Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You have no idea.......color me surprised....Yo, Colonel....Snowflakes are very concerned with government spending, we know.
Can you post the annual growth rates of federal spending (in nominal dollars) for the following
Carter
Reagan
Poppy
Clinton
Scrub
Obama
?
Just the numbers.......I'll figure out their ordinal ranking....
Why don't you cut right to the point you think you are making?
Here is my point directly.
Liberals have no problem with a $20 trillion debt, but they feign being very concerned about the money being used for border security.
Carter's spending means dick.
Here is the deal on federal spending as percentage of GDP...
Popular Conception
Obama’s rhetoric plays to the misconception that the Republicans are the party of irresponsible deregulation, small government and tax cuts that favor the rich, while the Democrats are the reverse. But the policy history back to Jimmy Carter is inconsistent with that view.
Let’s look at each key component, spending, regulation, and taxes, in turn. Contrary to popular belief, the relationship between the party in the White House and government outlays is the opposite of what one might expect.
Under Carter, total government outlays as a percent of gross domestic product averaged a relatively stable 20.8 percent. Over the next 12 years, when Republicans Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush resided in the White House, spending increased, averaging 22.2 percent of GDP.
The trend reversed under the Democratic leadership of Bill Clinton. Government on average consumed 19.8 percent of GDP during his term.
Finally, Republicans under George W. Bush undid the progress made during the Clinton years with spending rising from just 18.2 percent of GDP in his first year, to 20.7 percent by the time he left office.
Carter Shows Where Obama Needs to Go
And, since I know damned well where you are thinking of heading next, I suggest you google AEI and Kevin Hassett before opening your piehole...
If you would like to see the spending growth data, hollaback...
Snowflakes don't mind $10 trillion additional debt over he past 8 years.
They claim to be angry about spending money to secure the border.
Hypocrites regardless of anything Jimmy Carter did nearly half a century ago.
I have nothing against the idea of a National Sales Tax, but would like to see some numbers first.How might Trump pay for his wall? He's suggested a tax on goods imported from Mexico. Great, right? Well, just who buys goods imported into the U.S. from Mexico? It's not Mexicans or Canadians.
Why am I expected to pay for the Great Wall of Trump while Trump isn't?
Oh, suddenly you don't like complex tax codes?
Want to support ending them?
Do I like tax codes that make the taxpayer compensate Trump for losing almost a billion dollars in bad investments?
No, I don't
So, you going to join me in supporting a National Sales Tax, or just bitch about this issue when you can use it to smear your enemies?
Were you neutered at birth, or did you have them removed when it became clear to you that they would be of no use?I don't speak Indonesian either.I don't speak Indonesian so please stop being coy and just say so. Is it something negative?What does "NL" stand for, Conservative65?
Why don't you say what you think it means. You imply it's negative. What are your thoughts?
I'll give you a hint. It's an acronym referencing a term in the Indonesian language.
I don't speak Indonesian either. Look it up you lazy bastard.
Whether it's negative or not is a matter of opinion.
So where did you come up with it?
From a fortune cookie?
Wrong cuisine......
There's a new invention called the internet. Perhaps you've heard of it.
You can get an idea by looking at the use of VATs.......I have nothing against the idea of a National Sales Tax, but would like to see some numbers first.How might Trump pay for his wall? He's suggested a tax on goods imported from Mexico. Great, right? Well, just who buys goods imported into the U.S. from Mexico? It's not Mexicans or Canadians.
Why am I expected to pay for the Great Wall of Trump while Trump isn't?
Oh, suddenly you don't like complex tax codes?
Want to support ending them?
Do I like tax codes that make the taxpayer compensate Trump for losing almost a billion dollars in bad investments?
No, I don't
So, you going to join me in supporting a National Sales Tax, or just bitch about this issue when you can use it to smear your enemies?
You have no idea.......color me surprised....Yo, Colonel....Snowflakes are very concerned with government spending, we know.
Can you post the annual growth rates of federal spending (in nominal dollars) for the following
Carter
Reagan
Poppy
Clinton
Scrub
Obama
?
Just the numbers.......I'll figure out their ordinal ranking....
Why don't you cut right to the point you think you are making?
Here is my point directly.
Liberals have no problem with a $20 trillion debt, but they feign being very concerned about the money being used for border security.
Carter's spending means dick.
Here is the deal on federal spending as percentage of GDP...
Popular Conception
Obama’s rhetoric plays to the misconception that the Republicans are the party of irresponsible deregulation, small government and tax cuts that favor the rich, while the Democrats are the reverse. But the policy history back to Jimmy Carter is inconsistent with that view.
Let’s look at each key component, spending, regulation, and taxes, in turn. Contrary to popular belief, the relationship between the party in the White House and government outlays is the opposite of what one might expect.
Under Carter, total government outlays as a percent of gross domestic product averaged a relatively stable 20.8 percent. Over the next 12 years, when Republicans Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush resided in the White House, spending increased, averaging 22.2 percent of GDP.
The trend reversed under the Democratic leadership of Bill Clinton. Government on average consumed 19.8 percent of GDP during his term.
Finally, Republicans under George W. Bush undid the progress made during the Clinton years with spending rising from just 18.2 percent of GDP in his first year, to 20.7 percent by the time he left office.
Carter Shows Where Obama Needs to Go
And, since I know damned well where you are thinking of heading next, I suggest you google AEI and Kevin Hassett before opening your piehole...
If you would like to see the spending growth data, hollaback...
Snowflakes don't mind $10 trillion additional debt over he past 8 years.
They claim to be angry about spending money to secure the border.
Hypocrites regardless of anything Jimmy Carter did nearly half a century ago.
You're an idiot.....I just demonstrated that the assumption "informing" your ignorance is completely at odds with Reality...
Under Obama (in nominal terms) federal spending grew at an annual rate of 2.2%...
Under Scrub, it grew at a rate approaching 7.5% (EXCLUSIVE of Iraqnam)..
That's half of the equation.....the other half covers Revenues......it looks even worse for you...
You wanna see?
You have no idea.......color me surprised....Yo, Colonel....
Can you post the annual growth rates of federal spending (in nominal dollars) for the following
Carter
Reagan
Poppy
Clinton
Scrub
Obama
?
Just the numbers.......I'll figure out their ordinal ranking....
Why don't you cut right to the point you think you are making?
Here is my point directly.
Liberals have no problem with a $20 trillion debt, but they feign being very concerned about the money being used for border security.
Carter's spending means dick.
Here is the deal on federal spending as percentage of GDP...
Popular Conception
Obama’s rhetoric plays to the misconception that the Republicans are the party of irresponsible deregulation, small government and tax cuts that favor the rich, while the Democrats are the reverse. But the policy history back to Jimmy Carter is inconsistent with that view.
Let’s look at each key component, spending, regulation, and taxes, in turn. Contrary to popular belief, the relationship between the party in the White House and government outlays is the opposite of what one might expect.
Under Carter, total government outlays as a percent of gross domestic product averaged a relatively stable 20.8 percent. Over the next 12 years, when Republicans Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush resided in the White House, spending increased, averaging 22.2 percent of GDP.
The trend reversed under the Democratic leadership of Bill Clinton. Government on average consumed 19.8 percent of GDP during his term.
Finally, Republicans under George W. Bush undid the progress made during the Clinton years with spending rising from just 18.2 percent of GDP in his first year, to 20.7 percent by the time he left office.
Carter Shows Where Obama Needs to Go
And, since I know damned well where you are thinking of heading next, I suggest you google AEI and Kevin Hassett before opening your piehole...
If you would like to see the spending growth data, hollaback...
Snowflakes don't mind $10 trillion additional debt over he past 8 years.
They claim to be angry about spending money to secure the border.
Hypocrites regardless of anything Jimmy Carter did nearly half a century ago.
You're an idiot.....I just demonstrated that the assumption "informing" your ignorance is completely at odds with Reality...
Under Obama (in nominal terms) federal spending grew at an annual rate of 2.2%...
Under Scrub, it grew at a rate approaching 7.5% (EXCLUSIVE of Iraqnam)..
That's half of the equation.....the other half covers Revenues......it looks even worse for you...
You wanna see?
$9.3 trillion was added to the debt under Obama. You wanna see?
You're a fucking simpleton....Bankers do it all the time.......without it, your skyline would look entirely different...It's even worse than that......Trump lost the bank's money....then, mysteriously, wound up with a nearly 1 billion dollar loss carry forward...Oh, suddenly you don't like complex tax codes?
Want to support ending them?
Do I like tax codes that make the taxpayer compensate Trump for losing almost a billion dollars in bad investments?
No, I don't
You try that, Home Gamers....
Investing in real estate is risky. Any banker that doesn't know that, is incompetent and should be fired.
In this particular instance, as I recall, Trump had personally guaranteed some of these loans...
but that has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that Trump took losses to which he should not have been entitled....and it raises questions about why his personal guarantee was acceptable (my guess is that, in some way, the banks were counting on Donny's daddy to bail him out.....as he had before), given that he could not possibly have had the net worth to deliver on it...
The reason he won't release his tax returns is because that particular scam is unlikely to play well with the part of his constituency which does NOT spend the bulk of its day, slack jawed, before FOX News...
Sooo, no matter the job responsibilities of the banker, nor standard practices, not anything,
in your mind it all comes back to Trump, because, reasons...
LOL!
You're a fucking idiot.......I have demonstrated that.....You have no idea.......color me surprised....Why don't you cut right to the point you think you are making?
Here is my point directly.
Liberals have no problem with a $20 trillion debt, but they feign being very concerned about the money being used for border security.
Carter's spending means dick.
Here is the deal on federal spending as percentage of GDP...
Popular Conception
Obama’s rhetoric plays to the misconception that the Republicans are the party of irresponsible deregulation, small government and tax cuts that favor the rich, while the Democrats are the reverse. But the policy history back to Jimmy Carter is inconsistent with that view.
Let’s look at each key component, spending, regulation, and taxes, in turn. Contrary to popular belief, the relationship between the party in the White House and government outlays is the opposite of what one might expect.
Under Carter, total government outlays as a percent of gross domestic product averaged a relatively stable 20.8 percent. Over the next 12 years, when Republicans Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush resided in the White House, spending increased, averaging 22.2 percent of GDP.
The trend reversed under the Democratic leadership of Bill Clinton. Government on average consumed 19.8 percent of GDP during his term.
Finally, Republicans under George W. Bush undid the progress made during the Clinton years with spending rising from just 18.2 percent of GDP in his first year, to 20.7 percent by the time he left office.
Carter Shows Where Obama Needs to Go
And, since I know damned well where you are thinking of heading next, I suggest you google AEI and Kevin Hassett before opening your piehole...
If you would like to see the spending growth data, hollaback...
Snowflakes don't mind $10 trillion additional debt over he past 8 years.
They claim to be angry about spending money to secure the border.
Hypocrites regardless of anything Jimmy Carter did nearly half a century ago.
You're an idiot.....I just demonstrated that the assumption "informing" your ignorance is completely at odds with Reality...
Under Obama (in nominal terms) federal spending grew at an annual rate of 2.2%...
Under Scrub, it grew at a rate approaching 7.5% (EXCLUSIVE of Iraqnam)..
That's half of the equation.....the other half covers Revenues......it looks even worse for you...
You wanna see?
$9.3 trillion was added to the debt under Obama. You wanna see?
Yea, but....Jimmy Carter did something...so there you go.
To entertain the cats?Were you neutered at birth, or did you have them removed when it became clear to you that they would be of no use?I don't speak Indonesian either.I don't speak Indonesian so please stop being coy and just say so. Is it something negative?
I don't speak Indonesian either. Look it up you lazy bastard.
Whether it's negative or not is a matter of opinion.
So where did you come up with it?
From a fortune cookie?
Wrong cuisine......
There's a new invention called the internet. Perhaps you've heard of it.
What proud state are you humiliating, Red?
Ask your wife. I use them regularly with her.
I live in a state where if the only blue district wasn't embarrassing the rest of us with it's high poverty and more than 1 in 5 food stamp users, we'd be even better than we are.
You're a fucking idiot.......I have demonstrated that.....You have no idea.......color me surprised....
Here is the deal on federal spending as percentage of GDP...
Popular Conception
Obama’s rhetoric plays to the misconception that the Republicans are the party of irresponsible deregulation, small government and tax cuts that favor the rich, while the Democrats are the reverse. But the policy history back to Jimmy Carter is inconsistent with that view.
Let’s look at each key component, spending, regulation, and taxes, in turn. Contrary to popular belief, the relationship between the party in the White House and government outlays is the opposite of what one might expect.
Under Carter, total government outlays as a percent of gross domestic product averaged a relatively stable 20.8 percent. Over the next 12 years, when Republicans Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush resided in the White House, spending increased, averaging 22.2 percent of GDP.
The trend reversed under the Democratic leadership of Bill Clinton. Government on average consumed 19.8 percent of GDP during his term.
Finally, Republicans under George W. Bush undid the progress made during the Clinton years with spending rising from just 18.2 percent of GDP in his first year, to 20.7 percent by the time he left office.
Carter Shows Where Obama Needs to Go
And, since I know damned well where you are thinking of heading next, I suggest you google AEI and Kevin Hassett before opening your piehole...
If you would like to see the spending growth data, hollaback...
Snowflakes don't mind $10 trillion additional debt over he past 8 years.
They claim to be angry about spending money to secure the border.
Hypocrites regardless of anything Jimmy Carter did nearly half a century ago.
You're an idiot.....I just demonstrated that the assumption "informing" your ignorance is completely at odds with Reality...
Under Obama (in nominal terms) federal spending grew at an annual rate of 2.2%...
Under Scrub, it grew at a rate approaching 7.5% (EXCLUSIVE of Iraqnam)..
That's half of the equation.....the other half covers Revenues......it looks even worse for you...
You wanna see?
$9.3 trillion was added to the debt under Obama. You wanna see?
Yea, but....Jimmy Carter did something...so there you go.
Now you are left to huddle with contemptible bigot, and celebrated idiot, Red.
It's even worse than that......Trump lost the bank's money....then, mysteriously, wound up with a nearly 1 billion dollar loss carry forward...Oh, suddenly you don't like complex tax codes?
Want to support ending them?
Do I like tax codes that make the taxpayer compensate Trump for losing almost a billion dollars in bad investments?
No, I don't
You try that, Home Gamers....
Investing in real estate is risky. Any banker that doesn't know that, is incompetent and should be fired.
Real estate was booming at the time. Trump lost money on his casinos and Trump Airlines
But, lucky for him, the taxpayers will make up the difference
Even in a boom, real estate is risky. DId the banker do his due diligence?
It wasn't Obama who told her....it was SCOTUS....And the flip-flopping continues.Flip flopping took place between 1/20/09 and 1/20/17. How many times did Obama say he didn't have the authority to do with immigration what he eventually did with immigration? Just one example.
When President Obama told Governor Brewer she couldn't handle the immigration problem herself then refused to do anything about himself, that was wrong.
Show me where my math is incorrect, Red.....You're a fucking idiot.......I have demonstrated that.....Snowflakes don't mind $10 trillion additional debt over he past 8 years.
They claim to be angry about spending money to secure the border.
Hypocrites regardless of anything Jimmy Carter did nearly half a century ago.
You're an idiot.....I just demonstrated that the assumption "informing" your ignorance is completely at odds with Reality...
Under Obama (in nominal terms) federal spending grew at an annual rate of 2.2%...
Under Scrub, it grew at a rate approaching 7.5% (EXCLUSIVE of Iraqnam)..
That's half of the equation.....the other half covers Revenues......it looks even worse for you...
You wanna see?
$9.3 trillion was added to the debt under Obama. You wanna see?
Yea, but....Jimmy Carter did something...so there you go.
Now you are left to huddle with contemptible bigot, and celebrated idiot, Red.
You've demonstrated you're a liar, that you don't understand simple math, and that you're willing to pucker up to a former President that lied his way through 8 years of people like you puckering up to him.
I would prefer the money for the wall would come out of foreign aid and budgets of other programs. I see the wall as only a partial solution to the illegal immigration problem and think its effect is being over-emphasized for political purpose. .
To entertain the cats?Were you neutered at birth, or did you have them removed when it became clear to you that they would be of no use?I don't speak Indonesian either.I don't speak Indonesian either. Look it up you lazy bastard.
Whether it's negative or not is a matter of opinion.
So where did you come up with it?
From a fortune cookie?
Wrong cuisine......
There's a new invention called the internet. Perhaps you've heard of it.
What proud state are you humiliating, Red?
Ask your wife. I use them regularly with her.
I live in a state where if the only blue district wasn't embarrassing the rest of us with it's high poverty and more than 1 in 5 food stamp users, we'd be even better than we are.
I live in a state where if the only blue district wasn't embarrassing the rest of us with it's high poverty and more than 1 in 5 food stamp users
What is the rate in Cowards Corner, Ofay?
The LWers are casual about spending other people's money. IMO, RWers should be more conservative and fiscally responsible.Any program to deal with the problem will have a dollar cost.
Helpful to solving a big problem is justification to spend money.
Focusing on this small couple of billion dollars as the reason for our debt, is not reasonable, considering the already existing size of our debt, the size of our current budget and the size of our current deficit.
Show me where my math is incorrect, Red.....You're a fucking idiot.......I have demonstrated that.....You're an idiot.....I just demonstrated that the assumption "informing" your ignorance is completely at odds with Reality...
Under Obama (in nominal terms) federal spending grew at an annual rate of 2.2%...
Under Scrub, it grew at a rate approaching 7.5% (EXCLUSIVE of Iraqnam)..
That's half of the equation.....the other half covers Revenues......it looks even worse for you...
You wanna see?
$9.3 trillion was added to the debt under Obama. You wanna see?
Yea, but....Jimmy Carter did something...so there you go.
Now you are left to huddle with contemptible bigot, and celebrated idiot, Red.
You've demonstrated you're a liar, that you don't understand simple math, and that you're willing to pucker up to a former President that lied his way through 8 years of people like you puckering up to him.
