Alan Simpson Calls GOP Refusal To Raise Revenue ‘Absolute Bullshit’

dblack, that is libertarian code talk. Libertarians are not necessarily fascists, but that does not excuse them for having such a philosophy.

oooh! more 'code talk'. Tell me, what is the super-secret 'real' meaning?
 
BenNatuf, you really can't read and understand the chart? Or are you just kidding?
I read it just fine, evidently the words

Total................On Budget.................Off Budget

confuse the fuck out of you liberal fucking morons though.

You use Righty Extremist Fascist code talk to try to force sensible Republicans, like me, out of the GOP. Two words, roadie: fuck on. Two more: I'm staying. Two final: you lose.
What the fuck do I care if you claim to be a Republican while you vote for Obama? You can lie and claim anything you want.

Did you figure out how to read the chart?
 
You use Righty Extremist Fascist code talk to try to force sensible Republicans, like me, out of the GOP. Two words, roadie: fuck on. Two more: I'm staying. Two final: you lose.

The more people remain deluded by the left/right, Republican/Democtate, Coke/Pepsi nonsense - well, we all lose. Wake up.

Thing is jokey is nothing conservative. he's a true blue progressive liberal.
You left fascist off the end... not that the dumbassed progressives would ever reccognize what they support without the jackboots.
 
Alan Simpson is a tax-and-spend RINO. That's why he was selected for President's debt commission. he's the kind of Republican who is always willing to cut deals with the devil "to get things done." In other words, he's eager to sell his constituents down the river.

Fmr. GOP Sen. Alan Simpson Calls Republican Refusal To Raise Revenue ‘Absolute Bullshit’

Former GOP Sen. Alan Simpson blasted his intransigent GOP colleagues on the Hill today for failing to reach a deal on the deficit. The blunt-talking co-chairman of President Obama’s bipartisan fiscal reform commission slammed Republicans for kowtowing to Americans for Tax Reform head Grover Norquist (“Republicans can’t be in thrall to him”) and pushed Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner to stand fast on the August 2 deadline.

Surveying the lay of the current fiscal land, Simpson said, “We’re at 15 percent revenue, and historically it’s been closer to 20 percent.”

He added, “We’ve never had a war without a tax, and now we’ve got two. … Absolute bullshit.”

Dude you are so right wing you have long ago legft conservative and are sitting squarely in the facist camp!
 
Table 1.1—SUMMARY OF RECEIPTS, OUTLAYS, AND SURPLUSES OR DEFICITS (−): 1789–2016
(in millions of dollars)
Year Total......................................On-Budget............................Off-Budget
year Gov Receipts Outlays Deficit (−) Receipts Outlays Deficit (−) Receipts Outlays Deficit (−)
2001 1,991,082 1,862,846 128,236
2002 1,853,136 2,010,894 -157,758
2003 1,782,314 2,159,899 -377,585
2004 1,880,114 2,292,841 -412,727
2005 2,153,611 2,471,957 -318,346
2006 2,406,869 2,655,050 -248,181
2007 2,567,985 2,728,686 -160,701
2008 2,523,991 2,982,544 -458,553
2009 2,104,989 3,517,677 -1,412,688
2010 2,162,724 3,456,213 -1,293,489
and you are the poster child for idiots who can't read a chart. The chart dumbass has the total deficit, the on budget deficit and the off budget SURPLUS. the total deficit including both ON budget and OFF budget items in 2007 was 161B. The wars are still paid for with off budget supplemental appropriations not as part of the defence budget... Obama lied to you... again.

The chart dumbass is not a chart of projections based on the proposed budget it is a chart of ACTUAL deficit numbers. No matter how your left wing hero's try to spin it those are the numbers and they are ALL of the numbers including spending for the wars and katrina.

Also dumbfuck, if you bother to look at the chart you'll notice that OFF Budget spending (which you seem to dislike) has incresed about 20% under Obama from an average of less than 430M under Bush to more than 530M under Obama while reciepts have stayed the same.
Your chart shows "off budget" spending but NOT off budget supplemental appropriations.

Here is the actual national debt for the years you posted earlier. Subtract one year from the next and you get the real deficit for that year including the off budget SUPPLEMENTAL spending. As you can see the deficit for the year you chose in the above post, 2007, was $500 billion, not the $161 billion you claim.

Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 2000 - 2010
Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 2000 - 2010
Includes legal tender notes, gold and silver certificates, etc.
The first fiscal year for the U.S. Government started Jan. 1, 1789. Congress changed the beginning of the fiscal year from Jan. 1 to Jul. 1 in 1842, and finally from Jul. 1 to Oct. 1 in 1977 where it remains today.
To find more historical information, visit The Public Debt Historical Information archives.
Date - Dollar Amount
09/30/2010 - $13,561,623,030,891.79
09/30/2009 - $11,909,829,003,511.75
09/30/2008 - $10,024,724,896,912.49
09/30/2007 - $9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 - $8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 - $7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 - $7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2003 - $6,783,231,062,743.62
09/30/2002 - $6,228,235,965,597.16
09/30/2001 - $5,807,463,412,200.06
09/30/2000 - $5,674,178,209,886.86
What kind of fucking moron are you? Off budget include ALL off budget spending including supplemental appropriations. You guys and you ignorant assed denial is just plain stupid. You are aware that treasuries outstanding that have matured are still fucking owed aren't you, the money to redeem them is budgetted. You cannot look at the total debt to figure out what the deficit was, to figure the deficit you look at outlays vs reciepts. And the total fucking deficit for 2007 including ALL on and off budget items was 161B. The other 340B has NOTHING whatever to do with outlays or reciepts in 2007. it could be money owed to the government from 2006 that was not paid in 2007, it could be unredeemed trasuries still on the books, it could be a combination of both, neither of which has a damned thing to do with 2007. What it is NOT is any "hidden" spending on any supplemental appropriation, those are INCLUDED in the final deficit number. No matter how much you want to believe otherwize. My god you fucking liberals are stupid.
BULLSHIT!
That $340 billion has everything to do with the debt racked up in 2007. What ever its source it is not part of the budget numbers posted for the 2007 debt, yet it is part of the 2007 debt. So if you don't like the words "off budget" then how about "Off Accountability Deficit?" Whatever you call it it is still a deficit for 2007 and therefore the 2007 deficit was $500 billion and not $161 billion!!!!
Get it?
 
Table 1.1—SUMMARY OF RECEIPTS, OUTLAYS, AND SURPLUSES OR DEFICITS (−): 1789–2016
(in millions of dollars)
Year Total......................................On-Budget............................Off-Budget
year Gov Receipts Outlays Deficit (−) Receipts Outlays Deficit (−) Receipts Outlays Deficit (−)
2001 1,991,082 1,862,846 128,236
2002 1,853,136 2,010,894 -157,758
2003 1,782,314 2,159,899 -377,585
2004 1,880,114 2,292,841 -412,727
2005 2,153,611 2,471,957 -318,346
2006 2,406,869 2,655,050 -248,181
2007 2,567,985 2,728,686 -160,701
2008 2,523,991 2,982,544 -458,553
2009 2,104,989 3,517,677 -1,412,688
2010 2,162,724 3,456,213 -1,293,489
Your chart shows "off budget" spending but NOT off budget supplemental appropriations.

Here is the actual national debt for the years you posted earlier. Subtract one year from the next and you get the real deficit for that year including the off budget SUPPLEMENTAL spending. As you can see the deficit for the year you chose in the above post, 2007, was $500 billion, not the $161 billion you claim.

Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 2000 - 2010
Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 2000 - 2010
Includes legal tender notes, gold and silver certificates, etc.
The first fiscal year for the U.S. Government started Jan. 1, 1789. Congress changed the beginning of the fiscal year from Jan. 1 to Jul. 1 in 1842, and finally from Jul. 1 to Oct. 1 in 1977 where it remains today.
To find more historical information, visit The Public Debt Historical Information archives.
Date - Dollar Amount
09/30/2010 - $13,561,623,030,891.79
09/30/2009 - $11,909,829,003,511.75
09/30/2008 - $10,024,724,896,912.49
09/30/2007 - $9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 - $8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 - $7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 - $7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2003 - $6,783,231,062,743.62
09/30/2002 - $6,228,235,965,597.16
09/30/2001 - $5,807,463,412,200.06
09/30/2000 - $5,674,178,209,886.86
What kind of fucking moron are you? Off budget include ALL off budget spending including supplemental appropriations. You guys and you ignorant assed denial is just plain stupid. You are aware that treasuries outstanding that have matured are still fucking owed aren't you, the money to redeem them is budgetted. You cannot look at the total debt to figure out what the deficit was, to figure the deficit you look at outlays vs reciepts. And the total fucking deficit for 2007 including ALL on and off budget items was 161B. The other 340B has NOTHING whatever to do with outlays or reciepts in 2007. it could be money owed to the government from 2006 that was not paid in 2007, it could be unredeemed trasuries still on the books, it could be a combination of both, neither of which has a damned thing to do with 2007. What it is NOT is any "hidden" spending on any supplemental appropriation, those are INCLUDED in the final deficit number. No matter how much you want to believe otherwize. My god you fucking liberals are stupid.
BULLSHIT!
That $340 billion has everything to do with the debt racked up in 2007. What ever its source it is not part of the budget numbers posted for the 2007 debt, yet it is part of the 2007 debt. So if you don't like the words "off budget" then how about "Off Accountability Deficit?" Whatever you call it it is still a deficit for 2007 and therefore the 2007 deficit was $500 billion and not $161 billion!!!!
Get it?

Is it tiring defend obam,a everyday? I bet it's even painful twisting facts to fit your lie.
 
right, but just the revenue aspect of it is increased when taxes are low, but spread among a wider population, also the economy grows and unemployment is low when taxes are low but wide...theres a new phrase for you. "low and wide taxes" :)
 
right, but just the revenue aspect of it is increased when taxes are low, but spread among a wider population, also the economy grows and unemployment is low when taxes are low but wide...theres a new phrase for you. "low and wide taxes" :)

Lower taxes creats more jobs. which in the end creates more revenue. How many poor people hire people to work for them?
 
exactly, i never understood this whole "tax the rich" mindset...like that'll make things better lol. We already have the 2nd highest corporate tax IN THE WORLD...wtf more do the lefties want?
 
The more people remain deluded by the left/right, Republican/Democtate, Coke/Pepsi nonsense - well, we all lose. Wake up.

Thing is jokey is nothing conservative. he's a true blue progressive liberal.
You left fascist off the end... not that the dumbassed progressives would ever reccognize what they support without the jackboots.

Righty Extremist Fascists like BenNatuf and littledebbie use code talk to hide their fascist-agenda far right drivel, but they are simply not smart enough to succeed at it. We see that daily.
 
Thing is jokey is nothing conservative. he's a true blue progressive liberal.
You left fascist off the end... not that the dumbassed progressives would ever reccognize what they support without the jackboots.

Righty Extremist Fascists like BenNatuf and littledebbie use code talk to hide their fascist-agenda far right drivel, but they are simply not smart enough to succeed at it. We see that daily.

nothing to say, but you're an idiot.:clap2:
 
Table 1.1—SUMMARY OF RECEIPTS, OUTLAYS, AND SURPLUSES OR DEFICITS (−): 1789–2016
(in millions of dollars)
Year Total......................................On-Budget............................Off-Budget
year Gov Receipts Outlays Deficit (−) Receipts Outlays Deficit (−) Receipts Outlays Deficit (−)
2001 1,991,082 1,862,846 128,236
2002 1,853,136 2,010,894 -157,758
2003 1,782,314 2,159,899 -377,585
2004 1,880,114 2,292,841 -412,727
2005 2,153,611 2,471,957 -318,346
2006 2,406,869 2,655,050 -248,181
2007 2,567,985 2,728,686 -160,701
2008 2,523,991 2,982,544 -458,553
2009 2,104,989 3,517,677 -1,412,688
2010 2,162,724 3,456,213 -1,293,489
What kind of fucking moron are you? Off budget include ALL off budget spending including supplemental appropriations. You guys and you ignorant assed denial is just plain stupid. You are aware that treasuries outstanding that have matured are still fucking owed aren't you, the money to redeem them is budgetted. You cannot look at the total debt to figure out what the deficit was, to figure the deficit you look at outlays vs reciepts. And the total fucking deficit for 2007 including ALL on and off budget items was 161B. The other 340B has NOTHING whatever to do with outlays or reciepts in 2007. it could be money owed to the government from 2006 that was not paid in 2007, it could be unredeemed trasuries still on the books, it could be a combination of both, neither of which has a damned thing to do with 2007. What it is NOT is any "hidden" spending on any supplemental appropriation, those are INCLUDED in the final deficit number. No matter how much you want to believe otherwize. My god you fucking liberals are stupid.
BULLSHIT!
That $340 billion has everything to do with the debt racked up in 2007. What ever its source it is not part of the budget numbers posted for the 2007 debt, yet it is part of the 2007 debt. So if you don't like the words "off budget" then how about "Off Accountability Deficit?" Whatever you call it it is still a deficit for 2007 and therefore the 2007 deficit was $500 billion and not $161 billion!!!!
Get it?

Is it tiring defend obam,a everyday? I bet it's even painful twisting facts to fit your lie.
The fact is there is $340 billion in deficit spending that YOU nor any other CON$ervative can account for, therefore it was not only off budget, it was off everything except the national debt!!!!!!!
 
Table 1.1—SUMMARY OF RECEIPTS, OUTLAYS, AND SURPLUSES OR DEFICITS (−): 1789–2016
(in millions of dollars)
Year Total......................................On-Budget............................Off-Budget
year Gov Receipts Outlays Deficit (−) Receipts Outlays Deficit (−) Receipts Outlays Deficit (−)
2001 1,991,082 1,862,846 128,236
2002 1,853,136 2,010,894 -157,758
2003 1,782,314 2,159,899 -377,585
2004 1,880,114 2,292,841 -412,727
2005 2,153,611 2,471,957 -318,346
2006 2,406,869 2,655,050 -248,181
2007 2,567,985 2,728,686 -160,701
2008 2,523,991 2,982,544 -458,553
2009 2,104,989 3,517,677 -1,412,688
2010 2,162,724 3,456,213 -1,293,489

BULLSHIT!
That $340 billion has everything to do with the debt racked up in 2007. What ever its source it is not part of the budget numbers posted for the 2007 debt, yet it is part of the 2007 debt. So if you don't like the words "off budget" then how about "Off Accountability Deficit?" Whatever you call it it is still a deficit for 2007 and therefore the 2007 deficit was $500 billion and not $161 billion!!!!
Get it?

Is it tiring defend obam,a everyday? I bet it's even painful twisting facts to fit your lie.
The fact is there is $340 billion in deficit spending that YOU nor any other CON$ervative can account for, therefore it was not only off budget, it was off everything except the national debt!!!!!!!

You're the one in love with the government why don't you ask them?
 

Forum List

Back
Top