Romney's Parting Shot At The Media:
|
Romney's parting shot at the media:
People who believe in a balanced budget in America are labeled as radicals, teabaggers.
Phoenix.Amandarius said: » People who believe in a balanced budget in America are labeled as radicals, teabaggers. a balanced budget doesn't make sense at a national level, that's why. how doesn't a balanced budget make sense?
Phoenix.Amandarius said: » how doesn't a balanced budget make sense? I knew you wouldn't understand. It makes sense to balance a household budget, possibly even a state budget, but as far as the nation is concerned to operate on a balanced budget is ludicrous, and short-sided. I'm not going to sit here and explain economics to you. I'm sure somebody else would be more than welcome though. because you can't explain it because what you said makes no sense. don't put the ignorance of your argument on me.
Don't get me wrong though, operating on a constantly expanding debt isn't the answer either,
I'd like to cut about 400 billion from the debt right off the top. about half of federal pensions, and about half of military spending. Then we could work on reducing healthcare costs by increasing preventative care and try to get to a single-payer system to be able to save on medicare/medicaid in the future. Also increase taxes on those making about 400k. And increase capital gains tax to about 25% Phoenix.Amandarius said: » because you can't explain it because what you said makes no sense. don't put the ignorance of your argument on me. It does, and I can explain it, I don't have the patience to teach you economics though. As it would rock your world. Phoenix.Amandarius said: » I would probably agree. History would also agree that the only way to pull out of a recession is to spend money. Jetackuu said: » It does, and I can explain it, I don't have the patience to teach you economics though. As it would rock your world. You are backing down from your claim because you cannot back it up with anything. You said "I'd like to cut about 400 billion from the debt right off the top." If you cut 400 billion from our national debt it would still be 16 trillion dollars, that is 16,000,000,000,000 dollars. If you are referring to our annual deficit and using the incorrect word then our annual deficit minus your 400 billion would still be a trillion dollars, that is 1,000,000,000,000 every year extra going right on to our debt. If that is your economics lesson I can see why you don't want to teach me. and cutting back by more than we can afford creates more problems, resulting in higher net loss, perpetuating the recession
gotta spend money to make money wrong
Phoenix.Amandarius said: » Jetackuu said: » It does, and I can explain it, I don't have the patience to teach you economics though. As it would rock your world. You are backing down from your claim because you cannot back it up with anything. You said "I'd like to cut about 400 billion from the debt right off the top." If you cut 400 billion from our national debt it would still be 16 trillion dollars, that is 16,000,000,000,000 dollars. If you are referring to our annual deficit and using the incorrect word then our annual deficit minus your 400 billion would still be a trillion dollars, that is 1,000,000,000,000 every year extra going right on to our debt. If that is your economics lesson I can see why you don't want to teach me. Last I checked our interest is about 1/4th of the debt, and the only way to get that down is to pay it. The only way to be able to pay it (and start to pay off the rest), is to close up some of our annual defect. Unfortunately there needs to be debt/spending in order to grow the economy, and that would be the quickest way to solve multiple issues. Spending another 1-3 trillion (depending on who you ask) on just 1 of 2 wars didn't help either. I'd also like to cut the entire TSA department. I'm not backing down from anything. show me one example in history where a country got out of a recession by increasing their national spending and debt then maybe I will consider your arguments. you claim history is on your side, just one historical example then.
Phoenix.Amandarius said: » show me one example in history where a country got out of a recession by increasing their national spending and debt then maybe I will consider your arguments. you claim history is on your side, just one historical example then. Check out "the new deal", roosevelt/truman did it 70 years ago, started the biggest economic boom in us history.
[+]
Solving the problems of the world through "I am smarter than you and if you saw how smart I am you would be amazed. Also do this one obvious thing and everything will be ok."
God bless you ffxiah and Merry Christmas! Fenrir.Terminus said: » Solving the problems of the world through "I am smarter than you and if you saw how smart I am you would be amazed. Also do this one obvious thing and everything will be ok." God bless you ffxiah and Merry Christmas! If only they would listen, right... Xenshi said: » Wow..and this dude was almost president? Money hungry SOB!! Actually, other than for a few days after the first debate, he was thankfully never close to being president. Shiva.Viciousss said: » Yeah the thread title is misleading, this has nothing to do with Romney. The letter isn't even addressed to him, its to his campaign. He isn't responsible for this, at all. He probably won't even make a statement. I hope people remember that the next time a bird poops on there head... or will it be that f'nn OBAMA! EVERYTHING IS HIS FAULT! Phoenix.Amandarius said: » show me one example in history where a country got out of a recession by increasing their national spending and debt then maybe I will consider your arguments. you claim history is on your side, just one historical example then. I can easily show you where austerity programs deepened a recession. And I do not need history to do it but I can*. Just look at current financial events in Europe. *Herbert Hoover. Phoenix.Amandarius said: » show me one example in history where a country got out of a recession by increasing their national spending and debt then maybe I will consider your arguments. you claim history is on your side, just one historical example then. THE GREAT DEPRESSION! FYI you ignorant republican/conservatives who think you are on the side of fiscal responsibility need to wake up, SERIOOOOOOOSLY! Your party spends, spends, spends, spends, spends, spends!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Here is THE question you need to ask yourself: Name the last republican that balanced a budget and didn't start some illegal war! Garuda.Chanti said: » Phoenix.Amandarius said: » show me one example in history where a country got out of a recession by increasing their national spending and debt then maybe I will consider your arguments. you claim history is on your side, just one historical example then. I can easily show you where austerity programs deepened a recession. And I do not need history to do it but I can*. Just look at current financial events in Europe. *Herbert Hoover. As far as Europe goes look at how good France is doing since they threw out that NEO-con. (just another example of the good of all is the good of the nation) Odin.Jassik said: » Phoenix.Amandarius said: » show me one example in history where a country got out of a recession by increasing their national spending and debt then maybe I will consider your arguments. you claim history is on your side, just one historical example then. Check out "the new deal", roosevelt/truman did it 70 years ago, started the biggest economic boom in us history. Republicans don't like facts though :( Even easy ones. A balanced budget is incompatible with certain federal responsibilities, namely the timely ability to declare/fund wars and conflicts, to provide funding in recession periods, and to respond to national emergencies.
Let's say a balanced budget amendment has passed and now a natural disaster hits a state/s. States rely on federal aid in these situations as they are almost all required by their state constitutions to pass a balanced budget and this doesn't easily allow for emergency spending. Unfortunately, the dispensing of this aid is now dependent on a Congressional supermajority. What happens if some of the unaffected states decide that they don't want to add debt by providing aid for whatever reason and the vote fails? President may veto (or not), the states get their aid anyway, and precious time is lost for nothing. Adding a law that attempts to distill the complex workings of the largest budget in the world down to a zero sum game at the very last step of the process is ridiculously oversimplified and short-sighted. But then again, no one has ever accused teabaggers of over thinking things.
[+]
Bahamut.Serj said: » Odin.Jassik said: » Phoenix.Amandarius said: » show me one example in history where a country got out of a recession by increasing their national spending and debt then maybe I will consider your arguments. you claim history is on your side, just one historical example then. Check out "the new deal", roosevelt/truman did it 70 years ago, started the biggest economic boom in us history. Republicans don't like facts though :( Even easy ones. That's far from partisan, though it is amazing how short people's memory can be.
[+]
|
All FFXIV and FFXI content and images © 2002-2025 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD.
FINAL FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.