupid shit).
2. Means test the big three entitlement programs and require co-pays for the medical stuff.
3. Do all the things we suggested about health insurance including tort reform, interstate competition, and vouchers.
4. Secure the borders (duh).
5. Actually do some of those innovation awards that McCain suggested back in '08 (one of his few geniunely great ideas). New battery technology, fusion power, nano medical devices, quantum computing, better anal bead technology. Rule: The thing has to work to get the prize. You don't get $500 million dollars to "work on it."
6. Education...en toto returns to the states. Period. Fin. No more. Let them compete.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at April 15, 2015 02:06 PM (659DL)
Posted by: mynewhandle
i find your lack of faith in the Farce....disturbing.
Posted by: mini-moo at April 15, 2015 02:06 PM (Spluw)
Posted by: Hillary at April 15, 2015 02:06 PM (VndSC)
Posted by: Math at April 15, 2015 02:06 PM (evdj2)
Sure he could have and as I said I like him. But he did have the votes and legislators who were as dug in as he was even if they weren't getting all the hate. It's a lot easier to stand strong when you are in the majority and he was despite what the msm said.
He does need to get his shit together on immigration but so far he is leading my pack.
Posted by: JackStraw at April 15, 2015 02:06 PM (g1DWB)
"Serious question: How do you fix medicare / medicaid?
close to 50% of all healthcare spending in this country is government spending via those two programs. "
Outside of a revolution or a mass pandemic (not counting these out now, just putting them aside as they're far too easy), you have to address the tort system as driven by the lawyers with their share in the awards.
Outlaw that. Reduce by federal law their top billable rates as being 12 times the poverty level for a single person, converted into hourly wages. For Fiscal year 2014, that would be $5.61/hr poverty line for 1 person given an 2080 hr work year. Twelve times that would be a top billing of $67.33/hour for each billable hour for each attorney, no matter the award, number of plaintiffs, or anything. They get paid piecework. The rest of the society gets to return to market forces.
They want to make more money? They should start a business, mine some minerals, or design a product and market it. Farm some potatoes, be productive - we'd have fewer lawsuits and more potatoes.
Posted by: Inspector Cussword at April 15, 2015 02:07 PM (S8V5R)
Posted by: Citizen X at April 15, 2015 02:07 PM (7ObY1)
Ha ha ha ha. I can't breathe . Haha ha. Ah ah ha ha
Posted by: Cruzinator at April 15, 2015 02:07 PM (P7ulB)
Posted by: Fritz at April 15, 2015 02:07 PM (UzPAd)
"The reason weve been not moving forward more quickly, is first of all, we had to get some of the holds lifted," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid* (D-Nev.) said on the floor before the votes
*sic -- but accurate
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at April 15, 2015 02:07 PM (kdS6q)
2008: 3.253 T
2009: 3.792 T
2010: 3.696 T
2011: 3.777 T
GOP WINS ELECTION
2012: 3.644 T
2013: 3.505 T
2014: 3.504 T
This is fiscal year so the spending is allocated the year ahead of time. Notice a pattern once the GOP won?
But yeah, no difference at all between the D and the R. Just keep voting 3rd party since it makes no difference at all.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:07 PM (0LHZx)
Homophobe!!!
Posted by: Teh Gheys at April 15, 2015 02:08 PM (xSCb6)
Posted by: Citizen X
That's a little weird, and probably illegal in most states.
Posted by: Moderate Salami at April 15, 2015 02:08 PM (/Ho8c)
I vote for BOOB PIE
Posted by: Roy at April 15, 2015 02:08 PM (VndSC)
Posted by: Roy at April 15, 2015 02:09 PM (VndSC)
I agree.
Which is what I was saying about Paul in the last thread.
I'd like to see more libertarians embraced by the party if only so that they can move the overton window a little on this issue.
Because math is a bitch, and unless we do something drastic, math will eventually make all of this debating academic.
Here's how I see it: The fed is already talking about inching the interest rates up. As it currently stands, with close to 0% interest rates on our t-bonds, social security, medicaid, medicare and interest on our debt (for all intents and purposes, what DC calls "mandatory spending") currently eats up close to every penny DC brings in.
Everything beyond that is borrowed.
What do we do when SS alone eats up all our tax receipts?
I mean, how long is this really sustainable?
Maybe the answer is indefinitely, I don't know. But math would seem to say at SOME point this becomes a huge issue. So why not try to head it off when we can still control the landing?
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:09 PM (AkOaV)
Posted by: rickb223 at April 15, 2015 02:09 PM (v6tPi)
OK, then I vote for PIE-COVERED BOOBS
Posted by: Citizen X at April 15, 2015 02:09 PM (7ObY1)
Posted by: Moderate Salami at April 15, 2015 02:10 PM (/Ho8c)
Posted by: Citizen X at April 15, 2015 02:10 PM (7ObY1)
Posted by: Citizen X at April 15, 2015 02:09 PM (7ObY1)
75 Second!
Posted by: Moderate Salami
These probably wouldn't be cherry, would they?
Posted by: mini-moo at April 15, 2015 02:10 PM (Spluw)
Posted by: Moderate Salami at April 15, 2015 02:11 PM (/Ho8c)
Posted by: Roy at April 15, 2015 02:11 PM (VndSC)
Posted by: Citizen X
Second!
Posted by: Moderate Salami
All in favor??
Posted by: rickb223 at April 15, 2015 02:11 PM (v6tPi)
Pretty much this.
That and idiot boomers have been told they "paid into this." so they think they deserve it (even though they frittered it away.)
Fact is there's no way to reform medicare or SS until it's too late and the checks *can't* go out.
Plus even though this supposedly ends the "doc fix" we all know that when the cuts actually do come, they'll delay them again and again...well again.
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) rogue bioethicst at April 15, 2015 02:11 PM (HDwDg)
Well, and Obamas stimulus wound down slightly.
But we're still talking about spending close to twice as much as we bring in. Even with our fiscal saviors, who promised to cut $100 billion dollars in real spending day 1 if we just gave the R's a majority in the house in 2010.
And I don't think any of us thought they meant from a baseline inflated by a trillion dollars with Obamas stimulus.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:11 PM (AkOaV)
Posted by: eleven at April 15, 2015 02:12 PM (IPzoI)
Posted by: Citizen X at April 15, 2015 02:12 PM (7ObY1)
Posted by: Buzzion at April 15, 2015 02:12 PM (z/Ubi)
-----------------------------
Having a Herb Alpert's Whipped Cream and Other Delights flashback.
Posted by: Roy at April 15, 2015 02:12 PM (VndSC)
Also, Moo, the R's won the house in 2010, not 2012.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:13 PM (AkOaV)
Posted by: X-Zibit at April 15, 2015 02:13 PM (38Xg+)
Well gosh Mumu, if your numbers are right, that means we'll get the spending down to manageable levels about the time Picard takes command of the USS Enterprise.
This assumes that your numbers are correct (which they are not).
Posted by: Burn the Witch at April 15, 2015 02:13 PM (xSCb6)
Maybe he better say a Hail Mary each time he catches a fish. nyuck nyuck. Because FREDO.
Posted by: Citizen X at April 15, 2015 02:13 PM (7ObY1)
Oh... wait... I can't quote that, its a sexist document according to the Dept. of Defense...
Posted by: BB Wolf, Redshirt at April 15, 2015 02:14 PM (qh617)
Yeah, wage controls usually don't work out too well.
Also, while tort reform could shave a few dollars off, it is no silver bullet.
Most spending is driven by government.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:14 PM (AkOaV)
Posted by: Citizen X
Frank! Git over here! Show 'em yer berries.
Posted by: rickb223 at April 15, 2015 02:14 PM (v6tPi)
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:09 PM (AkOaV)
This leads nicely to my favorite question ever to ask liberals:
If deficit and debt don't matter, as you constantly remind me they don't, why do we pay taxes?
Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 02:14 PM (fwARV)
Posted by: bosk at April 15, 2015 02:14 PM (n2K+4)
Please tell me you're kidding.
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at April 15, 2015 02:15 PM (kff5f)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at April 15, 2015 02:16 PM (kff5f)
But we're still talking about spending close to twice as much as we bring in. Even with our fiscal saviors, who promised to cut $100 billion dollars in real spending day 1 if we just gave the R's a majority in the house in 2010.
And I don't think any of us thought they meant from a baseline inflated by a trillion dollars with Obamas stimulus.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:11 PM (AkOaV)
_____________
The point is, GOP wins, spending decreases, if even slightly. Democrats control things, spending increase by a lot.
Would I like spending to be cut by 30% tomorrow? Fuck yeah. But that's not realistic. Our realistic options are a small cut or a small increase with the GOP or a huge increase with the Dems running things.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:16 PM (0LHZx)
I left some extra profanity on the sideboard next to the whipped cream.
Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at April 15, 2015 02:17 PM (/kI1Q)
Look, you might only be able to afford a condom machine sex novelty with your check, but By God, we'll make sure we keep cutting checks no matter what.
Posted by: The Fed, Treasury at April 15, 2015 02:17 PM (xSCb6)
Whining about truecons and unicorns is far easier.
Posted by: mini-moo at April 15, 2015 02:17 PM (Spluw)
Posted by: Mx Mxx Mxx at April 15, 2015 02:17 PM (JdEZJ)
Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 02:14 PM (fwARV)
They seem to only matter when it's the right's oxen being gored.
(For that matter, I've long held there can be no sacred cows, so gore my ox as well.)
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) rogue bioethicst at April 15, 2015 02:17 PM (HDwDg)
Posted by: wooga at April 15, 2015 02:17 PM (38Xg+)
They are now in the "Lets show 'em we can govern" mode.
They have also completly inverted the treaty clause of the constitution.
They have been a complete disaster.
Posted by: Kreplach at April 15, 2015 02:18 PM (D9OaR)
Please tell me you're kidding.
You missed the school bus and got in late this morning. Nope. Not kidding.
Posted by: rickb223 at April 15, 2015 02:18 PM (v6tPi)
Romney/Ryan had medicare reform as a centerpiece of their campaign last cycle. They had what amounted to a voucher type plan that seemed to have some merit as at least a change in direction and a place to start.
They got slammed by everyone. Liberals, of course hated it because there was math involved and throwing granny off a cliff and Republicans hated it cause.
Posted by: JackStraw at April 15, 2015 02:18 PM (g1DWB)
Push Granny off the cliff, of course. Or have her take the pain pill rather than get the new hip, as Ear Leader put it. And that's what will happen. Anybody who was around for the AIDS outbreak in the early 80s with tons of visibly sick people walking around and tons more dying every day has a kind of handle on what it will look like.
Posted by: Bigby's Pinkyswear at April 15, 2015 02:18 PM (3ZtZW)
_________
And we're not spending twice as much as we bring in. Nit even close. The deficit last year was 483 billion on revenue of 3T.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:18 PM (0LHZx)
Posted by: DangerGirl at April 15, 2015 02:18 PM (U7cLk)
Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 02:14 PM (fwARV)
Because their perverted, warped view of Keynesianism (which in and of itself is a perverted, warped view of free markets) doesn't have an answer for that one.
I asked it in college in an economics class. The professor had no answer. The rest of the class noticed he couldn't answer it, so I felt there was some hope for them.
I basically said, "well if GDP is driven by consumer spending, government spending, and investments, and government spending is the same as consumer spending and deficits are good for economic growth... wouldnt it make the most sense just to abolish the income tax and let consumers spend more money and boost aggregate demand like crazy, while ALSO boosting government deficit spending to cover governments' expenses? That would lead to a huge economic boom, right?!"
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:18 PM (AkOaV)
That's a pretty cool gig.
He says Sinise is the nicest guy in Hollyweird and it's a lot of fun playing in his band.
Posted by: Citizen X at April 15, 2015 02:18 PM (7ObY1)
Is this news to anyone else? Not the extra profanity thing, the Dept. Defense calling the Declaration of Independence "sexist" thing.
Because... yeah, assume ALL the profanity here. (I'd do a real PLR, but I'm about to head into a meeting in the next 10 minutes, and I don't want to just leave it hanging).
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at April 15, 2015 02:18 PM (kff5f)
BRAT!
Posted by: Sharkman at April 15, 2015 02:18 PM (xErAG)
Posted by: DCPensFan at April 15, 2015 02:19 PM (ma/2m)
Posted by: eman at April 15, 2015 02:19 PM (MQEz6)
---
He's my bitch.
Posted by: McConnell at April 15, 2015 02:19 PM (9BRsg)
I remember that, because I remember ace going "no one here actually knows what the voucher value is!"
And I responded "it's equal to the cost of the 2nd cheapest plan in your defined area."
Granted, that's far to complex for LIVs.
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) rogue bioethicst at April 15, 2015 02:19 PM (HDwDg)
Well, and Obamas stimulus wound down slightly.
But we're still talking about spending close to twice as much as we bring in. Even with our fiscal saviors, who promised to cut $100 billion dollars in real spending day 1 if we just gave the R's a majority in the house in 2010.
And I don't think any of us thought they meant from a baseline inflated by a trillion dollars with Obamas stimulus.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:11 PM (AkOaV)
And don't forget where those supposed spending decreases are happening. Hint its not where we want them and the democrats don't. A lot is probably from taking it out of the pockets of our soldiers which the amoral shit head moo moo loves to do. And oh yeah don't forget the little trick Obama did of putting the Iraq war in the budget so when it ended it would look like he reduced spending.
Posted by: Buzzion at April 15, 2015 02:20 PM (z/Ubi)
Somebody has to pay into Social Security.
Posted by: Larry Kudlow's green shoots at April 15, 2015 02:20 PM (W5DcG)
Oh, because its passing the Doc Fix, something that has needed to be done since the law changed in 97?
So...we shouldn't pay Doctors what we agreed to pay them? or, no, wait, the GOP shouldn't have passed it because we now finally have the popular will and the voted to overturn Medicare/Medicaid. I get it now.
Oh and I loved the evidence you gave for saying the budget resolutions are a "sham". Most bills go to conference, the Senate just doesn't take the House Bill and rubber stamp it.
Posted by: Stone at April 15, 2015 02:20 PM (qRV1m)
The numbers that say there is a $485 billion deficit, in the same year they go $1.1 TRILLION further into debt...
In the real non government world.. that is called cooking the books...
Posted by: BB Wolf, Redshirt at April 15, 2015 02:21 PM (qh617)
ROTFLMAO at that one.
Posted by: Y-not at April 15, 2015 02:22 PM (9BRsg)
The ObamaCare Law is laughing at you.
Posted by: Guy Who Doesn't Give a Shit at April 15, 2015 02:22 PM (7ObY1)
You're that smartass in the back of the room aren't you.
Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That at April 15, 2015 02:22 PM (zRby/)
There is so much fail there, I don't even know where to start.
Go get your shinebox.
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at April 15, 2015 02:22 PM (kff5f)
Treasurydirect.gov > Government Tab > Historical Debt Outstanding > 2000-2014
Aaaaaand STFU.
FYI, that link also puts the Clinton surplus lie to rest as well.
Posted by: The Fed, Treasury at April 15, 2015 02:22 PM (xSCb6)
Posted by: Hank at April 15, 2015 02:22 PM (U/UEh)
Even if I am willing to concede the extremely suspect math at play here, just exactly how long do you think we can add a trillion in debt every two years?
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at April 15, 2015 02:22 PM (659DL)
You're completely unaware what the "doc fix" is aren't you?
Strictly speaking, letting the SGR go into effect would be paying the docs what we agreed to. We keep changing it because the AMA and AARP are powerful lobbying groups.
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) rogue bioethicst at April 15, 2015 02:23 PM (HDwDg)
The pols know this, so the can gets kicked.
Their goal is to be safely long dead before we run out of road.
Posted by: eman at April 15, 2015 02:24 PM (MQEz6)
Who saw that coming?
Posted by: Random guy at April 15, 2015 02:24 PM (yxw0r)
"Paul for some reason broke with the others and voted with the majority to pass
the bill even though it adds to the deficit and debt."
Daddy is a doctor. Just sayin'.
Posted by: Speller at April 15, 2015 02:24 PM (PsEVn)
Posted by: Sabrina R. Erdely, journalista at April 15, 2015 02:24 PM (LISuA)
I love this argument.
Okay, so is the payroll tax general revenue, or is it dedicated to social security and those "who paid in to it"?
Because DC loves to count it as general revenue, but then tell us SS doesn't drive deficits since it's all paid for with FICA taxes that we all "paid in to"
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:24 PM (AkOaV)
Even if I am willing to concede the extremely suspect math at play here, just exactly how long do you think we can add a trillion in debt every two years?
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at April 15, 2015 02:22 PM (659DL)
Yet somehow... magically... we went $1.1 Trillion further into debt...
I guess Math is hard...
Posted by: BB Wolf, Redshirt at April 15, 2015 02:24 PM (qh617)
*Raises hand*
And next will likely be laws banning incest.
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at April 15, 2015 02:24 PM (kff5f)
Posted by: Speller at April 15, 2015 02:24 PM (PsEVn)
Rand is a doctor, too.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:24 PM (AkOaV)
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at April 15, 2015 02:25 PM (DXzRD)
The numbers that say there is a $485 billion deficit, in the same year they go $1.1 TRILLION further into debt...
In the real non government world.. that is called cooking the books...
Posted by: BB Wolf, Redshirt at April 15, 2015 02:21 PM (qh617)
________
And the unskewed polls show Romney will win 52 states.
Just stop. Please.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:25 PM (0LHZx)
Who do you like? I mean who do you like out of the people who have actually volunteered to run? Because every candidate will have something to fault them for and you are limited* to those who actually have decided to throw their hat into the ring.
*You can write in Mickey Mouse, for whatever that is worth.
Posted by: Mikey NTH - Internecine Squabbles Coming to the Outrage Outlet! at April 15, 2015 02:25 PM (hLRSq)
Posted by: another fred at April 15, 2015 02:25 PM (o2Z7Y)
"I'll go: I like Walker. Why? Because he stuck to his guns through
one heck of a mess, when there were people camped out in the same
building who would gleefully have murdered him. He didn't loss his calm
or his balance and he won, he outlasted them and broke them.
"
Those are great reasons to like him. But as an added bonus I will add my liberal family members that live in Wisconsin have a white-hot hatred of him and can't mention his name without going into a liberal hate rant. So if I didn't know anything about him I would take that as an indicator he is doing a good job.
Posted by: George Orwell de Leon at April 15, 2015 02:25 PM (1BQGO)
Posted by: Jay Guevara at April 15, 2015 02:26 PM (oKE6c)
Yes, guilty as charged.
I was "that guy."
Mostly kept quite except when I had a brilliant thought to smack down my liberal professors with.
Then I'd shut up again.
Don't want to make too many waves.
But watching my friends getting indoctrinated (they didnt know any better) by bullshit was infuriating.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:26 PM (AkOaV)
And the unskewed polls show Romney will win 52 states.
Just stop. Please.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:25 PM (0LHZx)
Yeah... don't want to argue those facts... the ones that come straight from the damn government itself...
continue on dolt...
there are none so blind, as he who will not see... and none so dumb, as he who will not THINK...
Posted by: BB Wolf, Redshirt at April 15, 2015 02:26 PM (qh617)
Posted by: MTF at April 15, 2015 02:27 PM (LISuA)
That is all I had to read.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at April 15, 2015 02:27 PM (oKE6c)
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at April 15, 2015 02:22 PM (659DL)
_________
The numbers don't matter as much as the ratios. And deficit to GDP ratio is actually quite low today. And what is also important is the trend. The deficit has been falling both as a raw number and as a % of GDP for the last 4 or 5 years.
The sky isn't falling. It just isn't.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:27 PM (0LHZx)
Just stop. Please.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:25 PM (0LHZx)
*******
Indisputable facts are very inconvenient to every argument I have ever seen you attempt here, dipshit.
Posted by: ManWithNoParty, unperson from Free Market Jesus Paradise at April 15, 2015 02:27 PM (3F6F8)
Who saw that coming?
Posted by: Random guy at April 15, 2015 02:24 PM (yxw0r)
Can't.
The government can't tell me who I can and cannot marry.
This has been asked and answered.
Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 02:27 PM (fwARV)
Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at April 15, 2015 02:28 PM (/kI1Q)
If you want to abolish Medicare, then be straight up and say it. Tell all those folk who paid Medicare taxes for all those years that you don't believe in honoring commitments and that they are on their own in their last years, because you are just going to take all that money and walk away.
Or, if you want to honor that commitment, then you have to pay for it. This idea that you can *force* doctors to work for less than it costs them to do the work isn't really going to fly for long.
In my city, which is a regional health magnet, out of the hundreds of private physicians in the area only *two* took Medicare patients. This year, there are none. If you are a Medicare patient, you have to go to the clinic at the state hospital in the area -- that only accepts Medicare patients because it gets extra funds to do that. In the up coming years, as Obamacare tightens things even more, even fewer physicians will accept Medicare patients. And if you want to make sure that this transition to complete lack of care is accomplished, then don't do the doc fix. That will kill Medicare, pure and simple.
If "libertarianism" means taking somebody who's paid Medicare taxes all their lives and then, when they get old flipping them a nickel and saying "Here, old man, go buy yourself a new knee with this." Then it doesn't really stand for much, does it? Other than, I guess, validating Alan Greyson's claim that we really do just want sick people to die quickly.
Posted by: billo at April 15, 2015 02:28 PM (tBgLX)
Okay, we'll use your numbers!
But only if you concede that payroll deductions are general revenue, counted as general revenue (for deficit purposes), and are in no way a program people "pay in to" to fund their social security, which is obviously just wealth transferring welfare if the payroll taxes that get deducted from my check every week are just general revenue and not in a "lockbox" somewhere.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:28 PM (AkOaV)
Posted by: Moderate Salami at April 15, 2015 02:28 PM (/Ho8c)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:29 PM (0LHZx)
141 Posted by: eman at April 15, 2015 02:19 PM (MQEz6)
Who do you like? I mean who do you like out of the people who have actually volunteered to run? Because every candidate will have something to fault them for and you are limited* to those who actually have decided to throw their hat into the ring.
*You can write in Mickey Mouse, for whatever that is worth.
Posted by: Mikey NTH - Internecine Squabbles Coming to the Outrage Outlet! at April 15, 2015 02:25 PM (hLRSq)
I like Cruz because he is most similar to my ideal choice.
The others range from acceptable to hell no.
Posted by: eman at April 15, 2015 02:29 PM (MQEz6)
Just stop. Please.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:25 PM (0LHZx)***
No one's talking about polls here, just your incorrect data and shitty math.
Focus for once in your miserable, lying life.
Posted by: The Fed, Treasury at April 15, 2015 02:29 PM (xSCb6)
Posted by: Hank at April 15, 2015 02:29 PM (U/UEh)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at April 15, 2015 02:30 PM (xSCb6)
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:28 PM (AkOaV)
______
Payroll taxes are taxes just like other taxes. Only fools think otherwise, like there's a Social Security account with a balance in it for them. So yes I very much concede your point since I never argued otherwise.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:30 PM (0LHZx)
Explain the difference between the additional debt of half a trillion dollars alongside a simultaneous addition of 1.1 trillion dollars to the deficit in FY14
Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 02:31 PM (fwARV)
I like boobs better than pie.
Posted by: Moderate Salami at April 15, 2015 02:04 PM (/Ho8c)
You know the definition of an Irish queer, right?
Likes women more than liqueur.
Posted by: Nip Sip at April 15, 2015 02:31 PM (0FSuD)
Posted by: eleven at April 15, 2015 02:31 PM (IPzoI)
It'll save money and rebuild the great cities like Detroit
Posted by: Navycopjoe betting on Da Cubbies at April 15, 2015 02:31 PM (3sozU)
Posted by: Libs disguised as the GOP at April 15, 2015 02:31 PM (TBp4e)
I read a report couple days ago from CBO how the deficit increased almost that much in just the first 6 months of 2014 (actual hard numbers. So the numbers the administration they have been putting out are obviously being twisted using Obama-math and we are still at or near 1 trillion per year deficits. Why am I not surprised?
Posted by: George Orwell de Leon at April 15, 2015 02:32 PM (1BQGO)
These aren't "my numbers". They are THE numbers. If your argument is based on some sort of conspiracy theory about fake govt numbers, then there's no point in having a debate. There's nobody credible out there who thinks the numbers are fake. Notice I said credible, ie Ron Paul doesn't count.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:32 PM (0LHZx)
bonus I will add my liberal family members that live in Wisconsin have a
white-hot hatred of him and can't mention his name without going into a
liberal hate rant. So if I didn't know anything about him I would take
that as an indicator he is doing a good job.
Posted by: George Orwell de Leon at April 15, 2015 02:25 PM (1BQGO)
I often use a similar shorthand criterion: who hates the guy, and why? I don't even bother to read the voter's guide here in CA, I just look at the endorsement. Got an endorsement from the "Working Mothers for Peace, Social Justice, Bread, and Equality?" Keep moving, Bucky.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at April 15, 2015 02:32 PM (oKE6c)
Uh... we've all paid uncountable thousands and thousands of dollars in payroll and income taxes over our lives.
What you're telling me is that I have to continue paying for grandpa's knee replacement out of my pay check while knowing that I will never get some dupe to pay for my knee replacement when I get old.
So I have to take food off my table to pay for my neighbors viagra because he lived to be 65 years old.
And no, its not fair to tell people who planned their lives around medicaid and social security that they can't get it.
But do you know what else is not fair? Telling me I have to keep paying in to a system that clearly will be bankrupt and gone by the time I'm ready to retire. In the name of "fairness."
I didn't vote for that.
I mean, there's no solution to this that doesnt fuck over one or more groups really badly. Maybe there's a compromise in here, but only if everyone agrees to premise of winding down entitlements.
Until then, I don't know what to tell you other than "fuck you, I don't care if you've paid taxes your whole life. the government wasted that money. It's gone. The only way you get your free knee replacement is for it to come out of my paycheck, and I've got mouths to feed and bills to pay here."
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:32 PM (AkOaV)
Posted by: Just the Punchline at April 15, 2015 02:32 PM (evdj2)
Posted by: eman at April 15, 2015 02:32 PM (MQEz6)
I'm sorry you got ripped off by a bunch of old people, but you had decades to do something about it.
Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at April 15, 2015 02:32 PM (/kI1Q)
Dude, you're so far over Mumu's head right now, I'm gonna bank on him completely ignoring you like he's ignoring everyone else.
Posted by: Burn the Witch at April 15, 2015 02:32 PM (xSCb6)
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at April 15, 2015 02:24 PM (kff5f)
And then those pesky patriarchal "age of consent" laws.
Who are we to tell someone whom they can love? The heart wants what the heart wants.
Posted by: Random guy at April 15, 2015 02:33 PM (yxw0r)
So there is a bit of a tradeoff here sometimes in voting against then for something, if you voted to kill it based on principle in the amendment, but voted overall for it if you know it will pass anyway to avoid the "he voted for shutdown" rhetoric, is it good or bad or just pragmatic?
Can you be pragmatic and principled without being a hypocrite? After all you have to get elected to do something. Unfortunately the best answer appears to be a deceiver like obama and just never take a stand on anything.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 15, 2015 02:33 PM (ODxAs)
Bet he got his car at a E-1 and up lot too
Posted by: Navycopjoe betting on Da Cubbies at April 15, 2015 02:33 PM (3sozU)
If deficit and debt don't matter, as you constantly remind me they don't, why do we pay taxes?
Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 02:14 PM (fwARV)
For fairness. And to spread the wealth around a little bit.
Posted by: Bandersnatch at April 15, 2015 02:33 PM (JtwS4)
Posted by: Mr Wizard at April 15, 2015 02:34 PM (eOpVe)
Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 02:31 PM (fwARV)
____________
There is no such thing as an addition to the deficit. The deficit is a one time thing. In 2014 the deficit was 483B, ie the govt spent 483B more than the revenue it took in. End of story.
There's no conspiracy.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:34 PM (0LHZx)
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:32 PM (AkOaV)
Cut. Jib. Newsletter.
Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 02:34 PM (fwARV)
------
Generation X will bear the brunt of the correction. We don't have the votes to stop it. The boomers will never vote away SS/Medicare that they feel they are entitled to. And the millenials are not going to pay for Gen Xrs and continue to pay into a system that they will not reap benefits out of.
But that's ok - we Gen Xrs have never counted on SS even though we will have paid for it most of our working lives.
Posted by: SH at April 15, 2015 02:35 PM (gmeXX)
If you think DC accounting is honest, then you're an idiot. Call it a conspiracy or whatever, but I mean...
They don't use GAAP, they make up their own system.
Which is how they double count payroll deductions as both tax receipts (income), and as assets (intra government bonds for ssa), but not as expenses anywhere, since SS is considered "off budget."
So if we use official govt numbers, then lets call the payroll tax what it is -- another income tax. That goes right in to the general account. If that's your argument, then fine, I'll use your numbers.
But you don't get to do it both ways.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:35 PM (AkOaV)
Posted by: eleven at April 15, 2015 02:35 PM (IPzoI)
Posted by: eman at April 15, 2015 02:32 PM (MQEz6)
__________
Try again. I said when the GOP is in power, spending drops. When Dems are in power, spending increases. It's not that hard to follow along. Really.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:35 PM (0LHZx)
Posted by: eman at April 15, 2015 02:35 PM (MQEz6)
Even if he's got serious coinage in the bank, and you're a "single mother" pulling down minimum wage.
Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at April 15, 2015 02:35 PM (/kI1Q)
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 15, 2015 02:35 PM (ODxAs)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:32 PM (0LHZx)"***
No, you ignorant, lying troll. I just posted the actual government numbers.
The numbers you posted were yours as they came strictly from your lower colon.
Posted by: Burn the Witch at April 15, 2015 02:35 PM (xSCb6)
https://youtu.be/qD03TYxWaRw
That's music you won't like, by the way.
That seclusive billionaire gig is a nice idea, if you can get it. Just shake your head and watch it all be torn down, again and again.
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at April 15, 2015 02:36 PM (bLnSU)
You believed them didn't you.
Reality check, what do politicians and the truth have in common?
As little as possible.
/rimshot
Thank you, don't forget to tip the waitress, I'll be here all week.
Posted by: Gmac- Pulling in feelers in preperation... at April 15, 2015 02:36 PM (4CRfK)
There's no conspiracy.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:34 PM (0LHZx)
And yet, the total red ink accumulated by the government, in sum, increased by 1.1 trillion over the same time period.
Now to my original question.
If that $483b doesn't matter, why do we pay taxes?
Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 02:36 PM (fwARV)
Posted by: Kensington (@NYKensington) at April 15, 2015 02:37 PM (7Kbxu)
_________
WTF are you talking about? SS and Medicare are included in the numbers I posted. There's no double counting of anything.
Jesus dude, you need to stop reading ZeroHedge and other such websites. They're poisoning your mind.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:37 PM (0LHZx)
Posted by: Citizen X at April 15, 2015 02:37 PM (7ObY1)
Posted by: Bigby's Pinkyswear at April 15, 2015 02:37 PM (3ZtZW)
-----
You were sold a lie your entire life. Its what makes this so hard. It is why I say start the means testing. The sooner we do that the sooner we are to killing this welfare program - or at least we can stop the lying and recognize it as just another welfare program.
Posted by: SH at April 15, 2015 02:37 PM (gmeXX)
You daid spending dropped and deficit ratio to GMP dropped. GMP is directly related to revenue, so in effect you said the GOP reduced deficits.
Posted by: eman at April 15, 2015 02:37 PM (MQEz6)
Posted by: Random guy at April 15, 2015 02:33 PM (yxw0r)
You said it.
Posted by: NAMBLA Local 666 at April 15, 2015 02:38 PM (oKE6c)
Posted by: The Great Inevitable at April 15, 2015 02:38 PM (S8aM1)
Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 02:36 PM (fwARV)
_______
1. When did I say deficits don't matter?
2. Your second question makes zero sense.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:38 PM (0LHZx)
Posted by: the invisible hand at April 15, 2015 02:38 PM (evdj2)
Posted by: eman at April 15, 2015 02:37 PM (MQEz6)
_____
GMP? You mean GDP?
Yes the GOP reduced deficits, both in raw tems and as a % of GDP.
Why is this so hard to understand?
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:39 PM (0LHZx)
"I paid into the ponzi scheme my whole life, so damn it, you must as well" !
Posted by: ScoggDog at April 15, 2015 02:39 PM (PXKj8)
Sure there is, vouchers work. The free market works. It works for schools it will work for health care.
Posted by: JackStraw at April 15, 2015 02:39 PM (g1DWB)
What's amazing is your ability to reach new levels of ignorance and stupidity with each passing day.
not only have your numbers been proven wrong, but you don't even know what deficit even means.
Is it possible to ban someone for hopeless ignorance?
Posted by: Burn the Witch at April 15, 2015 02:40 PM (xSCb6)
My second question is the only question that really matters.
If deficit and debt matter, we need to cut them. Period. Today, that means 'drastically, by drastic measures.'
If they don't matter, then we can continue deficit spending indefinitely, debt is unimportant and the government can get it's fucking hands out of my wallet.
They are mutually exclusive and we have to (as a nation) pick one.
I chose option 1, as painful as it is.
You seem to be under the impression that there is no choice required.
Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 02:40 PM (fwARV)
"What difference...at this point, what difference does it make?"
Posted by: Mr Wizard at April 15, 2015 02:34 PM (eOpVe)
-----------------------------------
Fail.
Trust me,, I know......
Posted by: Hillary Clinton at April 15, 2015 02:40 PM (HSmrB)
Posted by: GOP Whipping Boy at April 15, 2015 02:40 PM (YX5pz)
There's nothing to "take". it's been spent. They haven't been building HSAs. They've been paying into a government running an entitlement program. One that is bleeding money."Or, if you want to honor that commitment, then you have to pay for it. This idea that you can *force* doctors to work for less than it costs them to do the work isn't really going to fly for long."
The POS is dedicated to screwing over medical providers. It's the possible cost control; denying adequate payment."Other than, I guess, validating Alan Greyson's claim that we really do just want sick people to die quickly.
Posted by: billo"
You're quoting an asshole that demands that we spend our and other peoples money so as to further delay admitting that this POS is unsustainable.
Posted by: mini-moo at April 15, 2015 02:40 PM (Spluw)
Knowing that we have that famous rich piece worker, Moo Moo, to instruct us on how government works.
Think of all the thousands of dollars of his time we are taking away from his plumbing business.
What a guy.
Posted by: Nip Sip at April 15, 2015 02:40 PM (0FSuD)
Posted by: Fozzie Bear at April 15, 2015 02:40 PM (/kI1Q)
These programs are political heroin.
The first shot is free (the program starts small).
One day you wake up and you are an addict ( the program is huge).
There are few pleasant options at this point.
Posted by: eman at April 15, 2015 02:41 PM (MQEz6)
Exactly!
Posted by: The cholesterol in your aorta at April 15, 2015 02:41 PM (S8aM1)
Posted by: that guy that always thinks we're boned at April 15, 2015 02:41 PM (evdj2)
That would buy a LOT of Celicas.
Posted by: @JohnTant at April 15, 2015 02:41 PM (tVWQB)
2014: 483
2013: 690
2012: 1120
2011: 1362
2012-2104 were with a GOP house. 2011 was spending allocated in 2010 when Dems still ran the house.
So, please explain to me how a GOP house did not reduce deficits.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:41 PM (0LHZx)
-
Say what you will about Dr. Frankenstein, he knew how to make friends.
Posted by: The Great White Snark at April 15, 2015 02:41 PM (XUKZU)
Posted by: Citizen X at April 15, 2015 02:41 PM (7ObY1)
Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 02:42 PM (fwARV)
Posted by: Just the Punchline at April 15, 2015 02:43 PM (evdj2)
----
No there are not. And none will be implemented until there is nothing left to do.
I fully expect to never receive a dime of SS or Medicare even after a lifetime of paying into the system. Is that fair - No (I of course could also be wrong).
But would I be willing to make that sacrifice if it meant abolishing those programs. Absolutely.
Posted by: SH at April 15, 2015 02:43 PM (gmeXX)
Posted by: flounder at April 15, 2015 02:43 PM (ecDRv)
Think of all the thousands of dollars of his time we are taking away from his plumbing business."***
Don't forget about the family he lies about having.
Guy's a troll and a serial liar.
Posted by: Burn the Witch at April 15, 2015 02:43 PM (xSCb6)
Yeah, typos.
So, the GOP did something that you say doesn't matter.
Posted by: eman at April 15, 2015 02:43 PM (MQEz6)
Posted by: Bandersnatch at April 15, 2015 02:44 PM (JtwS4)
Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 02:44 PM (fwARV)
Agree with the need to cut them, but disagree with doing so drastically. As a matter of principle, I think it's best to make economic changes slowly so that the economy can adjust. Drastic, sudden changes cause serious disruption and dislocations in the economy as everyone tries to figure out WTF is going on, and what's going to happen next.
That's kind of the story of Obolacare; no one knows what's going to happen, so everyone hunkers down to wait and see. Upshot: shitty economy.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at April 15, 2015 02:45 PM (oKE6c)
-----
Agree the GOP is better than the Dems, but they are just driving more slowly to the cliff - sooner or later we are going over.
I'm more optimistic than others - but the GOP sure does disappoint.
Posted by: SH at April 15, 2015 02:45 PM (gmeXX)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:41 PM (0LHZx)"***
Does anyone know what language I can translate "Your numbers are completely fucking wrong" into that Mumu might understand?
Posted by: Burn the Witch at April 15, 2015 02:45 PM (xSCb6)
Posted by: John McCain at April 15, 2015 02:45 PM (2w9ws)
Come now, I've had 12 years to do something about it. Which is 3 presidential cycles. and 3 midterms.
It's cool, though, I'll sift through the ashes I guess.
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) rogue bioethicst at April 15, 2015 02:45 PM (HDwDg)
Same here.
The entire foot is gangrenous.
The time when you could have saved a limb by sacrificing a few toes is long gone.
Posted by: eman at April 15, 2015 02:45 PM (MQEz6)
Posted by: eman at April 15, 2015 02:43 PM (MQEz6)
___________
You're either obtuse or you can't read well. I said the GOP has reduced deficits. The GOP has reduced the deficit to GDP ratio. Both of these things do matter, whcih is why I am happy having the GOP in charge instead of the Dems.
But in the TruCon alternate universe, the GOP is no better than the Dems, so let's all vote 3rd party. Fine. Then we'll go back to the good old days of 1.3T deficits. But we'll teach those RINOs a lesson, eh?
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:46 PM (0LHZx)
Moo Moo,
You are missing my point.
The government is counting your FICA deductions as income to the treasury.
The government also has a whole "off budget" system called the social security administration which claims to have billions in assets made up of t-bonds that were purchased with said FICA deductions. Thus, they claim social security is a program "you paid in to" and that its nowhere near bankrupt cuz look at all of the billions of dollars worth of pieces of paper they have.
In order to count FICA as general revenue (to produce a low deficit number), then government cannot (with a straight face, because they do) claim that the t-bonds are ASSETS for SS (but not liabilities for treasury) and that SS payouts are PAID FOR with a separate "lock box" fund which is off-budget.
So they double count the money (as assets to SSA, cash to treasure), but keep the liability side of the (you remember double entry accounting, right) OFF BUDGET. Which is how you get such dishonest numbers.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:46 PM (AkOaV)
09/30/2014 17,824,071,380,733.82
09/30/2013 16,738,183,526,697.32
09/30/2012 16,066,241,407,385.89
09/30/2011 14,790,340,328,557.15
09/30/2010 13,561,623,030,891.79
09/30/2009 11,909,829,003,511.75
09/30/2008 10,024,724,896,912.49
Posted by: Just the Punchline at April 15, 2015 02:46 PM (evdj2)
Posted by: Hillary Clinton at April 15, 2015 02:46 PM (HSmrB)
Is that the current plan?
Posted by: chemjeff at April 15, 2015 02:46 PM (2ap0X)
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 15, 2015 02:47 PM (ODxAs)
----
Ironically, that is how you progress the fastest. I prefer such disruptions. Life is never perfectly linear - why should we expect economies to be the same?
Posted by: SH at April 15, 2015 02:47 PM (gmeXX)
Why Must The Spice Keep Flowing?
If you can answer that question, you can begin to understand why the Federal govt must keep spending money it does not have.
Posted by: Soothsayer's innapropiate participation at April 15, 2015 02:47 PM (H1DmM)
Just friendly reminder.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:47 PM (0LHZx)
Who saw that coming?
-
Remember when we were nuts for thinking something like that might happen?
Posted by: The Great White Snark at April 15, 2015 02:47 PM (XUKZU)
If there were a way to do it slowly and to trust politicians to continue to slowly cut "in the off years" I might agree with you.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:47 PM (AkOaV)
Posted by: The Invisible Hand at April 15, 2015 02:48 PM (fLKzW)
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:48 PM (AkOaV)
I've never heard the phrase, "kick the can down the road" or "make the other guy pay for it" or "screw everyone and everything else; I want mine!" stated this way.
It's a welfare program. it isn't health insurance that was earned, and people get this shit whether they worked or not. And most are drawing out far more than they ever put in.
And using this shit 'logic', changing the benefits age or means testing would be contrary to the "commitment".
It might keep the con running a bit longer.
Check out Greece. They're slowly turning away from screaming about nazis and blood money and making preperations to default. That's what unsustainable spending and lying about it ressults in.
Posted by: Blue Hen at April 15, 2015 02:48 PM (Spluw)
Who are we to tell someone whom they can love? The heart wants what the heart wants.
Touch my 12 yr old niece, and I'll want your heart.
In a jar. On my mantle.
Posted by: rickb223 at April 15, 2015 02:48 PM (v6tPi)
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:46 PM (AkOaV)"***
Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you "The Cinton Surplus!"
Posted by: Burn the Witch at April 15, 2015 02:48 PM (xSCb6)
Posted by: The Great White Snark at April 15, 2015 02:47 PM (XUKZU)
SOON!
Posted by: NAMBLA Pres. - Hairy Reed at April 15, 2015 02:49 PM (ecDRv)
Yes yes we know, Republicans should refuse to spend one single penny, shutting down the government, then they will get rightly blamed and thrown out of office, then the Democrats will have full power again and will enact full-blown socialism, with the inevitable dictatorship and gulags, the collapse that follows will spark a revolution in which the true American patriots will win and established limited constitutional government as it was all meant to be.
Is that the current plan?
Where did you get this information?
Posted by: eleven at April 15, 2015 02:49 PM (IPzoI)
Posted by: rickb223 at April 15, 2015 02:49 PM (v6tPi)
Maybe. Or we could go back to that hard-scrabble budget of 2006 when we were paying for two wars simultaneously.
Posted by: toby928(C) at April 15, 2015 02:49 PM (evdj2)
The numbers were tiny. The fear of doing what needed to be done was enormous.
So what did they do?
They raised SS taxes and kicked the can down the road to today.
The folks who did that are by and large safely dead.
Now it is too late to do anything except wait for the collapse and identify who is on what side.
Posted by: eman at April 15, 2015 02:49 PM (MQEz6)
Moo,
it's based on the fact that Congress (not Obama, it's been this way at least since the budget act of 74) uses grossly distorted accounting methods. Unlike every business in the country which uses GAAP, congress / government bureaucrats decided to invent their own accounting system that manages to -- oh golly gee -- hide a shit ton of liabilities.
But its not like the information is SECRET. You can find it all. And plug that in to the governments official numbers and boom, there you go.
I didn't realize this was controversial at all, i thought everyone who was paying attention was on to this trick.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:50 PM (AkOaV)
In order to count FICA as general revenue (to produce a low deficit number), then government cannot (with a straight face, because they do) claim that the t-bonds are ASSETS for SS (but not liabilities for treasury) and that SS payouts are PAID FOR with a separate "lock box" fund which is off-budget.
So they double count the money (as assets to SSA, cash to treasure), but keep the liability side of the (you remember double entry accounting, right) OFF BUDGET. Which is how you get such dishonest numbers.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:46 PM (AkOaV)
__________
Uhm, no.
Deficits are based on income and outlays. Assets are not part of the equation. You're conflating income statements and balance sheets. I could have $100M hidden under my mattress and it has absolutely no bearing on my income or my expenses for the year. The govt can have all the lockboxes in the world and it doesn't impact the money it takes in via taxes or the money it spends.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:50 PM (0LHZx)
Who saw that coming?
-
Remember when we were nuts for thinking something like that might happen?
Posted by: The Great White Snark at April 15, 2015 02:47 PM (XUKZU)
Well... it's logically consistent, at least.
For the left, that's a rarity.
Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 02:50 PM (fwARV)
Posted by: Zorastarian Shapeshifter at April 15, 2015 02:50 PM (evdj2)
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 15, 2015 02:50 PM (ODxAs)
Yeah, those guys at treasurydirect.gov are some serious black helicopter types.
Get lost troll.
Posted by: Burn the Witch at April 15, 2015 02:50 PM (xSCb6)
Oh... wait... I can't quote that, its a sexist document according to the Dept. of Defense... Posted by: BB Wolf, Redshirt at April 15, 2015 02:14 PM (qh617)
Dissovling the bands holding two groups together, forcing a separation? Sounds like a Trigger warning is in order!
Posted by: LIV SJW in civics class at April 15, 2015 02:50 PM (yRwC8)
Posted by: Just The Punchline at April 15, 2015 02:50 PM (tVWQB)
Posted by: Bandersnatch at April 15, 2015 02:50 PM (JtwS4)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:50 PM (0LHZx)
And if the money were (and this part's important) actually IN THE FUCKING LOCKBOXES, I'd agree with you.
But it's not.
Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 02:51 PM (fwARV)
Posted by: Suppressed Flasher at April 15, 2015 02:51 PM (X+nFp)
The truth is that all this ranting about spending isnt helping us with the electorate. If we demonstrate that we care, we can win elections!
Posted by: Begonia at April 15, 2015 02:51 PM (3bq/d)
----
But some (many - most) of those are not true liabilities. They will never be paid and US has no obligation to pay them.
Posted by: SH at April 15, 2015 02:51 PM (gmeXX)
Come on man.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:51 PM (0LHZx)
Thats what I think is going to happen, except no one will ID anybody.
Posted by: Bigby's Pinkyswear at April 15, 2015 02:52 PM (3ZtZW)
Posted by: Thank Goodness There's a Lock at April 15, 2015 02:52 PM (fLKzW)
Posted by: Aviator at April 15, 2015 02:52 PM (sQzB6)
Posted by: Hillary Clinton at April 15, 2015 02:52 PM (HSmrB)
tinyurl.com/nwey6yl
Posted by: People Corp at April 15, 2015 02:52 PM (TzeLs)
politicians to continue to slowly cut "in the off years" I might agree
with you.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:47 PM (AkOaV)
Agreed. I was speaking as a theoretical matter. As a practical matter, given the turds we have in office, and are likely to have in office for the foreseeable future, we probably have to go with the traumatic amputation scenario.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at April 15, 2015 02:52 PM (oKE6c)
Yep, the Reps really took in the the keister electorally on that last one didn't they?
Posted by: Burn the Witch at April 15, 2015 02:52 PM (xSCb6)
But it's not.
Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 02:51 PM (fwARV)
________
Still has zero to do with income or expenses. Why do you keep conflating balance sheets with income statements?
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:52 PM (0LHZx)
Look peeps, when your entire premise of an argument is based on a
conspiracy (Obama is cooking the deficit numbers), nobody will ever take
you seriously.
Just friendly reminder.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:47 PM (0LHZx)
Mighty strong talk for such a rich guy. I've heard plumbers can get mad as hell.
Posted by: Nip Sip at April 15, 2015 02:52 PM (0FSuD)
Posted by: toby928(C) at April 15, 2015 02:53 PM (evdj2)
Why would they matter if the sky isn't falling?
Posted by: eman at April 15, 2015 02:53 PM (MQEz6)
Posted by: Just The Punchline at April 15, 2015 02:53 PM (tVWQB)
From WZ.
Posted by: The Great White Snark at April 15, 2015 02:54 PM (XUKZU)
Why do you keep conflating balance sheets with income statements?
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:52 PM (0LHZx)
Why are you unable to explain the distinction between debt and deficit?
Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 02:54 PM (fwARV)
The Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?
Posted by: Eric "Otter" Stratton at April 15, 2015 02:54 PM (xSCb6)
Awww that's adorable.
Posted by: Supreme Court, SOON at April 15, 2015 02:55 PM (yRwC8)
Posted by: toby928(C) at April 15, 2015 02:55 PM (evdj2)
Reagan musta been a communist huh?
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:55 PM (0LHZx)
isnt helping us with the electorate. If we demonstrate that we care, we
can win elections!
Posted by: Begonia at April 15, 2015 02:51 PM (3bq/d)
Yeah, but we shouldn't care. I know the "caring" shit appeals to the chicks, but the government is like a referee of social and economic life, and should not be emotionally invested in the decisions, any more than an NFL referee should care which team wins.
Just keep the country secure (from threats both foreign and now, especially, domestic), keep the playing field level, and what happens is what happens. Period.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at April 15, 2015 02:55 PM (oKE6c)
So the accounting has been done the same way since 1974
Of course it has, by one little thick glassed guy with a pointy head who works in a lockbox. He goes by the name of "The Spectre". He only eats cheetos and water. On occasion takes a prostitute.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 15, 2015 02:55 PM (ODxAs)
Maybe they didn't teach that yet in whatever Sally Struthers correspondence course he's taking.
Posted by: @JohnTant at April 15, 2015 02:55 PM (tVWQB)
Posted by: Count de Monet at April 15, 2015 02:55 PM (JO9+V)
You're exhausting and purposely missing my point.
They've been "fake" since 1974, probably since way before but I'm not going to do a research paper on this for you.
And by fake I mean they use real numbers, but use non- GAAP formulas to come up with inlays / outlays assets / liabilities in which they DOUBLE COUNT a lot of income, but ignore a lot of outlays.
Remember how Obamacare counted $800 million (or whatever, exact numbers dont matter) in cuts to medicare to help keep its 10-yr cost under $1 trillion? Romney and Ryan bitched about it in 2012.
Yeah, that money (of course) was never cut, but due to DC accounting "conspiracies" was double counted. As both savings to Medicare and as "income" for Obamacare.
Is this really all that complicated for you to understand?
This all started because you said "the deficit is only half a trillion! no biggy" and I said "well, it depends if you count FICA as income to the treasury or not. If you do, then you concede social security and medicaid/medicare are just welfare and not something 'people pay in to'. If you claim those are seperate off-budget programs that people do pay in to and keep the money in a lockbox and all of that bullshit, you can't SIMULTANEOUSLY count that "lockboxed" money as income."
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 02:56 PM (AkOaV)
Posted by: Citizen X at April 15, 2015 02:56 PM (7ObY1)
Posted by: Suppressed Flasher at April 15, 2015 02:56 PM (X+nFp)
So, how can the GOP be seen as useful?
How do we measure their success?
Posted by: eman at April 15, 2015 02:56 PM (MQEz6)
Now leave Californians out of this.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at April 15, 2015 02:57 PM (oKE6c)
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at April 15, 2015 02:57 PM (so+oy)
1. Balance sheets and income statesments are like the same thing
2. All govt numbers are fake
3. 483B deficit under the GOP is no different than 1200B deficit under the Dems
Oh and the polls are totally skewed.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:57 PM (0LHZx)
-----
There is really nothing to concede. That is just a simple fact that common sense and the Supreme Court has dictated.
Posted by: SH at April 15, 2015 02:57 PM (gmeXX)
Posted by: eman at April 15, 2015 02:56 PM (MQEz6)
With an electron microscope?
Posted by: Jay Guevara at April 15, 2015 02:58 PM (oKE6c)
So, how can the GOP be seen as useful?
How do we measure their success?
Posted by: eman at April 15, 2015 02:56 PM (MQEz6)
_________
You really don't think a 483B deficit is better than as 1200B deficit? Good fucking god.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:58 PM (0LHZx)
-----
Kind of a low bar though - No?
Posted by: SH at April 15, 2015 02:59 PM (gmeXX)
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 15, 2015 02:59 PM (ODxAs)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at April 15, 2015 02:59 PM (bLnSU)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:52 PM (0LHZx)
Because GAAP would not allow a company to count something as income, an asset, and an outlay at the same time, while ignoring the "liability" side of the ledger.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 03:00 PM (AkOaV)
Posted by: eman
With an electron microscope?
Posted by: Jay Guevara
Plugged in, or not?
Posted by: rickb223 at April 15, 2015 03:00 PM (v6tPi)
09/30/2014 17,824,071,380,733.82
09/30/2013 16,738,183,526,697.32
09/30/2012 16,066,241,407,385.89
09/30/2011 14,790,340,328,557.15
09/30/2010 13,561,623,030,891.79
09/30/2009 11,909,829,003,511.75
09/30/2008 10,024,724,896,912.49
Posted by: toby928(C) at April 15, 2015 03:00 PM (evdj2)
-
If it's true you know what's funny? The feds beat the polygamy out of the Mormons back in the day, now the church is definitely anti-polygamy, and the feds will beat it back into them.
Posted by: The Great White Snark at April 15, 2015 03:00 PM (XUKZU)
In the Nineties they argued reducing deficits was a good thing.
In the 2000's they argued deficits were bad, good, unimportant, and racist all at once.
Posted by: eman at April 15, 2015 03:00 PM (MQEz6)
Posted by: Just The Punchline at April 15, 2015 03:00 PM (tVWQB)
Just keep the country secure (from threats both foreign and now, especially, domestic), keep the playing field level, and what happens is what happens. Period.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at April 15, 2015 02:55 PM (oKE6c)
---
Campaign on this platform and you can join the Libertarian Party in the political wilderness. Americans dont want a skeletal federal government. They expect more from Congress and the White House than a well-maintained military.
Posted by: Begonia at April 15, 2015 03:00 PM (3bq/d)
Normally, if we just make it past noon we get away from Chicken Drew's "the sky is falling" posts.
I'm so fucking tired of them.
Posted by: jwest at April 15, 2015 03:00 PM (9ZZd+)
This is what academics refer to as "obfuscational bullshit".
The "money" in the so-called "lockbox" for SS is not a "balance sheet" item as they are technically interest bearing (read: income producing) securities.
then again, you can't even display a proper understanding of the word "deficit" so this is well beyond you.
Posted by: Burn the Witch at April 15, 2015 03:00 PM (xSCb6)
Posted by: Buzzion at April 15, 2015 03:01 PM (z/Ubi)
You and I know that.
But the left touts both numbers -- "look at how small the deficit is. Look at how big the "trust fund" is."
Well, its one or the other.
It can't be both.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 03:01 PM (AkOaV)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:58 PM (0LHZx)
You really don't think that fucking a 9 year old is better than fucking a 6 year old? Good fucking allah.
Posted by: Mr. Muzz Muzz at April 15, 2015 03:01 PM (Q819Q)
Posted by: Soona at April 15, 2015 03:01 PM (/HX7u)
Posted by: Nip Sip at April 15, 2015 03:01 PM (0FSuD)
However, you cannot have a discussion with someone who asserts that this is not double-counting because spending the very same dollar and saving it at the same time is totes possible.
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at April 15, 2015 03:02 PM (bLnSU)
Normally, if we just make it past noon we get away from Chicken Drew's "the sky is falling" posts.
I'm so fucking tired of them.
Posted by: jwest at April 15, 2015 03:00 PM (9ZZd+)
Then stop coming here.
Posted by: Buzzion at April 15, 2015 03:02 PM (z/Ubi)
So, how can the GOP be seen as useful?
How do we measure their success?
Posted by: eman at April 15, 2015 02:56 PM (MQEz6)
_________
You really don't think a 483B deficit is better than as 1200B deficit? Good fucking god.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 02:58 PM (0LHZx)
I have said nothing of the kind.
You have said the sky isn't falling and deficits are not important.
Posted by: eman at April 15, 2015 03:02 PM (MQEz6)
Exactly.
You said it better than I did.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 03:02 PM (AkOaV)
I am, of course, talking about Glitter Bomb Girl.
That
stuffy executive she threw glitter at had *one* choice, and failed to
take it - stand up and start club-style dancing in the glitter shower. I
say this as someone who hates dancing.
Would have taken all the wind out of GBG's sails.
Now,
I admit, I have not taken every opportunity that came to me in this
life, hell, I've missed most of them, so I can't really judge. But I can
shake my head sadly at missed chances.
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at April 15, 2015 03:03 PM (bLnSU)
I'm so fucking tired of them.
----
I think for Drew - the Sky has already fallen.
Posted by: SH at April 15, 2015 03:03 PM (gmeXX)
B/c freedom and elections or something...
Posted by: prescient11 at April 15, 2015 03:03 PM (q5APL)
Posted by: Waldo at April 15, 2015 03:03 PM (W5DcG)
Posted by: Buzzion at April 15, 2015 03:01 PM (z/Ubi)
____________
That's how ratios work, yes.
25K deficit on 50K revenue is a lot worse than 15K deficit on 100K revenue.
And that's basically what is ideal, a small deficit to GDP or deficit to revenue ratio. The US has had a deficit pretty much every year since 1776.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 03:04 PM (0LHZx)
Posted by: Buzzion at April 15, 2015 03:01 PM (z/Ubi)
-------------------------------------
It's Mooboy. He makes more money in a day than all of us make in our lifetimes combined.
Posted by: Soona at April 15, 2015 03:04 PM (/HX7u)
"...it adds to the deficit and debt."
.......................................
What difference at this point, does it make?
Posted by: Hillarrhoids at April 15, 2015 03:04 PM (wAQA5)
Posted by: Begonia
It's not a matter of 'want'. What can we afford?That includes the military, which incidentally, is one of the things they ARE cutting. SS isn't being cut, but they are going after veteran pensions. And the VA is doing worse.
Try again.
Greece doesn't want to do any of what they're doing. They are going to have to do it.
Posted by: Blue Hen at April 15, 2015 03:04 PM (Spluw)
I gave you the real government numbers straight from the source you silly little boy.
Posted by: Burn the Witch at April 15, 2015 03:04 PM (xSCb6)
25K deficit on 50K revenue is a lot worse than 15K deficit on 100K revenue.
And that's basically what is ideal, a small deficit to GDP or deficit to revenue ratio. The US has had a deficit pretty much every year since 1776.
------
But at some point you have to pay back debt - yes or no?
With the understanding that your options are going to be pay in full, default, or inflate. I'm guessing we'll see a lot more of the latter two options than the first.
Posted by: SH at April 15, 2015 03:05 PM (gmeXX)
Watch it you old one eyed trouser snake. I'll take out your last good eye.
Posted by: Juan McCain at April 15, 2015 03:06 PM (sQzB6)
Posted by: Buzzion at April 15, 2015 03:02 PM (z/Ubi)
What? And let people think that Ace's website only has sycophants and lemmings?
Posted by: jwest at April 15, 2015 03:06 PM (9ZZd+)
-
I used to have trouble with the concept of irrational numbers but now I think I've got it figured out.
Posted by: The Great White Snark at April 15, 2015 03:06 PM (XUKZU)
Posted by: eman at April 15, 2015 03:02 PM (MQEz6)
_________
Please quote me where I said deficits aren't important.
What I said was what is important is the size of deficits i terms of GDP.
If we can keep deficits to 2% of GDP, I'm perfectly fine with that. We're at 4% now but heading in the right directtion. We should be in the 2% range within a couple of years.
Which means, the sky is not falling. It will be OK.
But Limbaugh, Beck and the rest don't get ratings by saying, things are OK. They get ratings by screaming about how the end of the world is here. Oh and PS buy gold from one of our sponsors.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 03:07 PM (0LHZx)
And that's basically what is ideal, a small deficit to GDP or deficit to revenue ratio. The US has had a deficit pretty much every year since 1776.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 03:04 PM (0LHZx)
No, you stupid cockholster. Just, no.
What's ideal is no deficit and no debt.
People spend YEARS working themselves out of debt because of deficit spending.
You're truly arguing that it's best for them to remain in debt in perpetuity?
Holy hell, you're one ignorant cum-guzzling gutter slut.
Cheers.
Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 03:07 PM (fwARV)
We ARE so fucking boned.
Posted by: toby928(C) at April 15, 2015 03:07 PM (evdj2)
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at April 15, 2015 03:07 PM (ODxAs)
He defeated that little Slime Eric Cantor,
Then again content is a personal perception
or gleaned as needed
Posted by: From Shredder to Hard Drive Wiper it is all good in Arkansas at April 15, 2015 03:07 PM (/WmRg)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 03:04 PM (0LHZx)
This from the guy who pays more for hookers to poop in his mouth in a day that most of y'all make in a decade.
Posted by: Mr. Muzz Muzz at April 15, 2015 03:07 PM (Q819Q)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo
And how has it serviced its debt?
What are the implications of debt, for a business or a government?
What are the implications of unfunded liabilities?
We have both. municipalities have already crashed for far less. Think Detroit.
Posted by: Blue Hen at April 15, 2015 03:08 PM (Spluw)
Posted by: toby928(C) at April 15, 2015 03:08 PM (evdj2)
stuffy executive she threw glitter at had *one* choice, and failed to
take it - stand up and start club-style dancing in the glitter shower.
He should have shot her, but I guess that's not allowed in Frankfurt.
Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at April 15, 2015 03:08 PM (/kI1Q)
Posted by: jwest at April 15, 2015 03:06 PM (9ZZd+)"***
No, you account for the unjustifiably arrogant douche contingent.
You get bonus points for "lemmings" instead of 'sheep'.
Posted by: Burn the Witch at April 15, 2015 03:09 PM (xSCb6)
Posted by: Hillary Clinton at April 15, 2015 03:09 PM (HSmrB)
With the understanding that your options are going to be pay in full, default, or inflate. I'm guessing we'll see a lot more of the latter two options than the first.
Posted by: SH at April 15, 2015 03:05 PM (gmeXX)
____________
Well yes the debt is always paid back. The debt isn't one item. It's a series of debts that are constantly getting paid. Every year the govt sells bonds. And every year the govt pays interest on bonds and also pays principal on bonds. In 2015 we're retiring debt from 1985 and 1984 and 1983, and so on. And the bonds we're issuing today will be paid back over the next 30 years and on it goes.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 03:09 PM (0LHZx)
He defeated that little Slime Eric Cantor,
Then again content is a personal perception
or gleaned as needed
Posted by: From Shredder to Hard Drive Wiper it is all good in Arkansas at April 15, 2015 03:07 PM (/WmRg)
It's amazing that you are able to type so well for being so blind.
Posted by: Buzzion at April 15, 2015 03:09 PM (z/Ubi)
In an alternative model where GDP is equally large and deficits and debts are tiny, the machine can stall and sputter a great deal, but calamity can be avoided.
Posted by: eman at April 15, 2015 03:09 PM (MQEz6)
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at April 15, 2015 03:09 PM (W5DcG)
Posted by: Bigby's Pinkyswear at April 15, 2015 03:09 PM (3ZtZW)
-
Depends. Are you a Clinton or an Obama?
Posted by: The Great White Snark at April 15, 2015 03:10 PM (XUKZU)
Posted by: toby928(C)
We spent close to half a trillion dollars just on debt servicing? Out of total expenditure of less than 4T?
And this is with rates artificially low.
Posted by: Blue Hen at April 15, 2015 03:10 PM (Spluw)
The US has had a deficit pretty much every year since 1776.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo
That my friend is total horse shit. I am too lazy to go dig up the numbers and give you a history lesson.
Go back to plumbing.
Posted by: Nip Sip at April 15, 2015 03:10 PM (0FSuD)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 03:09 PM (0LHZx)
You base this conclusion on the faulty assumption that the economy will always grow.
We're increasing deficit spending, so our debt will be bigger. We will require more money to pay it back.
If the economy grows forever, this may be possible. May.
It won't. It's not.
Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 03:11 PM (fwARV)
Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at April 15, 2015 03:08 PM (/kI1Q)..(turns down music, backs away slowly)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at April 15, 2015 03:11 PM (bLnSU)
SHHHHHH!! Maybe Mumu won't notice that he's confused debt service for deficit.
Lord knows the dog has already figured it out.
Posted by: Burn the Witch at April 15, 2015 03:11 PM (xSCb6)
---
This statement reminds me of the old Gracie Allen joke:
"George, I got some artichokes for free! Well, they were 50% off, so I used the 50% I saved to pay for the other 50%!"
Posted by: @JohnTant at April 15, 2015 03:11 PM (tVWQB)
No, that's not true. Look at the historical tables, available on whitehouse dotgov.
Occasional deficits, mostly small surpluses, pretty close to balanced.
Except for civil war, wwi and wwii.
And modern day.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 03:11 PM (AkOaV)
It's how the world works.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 03:12 PM (0LHZx)
Submitted as Moron Lifestyle compliant:
"Nude beer festival Bare Beach Beer Bash returns to the Poconos this summer"
http://bit.ly/1CLb98R
Posted by: Bandersnatch at April 15, 2015 03:12 PM (JtwS4)
Posted by: Lauren at April 15, 2015 03:12 PM (MYCIw)
Posted by: GOP Whipping Boy at April 15, 2015 03:12 PM (YX5pz)
Posted by: toby928(C) at April 15, 2015 03:13 PM (evdj2)
No, actually.
The rules about paying debt back apply to everyone and everything except the world's sole superpower.
If there isn't a controlling authority with the ability to compel compliance by force, repayment is totally voluntary.
Posted by: jwest at April 15, 2015 03:13 PM (9ZZd+)
In good times, we spent wildly. But not a big deal, since the economy was growing by leaps and bounds.
In bad times, we spent even more wildly. Not a big deal, the economy will eventually be growing by leaps and bounds again.
But uh... it hasn't. I mean we saw good growth under Reagan, but the debt still exploded and so did annual deficits. And it's continued since then. We've seen okay GDP growth on average, but our debt growth (in real dollars) as been astronomical. All in a relatively short period of time.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 03:14 PM (AkOaV)
Can't we get one thread on how much the Dems suck instead of thread after thread of how much the Republicans suck?
Posted by: JackStraw at April 15, 2015 03:14 PM (g1DWB)
Posted by: jwest at April 15, 2015 03:13 PM (9ZZd+)
Yes. Totally voluntary
Posted by: China, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 03:14 PM (fwARV)
We're increasing deficit spending, so our debt will be bigger. We will require more money to pay it back.
If the economy grows forever, this may be possible. May.
It won't. It's not.
Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 03:11 PM (fwARV)
_________
But that's the point. We're not increasing deficit spending. We are in fact DECREASING deficit spending. The deficit has been decreasing for the past 5 years. As a % of GDP it has tumbled over the past 5 years from 10% to 4%.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 03:14 PM (0LHZx)
You are creatively ignorant.
We can now chalk "bond" up with "deficit" to the list of basic terms you're fucking up.
Posted by: Burn the Witch at April 15, 2015 03:14 PM (xSCb6)
Posted by: Greece at April 15, 2015 03:14 PM (z/Ubi)
Well, except math.
At some point there will not be enough money in the world to cover
a) new debt
b) revolving debt
c) interest payments on said revolving and new debt
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 03:14 PM (AkOaV)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at April 15, 2015 03:15 PM (F2IAQ)
If there isn't a controlling authority with the ability to compel compliance by force, repayment is totally voluntary.
Voluntarily crashing the entire world economic system.
Posted by: Bandersnatch at April 15, 2015 03:15 PM (JtwS4)
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 03:14 PM (AkOaV)
Eh. I've discussed it with Moo Moo.
I'm not going to be worried until our debt growth passes his monthly income.
Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 03:15 PM (fwARV)
No shit Mr. Accountant. Now see if you can figure out the difference between the debt Apple holds and the debt the US Government holds.
Posted by: JackStraw at April 15, 2015 03:16 PM (g1DWB)
Posted by: toby928(C) at April 15, 2015 03:16 PM (evdj2)
Moo, depends on your historical perspective. We have higher (inflation adjusted) deficits in 2014 then we have in any time in US history that we weren't fighting a world war.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 03:16 PM (AkOaV)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 03:12 PM (0LHZx)
215 Trillion Dollars in debt and unfunded liabilities. Hope you are teaching the little calves to be good little workers.
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at April 15, 2015 03:17 PM (F2IAQ)
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 03:17 PM (AkOaV)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo
Do you have anything other than strawmen? No one said this.
"if well managed".
If i buy a house with an ARM and the interest rate goes up 3%, then all of my hopes were just that; hopes. I can't begin to handle that dramatic a change. And if i can't, then i shouldn't have incurred the debt.
We can't begin to handle a 3% increase in the debt we're carrying. And unlike the companies you bullshitted about, people aren't as interested in our debt, so we're buying our own, using printed money.
Jackass.
Posted by: Blue Hen at April 15, 2015 03:17 PM (Spluw)
The military was 18%, SS was 25%, Medicare was 24%
Interest payments aren't the problem.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 03:17 PM (0LHZx)
Posted by: toby928(C) at April 15, 2015 03:17 PM (evdj2)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 03:14 PM (0LHZx)
Again.
You're presupposing that GDP will continue to grow faster than deficit spending as a percentage.
That's simply not a sound assumption.
Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 03:17 PM (fwARV)
They are things that can't do anything else but drain power from existing revenue.
Deficits create debt and every dollar you use to retire debt is a dollar that can't do something else.
So, if this is judged to be okay, then the debt being retired must have been made doing something of such great value that its retirement with present revenue is easily worth it.
Can we truly say this is so? Can we truly say the things we are funding now are so worthy that the loss of flexibility, the loss of choice, is worth it?
The answer is no because we are funding the buying of votes.
Posted by: eman at April 15, 2015 03:18 PM (MQEz6)
I'm not going to be worried until our debt growth passes his monthly income.
Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 03:15 PM (fwARV)
After lunch coffee meet computer monitor.
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at April 15, 2015 03:18 PM (F2IAQ)
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 03:16 PM (AkOaV)
_______
That is absolutely not true.
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2014/12/federal-spending-by-the-numbers-2014
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 03:18 PM (0LHZx)
You pay taxes to keep up the charade of a properly functioning monetary system and not a Rube Golbergian Ponzi scheme.
Which it is.
Posted by: Kreplach at April 15, 2015 03:18 PM (D9OaR)
One always has to take Mr. Drews word with a grain of salt!
Posted by: Begonia at April 15, 2015 03:18 PM (3bq/d)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo
You are agreeing that there is a problem, yes?
Posted by: Moderate Salami at April 15, 2015 03:18 PM (/Ho8c)
First three sentences proven wrong in this thread with government numbers.
Last sentence fails to take into account well-known facts on how the GDP calculation has been changed since Obama has taken office.
It's like you're trying to accumulate points for being wrong.
Posted by: Burn the Witch at April 15, 2015 03:18 PM (xSCb6)
Yep, the old "rip off your investors, get away with it because reasons" ploy.
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at April 15, 2015 03:19 PM (bLnSU)
2 Right before an election Republicans argue what they would think you want them to do, but argue that they cannot do it unless you re-elect them.
Process is 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2
Yet, somehow, voters never catch on.
Let it burn, better to live a horrible life in anarchy or tyranny than to live a terrible life under a republican form of government. Chances are the producers will stay alive and the slackers will die off in the former and in the latter, the producers are being robbed to care for the slackers and demonized.
Posted by: astonerii at April 15, 2015 03:19 PM (mTw6c)
Kinda hard to make out the differences from here.
Posted by: Aviator at April 15, 2015 03:19 PM (sQzB6)
That's simply not a sound assumption.
Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 03:17 PM (fwARV)
____________
When did I say that exactly? I was telling you what happened the past 5 years.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 03:19 PM (0LHZx)
Posted by: Bandersnatch at April 15, 2015 03:15 PM (JtwS4)
The world's sole superpower makes the rules.
If the U.S. decided that now is the time for a global "reset" and cancelled all public debt, people, companies, institutions and governments would have two choices...
Shut down in total economic chaos or accept the new rules and continue on with the new rules.
Not a hard choice to make.
The reason other countries don't have the power to change the rules is that they don't have a dozen aircraft carriers to park offshore to force the old rules to be followed.
Posted by: jwest at April 15, 2015 03:19 PM (9ZZd+)
Posted by: John McCain, Card Carring Maverick at April 15, 2015 03:19 PM (WGm5T)
Posted by: Tom in a Truck at April 15, 2015 03:19 PM (YX5pz)
Posted by: The Great White Snark at April 15, 2015 03:20 PM (XUKZU)
Posted by: The World Bank at April 15, 2015 03:20 PM (0FSuD)
Say I made $100,000 a year and borrowed (on average) $25,000 a year. Now, I've never paid any of that off, I just keep transferring the balance to new credit cards.
Then, one year, I borrow $60,000. Still haven't paid anything off, just servicing my debt by paying my monthly interest fees. I keep borrowing $50,000 or $45,000 for a few years, then I borrow $30,000.
Would it be safe to say that I cut my "deficit" in half?
A discerning math type might say, "no, you didn't cut your deficit in half, dummy, you're still borrowing $30,000 a year when you were borrowing $25,000 5 years ago. You've also just continued to roll over all of th at previous debt without paying any of the principle down. Your financial situation has not improved, if anything it's gotten a lot worse."
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 03:20 PM (AkOaV)
Posted by: eman at April 15, 2015 03:18 PM (MQEz6)
-----------------------------------------
You've just nailed the core problem.
Posted by: Soona at April 15, 2015 03:20 PM (/HX7u)
calculation has been changed since Obama has taken office.
Yes. GDP now includes unicorn farts as a major component.
Posted by: Moderate Salami at April 15, 2015 03:20 PM (/Ho8c)
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/utah-judge-rules-favor-polygamist-family-sister-wives-n191021
Posted by: Random Guy at April 15, 2015 03:20 PM (vgIRn)
Posted by: Lauren at April 15, 2015 03:20 PM (MYCIw)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at April 15, 2015 03:18 PM (xSCb6)
______
And the unskewed polls show a Romney landslide.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 03:21 PM (0LHZx)
Obama wanted to give the mullahs in Tehran nukes with zero constraints. Republicans stopped him.
That seems like kind of a big deal, no?
Posted by: JackStraw at April 15, 2015 03:21 PM (g1DWB)
Join me.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 03:19 PM (0LHZx) Unhide all posts from (0LHZx)
Posted by: toby928(C) at April 15, 2015 03:21 PM (evdj2)
Posted by: Mary Cloggensteyn from Battleboro on a goat farm at April 15, 2015 03:22 PM (q+zA9)
Posted by: GOP Whipping Boy at April 15, 2015 03:22 PM (YX5pz)
http://weaselzippers.us/220821-israeli-embassy-trolls-the-white-house/
Posted by: HR braucht ein Bier at April 15, 2015 03:22 PM (/kI1Q)
Posted by: Lauren
----------------
Luckily, he landed short of the Capitol. Sheriff Joe Biden was on the balcony with his shotgun at the ready for the take down.
Posted by: Roy at April 15, 2015 03:22 PM (VndSC)
Then, one year, I borrow $60,000. Still haven't paid anything off, just servicing my debt by paying my monthly interest fees. I keep borrowing $50,000 or $45,000 for a few years, then I borrow $30,000.
Would it be safe to say that I cut my "deficit" in half?
A discerning math type might say, "no, you didn't cut your deficit in half, dummy, you're still borrowing $30,000 a year when you were borrowing $25,000 5 years ago. You've also just continued to roll over all of th at previous debt without paying any of the principle down. Your financial situation has not improved, if anything it's gotten a lot worse."
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 03:20 PM (AkOaV)
__________
This example has zero relevance to this discussion. The govt pays off debt every year. The govt's income increases every year. The govt's spending has decreased for the past 5 years.
Try your example again with those variables.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 03:23 PM (0LHZx)
Yes, I posted an astericks (other than Obamas early years with the one time stimulus).
We're still deficiting worse then any time we weren't fighting a world war.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 03:23 PM (AkOaV)
Sigh.
Posted by: @JohnTant at April 15, 2015 03:24 PM (tVWQB)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 03:21 PM (0LHZx)"***
So your first response to the factual information I have refutined your nonsense with is to whip out a big old red herring.
Focus troll.
Posted by: Burn the Witch at April 15, 2015 03:24 PM (xSCb6)
First time the mail has been close to on time in years.
Posted by: Aviator at April 15, 2015 03:24 PM (sQzB6)
Interest payments aren't the problem. Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo
6% of the budget is being spent on debt, and that with artificially low interest rates.
I'll return to the analogy of the ARM. If we we're getting value for what we're in debt for, and if our cashflow and reserves were good, then MAYBE that would be true.
Then again, no one else is allowed to buy their own IOUs.
Posted by: Blue Hen at April 15, 2015 03:24 PM (Spluw)
"Interest rates are not the problem"
shows just how ignorant he is. They're not the problem, until they are. Sweet fuck read history.
Posted by: prescient11 at April 15, 2015 03:25 PM (q5APL)
The one that wastes all my time on BS
Posted by: Bigby's Pinkyswear at April 15, 2015 03:25 PM (3ZtZW)
Posted by: Mary Cloggensteyn from Battleboro on a goat farm at April 15, 2015 03:22 PM (q+zA9)
Master Blaster!
Posted by: Mr. Muzz Muzz at April 15, 2015 03:25 PM (Q819Q)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 03:26 PM (0LHZx)
And yet, government debt grows every single year. See if you can figure out why.
Posted by: JackStraw at April 15, 2015 03:26 PM (g1DWB)
Posted by: eleven at April 15, 2015 03:26 PM (IPzoI)
That seems like kind of a big deal, no?
Posted by: JackStraw
Not yet they haven't. Color me .... skeptical.
Posted by: Aviator at April 15, 2015 03:26 PM (sQzB6)
http://tinyurl.com/nwhczzm
Posted by: Brother Cavil, Unrepresented Christian Objectivist at April 15, 2015 03:26 PM (DT3rQ)
No, the government does not pay off debt.
It rolls it over. As in, the 30 year t-bond matures, and the government gets another 30 year t-bond to pay off the principal on the 30 year t-bond that just expired.
So, on a consumer level, thats paying off one credit card balance with another.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 03:26 PM (AkOaV)
--------------------------------------------
The singer in the alien bar scene.
Posted by: Soona at April 15, 2015 03:27 PM (/HX7u)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 03:21 PM (0LHZx)
Do you really believe that, or are you just saying it because you're a lonely troll who can't think of anything intelligent to say?
Posted by: Mr. Muzz Muzz at April 15, 2015 03:27 PM (Q819Q)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo
These aren't variables, they're dodges.
We're paying off SOME debt. We're deferring other debt, accruing new debt AND buying some of our debt.
And we're devaluing our currency to do that last one.
Posted by: Blue Hen at April 15, 2015 03:27 PM (Spluw)
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 03:23 PM (0LHZx)"***
Because comments on Romney's 2012 polling are on point here.
Posted by: Burn the Witch at April 15, 2015 03:27 PM (xSCb6)
Heh, okay.
You continue to fuck that chicken, moo moo.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 03:27 PM (AkOaV)
Focus troll.
Posted by: Burn the Witch at April 15, 2015 03:24 PM (xSCb6)
_________
LOL. Your argument is basically, all the numbers are fake so I don't believe anything except what numbers I make up, or most likely what numbers Glen Beck told me are the "troof".
Whatever man. Live in your paranoid little bubble for all I care.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 03:27 PM (0LHZx)
It's the equivalent of paying off one credit card using another. It's called revolving credit, and it seldom ends well.
Posted by: Brother Cavil, Unrepresented Christian Objectivist at April 15, 2015 03:27 PM (DT3rQ)
Understandable. But I think Obama's plan was to try and ram this through before anyone got a look at it. Once people get a look at the details I think even the most apathetic are going to say whoa.
We shall see.
Posted by: JackStraw at April 15, 2015 03:29 PM (g1DWB)
It was a very common sour grapes trope post-2012
Still currently, in some quarters.
Posted by: Bigby's Pinkyswear at April 15, 2015 03:29 PM (3ZtZW)
Posted by: Roy at April 15, 2015 03:29 PM (VndSC)
Posted by: The Chicken at April 15, 2015 03:29 PM (/kI1Q)
Posted by: 3PO at April 15, 2015 03:30 PM (tVWQB)
It rolls it over. As in, the 30 year t-bond matures, and the government gets another 30 year t-bond to pay off the principal on the 30 year t-bond that just expired.
So, on a consumer level, thats paying off one credit card balance with another.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 03:26 PM (AkOaV)
__________
No, the govt actually pays off debt. And it's silly to compare how a govt works vs how a consumer works. That's one of my pet peeves when people (and especially politicans) compare an $18T economy with "regular folks sitting at the kitchen table to draw up a budget".
A better comparison would be between the federal govt and GE or IBM. And if you do that comparison you'll see that GE/IBM also issue new debt every year while paying off old debt. And they have been doing it for as long as they've existed. Just like every behemoth corporation does all over the world.
But Glenn Beck can't sell you gold with that argumnet, so he has to scare you into buying gold by telling you about the family budget.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at April 15, 2015 03:30 PM (0LHZx)
Awww, sweetie, if you tried absorbing facts like mot people, you might not be so butthurt.
Posted by: Burn the Witch at April 15, 2015 03:31 PM (xSCb6)
You wish. We're paying off 30 year bonds with 2 year bonds.
Posted by: toby928(C) at April 15, 2015 03:31 PM (evdj2)
Posted by: fatwa fatwa at April 15, 2015 03:31 PM (q+zA9)
Posted by: Hillary Clinton at April 15, 2015 03:32 PM (HSmrB)
Posted by: lurkingestlurker-Giant Hungry Monastic Plush Porcupine Standing Next to a Smoker at April 15, 2015 03:33 PM (k8xvx)
Instead of drawing out of my IRA funds, which are taxable, I borrow from the LLC's. The interest on my notes is a demand payment. Amazingly, I have not demanded I pay the interest, but it accrues and the LLC's pay taxes on the interest due. I have insured my notes with life insurance policies and my home and my IRA, which when I die will be used to pay off the notes with no tax penalty.
This only works if you a rich guy like Moo Moo.
Posted by: Nip Sip at April 15, 2015 03:34 PM (0FSuD)
Mr Moo,
large corporations borrow short term paper to pay off short term debts. They operate on net 30 all the way to net 90 terms, which means sometimes they have a large amount on their balance sheet for AR , but don't have much actual cash on hand to fund whatever they need to fund.
So they borrow money short term to cover that cap until their AR money comes in.
That's very similar to a title loan or paycheck loan or other household loan used in the short term.
The federal government hasn't paid down debt since the '50s and '60s when they paid off war bonds from WWII.
We just roll it over every year.
GE is not still rolling over debt from 1972. If they were, they would have gone chapter 11 a long time ago.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 03:34 PM (AkOaV)
Threadwinner!
Posted by: lurkingestlurker-Giant Hungry Monastic Plush Porcupine Standing Next to a Smoker at April 15, 2015 03:35 PM (k8xvx)
Threadwinner!
Posted by: lurkingestlurker-Giant Hungry Monastic Plush Porcupine Standing Next to a Smoker at April 15, 2015 03:35 PM (k8xvx)
Posted by: Tom in a Truck at April 15, 2015 03:35 PM (YX5pz)
Well, that's been a drastic recent change. Because no one wants a 30-yr T-bond at .01% interest.
2 years? Eh...
30 years? Fuck that.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 03:35 PM (AkOaV)
Posted by: GOP Whipping Boy at April 15, 2015 03:40 PM (YX5pz)
Try your example again with those variables.
The government's income will not increase every year, you stupid fuck. That's the point.
Posted by: Washington Nearsider, Keeper of the Guards at April 15, 2015 03:42 PM (fwARV)
I want a Congress that blocks Iranian nukes AND doesn't increase the deficit by $200 billion dollars in a quixotic effort to fix an ever-broken fatally flawed entitlement boondoggle.
If that's "purity," so be it.
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at April 15, 2015 03:44 PM (QKIQb)
Well, I'm sure it will the sense that the actual dollar amount will be higher every year.
Because, why not? the fed controls the money supply, they can make that happen easily enough.
But money does not equal wealth.
And when federal spending alone accounts for almost a quarter of your entire GDP...
I mean, how much underlying wealth creation is really happening in this country? Hard to say.
Posted by: mynewhandle at April 15, 2015 03:45 PM (AkOaV)
Posted by: Buzzion at April 15, 2015 03:47 PM (z/Ubi)
Guys, you can't attack the GOP for spending too much money when the Democrats would have spent even more too much money."
That's a false choice/dilemma. Why take it as given that spending must increase every year, particularly deficit spending? There is another option. Team GOP doesn't want to address that inconvenient truth. Being a little better than horribly wrong doesn't make them right. Sometimes a "lesser of two evils" is still too evil to have my support.
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at April 15, 2015 03:48 PM (QKIQb)
Oh, in case you're wondering Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and Rand Paul
voted for the amendment that would have forced the bill to be fully paid
for. Paul for some reason broke with the others and voted with the
majority to pass the bill even though it adds to the deficit and debt.
1) I'm liking Cruz's record more and more.
2) Marco Rubio is already dead to me.
3) Wasn't Paul's main selling point (I mean, besides MOAR WEED!) his Fiscal Conservatism?
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at April 15, 2015 01:54 PM (kff5f)
Justincase Rubio was NOT already dead to you, he along with Mike Lee(?!?) today proposed tax reform that would "cut taxes for 90% of tax payers" by raising the tax bracket for all those darned "rich" people making more than $75,000 per year (as apposed to the over $400,000 you have to make now to hit a 35% tax bracket).
Remember when Republicans used to argue that everyone who pays taxes ought to get a tax cut if such things were being handed out?
Posted by: redbanzai at April 15, 2015 03:56 PM (OrI3J)
People like you are who brought us The Insane One, Ross they're coming to take me away Pirogi, that cost a good and decent man his job.
And that little shit-fit is EXACTLY the reason why Republicans have lost 5 out of the last 6 popular votes.
I hate liberturdians.
Hate 'em
fucking hate them
Posted by: Uncle Rick at April 15, 2015 03:59 PM (ZbB1q)
Scatter the stones.
Salt the earth where it stood.
Posted by: AllenG (DedicatedTenther) - TrueCon at April 15, 2015 01:49 PM (kff5f)""
Find some other country to burn down, patriots fight for what they want, losers roll over and take it.
Posted by: DrewM sucks at April 15, 2015 04:07 PM (EgbCN)
Posted by: Uncle Rick at April 15, 2015 03:59 PM (ZbB1q)"
You had me at "fuck you Drew".
Ace, take away his crayon, will you?
Posted by: DrewM sucks at April 15, 2015 04:09 PM (EgbCN)
Paul Ryan is Chairman of the Budget Committee, so why isn't he touting this awesome voucher plan today? Oh right, nobody seriously wanted it.
Posted by: Chris_Balsz at April 15, 2015 04:30 PM (8rRE+)
For years I was right there with you. Ready to take up the cause. Ready to fight. Ready to take back our country.
Our country's gone. On issues of moral conscience, the country continues to skew more and more left. On issues of politics, we lose. We lose elections. We lose votes. Even when we win, we lose. We get a Chief Justice who sides with Obamacare. We get a overwhelming victory in Congress, but they vote for more of the same.
On issues of finances, it's just not worth it for some people to make an honest living anymore. Decades ago, years ago even....the dream was to have a good-paying stable job. Now, the dream is to not have to work. The number of people on the dole is only increasing. And, now we are looking at free college, free phones, free food.
I just don't see this course reversing itself. People aren't going to get MORE conservative. People aren't going to all of the sudden, get ambitious and choose to work...if there are even jobs to be had. Illegals aren't going to stop invading our country. The government isn't going to scale back entitlements. They aren't going to make it harder to qualify for entitlements, either.
Frankly, let it burn is about the only thing that can happen.
Posted by: TickledPink at April 15, 2015 04:32 PM (TMe1n)
Posted by: Bruce J. at April 15, 2015 05:00 PM (iQIUe)
I don't want there to be some catastrophe, but I don't see how to stop it. There are too many organizations, plural, dedicated to preventing anyone from stopping it. I don't understand that, but that's how it looks to me.
So I focus on the (very short) list of people whose safety and well-being is more important to me than keeping my bodily fluids on the inside of my skin, and hope smarter people than me think of something, quickly.
Posted by: Deputy Director Higgins at April 15, 2015 05:04 PM (IxEWc)
http://goo.gl/cVZhgw
Posted by: Bruce J. at April 15, 2015 05:13 PM (iQIUe)
Yeah, this next election shouldn't be a problem for the establishment Repubes at all. No, Jeb will be a shoo in for sure. Uh huh. Sure.
Posted by: Mistress Overdone at April 15, 2015 08:47 PM (2/oBD)
Oh poor you, it got inconvenient to fight for the freedoms that people died to give you.
I get it, it's disheartening and it gets old getting stabbed in the back, I get it, trust me on that, but this is your home and you have no place else to go so you have to strap one on and fight for it, like it or no. Otherwise you are just as much of a parasite as the people you supposedly oppose.
If you think the country is "gone" you owe it to yourself and everyone else to get out. If there is a chance, even a chance of saving it you owe it to the ashes of your fathers to stop whining like a big bitch and stop listening to people who get their beer money by whining like big bitches (Yeah, you DrewM you POS) and get into the fight.
The course will reverse itself when we the people MAKE it reverse. If you can't be bothered then get out.
Posted by: DrewM sucks at April 15, 2015 09:01 PM (EgbCN)
care if you've paid taxes your whole life. the government wasted that
money. It's gone. The only way you get your free knee replacement is for
it to come out of my paycheck, and I've got mouths to feed and bills to
pay here."
So, Alan Grayson was right, then.
You're quoting an asshole that demands that we spend our and other
peoples money so as to further delay admitting that this POS is
unsustainable.
Yeah, I'm quoting an asshole. But he hit the nail on the head, didn't he?
Posted by: billo at April 15, 2015 09:42 PM (WUK1X)
Why doen't the GOP Senate go nuclear and eliminate the filibuster, if not just for stuff that includes executive orders and regulations? Simple -- when everything requires 60 votes to get anything done, there's more Crony bucks floating around.
In that respect, the 'Filibuster rule' has become the 'Crony Lard rule'.
If passing something only required 50 votes, there wouldn't be a lot of Crony bucks required to get stuff done, nor would there be a requirement for larded up 'comprehensive' bills -- common sense clarity in legislation might actually see the light of day. And the mumbling go along to get along appeasing RINOsaurs wouldn't retain their leadership for long.
Posted by: Seipherd at April 16, 2015 12:37 AM (YcFy3)
"[F]uck you, I don't
care if you've taken a bullet for the country. The government wasted that
money. It's gone. The only way you get your free knee replacement is for
it to come out of my paycheck, and I've got mouths to feed and bills to
pay here."
This libertarianism policy of "fuck you" can be applied to a lot of places once you get over this silly idea that contracts and obligations mean something.
Posted by: billo at April 16, 2015 08:06 AM (WUK1X)
I'm now a registered Independent. I will vote conservative - if no conservative is running, I'll vote Democrat, and if there are only establishment Republicans, I will write myself or my dog in...
Posted by: DrDeano at April 16, 2015 05:40 PM (x18S2)
Posted by: DrDeano at April 16, 2015 05:40 PM (x18S2)
You sir, are an idiot.
Posted by: DrewM sucks at April 17, 2015 02:22 AM (EgbCN)
Processing 0.05, elapsed 0.0567 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0223 seconds, 481 records returned.
Page size 254 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.
Real Clear Politics
Gallup
Paul Anka Haiku Contest Announcement
Integrity SAT's: Entrance Exam for Paul Anka's Band
AllahPundit's Paul Anka 45's Collection
AnkaPundit: Paul Anka Takes Over the Site for a Weekend (Continues through to Monday's postings)
George Bush Slices Don Rumsfeld Like an F*ckin' Hammer
Democratic Forays into Erotica
New Shows On Gore's DNC/MTV Network
Nicknames for Potatoes, By People Who Really Hate Potatoes
Star Wars Euphemisms for Self-Abuse
Signs You're at an Iraqi "Wedding Party"
Signs Your Clown Has Gone Bad
Signs That You, Geroge Michael, Should Probably Just Give It Up
Signs of Hip-Hop Influence on John Kerry
NYT Headlines Spinning Bush's Jobs Boom
Things People Are More Likely to Say Than "Did You Hear What Al Franken Said Yesterday?"
Signs that Paul Krugman Has Lost His Frickin' Mind
All-Time Best NBA Players, According to Senator Robert Byrd
Other Bad Things About the Jews, According to the Koran
Signs That David Letterman Just Doesn't Care Anymore
Examples of Bob Kerrey's Insufferable Racial Jackassery
Signs Andy Rooney Is Going Senile
Other Judgments Dick Clarke Made About Condi Rice Based on Her Appearance
Collective Names for Groups of People
John Kerry's Other Vietnam Super-Pets
Cool Things About the XM8 Assault Rifle
Media-Approved Facts About the Democrat Spy
Changes to Make Christianity More "Inclusive"
Secret John Kerry Senatorial Accomplishments
John Edwards Campaign Excuses
John Kerry Pick-Up Lines
Changes Liberal Senator George Michell Will Make at Disney
Torments in Dog-Hell
The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)