Can we cut the bullshit about spending under Obama?

[The Rabbi]

Yes, revenue is high in terms of RAW dollars. However, what your dumbass doesn't understand is those figures don't take into account inflation, growing economy, and population. You aren't measuring it properly. Going back to the 50s, revenues as a percentage of GDP were higher than today's level during 55 or 63 years, or 87% of the time. Only for 8 years within that time was it lower than today's.

You are dumb.

You are like the energizer bunny of stupid.
So you made a claim about revenue. That was shown to be false. Now you want to revise the claim to include:
Inflation (running under 2% a year)
Growing economy (economy expanding under 2% a year)
Population (how that affects revenue is beyond me).
You want to make some kind of revenue/GDP comparison.
OK. Here;s the chart. It also shows revenue as a percentage of GDP is higher now.
Tax Revenues Return to Historical Average

What's next? Heritage is wrong? Provide your own chart. OR STFU and admit you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

You are so stupid. Of course heritage is bullshit. You might as well pulled that crap from Fox News. That graph, and you and the rest of the cons are completley oversimplifying the issue. Why am I not surprised you just ignored the inflation issue? The today's economy is bigger than ever and with the dollar being worth less than ever, of course revenue in terms of raw dollars is going to be higher than ever.

The only accurate way to measure revenue is through percentage of GDP. For 2013, federal revenue only accounts for 16.7% of the GDP. 2000 is when it was at its highest of 20.6. Facts like these must be put into historical context.

Proof?

 

[The Rabbi]

A few questions.
1. Do you think we should have the fda that makes sure we have standards for food?
2. Do you believe in the clean air and water acts?

These two within my opinion help make our nation far better then most of the world.

No.
No.

Any other questions,stupid?

 

[Billy000]

You are like the energizer bunny of stupid.
So you made a claim about revenue. That was shown to be false. Now you want to revise the claim to include:
Inflation (running under 2% a year)
Growing economy (economy expanding under 2% a year)
Population (how that affects revenue is beyond me).
You want to make some kind of revenue/GDP comparison.
OK. Here;s the chart. It also shows revenue as a percentage of GDP is higher now.
Tax Revenues Return to Historical Average

What's next? Heritage is wrong? Provide your own chart. OR STFU and admit you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

You are so stupid. Of course heritage is bullshit. You might as well pulled that crap from Fox News. That graph, and you and the rest of the cons are completley oversimplifying the issue. Why am I not surprised you just ignored the inflation issue? The today's economy is bigger than ever and with the dollar being worth less than ever, of course revenue in terms of raw dollars is going to be higher than ever.

The only accurate way to measure revenue is through percentage of GDP. For 2013, federal revenue only accounts for 16.7% of the GDP. 2000 is when it was at its highest of 20.6. Facts like these must be put into historical context.

Proof?

CBO | Monthly Budget Review?Summary for Fiscal Year 2013

 

[Billy000]

A few questions.
1. Do you think we should have the fda that makes sure we have standards for food?
2. Do you believe in the clean air and water acts?

These two within my opinion help make our nation far better then most of the world.

No.
No.

Any other questions,stupid?

Wow. I don't even know what to say to that.

 

[ScienceRocks]

A few questions.
1. Do you think we should have the fda that makes sure we have standards for food?
2. Do you believe in the clean air and water acts?

These two within my opinion help make our nation far better then most of the world.

No.
No.

Any other questions,stupid?

Insulting shows that you're a stupid piece of shit. Sorry your life has turned out to be crappy.

 

[The Rabbi]

You are so stupid. Of course heritage is bullshit. You might as well pulled that crap from Fox News. That graph, and you and the rest of the cons are completley oversimplifying the issue. Why am I not surprised you just ignored the inflation issue? The today's economy is bigger than ever and with the dollar being worth less than ever, of course revenue in terms of raw dollars is going to be higher than ever.

The only accurate way to measure revenue is through percentage of GDP. For 2013, federal revenue only accounts for 16.7% of the GDP. 2000 is when it was at its highest of 20.6. Facts like these must be put into historical context.

Proof?

CBO | Monthly Budget Review?Summary for Fiscal Year 2013

You understand that 2774 is bigger than 2524, right?
You have just shot your entire argument. Congratulations.

 

[The Rabbi]

A few questions.
1. Do you think we should have the fda that makes sure we have standards for food?
2. Do you believe in the clean air and water acts?

These two within my opinion help make our nation far better then most of the world.

No.
No.

Any other questions,stupid?

Insulting shows that you're a stupid piece of shit. Sorry your life has turned out to be crappy.

You asked two questions. They werent reallty questions. They were rhetorical statements dressed up like questions.
I answered them, since you asked. You arent happy because you believe in Big Daddy Government bringing toys and presents to all the good boys and girls.

 

[Billy000]

Proof?

CBO | Monthly Budget Review?Summary for Fiscal Year 2013

You understand that 2774 is bigger than 2524, right?
You have just shot your entire argument. Congratulations.

You really can't accept losing an argument.

 

[The Rabbi]

CBO | Monthly Budget Review?Summary for Fiscal Year 2013

You understand that 2774 is bigger than 2524, right?
You have just shot your entire argument. Congratulations.

You really can't accept losing an argument.

Is that a yes or no, that 2774 is bigger than 2524?

I seriously question whether you can answer that accurately. As it is you have a 50/50 shot at getting it right.

 

[Billy000]

You understand that 2774 is bigger than 2524, right?
You have just shot your entire argument. Congratulations.

You really can't accept losing an argument.

Is that a yes or no, that 2774 is bigger than 2524?

I seriously question whether you can answer that accurately. As it is you have a 50/50 shot at getting it right.

I know putting facts into context is complicated and scary to you, but at some point you will have to accept reality for what it is. Revenue as a percentage of GDP is a rather important fact to examine. Ignoring it makes you look dumb.

 

[The Rabbi]

You really can't accept losing an argument.

Is that a yes or no, that 2774 is bigger than 2524?

I seriously question whether you can answer that accurately. As it is you have a 50/50 shot at getting it right.

I know putting facts into context is complicated and scary to you, but at some point you will have to accept reality for what it is. Revenue as a percentage of GDP is a rather important fact to examine. Ignoring it makes you look dumb.

OK
Tell me, is 4.1 greater or less than 3.1?
I doubt you can answer this question any more than you could answer the other one. But we are dealing with smaller numbers so maybe that will help.

 

[Billy000]

Is that a yes or no, that 2774 is bigger than 2524?

I seriously question whether you can answer that accurately. As it is you have a 50/50 shot at getting it right.

I know putting facts into context is complicated and scary to you, but at some point you will have to accept reality for what it is. Revenue as a percentage of GDP is a rather important fact to examine. Ignoring it makes you look dumb.

OK
Tell me, is 4.1 greater or less than 3.1?
I doubt you can answer this question any more than you could answer the other one. But we are dealing with smaller numbers so maybe that will help.

Lol oh man you are really reaching.

 

[The Rabbi]

I know putting facts into context is complicated and scary to you, but at some point you will have to accept reality for what it is. Revenue as a percentage of GDP is a rather important fact to examine. Ignoring it makes you look dumb.

OK
Tell me, is 4.1 greater or less than 3.1?
I doubt you can answer this question any more than you could answer the other one. But we are dealing with smaller numbers so maybe that will help.

Lol oh man you are really reaching.

Is that a yes or no that 4.1 is greater than 3.1?

 

[RKMBrown]

OK
Tell me, is 4.1 greater or less than 3.1?
I doubt you can answer this question any more than you could answer the other one. But we are dealing with smaller numbers so maybe that will help.

Lol oh man you are really reaching.

Is that a yes or no that 4.1 is greater than 3.1?

He's a libtard, he can't answer the question. You must remember that up is down and right is left in their tiny made up world.

 

[Billy000]

OK
Tell me, is 4.1 greater or less than 3.1?
I doubt you can answer this question any more than you could answer the other one. But we are dealing with smaller numbers so maybe that will help.

Lol oh man you are really reaching.

Is that a yes or no that 4.1 is greater than 3.1?

Yes Daveman Bob. 4.1 is higher than 3.1 but you and I know that is not the issue.

 

[The Rabbi]

Lol oh man you are really reaching.

Is that a yes or no that 4.1 is greater than 3.1?

He's a libtard, he can't answer the question. You must remember that up is down and right is left in their tiny made up world.

He gets owned on the facts every time. Even when he posts links on his own, it disproves his own statements so he has to spin to something else and cover his tracks by calling others stupid.
I nominate him for CluckCommander of USMB.

 

[The T]

Lol oh man you are really reaching.

Is that a yes or no that 4.1 is greater than 3.1?

Yes Daveman Bob. 4.1 is higher than 3.1 but you and I know that is not the issue.

It is the issue. Your figures are wrong, and YOU won't admit it.

 

[The Rabbi]

Lol oh man you are really reaching.

Is that a yes or no that 4.1 is greater than 3.1?

Yes Daveman Bob. 4.1 is higher than 3.1 but you and I know that is not the issue.

You ar right. I was looking at the wrong chart.
But will you agree that 16.7 is greater than 15.0?

 

[Billy000]

Is that a yes or no that 4.1 is greater than 3.1?

Yes Daveman Bob. 4.1 is higher than 3.1 but you and I know that is not the issue.

It is the issue. Your figures are wrong, and YOU won't admit it.

So you're saying the dip in revenue as a percentage of GDP from the historic high in 2000 to the 16.7 it is now is a false fact? Based on what?

Nothing.

 

[Billy000]

Is that a yes or no that 4.1 is greater than 3.1?

Yes Daveman Bob. 4.1 is higher than 3.1 but you and I know that is not the issue.

You ar right. I was looking at the wrong chart.
But will you agree that 16.7 is greater than 15.0?

Yes would you agree 20.1 (2000) is greater than 16.7 (2013)?