IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Try to follow along here, now...
[link|http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/08/28/budget/index.html| From CNN:]
This year's federal budget surplus has plunged to $153 billion because of the nation's economic doldrums and the Bush administration's tax cut, meaning the federal government will have to cover $9 billion of spending by dipping into Social Security, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected Tuesday.

The CBO tends not to sugar-coat things to please a particular constituency.

What "got my goat" is the following (from the same article):
That is politically significant because both Bush and congressional lawmakers from both parties have pledged to avoid dipping into the retirement fund reserve.

The reason? Again, from the same article:
For the 10-year period from 2002 to 2011, the CBO calculates the nation will have a total surplus of $3.4 trillion -- three-quarters of which would be made up of excess monies in the Social Security trust fund. That number, however, is $2.2 trillion less than was projected just last May, and the reason for most of that drop is the $1.35 trillion tax cut championed by President Bush. [emphasis added]

So here we have a "tax cut" (that nobody outside of the "true believers" really wanted) happening at a time of economic downturn (fewer people working, or not making as much income as previously = fewer tax receipts...DUH!), resulting in the "surplus" being...uh, less that expected. The result: a(nother) broken promise (read: lie) not to dip into the perilously balanced Social Security Ponzi scheme^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hfund.

There. that should be clear enough for even a Republican to understand.
(Resistance is not futile...)
New Re: Try to follow along here, now...
Tax cuts to stimulate the economy and increase Federal revenue worked under Kennedy. Worked under Reagan (though, with Reagan, the effect was rather spoiled by a massive increase of federal spending.)

There's reason to think it can work again, though I am dubious about the "rebate" format.

I would think even a Democrat could come to terms with this, especially when I cite the Holy Name Kennedy - who, in retrospect, is so far to the right of most modern Democrats that he'd be considered a conservative.
French Zombies are zapping me with lasers!
New Re: Try to follow along here, now...
I see you've bit.

As far as it all goes...it all goes into general funds. Everything. Social Security and everything else.

And the CBO has forecast that the 10 year projected surplus has dropped from 5.4 to something like 3 and a half trillion.

Thats 3 1/2 trillion of OUR money the government doesn't need to make the bills.

Your worried about a 9 billion (if true) cash shortfall this year (which is still CLINTON's budget)

Lets give Bush a chance to pass his own budget and see if he needs to tap Social Security then (as if there's some bank account somewhere with all that SS money in it (ha ha))

Funny how the Dems play this game. Its THEIR budget and THEIR spending programs causing this problem...and THEIR tax programs cut more revenue faster than Bush's did...

So if we'd have listened to them THEN...we'd be even worse off.

But you seem to want to listen to them NOW...cause they're being critical of W. A very popular agenda item for you.,

You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson

New Well...if it's their programs and their budget...
then it was their surplus last year.
New I'm sure there's some...
...point you're going to come back with after I agree with that logic...

of course...it really was 'our' surplus....

I, quite frankly, want my share of it back.

You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson

New I want every penny of that surplus
Surplus? My ass. It's "Excuse to spend every penny we have and a billion more".

Refund ALL the so-called surplus. Now. That weak pinheaded Bush refund iis a pig's ear sewed onto a donkey. (Imagery deliberate, for dense people donkey=democrats)

Not that there is any surplus of any kind anyway.
French Zombies are zapping me with lasers!
"Lets give Bush a chance ..."

Anybody but me remember the tv ads in 1983 with the Postman coming by, chatting nicely and saying (about Reagan then) "Give the guy a chance."?

GACK! "Here we go again." -RR
     Question for all you Repo apologists out there... - (jb4) - (59)
         As opposed to... - (Another Scott) - (5)
             How's that? - (mmoffitt) - (4)
                 A couple of examples. - (Another Scott) - (3)
                     Wow, are those nits ever small - (drewk)
                     I am unmoved. - (mmoffitt) - (1)
                         Jimmy sure was a different President. - (inthane-chan)
         He'll take the tobacco defense - (GBert)
         Odds that we run a deficit b4 the Resident is out of office? -NT - (mmoffitt) - (1)
             I'm not taking that bet (regardless of the odds)! -NT - (jb4)
         Out of curiosity, what are you talking about? Budgets? - (wharris2)
         Question for all you Repo doubters - (rsf) - (10)
             As with most other politicians, telling when Bush is lying- - (DonRichards) - (2)
                 In this case, however - (wharris2) - (1)
                     I think you have it right - (DonRichards)
             Try to follow along here, now... - (jb4) - (6)
                 Re: Try to follow along here, now... - (wharris2)
                 Re: Try to follow along here, now... - (bepatient) - (4)
                     Well...if it's their programs and their budget... - (Simon_Jester) - (2)
                         I'm sure there's some... - (bepatient) - (1)
                             I want every penny of that surplus - (wharris2)
                     IT'S BAAAAAAAAAAAAAACCCCCCCCCCCCCK! - (mmoffitt)
         Link to Sources - (Simon_Jester) - (1)
             surplus, what surplus? - (boxley)
         Hee Hee - (deSitter) - (35)
             Ho Ho - (rsf) - (34)
                 Jabbering is no use - (deSitter) - (30)
                     About that '92-2000 period... - (inthane-chan) - (1)
                         Denonthinker - (wharris2)
                     Jabbering is no use - agreed - (rsf)
                     Why don't you tie those dates... - (bepatient) - (23)
                         I musta been sleeping for 8 years, but... - (jb4) - (22)
                             slap slap - (wharris2)
                             Huh? - (bepatient) - (20)
                                 hoorah! someone who understands basic economics! - (boxley) - (5)
                                     Capital Formation - (Decco Dave) - (2)
                                         the availability of capital has nothing to do with govt - (boxley)
                                         There is a small effect... - (bepatient)
                                     So lemme get this striaght.. - (jb4) - (1)
                                         according to me yeah, propaganda value only -NT - (boxley)
                                 Why that's.. that's - unDemocrat AND unRepublican!! of you \ufffd -NT - (Ashton) - (2)
                                     That may be the nicest thing said to me in this forum:) -NT - (bepatient) - (1)
                                         I had at times suspected that, behind that calm facade - (Ashton)
                                 Policies can have some impact - (wharris2) - (10)
                                     LOL! - (Simon_Jester) - (9)
                                         Which one? -NT - (bepatient) - (8)
                                             This one... - (Simon_Jester) - (7)
                                                 Ah... - (bepatient) - (6)
                                                     Muhahaha - (Simon_Jester) - (5)
                                                         Damn...I thought you could read... - (bepatient) - (4)
                                                             Oh I know, you left yourself weasel room - (Simon_Jester) - (3)
                                                                 Well...lets see... - (bepatient) - (2)
                                                                     Well, I think you're still looking at the trees too much... - (Simon_Jester) - (1)
                                                                         Presidential politics... - (bepatient)
                     Clearly not so. - (Another Scott) - (2)
                         Nancy - (rsf)
                         Bizarre :) - (deSitter)
                 Re: Ho Ho - (kelzer) - (2)
                     Can we get an AMEN! -NT - (bepatient)
                     But can G. be blamed for the massive gullibility that Was - (Ashton)

On bassline: Martina Nav... Navri... gosh, I wish she'd get married.
86 ms