If I can understand this this is why president obama it

25 posts / 0 new

When the Republicans spend money its evil, because they want to give to the super rich, when the democrats barrow money we do not have it magical...it autmatically fixes what the greedy repubicans did. wow

joemiddle's picture
joemiddle
Joined:
Nov. 15, 2011 1:03 pm

Comments

Not evil but irresponsible. If you have to spend money then you spend it where it is needed most and will do the most good for you family, err, country I mean. :)

Bush_Wacker's picture
Bush_Wacker
Joined:
Jun. 25, 2011 6:53 am

You need to be honest and change your name from joe middle to joe right.

Bush_Wacker's picture
Bush_Wacker
Joined:
Jun. 25, 2011 6:53 am
Quote Bush_Wacker:

You need to be honest and change your name from joe middle to joe right.

Joe illiterate would work as well.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 7:47 pm

At least he acknowledges that cutting the highest marginal income tax rates on the super-rich is "spending."

chilidog
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote joemiddle:

When the Republicans spend money its evil, because they want to give to the super rich, when the democrats barrow money we do not have it magical...it autmatically fixes what the greedy repubicans did. wow

Grammar, it's not a cracker.

Choco's picture
Choco
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

We need to "barrow" money for infrastructure and for R & D, not for wars of conquest. When we "barrow" money for infrastructure and R & D of science and technology, we are not screwing over future generations; they will be able to enjoy the fruits of the money we "barrowed" from them. But, when we "barrow" from those future generations and the Chinese to line the pockets of companies like Haliburton and the company formerly known as Blackwater...99% of current Americans and 99.5% of future Americans receive nothing at all from what they have to pay for it.......................................

DanP's picture
DanP
Joined:
Apr. 16, 2012 1:08 pm
Quote DanP:

We need to "barrow" money for infrastructure and for R & D, not for wars of conquest. When we "barrow" money for infrastructure and R & D of science and technology, we are not screwing over future generations; they will be able to enjoy the fruits of the money we "barrowed" from them. But, when we "barrow" from those future generations and the Chinese to line the pockets of companies like Haliburton and the company formerly known as Blackwater...99% of current Americans and 99.5% of future Americans receive nothing at all from what they have to pay for it.......................................

Great points, Dan. Republicans seem to act like all spending is equal. As if a trillion for a war is no different than a trillion for education. They fail to understand, or choose ignorance of, the fact that some spending is an investment in the future, with calculable pay-back, and other spending just creates debt and enriches the few.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 7:47 pm
Quote chilidog:

At least he acknowledges that cutting the highest marginal income tax rates on the super-rich is "spending."

Surely you're not defending that idiot. When the republicans spend money, it too is borrowed. To claim anything else is ignorant.

As for money spent being "evil" or "good", you know that some money MUST be spent as an investment in our country's future. There are ways to spend money on the federal level that produce social dividends and there are ways to spend money that do nothing but slow the economy and enable the already over-represented rich to have more sway with our government.

Please tell me, Chilidog, that you understand that. If you are going to go with the conservative lie that all spending is equal, then I don't know what to say but WOW. The bottom line is, when you guys talk about spending, you do so to justify cuts to the very societal investments that I spoke of. There is no equivilency between a billion in tax cuts for the rich and a billion spent on education. None! One is fascism and the other is crucial for a healthy democracy.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 7:47 pm
Quote joemiddle:

When the Republicans spend money its evil, because they want to give to the super rich

The right wing never refers to tax cuts as "spending." Hell, they never even refer to them as "tax cuts" - remember, "they're just keeping their money."

chilidog
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote D_NATURED:
Quote chilidog:

At least he acknowledges that cutting the highest marginal income tax rates on the super-rich is "spending."

Surely you're not defending that idiot. When the republicans spend money, it too is borrowed. To claim anything else is ignorant.

As for money spent being "evil" or "good", you know that some money MUST be spent as an investment in our country's future. There are ways to spend money on the federal level that produce social dividends and there are ways to spend money that do nothing but slow the economy and enable the already over-represented rich to have more sway with our government.

Please tell me, Chilidog, that you understand that. If you are going to go with the conservative lie that all spending is equal, then I don't know what to say but WOW. The bottom line is, when you guys talk about spending, you do so to justify cuts to the very societal investments that I spoke of. There is no equivilency between a billion in tax cuts for the rich and a billion spent on education. None! One is fascism and the other is crucial for a healthy democracy.

Don't ever forget that when a politician spends tax dollars, they ALWAYS are using that money to buy themselves votes first. This "government spending is an investment in America" sounds really good, until you look at the way it really works.

And just for the record, that is a shot at politicians on both sides of the aisle, not just the left.

mauiman58's picture
mauiman58
Joined:
Jan. 6, 2012 5:45 pm
Quote joemiddle:

When the Republicans spend money its evil, because they want to give to the super rich, when the democrats barrow money we do not have it magical...it autmatically fixes what the greedy repubicans did. wow

What the hell is that even supposed to mean????? So the GOP isn't borrowing money when it makes up for irresponsible tax cuts we can't afford? Bush was forced to borrow at least 4.9 TRILLION... and his irresponsible policies are still costing us.

Pierpont's picture
Pierpont
Joined:
Feb. 29, 2012 1:19 pm
Quote joemiddle:

When the Republicans spend money its evil, because they want to give to the super rich, when the democrats barrow money we do not have it magical...it autmatically fixes what the greedy repubicans did. wow

Republicans spend money, but Democrats borrow money?

Usually the addage is that the difference between Dems and Republicans is that Republicans want to spend spend spend, lower your taxes, and borrow money to put us in huge amounts of debt. The Dems want to spend spend spend but want to actually tax you to pay for it. That is certainly less true now but that is because the public demands lower taxes but screams when they cut things like medicare or social security or defense spending, etc. At some point we are going to have to foot the bill. I vote that we do it now and stop accurring interest. That just makes it worse.

ah2
Joined:
Dec. 13, 2010 9:00 pm

Sorry about the spam that was here, folks. Family illness meant I was not able to keep up as I usually do.

SueN's picture
SueN
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Thanks Sue... hope all is well!

Pierpont's picture
Pierpont
Joined:
Feb. 29, 2012 1:19 pm
Quote ah2:
Quote joemiddle:

When the Republicans spend money its evil, because they want to give to the super rich, when the democrats barrow money we do not have it magical...it autmatically fixes what the greedy repubicans did. wow

Republicans spend money, but Democrats borrow money?

Usually the addage is that the difference between Dems and Republicans is that Republicans want to spend spend spend, lower your taxes, and borrow money to put us in huge amounts of debt. The Dems want to spend spend spend but want to actually tax you to pay for it. That is certainly less true now but that is because the public demands lower taxes but screams when they cut things like medicare or social security or defense spending, etc. At some point we are going to have to foot the bill. I vote that we do it now and stop accurring interest. That just makes it worse.

Clearly we have to stop spending as much! The yearly shortfall is now 1.2 trillion dollars. No way you can get more than 200-300 billion a year by raising taxes and cutting the military. That still leaves a huge gap.

mauiman58's picture
mauiman58
Joined:
Jan. 6, 2012 5:45 pm

Actually we have to spend more. There should be a bill introduced that would involve a huge stimulus package that went directly to new schools and upgrading of schools and allowing states to pay teachers what they really deserve. Use some of the money for getting the arts programs up and running again. Then direct a large stimulus toward law enforcement and fire departments nation wide. If the states like Wisconsin don't give a shit about their public employees who put their lives and reputations on the line on a daily basis then maybe the Federal Government should get involved. Let's direct a large stimulus to the public offices in this country for both employees and the infrastructure involved in their work. They ultimately work for all of us. I would much rather see this kind of stimulus than the one that goes into the pockets of greedy private banks and wall street.

What do you conservatives think? Let's go on a spending binge like Ronnie did in the 80's and GW did in the 2000's. This time we'll be a little more picky about who the money goes to.

Bush_Wacker's picture
Bush_Wacker
Joined:
Jun. 25, 2011 6:53 am
Quote mauiman58:
Quote D_NATURED:
Quote chilidog:

At least he acknowledges that cutting the highest marginal income tax rates on the super-rich is "spending."

Surely you're not defending that idiot. When the republicans spend money, it too is borrowed. To claim anything else is ignorant.

As for money spent being "evil" or "good", you know that some money MUST be spent as an investment in our country's future. There are ways to spend money on the federal level that produce social dividends and there are ways to spend money that do nothing but slow the economy and enable the already over-represented rich to have more sway with our government.

Please tell me, Chilidog, that you understand that. If you are going to go with the conservative lie that all spending is equal, then I don't know what to say but WOW. The bottom line is, when you guys talk about spending, you do so to justify cuts to the very societal investments that I spoke of. There is no equivilency between a billion in tax cuts for the rich and a billion spent on education. None! One is fascism and the other is crucial for a healthy democracy.

Don't ever forget that when a politician spends tax dollars, they ALWAYS are using that money to buy themselves votes first. This "government spending is an investment in America" sounds really good, until you look at the way it really works.

And just for the record, that is a shot at politicians on both sides of the aisle, not just the left.

Right. So if we're going to have them "buy" our votes with tax dollars, why are we printing the money in China?

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 7:47 pm
The yearly shortfall is now 1.2 trillion dollars. No way you can get more than 200-300 billion a year by raising taxes and cutting the military. That still leaves a huge gap.
This is the oddest kind of rationale. First, ignore the potential for economic growth through stimulus. (Remember, that's how romney was going to pay for that $5 trillion hole). Then say that, because you can only get $200 billion out of it, we should just let rich people keep the money. Take it out of the hide of people at the lower ends. Does this seem kinda screwy to anybody but me?

Art's picture
Art
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote chilidog:
Quote joemiddle:

When the Republicans spend money its evil, because they want to give to the super rich

The right wing never refers to tax cuts as "spending." Hell, they never even refer to them as "tax cuts" - remember, "they're just keeping their money."

The "right-wing", in this case, happens to be correct. Leaving money if the pockets of those who earned it is not spending. The lifting of a burden is not spending. Tax loopholes or tax cuts, and spending in are different categories.

LysanderSpooner's picture
LysanderSpooner
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote mauiman58:
Quote D_NATURED:
Quote chilidog:

At least he acknowledges that cutting the highest marginal income tax rates on the super-rich is "spending."

Surely you're not defending that idiot. When the republicans spend money, it too is borrowed. To claim anything else is ignorant.

As for money spent being "evil" or "good", you know that some money MUST be spent as an investment in our country's future. There are ways to spend money on the federal level that produce social dividends and there are ways to spend money that do nothing but slow the economy and enable the already over-represented rich to have more sway with our government.

Please tell me, Chilidog, that you understand that. If you are going to go with the conservative lie that all spending is equal, then I don't know what to say but WOW. The bottom line is, when you guys talk about spending, you do so to justify cuts to the very societal investments that I spoke of. There is no equivilency between a billion in tax cuts for the rich and a billion spent on education. None! One is fascism and the other is crucial for a healthy democracy.

Don't ever forget that when a politician spends tax dollars, they ALWAYS are using that money to buy themselves votes first. This "government spending is an investment in America" sounds really good, until you look at the way it really works.

And just for the record, that is a shot at politicians on both sides of the aisle, not just the left.

Mauiman,

You're arguing with people who think that the majority has the right to steal from the minority. They believe in might makes rights. They support violence.

LysanderSpooner's picture
LysanderSpooner
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

LysanderSpooner,

Psychological manipulation is where a person makes someone else do something that they do not want to do, be it violent or nonviolent, coercive or deceptive. Just because a person is nonviolent does not stop them from being manipulative. Just putting someone in jail is an act of manipulation, so is the paying fines for a punishment. So even Libertarian societies are manipulative.

Your extreme dislike of government ignores that people in a society must surrender some of their freedoms in order to make it work. If a Libertarian says that taxation is the many taking from the few, then the problem with the few is that they do not belong in a society, which by definition means sometimes people have to do things that they don't want to do. Lysander Spooner, I do not know what to say, except that if you insist on never doing something you do not want to then society is not for you.

If people are allowed to disobey a law or not pay a tax everytime they dislike it, then they may be free, but society will fall apart all around them. While it may seem good to just deny someone a resource if they don't want to pay a tax for it, that is just nonfunctional. Such virtual anarchy will not allow a society to exist. I don't know what to call it.

I tell you what. I can always go live somewhere else where people want a society. I am not going to be so controlling telling you to leave. That would be arrogant, rude, and manipulative of me to tell you to leave.

Frankly, I do not know where there is a society with 0% manipulation. You are welcome to try to find it. I will do my best to not get in your way.

micahjr34
Joined:
Feb. 7, 2011 3:57 pm

LysanderSpooner,

Everything I said here, I mean it truthfully. I like the government in Canada because it operates under the assumption that it is a good thing for citizens of a country to take care of their own. However, I must admit that I am detered by the extremely cold weather. LysanderSpooner, if the people of the USA really grow into thinking like you do, then I would harbor no ill will, malice, or spite towards you. I will not use threats or terrorism to express my displeasure. I would simply save up money to pay my citizenship fees, move there, and live.

Like I said, I am not going to tell others to leave. I used to do that (tell others to leave...) but I've learned that can be obnoxious to people. If people like you win over the USA, then I will simply pull up stakes. I refuse to be the type of person to just get in people's way like a brick wall!

micahjr34
Joined:
Feb. 7, 2011 3:57 pm

Spending is taxing.

Collecting the taxes spent is different.

chilidog
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote LysanderSpooner:
Quote mauiman58:
Quote D_NATURED:
Quote chilidog:

At least he acknowledges that cutting the highest marginal income tax rates on the super-rich is "spending."

Surely you're not defending that idiot. When the republicans spend money, it too is borrowed. To claim anything else is ignorant.

As for money spent being "evil" or "good", you know that some money MUST be spent as an investment in our country's future. There are ways to spend money on the federal level that produce social dividends and there are ways to spend money that do nothing but slow the economy and enable the already over-represented rich to have more sway with our government.

Please tell me, Chilidog, that you understand that. If you are going to go with the conservative lie that all spending is equal, then I don't know what to say but WOW. The bottom line is, when you guys talk about spending, you do so to justify cuts to the very societal investments that I spoke of. There is no equivilency between a billion in tax cuts for the rich and a billion spent on education. None! One is fascism and the other is crucial for a healthy democracy.

Don't ever forget that when a politician spends tax dollars, they ALWAYS are using that money to buy themselves votes first. This "government spending is an investment in America" sounds really good, until you look at the way it really works.

And just for the record, that is a shot at politicians on both sides of the aisle, not just the left.

Mauiman,

You're arguing with people who think that the majority has the right to steal from the minority. They believe in might makes rights. They support violence.

Steal? Really, you can't make an argument that is not hyperbolic to the extreme? Look at it as a pay-to-play deal and it will make more conservative sense to you. The people who get the most from this fiscal roller coaster called the USA are charged more to ride. Those who don't get to ride, don't pay. How's that sound?

Now, as for your ridiculous claim about violence, do you think that all democracy is violence? Is majority rule a might-makes-right thing by your estimation? Really, though I hesitate to engage you over such a stupid claim, your words are so representative of conservative martyrdom in general that I must protest.

If democracy is violence, then when we get together to decide that it's illegal to drive 100 miles an hour past a school, the public is doing violence against me by taking valuable time (aka, money) from my schedule to keep school children-who aren't mine-safe. Do you agree?

If democracy is violence, then when the majority demand I get licensed to practice medicine, they are doing violence against me by making me spend my hard-earned dollars and time on education and testing. Agreed?

I could go on and on but it will never make sense to call it violence. You must, at some point, be honest enough to admit that creating a society has costs. Furthermore, you must admit that if taxation is violence against the rich, tax cuts are violence against the poor. You can't have it both ways. However, though, if both taxes and tax cuts are "violence", like murder as opposed to a slap in the face, they needn't be equal in the harm they cause. It seems to be your contention that they are, but objectively that is false.

When the rich pay more in taxes, the violence manifests itself as a slightly smaller amount of money for them to throw on the pile. That "violence" harmed nobody and nothing except the ego of the wealthy tax payer. When the poor have their societal benefits cut, it manifests itself as poverty, sickness and crime for our society to deal with, which are costlier to react to than they are to prevent, thus necessitating the need for higher taxes.

This seems to be where the wealthy want to stick their fingers in their ears and shout "LA LA LA LA". Trying to get conservatives to admit that there are costs associated with tax cuts is like trying to convince a three year old that you can't both have a cup of juice AND admire the Donald Duck picture on the bottom of the cup. Actions have reactions and knowing that makes it a little difficult for mature people to stand on empty principle while people suffer.

We know what happens when the wealthy pay their share. You get a stable society. We know what happens when they don't too. What happens is fascism. And, if you think fascism or wealth worship are less violent than taxation, all that tells me is which side you're on. Namely, the side that doesn't have to mop up the juice.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 7:47 pm

Currently Chatting

The other way we're subsidizing Walmart...

Most of us know how taxpayers subsidize Walmart's low wages with billions of dollars in Medicaid, food stamps, and other financial assistance for workers. But, did you know that we're also subsidizing the retail giant by paying the cost of their environmental destruction.

Powered by Pressflow, an open source content management system