It matters not who got our economy to this point

[rightwinger]

In other words, you aren't a fiscal conservative. You're a liberal. You can't be both.

Sure you can. Don't be stupid.

No you can't. Liberalism is a grab bag of rationalizations for increasing the scope and power of government. Everything liberals believe in goes in direct opposition to controlling government spending.

When have conservatives ever reduced the size of government?

They believe in a different scope of government, not a smaller government

 

[rightwinger]

What should they bring?
Reasonable cuts in spending. Reasonable as in having the least negative impact on most Americans.
Reasonable tax increases.
Paygo should be brought back.
Reward businesses that create jobs here and punish those who export jobs.
But this is all pipe dreams as they will stay the path we are currently on and we will go down.

There's no such thing as a "reasonable tax increase" when we all pay far too much in taxes already.

We pay less in taxes than at any time in the last 50 years.

And we have a stagnant economy to show for it. Cutting taxes did not lead to jobs and prosperity. It led to increased wealth for the one percent

 

[rightwinger]

As long as the voters continue to allow the career politicians unfettered access to the keys to the capitol, the games will continue.

I have been saying that for a long, long time.....

Career Politicians are the downfall of America

.

Putting political alliances over the good of the country is the downfall of the country

 

[NYcarbineer]

What should they bring?
Reasonable cuts in spending. Reasonable as in having the least negative impact on most Americans.
Reasonable tax increases.
Paygo should be brought back.
Reward businesses that create jobs here and punish those who export jobs.
But this is all pipe dreams as they will stay the path we are currently on and we will go down.

There's no such thing as a "reasonable tax increase" when we all pay far too much in taxes already.

Are you willing to cut 40% out of every government spending program including DEFENSE?

Because that is how much of the federal budget we are borrowing in order to let you have the low tax rates you currently have.

 

[rightwinger]

It would not matter that the Republicans got us into our current economic condition if they had learned from their mistakes

But when they double down on stupid, it sure as hell matters

 

[Sarah G]

Lots of polls and blame to go around. Enough to keep partisans on both sides pointing fingers for years.
What SHOULD matter at this point is why we are doing so poorly in our recovery. Blaming Bush is pointless to our recovery. The historians can decide who and what it will be viewed like later. In the meantime lets focus on the here and now and decide which path we need to take to expidite our recovery.

All the posts about BOOOOOOOOOSH are just pointless. For example I believe Frank, dems and many spinless pubs are to blame but starting such threads serves no purpose as its water under the bridge now and blame cant fix shit. Congress and Obama can however.

It does matter, if we don't learn from our mistakes, we are doomed to repeat them. It wasn't just Bush/Obama who got us here and are still making mistakes, it is the congress as well.

As American voters, we have to hold all of their feet to the fire and do it now before the elections.

 

[regent]

The problem, America repeats its mistakes. For example, a number of preventative economic measures were made into law during FDR's terms. As time went by, however, we removed the measures slowly, seemingly convinced the removal will help the economy and bingo another recession. We will probably continue being our own worst enemy because we either forget, are too greedy, or more likely, new generations come along and a "free economy" sounds great and so American, and so we must continue to have recessions and depressions. A "free economy" means good and bad economic periods.

 

[bripat9643]

There's no such thing as a "reasonable tax increase" when we all pay far too much in taxes already.

Are you willing to cut 40% out of every government spending program including DEFENSE?

Because that is how much of the federal budget we are borrowing in order to let you have the low tax rates you currently have.

I'm willing to cut 100% out of almost all of them and 40% out of defense. Furthermore, my tax rate isn't low. It's only "low" from the viewpoint of a blood sucking parasite.

 

[thereisnospoon]

lots of polls and blame to go around. Enough to keep partisans on both sides pointing fingers for years.
What should matter at this point is why we are doing so poorly in our recovery. Blaming bush is pointless to our recovery. The historians can decide who and what it will be viewed like later. In the meantime lets focus on the here and now and decide which path we need to take to expidite our recovery.

All the posts about booooooooosh are just pointless. For example i believe frank, dems and many spinless pubs are to blame but starting such threads serves no purpose as its water under the bridge now and blame cant fix shit. Congress and obama can however.

if a rightwinger fucks up, then you never want to look back and play the blame game. If a liberal fucks up, then it must be examined in minute detail and blame assigned.

waaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!

 

[thereisnospoon]

What should they bring?
Reasonable cuts in spending. Reasonable as in having the least negative impact on most Americans.
Reasonable tax increases.
Paygo should be brought back.
Reward businesses that create jobs here and punish those who export jobs.
But this is all pipe dreams as they will stay the path we are currently on and we will go down.

There's no such thing as a "reasonable tax increase" when we all pay far too much in taxes already.

We pay less in taxes than at any time in the last 50 years.

And we have a stagnant economy to show for it. Cutting taxes did not lead to jobs and prosperity. It led to increased wealth for the one percent

That not only is a load of crap, it's illogical.
Government creates nothing. It only consumes.
That stuff about "hiring more government workers stimulates the economy" is nonsense.
Government employment consumes more than the workers contribute to the economy. Here is the one glaring fact about that point. For each federal worker that becomes vested in the federal pension fund, that is one more person we that taxpayers have to compensate for 20 or 30 years TO NOT WORK!
Tell ya what....Get rid of the federal pension plan, turn it into a 401k, participate in the Social Security system and make the workers pay for their health insurance just like in the private sector and you can have more government employment. Deal?

 

[JoeNormal]

There was a time I didn't feel that way. I voted for Reagan twice and papa Bush once (not sure I'm proud of that any longer). It wasn't until GWB that my opinion of Republicans started going downhill and the current cast - Boehner, McConnell, Cantor among others has disgusted me even more than BushCo.

But you're happy with Harry Reid, Nazi Pelosi, Bawney Fwank and Company?

You'll have to excuse me if I doubt your judgement of politicians.

Most of congress.disgusts me. I like Ron Paul, Bernie Sanders and maybe a few others who don't immediately come to mind. But it's a matter of degree. The republicans have become the extreme anti-science, anti-intellectual, religious fanatic party that wants to continue the very policies that tanked the economy under Bush except this time, put them on steroids. Combine that with the lockstep obedience of a bunch of mindless drones and you have the sorry state of what a once-great party has become.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I have to disagree, what you are saying is that no matter what a POTUS does - it is okay, because the next one is responsible for his actions.

That doesn't make sense, we have to acknowledge what one inherent' s.

ANYONE who STILL blames their predecessor of 3.5 years earlier for their lack of performance is incompetent.

He is also weak of character because he cannot accept any responsibility for anything.

It's cringeworthy.

Well you are wrong, because the problem that Obama inherited should take more then 3 years to fix. I hope you realize that magnitude of both domestic, financial, Military, and near depression we were in.

Do you think Mccain and Palin would have done better, or quicker?

Well you are wrong, because the problem that Obama inherited should take more then 3 years to fix.

Obama himself said if he didn't fix it in 3 years, he didn't desreve a second term.
Was he wrong?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No, it is NOT - it is critical that we blame him for his actions, because we don't want to repeat it or at least I don't - nor send the message that a/any sitting POTUS - will not be responsible to it's people or his actions that he makes.

You say you don't want to repeat it yet that is EXACTLY what Obama has done, in spades.

Now this I agree with. However it contradicts your blameless before 3.5 years ago statement.

Blameless? Hardly. But at some point Obama, the smartest man in the world, must be blamed for not fixing it.
Blame Bush for getting us in the mess, but you can't blame Bush for not getting us out.
Bush has had exactly zero power the last 3.5 years.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Surely a reasonable position would be to accept 10 dollars in spending cuts for 1 dollar in tax increases; would it not? Perhaps someone should suggest that to the Republicans. Oh wait, they've already said they wouldn't do that.

So obviously the GOP will accept no sort of compromise whatsoever.

These are the facts and they are not in dispute.

Let's do the spending cuts for 5 years, then we can discuss tax hikes.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Lots of polls and blame to go around. Enough to keep partisans on both sides pointing fingers for years.
What SHOULD matter at this point is why we are doing so poorly in our recovery. Blaming Bush is pointless to our recovery. The historians can decide who and what it will be viewed like later. In the meantime lets focus on the here and now and decide which path we need to take to expidite our recovery.

All the posts about BOOOOOOOOOSH are just pointless. For example I believe Frank, dems and many spinless pubs are to blame but starting such threads serves no purpose as its water under the bridge now and blame cant fix shit. Congress and Obama can however.

It sure as hell does when one party is insisting it can fix the economy by doing the very things that put us in this position in the first place. One party insists that deregulation of the financial institutions is the panecea, yet that kind of deregulation, GlassSteagal, put us where we are today. Kind of like no matter how many times I cut the end off, it is still too short.

Deregulation? LOL!
When did Bush do that?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Another thread accusing Obama of blaming Bush. What a shock.

Someone tell Obama he's in the big leagues now.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

USC is right; it is all a game; "game" may be too strong a word--it is all theater because the stakes are for real.

If Romney does win; the debt ceiling will be raised without so much as a peep from the House. If Obama wins, expect WW III. If the parties and roles were reversed the same damn thing would happen. Harry Reid is basically vetoing bills from the House at this point. Why? Because he can. Mitch McConnell would be doing the same thing.


Until we fix the Constitution to have rules in it for Congress, nothing is going to change because politics is often the determining factor in what Congress wants to do.

Voting 3rd party (regardless of party) in november would send the message. Both parties are out to lunch fiscally.

Were Romney to win would you give him the benifit of the doubt until proven wrong?

Believe it or not I did with Obama. I didnt really believe his rhetoric about "change" but I hoped I was wrong

Benefit of the doubt? If he were to enact what he says he wants to do; I wouldn't support the plans if thats what you're asking.

Romney plans to cut taxes on the uber wealthy and wait to see if they make investments that benefit the middle income persons in the country. Well, we had the Bush tax cuts held over for Obama's entire term. We should be swimming in prosperity at this point if cutting taxes on the wealthiest Americans was the answer.

Deregulation during the Bush years gave us Enron total gouging of the entire State of California (for starters), the housing bubble and the wall street crisis of which the American taxpayer had to bail out these troubled industries.

What are his other plans? I did hear he had a good idea--one I support anyway. It goes something like this; if the forecasted impact of a regulation is going to cost upwards of $100M, it would be put to a congressional vote. I can go along with that because, afterall, we get the government we deserve.

The economy is starting to turn the corner due in large part to the stimulus. I think the next 4 years will be economically bullish even if we were to elect a chimpanzee as President. If Obama or Romney are at the helm; the expanding economy will not be due to either Obama's 2nd or Romney's 1st term programs.

As I've said over and over, both parties are out to lunch fiscally. We fund incredible amounts of bullshit programs regardless of who is in the White House. Absent of a difference on the fiscal side; I look for the social and foreign policy initiatives since neither party can help itself on the spending side. Obama has us on the right track on all of those fronts. It will be interesting to see what Romney wants to do with Russia, NATO, the UN, Iran, Americans' right to privacy, immigration, etc... I will wait and see on that front since there seems to be no information about what he wants to do on most if not all of those fronts.

Deregulation during the Bush years gave us Enron total gouging of the entire State of California (for starters),

When you only deregulate half the power market and forbid long term power contracts, don't be surprised that things get fucked up.

the housing bubble and the wall street crisis of which the American taxpayer had to bail out these troubled industries.

Where did Bush deregulate the financial markets? Be specific.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I think Obama is deliberately making things worse. It's like he's trying to overwhelm the system and I've heard some on the left start talking about completely tearing down our capitalist system and rebuilding it differently.

What we need is to have the government taking back control of the federal reserve. If things were as they were meant to be, perhaps we wouldn't be in this mess. Both sides are equally to blame over the years, but Obama seems hellbent on destroying the country completely. I think it's by design.

What we need is to have the government taking back control of the federal reserve.

The Fed is part of the government already.
If you meant that Congress needs to control monetary policy, I'll have to laugh at you.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

USC is right; it is all a game; "game" may be too strong a word--it is all theater because the stakes are for real.

If Romney does win; the debt ceiling will be raised without so much as a peep from the House. If Obama wins, expect WW III. If the parties and roles were reversed the same damn thing would happen. Harry Reid is basically vetoing bills from the House at this point. Why? Because he can. Mitch McConnell would be doing the same thing.


Until we fix the Constitution to have rules in it for Congress, nothing is going to change because politics is often the determining factor in what Congress wants to do.

Voting 3rd party (regardless of party) in november would send the message. Both parties are out to lunch fiscally.

Unfortunately the American electorate which is mostly uninformed will not vote 3rd party.
I will explain. Too many people vote as thouhg they are trying to pick the winner of a horse race.
I cannot say how many times I have heard people say "I won't vote third party because I don't want to waste my vote"....Or, " I voted for the winner".
That is nonsense. People who think this way should not be permitted to decide the leader of the Free World.
I think that in order to become eligible to vote each of us should be required a to pass a simple civics test. 5 questions, that's all. Stuff everyone should know. Stuff people who take their citizenship test could rattle off without blinking.

But you'd be disenfranchising the Dem base.

 

[bobgnote]

The problem, America repeats its mistakes. For example, a number of preventative economic measures were made into law during FDR's terms. As time went by, however, we removed the measures slowly, seemingly convinced the removal will help the economy and bingo another recession. We will probably continue being our own worst enemy because we either forget, are too greedy, or more likely, new generations come along and a "free economy" sounds great and so American, and so we must continue to have recessions and depressions. A "free economy" means good and bad economic periods.

The economy is all about stupid bitches, who don't know what to do, with a scam-affected mess, which developed, over years of unenforcement or uneven enforcement, of any law, but also enactment of special-interest-socialist measures, like Prohibition, the Harrison Act, the Hemp Stamp Tax Act of 1938, and the establishment of the DEA and DHS, by DDDs, who wouldn't share intel, from the CIA and FBI, or enforce borders, without a lot of funding.

The drug war was initiated, to prevent brewed alcohol, during the time petroleum became established, and the pot laws were designed to prevent Henry Ford from making too much hemp-plastic and ethanol. Now that gangs are in every town, jail, and prison, and cartels rule all territory, over gang turf, changes need to happen, to the scam, which led to 25% of the world's prisoners being funded, by 5% of the population. We don't get to endure this cost-structure, forever.

We don't get to keep starting conflict, by supporting Israel and Saddam and UBL, allowing lies to escalate to war, while paying to subsidize tyrants or those affected. The distorted economy in the US no longer allows ease of manufacture, and farmlands are threatened, by aquifer depletion and global warming. Hey! Tyranny has a cost structure, unfavorable to manufacturing, or don't you guys all know how to make stuff, under budget?

If people are too stupid to understand both global warming AND how humans defoliated and emitted GHGs, to cause CO2 to reach 400 ppm and climbing, when it always tops out at 280 ppm and heads down, to force gradual cooling, people are too stupid, to understand economics and the fatal distortion our economy has undergone. Stupid is, as stupid does. Don't try to make nukes, if you pronounce it, "nukuler." Fuckups do this.

We are suffering accelerating GHG emissions, currently 10x PETM rates. We will suffer Mass Extinction Event 6, as sure as Cain pitched to 27, during 10-0 vs. Astros, the other day, and the Giants won it all, in 2010, the hottest year, on instrument record.

Beware the GAS, in your face; see rise-balls, gamer-babes. When the Giants come to town, it's BYE-BYE, BABY! Same with GHGs. The change-up follows the gas, dammit, you fuckups, who can't play football, either. Or, re-green and dig the As. After AGW, the heat and acid will follow, with anoxic events and more heat, after that!

If you are too stupid for AGW, you are too stupid, for economics. But if you can't pitch, hit, or field, at least watch trends, or even baseball, on TV. Or there's no hope, for you. Ever. Not anywhere. Distortion is how stupid people got to a sizable percentage of today's 7 billion souls. Distortion allows people who are too wussy for football to forget about baseball, and then they are too stupid to notice AGW, and NO WAY do any DDs who struck out at three of the above master economics, let alone manufacturing.

So, smarten the fuck up, and don't fuck up. That is to say, quit fucking up.