Deficit Projected to be $300 Billion

Post #74,667 by deSitter 1/15/03 3:59:09 PM Reply	Deficit Projected to be $300 Billion [link\|http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Bigger-Deficits.html\|http://www.nytimes.c...ger-Deficits.html] Nice job, Repo-Men! -drl
Post #74,966 by orion 1/16/03 6:37:58 PM Reply	Billions, herr Bush blew it all for you and the tax breaks. Yes sir, der F\ufffdhrer, er ah I mean the President who gave us the tax breaks and told us that his math was perfect and that there wouldn't be any more deficit, now has to face the harsh reality that Gore was correct in that the tax breaks and other parts of Bush's programs made no sense in cutting down the deficit. I doubt Bush will win the re-election in 2004. The Democrafts will find a way to blame him for the 911 attacks, the deficit, and the war in Iraq and North Korea and other things. They may even say that he's been asleep at the wheel since he was elected? [link\|http://pub75.ezboard.com/bantiiwethey\| New and improved, Chicken Delvits!]
Post #74,970 by bepatient 1/16/03 6:50:20 PM Reply	You seem to be forgetting something... ...[link\|http://www.newhouse.com/archive/story1b103101.html\|that wasn't forecasted]. Put that price tag easily the half trillion dollar difference between the expense and economic impact. Sure...he gave us tax cuts. Usually what happens during the necessity of "economic stimulus". You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #75,089 by jb4 1/17/03 9:48:49 AM Reply	So lemme get this straight... Your own cite claims that the $176BB surplus is reduced by $124BB as the cost of the attacks. Hmmm..that leaves $52BB surplus. Now, lets assume that the $101BB "economic stimulus program" is passed. That would leave a $49BB deficit, making sure that the fat cats remain fat at the expense of the middle class. So, how did he squander another $251BB. Oh, yeah...Eliminate tax on dividends! That's the ticket! [link\|http://www.msnbc.com/news/858252.asp\|Alan Sloan in Newsweek calls Duh's so-called plan "Booboo Economics"]. I see you and Duh got your MBA from the same mail-order firm. jb4 "They lead. They don't manage. The carrot always wins over the stick. Ask your horse. You can lead your horse to water, but you can't manage him to drink." Richard Kerr, United Technologies Corporation, 1990
Post #75,219 by screamer 1/17/03 4:56:56 PM Reply	What surplus? When? Look here and tell us all about "fuzzy math"... [link\|http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/\|http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/] Care to comment? Just a few thoughts, Screamer Living is easy with eyes closed misunderstanding all you see, it's getting hard to be someone but it all works out it doesn't matter much to me J. Lennon - Strawberry Fields Forever
Post #75,230 by jb4 1/17/03 5:35:39 PM Reply	Well, the surplus BeeP himself cited in his link! It may be fuzzy math, but it's his fuzzy math!!! jb4 "They lead. They don't manage. The carrot always wins over the stick. Ask your horse. You can lead your horse to water, but you can't manage him to drink." Richard Kerr, United Technologies Corporation, 1990
Post #75,292 by Silverlock 1/17/03 10:44:58 PM Reply	Hoo! Raww! ...rare is the dollar of corporate profits that bears a tax burden heavier than the burden on an employee's wages. [link\|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/opinion/columns/kinsleymichael/\|Michael Kinsley]
Post #75,425 by bepatient 1/18/03 4:23:47 PM Reply	Dig a little. look at the dates...look at the shortfalls. Chances are...even if Bush had done NOTHING...that there would be no surplus this year...and possibly >ever<. Erase 9/11, the Afghan conflict, and the tax rebates...the current state of the economy was NOT part of the "fable" that was the Clinton surplus. It was based upon a belief in miracles...that there would be no recession and that the econ growth figures of the 90's would be maintained...and that the internet bubble on the market would never burst. It was based on FICTION. So, if you want to blame this on Bush. Go ahead. It seems to make you feel better. Did he make this years shortfall larger? Sure, he cut taxes. How much of the revenue shortfall is simply tax related? Very little. If you research the effects of massive tax cuts you soon find that the 2 largest cuts occurred, oddly enough, right before the 2 longest growth periods for the economy...those being the cuts of Kennedy and Reagan. So economic history seems to be on Bush's side here even if you are not. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #75,443 by Ashton 1/18/03 6:21:40 PM Reply	Umm are you really gonna assign causality to those two items, prima facie?
Post #75,320 by Silverlock 1/17/03 11:45:22 PM Reply	Hard to figure out the point Put that price tag easily the half trillion dollar difference between the expense and economic impact. Explanation? ...rare is the dollar of corporate profits that bears a tax burden heavier than the burden on an employee's wages. [link\|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/opinion/columns/kinsleymichael/\|Michael Kinsley]
Post #74,969 by inthane-chan 1/16/03 6:43:38 PM Reply	It's not entirely his fault. Quite frankly, the budget numbers as they were before he was elected were pretty much fiscal fantasy - assuming that the boom times would last forever. I'm pretty certain that we would have returned to deficit spending one way or the other once the bad times hit. On the other hand, I'm sure he's made the deficits worse than they had to be with the cuts... Any deity worthy of a graven image can cobble up a working universe complete with fake fossils in under a week - hey, if you're not omnipotent, there's no real point in being a god. But to start with a big ball of elementary particles and end up with the duckbill platypus without constant twiddling requires a degree of subtlety and the ability to Think Things Through: exactly the qualities I'm looking for when I'm shopping for a Supreme Being.
Post #74,984 by Brandioch 1/16/03 7:52:29 PM Reply	Not to mention the increased spending. Yep, the economy went downhill. And he cut taxes. And he increased spending. It wasn't a perfect situation that he was given. And he's made it worse. Isn't there anyone out there who sees a drop in income and cuts back on expenses?
Post #74,989 by bepatient 1/16/03 8:14:31 PM Reply	Awesome idea... ...oh....sorry...somebody blew the shit out of downtown New York with a couple of jumbo jets..."buddy can you spare a dime???" "Screw you Rudy! It ain't in the budget!" You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #75,085 by Silverlock 1/17/03 9:00:59 AM Reply	Pink smelt Too feeble to qualify as a red herring. Why should we ask our military to die for cheap oil when the rest of us aren't even being asked to get better mileage? -[link\|http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=14107\|Molly Ivins]
Post #75,088 by boxley 1/17/03 9:30:21 AM Reply	try a vinager douche will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] You think that you can trust the government to look after your rights? ask an Indian
Post #75,136 by Brandioch 1/17/03 12:25:36 PM Reply	You won't be able to correct him. If he's operating under the impression that the federal government is going to spend $300 billion to rebuild the WTC, there's nothing you can say that will change his mind.
Post #75,298 by Ashton 1/17/03 10:56:13 PM Reply	Now now: It's for Security and Wars. Lots of new wars...

Welcome to IWETHEY!