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.
Govt is too big.
As already correctly noted, this is an inane and meaningless phrase.
Now is a time that we need to borrow and spend. Interstate rates are so low that it is a no brainer. Borrow..........spend on infrastructure and education........bolster the economy while investing in the future.
And....why not eliminate the cap on payroll taxes and reduce the amount to 4%. Then we could expand Social Security....lower the retirement age and increase Medicare enrollment.
Yes dummies ...........we need to spend more.
Why is the GOP the party of "No"?
Because they don't have any ideas of their own except tax cuts for the rich. It isn't because government is too big. Heck, they gave us a huge increase in government with the DHS and TSA. It isn't about spending because they love to spend money too. It isn't about deficits because "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." What it is, is that a Democrat is President. They can't accept that and move forward with the will of the people and the good of the country. They have to say no to absolutely everything, even if those things were originally proposed by Republicans. If Obama is for it, they're against it.
Now is a time that we need to borrow and spend. Interstate rates are so low that it is a no brainer. Borrow..........spend on infrastructure and education........bolster the economy while investing in the future.
And....why not eliminate the cap on payroll taxes and reduce the amount to 4%. Then we could expand Social Security....lower the retirement age and increase Medicare enrollment.
Yes dummies ...........we need to spend more.
What is Interstate rates? frieght rates? what does that have anything to do with it? Come on wonder boy were you not just making fun of my spelling a few days ago? lol..
Simple
Govt is too big. The dems put forth a budget that does nothing to cut spending and attaches tax increases and then expects the GOP to negotiate
What would a bi partisan bill look like? 100% tax reform. The maybe you could get the GOP to look at spending increases. BTW spending over 3 trillion and cutting the growth from 5% to whatever is below that is not a cut
increase year to year spending higher than inflation is an increase, plain and simple
Why is the GOP the party of "No"?
Because they don't have any ideas of their own except tax cuts for the rich. It isn't because government is too big. Heck, they gave us a huge increase in government with the DHS and TSA. It isn't about spending because they love to spend money too. It isn't about deficits because "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." What it is, is that a Democrat is President. They can't accept that and move forward with the will of the people and the good of the country. They have to say no to absolutely everything, even if those things were originally proposed by Republicans. If Obama is for it, they're against it.
I'm sure the Republicans do a lot of things to protect their rich donors, but I think it's just slightly naive to assume that the Democrats aren't doing the exact same thing.
Ask yourself, why would Obama (in his second term) sign a piece of legislation that protects Monsanto from any legal action resulting from health issues, ect caused by their products? Why would Obama appoint a Monsanto exec to a top spot in the FDA, as if there's "no conflict of interests" that would exist in that scenario. How many bankers has Obama put behind bars in the past 5 years despite the fraud that crashed our economy putting MILLIONS and MILLIONS out of work (including many family and friends I know)? The answer's pretty easy to remember: zero.
The Dems are funded by (many) of the same powerful, rich entities as the Republicans, and you'd be a fool to not acknowledge this.
.
Simple
Govt is too big. The dems put forth a budget that does nothing to cut spending and attaches tax increases and then expects the GOP to negotiate
What would a bi partisan bill look like? 100% tax reform. The maybe you could get the GOP to look at spending increases. BTW spending over 3 trillion and cutting the growth from 5% to whatever is below that is not a cut
increase year to year spending higher than inflation is an increase, plain and simple
Because they don't have unified power in DC anymore. This isn't complicated. When they had the WH and Congress, they were the party of Medicare D, Nation Building, Deficits & Debt. They said yes to it all. It's all their fault.
Her plan would raise $975 billion in new revenue in the next decade by closing tax breaks that benefit upper-income households and corporations. Democrats plan to match the new taxes with $975 billion in spending reductions. They would lower spending on domestic programs by $493 billion, cut $240 billion from defense spending and count on $242 billion in savings from lower interest
Democrats' Budget Mixes Tax Increases, Spending Cuts - WSJ.com
Would that be reductions in current level in spending or reductions in the future growth of spending? See, that's the trick they like the to pull. They cut from projected spending growth then claim they cut spending, yet somehow the budget mysteriously still ends up being larger than the prior year.
Govt is too big.
As already correctly noted, this is an inane and meaningless phrase.
I dunno Clayton, perhaps the phrase is vague and general but Gov't can most definitely be "too big".
What do you call it when we have 50 gov't workers inefficiently doing the work that 20 could do in the private sector? Isn't there some room to trim?
What do you call it when we have companies lobbying and creating legislation and "regulations" that inefficiently favor big business, ect? Isn't there some room to trim?
.
The teepubs have said it right out loud - 'compromise means doing it their way'.
And, a little reminder -
The teepubs have said it right out loud - 'compromise means doing it their way'.
And, a little reminder -
