A novel approach, of course, would be to come right out with it and admit that taxes would have to go up. You might even get away with it you harp on having "fiscal responsibility" and say things like, "if we don't pay for it, our children will. Think of the children!" and "America can't live on credit forever."

I waver between "meh" and "friggin' finally!" on each of these. I'm glad that they'll fund stem cell and "science" research, whatever that means. I remain indifferent to jacking up the taxes on oil companies, though, but only I agree with the Republicans' handling of the coming energy crunch, for the most part.

So, whatever. None of this is going to happen unless the Dems take back the House and the Senate, and even then, it's going to be a hard sell to balance the budget again, because it necessitates tax increases.

quote:

---

Enact funding recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.

Institute lobbying reform, implement balanced budgets, pay down the national debt.

Enact tax changes to benefit entrepreneurs.

Focus national security strategy to nation's borders, increase port security.

---

I mean, the student loan stuff and the public transportation are old hat for these guys, but I thought the GOP was the party of business and security?

But you're right, taxes would either need to go up or the money taken out of other programs, like the oil subsidies mentioned.

quote:

---

Karnajing:
So, whatever. None of this is going to happen unless the Dems take back the House and the Senate, and even then, it's going to be a hard sell to balance the budget again, because it necessitates tax increases.

---

I think you mean unbalance the budget again; federal income is through the roof and the defecit as a percentage of GDP is under 3% and falling. All because tax cuts increase federal revenue.

But yeah let's vote the collectivists into office. I want to see what it's like to have John Murtha as senate majority leader and Nancy "The Brain" Pelosi as speaker of the house.

Maradon! fucked around with this message on 06-15-2006 at 03:16 PM.

quote:

---

Maradon! put down Tada! magazine long enough to type:
I think you mean unbalance the budget again; federal income is through the roof and the defecit as a percentage of GDP is under 3% and falling. All because tax cuts increase federal revenue.

---

Evidence/quantification of "through the roof."

quote:

---

Naimah got all f'ed up on Angel Dust and wrote:
Thier list comes down to fuck business, spend, spend, spend, spend, fuck business, spend, increase taxes, fuck big business, do the thing republicans are already doing, spend, screw big oil. Man sign me up!

---

It's them or republicans. Depressing, isn't it?

Personally I'm gonna vote towards conflicted legislative and evecutive branches. I don't care if it's democrats in the white house and republicans in congress or vice versa.

quote:

---

Over the mountain, in between the ups and downs, I ran into Karnaj who doth quote:
Evidence/quantification of "through the roof."

---

quote:

---

Maradon! had this to say about Pirotess:
[xIMG]http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/reports/revenue%20growth.jpg[/xIMG]

---

It's a graph with shadows! How can you argue!

quote:

---

Maradon! had this to say about Optimus Prime:
[xIMG]http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/reports/revenue%20growth.jpg[/IMG]

---

Now if only they were a little more shy about spending it.

I like a lot of Republican beliefs but there are a few real problems that I have with their stances. Democrats try to address that but they're pretty far off the deep end too. I don't know what to do.

quote:

---

x--JooJooFlopO-('-'Q) :
Now if only they were a little more shy about spending it.

---

You got me there. So let's vote in the democrats, I'm sure they'll do much better.

quote:

---

Suddar thought about the meaning of life:
I think Democrats would do a lot better if they just tried to be "sane" Republicans. Their values don't make much sense and that's probably why they don't attract as many votes. I don't like Democrats, but I like Republicans even less. That's a bad reason to vote for a party.

I like a lot of Republican beliefs but there are a few real problems that I have with their stances. Democrats try to address that but they're pretty far off the deep end too. I don't know what to do.

---

Vote libertarian, you'll double their results.

quote:

---

Naimah had this to say about Cuba:
Vote libertarian, you'll double their results.

---

And that's the problem with libertarians. I would vote for them but I know that it's just pissing my vote away until more than 12 people care.

quote:

---

Check out the big brain on Maradon!!
You got me there. So let's vote in the democrats, I'm sure they'll do much better.

---

"Why are you complaining about me constantly punching you in the face? The other guy will probably stab you."

quote:

---

x--SuddarO-('-'Q) :
And that's the problem with libertarians. I would vote for them but I know that it's just pissing my vote away until more than 12 people care.

---

See I thought the point was to vote for a guy because you agreed with him, not to vote for a guy because you thought he was going to win.

quote:

---

Suddar had this to say about Pirotess:
And that's the problem with libertarians. I would vote for them but I know that it's just pissing my vote away until more than 12 people care.

---

We're getting there. In a world where the Republicans leave a bad taste in their mouth and the Democrats have absolutely no strategy, Libertarianism is gaining with the voters.

quote:

---

Maradon! got served! Maradon! got served!
[xIMG]http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/reports/revenue%20growth.jpg[/IMG]

---

Great, so, when do we start paying down the national debt some? Now, I'm well aware that a good chunk is owed essentially to ourselves, but about 60% of it is owed to private sources of some variety. That's what, about 5 trillion dollars?

Also, assuming a $10 trillion GDP, our defecit is still well in excess of $250 billion per year. If federal revenues are so high, why can't the party that's traditionally for curbing spending balance the budget? As I've said in other threads, this money has to be paid back eventually. Why not start now?

quote:

---

Over the mountain, in between the ups and downs, I ran into Karnaj who doth quote:
Great, so, when do we start paying down the national debt some?

---

The only meaningful measurement of defecit is as a percentage of GDP and that is decreasing rapidly, and that is the best of all possible circumstances.

If you think that the defecit as a static number is ever going to be "paid down" and that it would be a good thing, then you do not understand what the defecit is. If the defecit as a static number were to decrease, that would be a sign that the country is actually beginning to shrink rapidly in terms of population and economic breadth.

quote:

---

Nobody really understood why Maradon! wrote:
The only meaningful measurement of defecit is as a percentage of GDP and that is decreasing rapidly, and that is the best of all possible circumstances.

If you think that the defecit as a static number is ever going to be "paid down" and that it would be a good thing, then you do not understand what the defecit is. If the defecit as a static number were to decrease, that would be a sign that the country is actually beginning to shrink rapidly in terms of population and economic breadth.

---

He said debt, not defecit.

quote:

---

Suddar said this about your mom:
I think Democrats would do a lot better if they just tried to be "sane" Republicans.

---

I doubt it. Public perception of things is shaped more by the ideas presented in public than people's self-researched opinions. What the left anywhere in the west needs to do is start drilling some of their issues into the public spehere in the same way that the right has made completely ridiculous issues like gay people marrying, scripture not being taught as scientific fact in schools and four week old fetuses into massive vote-winners. In politics you cannot ever engage the opposition on their own turf and win, since by engaging in a lengthy debate over whether the dragon Tiamat giving birth to the world is a legitimate scientific theory or not you are legitimizing the whole issue as a point of debate.

Also to be useful evidence that graph needs to go cover a longer timespan and be inflation-adjusted. As it is it barely covers one whole business cycle.

Edit: All this really doesn't do much good without a way to finance it. I can get on a soapbox and announce that I'm going to 'fix' a billion different programs for some easy cheers, but at some point something will have to fall by the wayside and it would be only honest to announce what that will be. I suspect that a lot of these proposals will fail because of internal DNC lobbying from various groups preventing any sort of compromise regarding the financing of such ideas.

Mod fucked around with this message on 06-15-2006 at 04:35 PM.

quote:

---

Maradon! still thinks SARS jokes are topical, as evidenced by:
The only meaningful measurement of defecit is as a percentage of GDP and that is decreasing rapidly, and that is the best of all possible circumstances.

If you think that the defecit as a static number is ever going to be "paid down" and that it would be a good thing, then you do not understand what the defecit is. If the defecit as a static number were to decrease, that would be a sign that the country is actually beginning to shrink rapidly in terms of population and economic breadth.

---

Wait, what? I was talking about debt. You know, that $8 trillion we owe to ourselves and private entities. The national defecit is only what we add to that debt each year. So it's decreasing. Marvelous; it doesn't change the fact that we're still spending more money than we're taking in, and adding to the debt which must, eventually, be repaid.

quote:

---

The logic train ran off the tracks when Karnaj said:
Wait, what? I was talking about debt. You know, that $8 trillion we owe to ourselves and private entities. The national defecit is only what we add to that debt each year. So it's decreasing. Marvelous; it doesn't change the fact that we're still spending more money than we're taking in, and adding to the debt which must, eventually, be repaid.

---

While debt is bad, productivity growth will absorb it eventually if deficits are kept to a minimum.

I've been hearing rumblings that our current means of handling our money could seriously screw us in the not-so-distant future if China rampages onto the scene.

In short: it's something to keep an eye on, but not a particularly bad thing and certainly not an emergency.

Of course, I could just be talking Keynesian commie nonsense, but hey, what are they going to do, break your legs?