A question for Dems about the TEA Party

[nodoginnafight]

Tell me Dante, what is it about that sign that bothers you?

Is it simply the use of the misspelled '******', or is it the correct observation that we are ALL slaves to the whims of an ever more powerful government?

ETA: Do you feel that the use of the term '******' in this instance is a racial one, or a comparative one?

Well said Guy.

NOOOOO! Not a tea party dude with a misspelled sign??????
Say it ain't so.

And making an ignorant "point" in an ignorant way.
I'm shocked.

 

[Koios]

Total Welfare Spending Now at $1 Trillion - By NRO Staff - The Corner - National Review Online

You were saying?

I was saying what was appropriated, in law, pursuant to the Constitution, for FY 2012, is not a Trillion as was asserted, orginally.

And a GOPnik-requested summary, we have not seen, and is only mentioned as saying $750 Billion Fed; $250 Billion States, seems a) questionable, and b) lumping state spending into Federal Government spending.

So the CRS gives different answers depending on the party of the requester?

How much of that $750 billion do you think can be saved by eliminating 80-some overlapping programs?

Haven't any idea. Do you? Where's the CRS report?

And yes, being that a GOPnik anti-social program zealot requests a summary, and then says it has $750 B and $250 B in it, I question what indeed the report says, both due to the messenger parsing the report and its conveniently round numbers.

Moreover, CRS has already had the GOP-controlled Congress shelve a report they didn't like the sound of; a first in history, best of my knowledge.

So I'll stick with published spending data, which by the way, the Constitution also requires "be reported from time to time."

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Tell me Dante, what is it about that sign that bothers you?

Is it simply the use of the misspelled '******', or is it the correct observation that we are ALL slaves to the whims of an ever more powerful government?

ETA: Do you feel that the use of the term '******' in this instance is a racial one, or a comparative one?

Well said Guy.

NOOOOO! Not a tea party dude with a misspelled sign??????
Say it ain't so.

And making an ignorant "point" in an ignorant way.
I'm shocked.

Nah the point in the sign is a good one even if the sign and its language are sub-par.

The point is that in modern day america the govt is our master who enslaves us with an ever growing tax burden.

In all honesty, considering we owe trillions to china we cant repay, even our govt is a slave to them (well not just yet, a few more years without fixing this mess however.....)

 

[thereisnospoon]

Source (scroll down the page about 1/3 of the way): US Welfare Budget: US Federal Budget FY11 Estimated Spending Breakdown - Pie Chart

Spending is the solution, whether as individuals or collectively through our government. Businesses that sell the stuff that's bought depend on it greatly.

Spending borrowed money is the problem, which we can eliminate by restoring sensible tax policy.

Policy Basics: Where Do Our Federal Tax Dollars Go? — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
Social programs consume HALF of the federal budget.
That's enough. It's all you're going to get. If you want government to operate more efficiently, cut some the funding for social programs.
You will bleat "what are these people supposed to do?!!!!!!"..
Well the ones that are gaming the system, will just have to do the responsible thing.....find a fucking job.

Sorry; you're simply wrong, which can be frustrating. So I understand your anger.

Wrong about what?..
You can opine all you like. Doesn't change the facts.
Additional taxation removes cash from the private sector. This slows the economy and reduces revenue to the federal and state governments.
The recession and subsequent slow economy is THE reason why cities, states and the federal government are having difficulty.
Increasing taxes will further reduce revenues as economic activity slows to a crawl.
Lower taxes, reduced, responsible spending is the clear path to a robust economy.
Now you may protest all you like. It changes nothing. The facts are clear. They are not in dispute.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Here's why ...

Social Security and Medicare are things every worker pays into, and are entitled to vis a vis having paid into them. Ergo, "Entitlements."

Social welfare, or in essence, government assistance, is a relatively small percentage of the total budget, albeit much of non-defense discretionary spending.

"Pay into"...No, these are TAXES.
They were funds. Once the federal government decided on it's own that it could collect this money and spend it on whatever it wished, these things became taxes.
SO please, don't tell us the money is "just sitting there".
And don't go down this road.."relatively small percentage of the budget". First off, it's not true. I have already posted an article explaining that.
One dollar of waste and fraud is too much.

 

[Koios]

Wrong about what?..
You can opine all you like. Doesn't change the facts.
Additional taxation removes cash from the private sector. This slows the economy and reduces revenue to the federal and state governments.
The recession and subsequent slow economy is THE reason why cities, states and the federal government are having difficulty.
Increasing taxes will further reduce revenues as economic activity slows to a crawl.
Lower taxes, reduced, responsible spending is the clear path to a robust economy.
Now you may protest all you like. It changes nothing. The facts are clear. They are not in dispute.

It ain't a Trillion. Period. Reporting to the People what's being spent is required in the Constitution. And thus it's done, regularly. And the reports say $471.5 Billion.

Thanks for your permission opine. I believe I will: man; them Righties are dumb as posts. You feel me, my wigga?

Okay back to our little repartee ...

Of course. Unemployment is high currently, and driving up UI costs. Nothing new there or anything we can cut and save us a bunch year after year, especially since it's normally a state-level issue, by and large. It's part of the stimulus, which we needed to pull our asses out of the deep recession trough, we lovingly call the Great Recession. Remember? Everything going south, fast. Then we bridged the delta with government spending? Surely you remember; yeah? So that's temporary, and already authorized. So, going back to the original contention "there's a Trillion," no; there ain't no Trillion. In fact, classical welfare, as in families and children aid, is ~$100 billion and vital to hunger and poverty reduction.

Those are facts. Sorry you don't like them. But I'm just the messenger. K?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Wrong about what?..
You can opine all you like. Doesn't change the facts.
Additional taxation removes cash from the private sector. This slows the economy and reduces revenue to the federal and state governments.
The recession and subsequent slow economy is THE reason why cities, states and the federal government are having difficulty.
Increasing taxes will further reduce revenues as economic activity slows to a crawl.
Lower taxes, reduced, responsible spending is the clear path to a robust economy.
Now you may protest all you like. It changes nothing. The facts are clear. They are not in dispute.

It ain't a Trillion. Period. Reporting to the People what's being spent is required in the Constitution. And thus it's done, regularly. And the reports say $471.5 Billion.

Thanks for your permission opine. I believe I will: man; them Righties are dumb as posts. You feel me, my wigga?

Okay back to our little repartee ...

Of course. Unemployment is high currently, and driving up UI costs. Nothing new there or anything we can cut and save us a bunch year after year, especially since it's normally a state-level issue, by and large. It's part of the stimulus, which we needed to pull our asses out of the deep recession trough, we lovingly call the Great Recession. Remember? Everything going south, fast. Then we bridged the delta with government spending? Surely you remember; yeah? So that's temporary, and already authorized. So, going back to the original contention "there's a Trillion," no; there ain't no Trillion. In fact, classical welfare, as in families and children aid, is ~$100 billion and vital to hunger and poverty reduction.

Those are facts. Sorry you don't like them. But I'm just the messenger. K?

That stimulus money vanished. With the lack of positive results and fulfilled promises( shovel ready jobs) the left has tried to change the narrative to "well, at least he did SOMETHING!".. Horse shit.
The bailouts should never happened. Those companies should have been permitted to file for bankruptcy. The auto industry bailout was a payoff to the unions which unequivocally supported Obama. GM is in the same place it would be had it not gotten our money.
Goldman Sachs and all the rest? Too big to fail? Shit instead of bailing them out, they should have been broken up.


Strange how a person of apparent intelligence such as yourself, has the time to waste posting such disconnected drivel.

 

[Koios]

That stimulus money vanished. With the lack of positive results and fulfilled promises( shovel ready jobs) the left has tried to change the narrative to "well, at least he did SOMETHING!".. Horse shit.
The bailouts should never happened. Those companies should have been permitted to file for bankruptcy. The auto industry bailout was a payoff to the unions which unequivocally supported Obama. GM is in the same place it would be had it not gotten our money.
Goldman Sachs and all the rest? Too big to fail? Shit instead of bailing them out, they should have been broken up.


Strange how a person of apparent intelligence such as yourself, has the time to waste posting such disconnected drivel.

Vanished? Where'd it go? Zimbabwe, perhaps? It's money; put into the economy, which circulates, and in this instance, turned recession into growth, albeit, slow growth.

It's what stimuluses do, hopefully. Get folks (and companies) thinking things are improving, which has a self-fulfilling prophecy quality. Folks spend with more confidence, and businesses feel it's safer to invest, and do. It's not the end-all, nor even the solution. It just kick starts an economy heading south, and gets it going north, which it did. Fact. We saw it happen.

 

[rightwinger]

Wrong about what?..
You can opine all you like. Doesn't change the facts.
Additional taxation removes cash from the private sector. This slows the economy and reduces revenue to the federal and state governments.
The recession and subsequent slow economy is THE reason why cities, states and the federal government are having difficulty.
Increasing taxes will further reduce revenues as economic activity slows to a crawl.
Lower taxes, reduced, responsible spending is the clear path to a robust economy.
Now you may protest all you like. It changes nothing. The facts are clear. They are not in dispute.

It ain't a Trillion. Period. Reporting to the People what's being spent is required in the Constitution. And thus it's done, regularly. And the reports say $471.5 Billion.

Thanks for your permission opine. I believe I will: man; them Righties are dumb as posts. You feel me, my wigga?

Okay back to our little repartee ...

Of course. Unemployment is high currently, and driving up UI costs. Nothing new there or anything we can cut and save us a bunch year after year, especially since it's normally a state-level issue, by and large. It's part of the stimulus, which we needed to pull our asses out of the deep recession trough, we lovingly call the Great Recession. Remember? Everything going south, fast. Then we bridged the delta with government spending? Surely you remember; yeah? So that's temporary, and already authorized. So, going back to the original contention "there's a Trillion," no; there ain't no Trillion. In fact, classical welfare, as in families and children aid, is ~$100 billion and vital to hunger and poverty reduction.

Those are facts. Sorry you don't like them. But I'm just the messenger. K?

That stimulus money vanished. With the lack of positive results and fulfilled promises( shovel ready jobs) the left has tried to change the narrative to "well, at least he did SOMETHING!".. Horse shit.
The bailouts should never happened. Those companies should have been permitted to file for bankruptcy. The auto industry bailout was a payoff to the unions which unequivocally supported Obama. GM is in the same place it would be had it not gotten our money.
Goldman Sachs and all the rest? Too big to fail? Shit instead of bailing them out, they should have been broken up.


Strange how a person of apparent intelligence such as yourself, has the time to waste posting such disconnected drivel.

Vanished?

I got mine, didn't you get yours?

 

[thereisnospoon]

That stimulus money vanished. With the lack of positive results and fulfilled promises( shovel ready jobs) the left has tried to change the narrative to "well, at least he did SOMETHING!".. Horse shit.
The bailouts should never happened. Those companies should have been permitted to file for bankruptcy. The auto industry bailout was a payoff to the unions which unequivocally supported Obama. GM is in the same place it would be had it not gotten our money.
Goldman Sachs and all the rest? Too big to fail? Shit instead of bailing them out, they should have been broken up.


Strange how a person of apparent intelligence such as yourself, has the time to waste posting such disconnected drivel.

Vanished? Where'd it go? Zimbabwe, perhaps? It's money; put into the economy, which circulates, and in this instance, turned recession into growth, albeit, slow growth.

It's what stimuluses do, hopefully. Get folks (and companies) thinking things are improving, which has a self-fulfilling prophecy quality. Folks spend with more confidence, and businesses feel it's safer to invest, and do. It's not the end-all, nor even the solution. It just kick starts an economy heading south, and gets it going north, which it did. Fact. We saw it happen.

Yeah..vanished.
Most of the money was used to prevent layoffs of public employees that wound up getting laid off anyway. Vanished!
If what you say is true that the stimulus improved the economy, show where that occurred.
The facts do not bear that out.
The stimulus was a sugar rush. A temporary move to improve the political prospects of those in control of Washington.
Anytime the federal government takes from one and gives it to another, the beneficiary has the undivided attention of the people who bestowed the largess.

 

[Koios]

Vanished?

I got mine, didn't you get yours?

Well sure. The payroll tax reduction was kinda sweet. And I, like most working-poor and middle class, vanished to the Caymans, and used my stimulus to set up a CIT.

 

[Koios]

Yeah..vanished.
Most of the money was used to prevent layoffs of public employees that wound up getting laid off anyway. Vanished!
If what you say is true that the stimulus improved the economy, show where that occurred.
The facts do not bear that out.
The stimulus was a sugar rush. A temporary move to improve the political prospects of those in control of Washington.
Anytime the federal government takes from one and gives it to another, the beneficiary has the undivided attention of the people who bestowed the largess.

If you don't know, just say "I don't know." You see? Then you're actually right.

And I won't have to slap you down with the truth, i.e. this: Recovery.gov - Tracking the Money

 

[Koios]

If what you say is true that the stimulus improved the economy, show where that occurred.

Oops; that.

Enjoy: World Development Indicators and Global Development Finance - Google Public Data Explorer

 

[GuyPinestra]

Wrong about what?..
You can opine all you like. Doesn't change the facts.
Additional taxation removes cash from the private sector. This slows the economy and reduces revenue to the federal and state governments.
The recession and subsequent slow economy is THE reason why cities, states and the federal government are having difficulty.
Increasing taxes will further reduce revenues as economic activity slows to a crawl.
Lower taxes, reduced, responsible spending is the clear path to a robust economy.
Now you may protest all you like. It changes nothing. The facts are clear. They are not in dispute.

It ain't a Trillion. Period. Reporting to the People what's being spent is required in the Constitution. And thus it's done, regularly. And the reports say $471.5 Billion.

Thanks for your permission opine. I believe I will: man; them Righties are dumb as posts. You feel me, my wigga?

Okay back to our little repartee ...

Of course. Unemployment is high currently, and driving up UI costs. Nothing new there or anything we can cut and save us a bunch year after year, especially since it's normally a state-level issue, by and large. It's part of the stimulus, which we needed to pull our asses out of the deep recession trough, we lovingly call the Great Recession. Remember? Everything going south, fast. Then we bridged the delta with government spending? Surely you remember; yeah? So that's temporary, and already authorized. So, going back to the original contention "there's a Trillion," no; there ain't no Trillion. In fact, classical welfare, as in families and children aid, is ~$100 billion and vital to hunger and poverty reduction.

Those are facts. Sorry you don't like them. But I'm just the messenger. K?

That delta you claim we just 'bridged'? It was only one BRANCH of that Delta, there will be more of them that government SPENDING won't help. You can only print SO MUCH!

 

[Koios]

That delta you claim we just 'bridged'? It was only one BRANCH of that Delta, there will be more of them that government SPENDING won't help. You can only print SO MUCH!

Borrowed, not printed, in this instance. "Printing" (actually just increasing the supply on the books) is what we're doing now to spur some borrowing / investment. Not ideal. Ideal would be just to raise the Minimum Wage.

But yes. It's a numbers game. Let's say the GDP looks like it'll shrink $800 B (recession). Just spend $801 B. Bingo. $1 B in growth. The flowery-sounding "Invest" seems like we're doing something more, but in fact, it's just creating a positive number instead of a negative one.

Hell; buy egg crates with the money. Great for the egg crates guys and they'll hire like there's no tomorrow, and contribute to the GDP. Plus egg crate makers spend their paycheck into the communities where they live, who spend it elsewhere, and so on. But we'd have more egg crates than we need. So roads and bridges are better.

Are you seeing?

 

[candycorn]

That €√€¶^°__√×÷π£°¶©®®¶@#$&*!!! Susan Collins won the 08 Senate election with about 60% of the vote. I'm hoping the TEA party will take her out in the primaries in 2014.

 

[Koios]

That €√€¶^°__√×÷π£°¶©®®¶@#$&*!!! Susan Collins won the 08 Senate election with about 60% of the vote. I'm hoping the TEA party will take her out in the primaries in 2014.

Kudos. Back on topic.

Teas are nincumpoops, who I doubt will still be a force of much strength come 2014. In fact, it seems like Boehner is already sending them back to the fringes of the caucus, where they belong.

 

[candycorn]

That €√€¶^°__√×÷π£°¶©®®¶@#$&*!!! Susan Collins won the 08 Senate election with about 60% of the vote. I'm hoping the TEA party will take her out in the primaries in 2014.

Kudos. Back on topic.

Teas are nincumpoops, who I doubt will still be a force of much strength come 2014. In fact, it seems like Boehner is already sending them back to the fringes of the caucus, where they belong.

Wrong.

The GOP will wreak havoc in 2014 due to the TEA party. I just hope they vote out more sure wins in their primaries. It will at least keep them from a Senatorial Super-Majority. I predicted they would get control in 2012 and the SM in 2014 so I could be wrong.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Yeah..vanished.
Most of the money was used to prevent layoffs of public employees that wound up getting laid off anyway. Vanished!
If what you say is true that the stimulus improved the economy, show where that occurred.
The facts do not bear that out.
The stimulus was a sugar rush. A temporary move to improve the political prospects of those in control of Washington.
Anytime the federal government takes from one and gives it to another, the beneficiary has the undivided attention of the people who bestowed the largess.

If you don't know, just say "I don't know." You see? Then you're actually right.

And I won't have to slap you down with the truth, i.e. this: Recovery.gov - Tracking the Money

Yes..I am certain the federal government's assessment of the Stimulus is 100% unbiased.
Ok, so where are the shovel ready jobs? Where are the government workers who's jobs were supposedly "saved"?
Why is unemployment so high? Why is the GDP growing at a snail's pace?
I can predict the answers...Because Because Because. Umm...Uhhh I know!! It's the republican's fault!
Please.

 

[thereisnospoon]

That delta you claim we just 'bridged'? It was only one BRANCH of that Delta, there will be more of them that government SPENDING won't help. You can only print SO MUCH!

Borrowed, not printed, in this instance. "Printing" (actually just increasing the supply on the books) is what we're doing now to spur some borrowing / investment. Not ideal. Ideal would be just to raise the Minimum Wage.

But yes. It's a numbers game. Let's say the GDP looks like it'll shrink $800 B (recession). Just spend $801 B. Bingo. $1 B in growth. The flowery-sounding "Invest" seems like we're doing something more, but in fact, it's just creating a positive number instead of a negative one.

Hell; buy egg crates with the money. Great for the egg crates guys and they'll hire like there's no tomorrow, and contribute to the GDP. Plus egg crate makers spend their paycheck into the communities where they live, who spend it elsewhere, and so on. But we'd have more egg crates than we need. So roads and bridges are better.

Are you seeing?

Borrowed? no one is that stupid.. Each time the federal government "borrows" ( which it should be law it cannot without selling bonds or securing the debt) it forces the federal reserve to print money. THe federal government monetized the debt years ago.
This has had a devastating effect on the strength of the US Dollar vs other major currencies.
The US Dollar is at 40 year lows vs other currencies. For example. The US Dollar used to buy well over 100 JPN Yen. Now it buys less than 80. The Pund Sterling used to trade just above $1. Now it trades at 1.5 US Dollars. The CDN Dollar just ten years ago was worth less than 60 cents. Now it worth 1.05 US Dollars.
Because of the falling dollar, the price of Gold has skyrocketed to over $1600/ troy ounce.