Democrats Push Heavy Spending Without Reading the Bills

[DBA]

I think both views are too simplistic. Revenue goes up almost every year whether taxes are cut, added to or left the same. We do not have a revenue problem, taxes are not the answer to our debt problem. We have a spending problem, taxes will never fix this.

Cutting taxes and spending would be a winner. Republicans have it 1/2 right, the Democrats are batting 0.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Cutting taxes and spending would be a winner. Republicans have it 1/2 right, the Democrats are batting 0.

Only one of them has any impact on our national debt, and the duopoly is batting 0. But they will get your undying support anyhow.

 

[DBA]

Only one of them has any impact on our national debt, and the duopoly is batting 0. But they will get your undying support anyhow.

Wrong again. Decreasing taxes will create a long term gain in tax revenue and if coupled with decreased spending is a winner. I don't have a problem voting for someone that would do both. A true Republican would, a true Democrat would never. Therein lies the difference.

Like most supposed Independents, you are fiscally conservative but socially liberal. Being socially liberal doesn't pay the bills, but it does get you some brownie points with the "cool" crowd. It is past time for Democrats and many Independents to put on their big boy pants and grow up if they are serious about curbing our debt.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

Oh so they're the same as republicans

Yes, conservatives admit the federal government is a bloated wasteful beast. You leftists believe the more your side spends the better it is for America.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Decreasing taxes will create a long term gain in tax revenue

Simply no data to support this claim. And even if it were true, the new revenue would just get spent.

and if coupled with decreased spending is a winner.

But this never happens and is the only thing that will help.

I don't have a problem voting for someone that would do both. A true Republican would, a true Democrat would never. Therein lies the difference.

Yet no Republican has done so since a guy named Calvin. Yet you still vote for them.

Like most supposed Independents, you are fiscally conservative but socially liberal.

Pretty much.

Being socially liberal doesn't pay the bills, but it does get you some brownie points with the "cool" crowd

It is not about brownie points, it is about a "live and let live" way of life. I am socially liberal as you put it because I do not care if two dude or two women that love each other want to get married. It has no impact on my life at all, so why would I care. Same goes with people that want to use pot. If I can sit in my living room and have a 5th of Jack, they should be able to sit in theirs and toke off a bong.

It is past time for Democrats and many Independents to put on their big boy pants and grow up if they are serious about curbing our debt.

By joining the Repubs that have not done a damn thing to curb our debt since the days of Coolidge?

Yeah, fuck that. The Repubs are no better in any way than the Dems.

 

[Augustine_]

Yes, conservatives admit the federal government is a bloated wasteful beast. You leftists believe the more your side spends the better it is for America.

Trump is your god and he spent more than anybody, snowflake

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

Trump is your god and he spent more than anybody, snowflake

Get some new material.

 

[Mac1958]

If only you all gave a fuck about heavy spending when there is a Repub sitting in the White House.

But that’s DIFFERENT

 

[Mac1958]

Trump made Keynes turn over in his fucking grave, then bragged about the economy. So did the rubes, of course, since they’re ignorant.

 

[DBA]

Simply no data to support this claim.

Sorry, but yes supply-side economics work. Do some research. Here is a link to get you started. BTW, yes, spending must be cut if we are talking about decreasing the debt or the deficit, but regardless, raising taxes is NOT the starting point for prosperity. Just another reason NOT to vote for Democrats. They have it completely backwards.

The Historical Lessons of Lower Tax Rates

Yet no Republican has done so since a guy named Calvin. Yet you still vote for them.

Right, none have done both, Many have done 1/2. Democrats do neither.

It is not about brownie points, it is about a "live and let live" way of life. I am socially liberal as you put it because I do not care if two dude or two women that love each other want to get married. It has no impact on my life at all, so why would I care. Same goes with people that want to use pot. If I can sit in my living room and have a 5th of Jack, they should be able to sit in theirs and toke off a bong.

It isn't that easy. Our way of life does affect our success as a nation. Many of these ideas are detrimental to our society and will ultimately affect our success economically as well. If we don't figure it out then we will no longer be the most powerful in the world. Our primary adversaries would be wise to push the nonsense above on our society and in fact they are. For example, TikTok has no issues with pushing many of these policies, but they choose not to do so in China, where the company is headquartered. China, who is our adversary, wants nothing more than for us to buy into all of this social nonsense as well as the green-energy craze because they recognize that it weakens us as a country and they will ultimately benefit from our carefree, spoiled, unrealistic way of life. "Live and let live" is a lazy, careless attitude and one which you and others don't really agree anyway as there are plenty of restrictions placed on individuals for the betterment of society.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Sorry, but yes supply-side economics work. Do some research. Here is a link to get you started. BTW, yes, spending must be cut if we are talking about decreasing the debt or the deficit, but regardless, raising taxes is NOT the starting point for prosperity. Just another reason NOT to vote for Democrats. They have it completely backwards.

Out of curiosity, what timeframe would you consider the hey-day of America?

Right, none have done both, Many have done 1/2. Democrats do neither.

Doing one without the other is meaningless. Thus no reason to vote for either party unless you are happy with the status quo

It isn't that easy. Our way of life does affect our success as a nation. Many of these ideas are detrimental to our society and will ultimately affect our success economically as well. If we don't figure it out then we will no longer be the most powerful in the world. Our primary adversaries would be wise to push the nonsense above on our society and in fact they are.

What a bunch of bull crap. Same sex marriage is no more detrimental to our society than opposite sex marriage. Using pot is no more detrimental to our society than alcohol. All you want is everyone to act just like you.

"Live and let live" is a lazy, careless attitude and one which you and others don't really agree anyway as there are plenty of restrictions placed on individuals for the betterment of society.

Actually it takes more energy and effort than your desire to control everyone and make them all just like you. And yes, we have restrictions placed on individuals. A great many of them I do not agree with and only agree with the ones that stop one individual from doing harm to another one.

 

[DBA]

Out of curiosity, what timeframe would you consider the hey-day of America?

Does it matter?

What a bunch of bull crap. Same sex marriage is no more detrimental to our society than opposite sex marriage. Using pot is no more detrimental to our society than alcohol. All you want is everyone to act just like you.

I simply disagree.

Actually it takes more energy and effort than your desire to control everyone and make them all just like you. And yes, we have restrictions placed on individuals. A great many of them I do not agree with and only agree with the ones that stop one individual from doing harm to another one.

Not at all. It is much easier to say pretty much anything goes. Your premise is ridiculous that you only agree with restrictions that prevent harming individuals directly. What about people that like to torture animals? Is that ok or are we to make an exception in that case? If so, why?

 

[Flash]

The Democrat shitheads don't have anything to worry about.

There will be a few RINOs that help the Democrat filth pass the bloated spending bills without reading them also. There always are.