Re: Re: Re: Re: Thanks, Mr. President. Newbie? P*ss off you elitist liberal twit...I started out offering an opinion, just like everyone else on this board. Just because I haven't put a lot of posts up doesn't mean that I'm not right. You seem to be under the impression that you're entitled to deference because your opinions,like the manure that they are, are abundant. YOU were the one that started this off by name calling. If anyone has any doubt, they can scroll up and see (i.e., "trickle down clown"). Now, to address your assertions, that apparently come straight from the Democrap National Committee (and, fortunately for them you apparently haven't had an original thought in your life, so they get typed right onto your posts with little risk of interruption)... First of all, the deficit has been largely caused by the ongoing efforts in the war on terrorism, and the fact that the economy began undergoing a recession during the CLINTON administration. Like any other recession, this caused federal revenues to shrink. Second, as for your assertions that the president's tax cuts caused this...that's probably the biggest lie in the Democrap arsenal. Why? Because the tax cuts were phased in over a period of ten years, and they were back loaded. So far, less that $20 Billion (that's right, billion with a "B"--sound it out willgator, and have someone explain it to you...slowly) have been given to the people (not counting those that are currently happening). So, somebody with a calculator explain how a $20 billion tax cut accounts for a $455 billion deficit. Here's how---you factor in Clinton's recession. And as far as the rich getting richer, you are absolutely right. But like the elitist twit that you seem to be, you didn't check the facts. It happened over the period since 1992. That's right, friends...largely while Bill Clinton was president (http://money.cnn.com/2003/06/26/pf/taxes/wealth/). So far, you've managed to call names, make unsubstantiated allegations, and, in general, show yourself to be a complete jacka$$. And, speaking of a$$es, you can pucker up and kiss mine.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Thanks, Mr. President. recession started with clinton, come on clown........ what his last 2 days in office........ and as far as azz that we be your mamma's I'm smackin clown........ And your right clown I don't get my facts from RUSH And if anyonre disputes what I say look it up for yourself, there are hundreds of links.......
Re: Re: Re: Re: Thanks, Mr. President. Uh huh...thousands of links, noticeably absent in your posting. And since you are learning impaired, the link I posted was not from Rush, it was from CNN, which is hardly a cheerleader for the Bush administration. Speaking of links, here's one showing it was Clinton's recession: http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/outside/messages/200096.html Incidentally, isn't it convenient that sh*t comes out of your mouth every time you open it? Must save you a lot of time since you don't have to bother sitting on the pot (too bad, might give you some quality thinking time)... A FACT!! A FACT!! WILLGATOR'S KINGDOM FOR A FACT!!!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Thanks, Mr. President. Dalaggie - Precisely who is going to pay for the government goods and services that we will be producing this year and not paying for? It's certainly not us, WE'RE NOT PAYING FOR IT. Who else will it be other than those who come after us? No, my children aren't paying for it. They aren't alive yet. Nice to stick people who haven't even been born yet with a bill for our greed. It's nice of you to blame "entitlements" as if "entitlements" make the decision about how to spend our tax money. Entitlements don't. The House and the Senate do. Which, if I'm not mistaken, are both controlled by Republicans who, rather than doing anything about the problem, cut taxes to make it worse, while conning the rubes with all of their blather about "fiscal responsibility". As for paying for current government services (which should be paid for with Income Tax monies) with Social Security money, you spout the standard knee-jerk conservative line: "we always accounted for Social Security dishonestly and fraudulently, so we can just keep doing so". Comingling future funds to pay current expenses is pension fraud. Debate that. Interesting of you to assume that someone who espouses balancing a budget (e.g., actually collecting enough in taxes to pay for the goods and services we demand, or cutting goods and services to cut taxes) is a liberal. Says a lot about where conservative "fiscal responsibility" values have gone. As for children, I pay for recreation, education, medical care, lunches, juvenile justice for everyone else's children. So when the government cuts taxes, why do the people WITH children get a bigger break than I do? I'm paying for something I don't even have, and I get to pay MORE than them? This is just a cheap buyout to con enough people into letting the rich get some whopping big tax cuts. It makes no sense at all, it's just a two-bit bribe.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Thanks, Mr. President. Red Devil-- Are you seriously suggesting that entitlements only became a problem in the last two years? They didn't. The reason "your children" are paying, as you put it, is because we're paying for the ones who are on these entitlements now. As far as the budget, my point was that it amazes me that liberals are concerned about the deficit and raiding social security, unless they're the ones doing it. You have a point about people justifying their actions based on the fact that the other side does it. I am not suggesting that at all. I think it would be far better to address the problem of entitlements, which contrary to what you seem to assert, are basically on autopilot, and have been for years (see http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=6&sequence=14). You wonder why they won't be addressed? Because liberals will demagogue to death anyone that dares to suggest it. You only need to go back to the last campaign to find examples of Democrats mailing and calling the elderly about how this Republican or that Republican was gonna make them eat dog food. Oh, and since you're complaining about your tax cut being too small and you paying too much, I would happily endorse another tax cut!!! (J/K) Best regards.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Thanks, Mr. President. Actually, it was cardkid who starting attacking me when I posted my opinion. carkid says: "I hear that Canada is a great place for ex-patriots these days. and than cardkid says "Just take them to a bank and have a certified check issued in my name (sending cash via mail is risky). In return, I will send you an envelope for which the contents will contain 25% of what supports your notes. Hey, I'm a fair guy. Just write the losses of on your taxes. You have my "permission to drink." If you act now, I'll include a subscription to Neo Nation and Overthrowing the Government for Dummies. So, act now. And thinking he's on a roll he further states: "You would make a terrific micro-manager of rock farm. Everything would be predictable. That is, unless other rock farms had issues that could affect yours. Then what would you do? The reality is government and the challenges it faces are far more complex than you probably would admit to. Although, I enjoy reading your perceptions. If you were President Not-So-Neo, inflation would be in triple digits and companies would dry up faster than a raindrop in the Arizona desert. At least our military would swell past China's. But, I wouldn't feel safe because few companies would have the resources to produce the weapons and your government could not afford to pay for them. And, your population would suffer serious medical conditions from eating all that butter and fatty cheese. Here's a dose of reality, consumer spending is up, the dollar is stronger against the Yen and Euro, the stock market is improving, first time home buyers are sharply up from last year, refinancing is sharply up from last year and the economy is expanding. Here's an experiment you should try: The smallest island in the world is called Bishop Rock (UK). It's about 2 acres. Go to the island. Generate an economy. Implement a tax system. Establish trade. Manage growth. Manage social services and don't forget to balance your budget each year. If you find yourself in the red each year, raise taxes until you break even. But continue to generate an economy, establish and protect your trade interests ...etc...etc. You get the idea. How long would you continue at this rate before your citizens assassinated you or called for sweeping tax cuts to stimulate growth? Cardkid..... The experiment you speak of has happened already. The American experiment is one of those. For the first one hundred years it worked just fine. Once our Central Bank was installed in 1913, and the income tax established with the passing of the 16th amm. to the constitution, freedoms and liberties were starting to erode. By the Time the Great Depression came along, and then Roosevelt with his NEW DEAL, and massive socialist programs, our servant government started to create a dependency class of citizens. The reasons why? Mainly because the people we had gained our freedom from at the start of the American Experiment thought that a free people were a danger to their own power centers. Hell we fought the revolutionary war and gained our independence from their central banks, unjust usury, and unjust & confusing laws. You couldn't possibly think that the King of England was just tickled pink that he lost the colonies to a bunch of rebels, now do you. As for you joking the overthrow of the government? I really hope you don't think our forefathers who overthrew their government were dummies do you? Now the British tried their best to discredit them. They were mad men, the were extremists, and as a matter of fact, the majority of the signers of the declaration of independence were burned out of their homes, and their families and farms destroyed. Our founding fathers knew that there was a possibility that our servant government would turn to tyranny, and wrote the constitution to remedy that, by throwing it away and establishing a new government. Abraham Lincoln said, "This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their constitutional right to dismember or overthrow it." Surely Abe was no dummy? Maybe you think he is. Thomas Jefferson said, "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." Is he a dummy too? And finally, I think that Samuel Adams had you in mind when he stated " If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.
Re: Re: Re: Thanks, Mr. President. I think that is my problem, I'm holding on to the past and this geographic area too much. I 've got a daughter entering the 10th grade and a son entering his Junior year, and both want to stay until they finsih High School. When I was in school, my parents moved about every 1-2 years, so I never got established or had friends, and in my Junior and Senior years, I knew maybe 10 people in high school. So, I kinda got into the mode of believing I need to stay put for a while, be stable, and let my kids have as much a normal childhood as possible. BTW, that was also part of my argument to the child custody Judge, was that I could and would provide a much more stable way of life for the kids than what my ex was doing. I've done the Hotjobs, Monster, CareerBuilder, etc ... and see jobs in other areas, but have been limiting myself to the Greensboro, Winston-Salem area for jobs. I do feel that I need to try another part of the country, but I'm in a pickle right now. Trying to weigh the advantages of moving to the dis-advantages of uprooting my kids at this point in their life. Also, up till now, being I'm still a single parent, I've stayed in this area cause I have family nearby that has been able to provide VERY affordable baby-sitting while I work. Now, the kids are old enough to watch after themselves once the get home from school, but that now also means they are in High School. I'd love to move down into Florida, near the Orlanda area, or out West,, somewhere near Utah or Colorado, I think that part of the country is just beautiful. Even moving to Raliegh, NC might be nice. I don't know, I guess I'm just trying to hold out for 2-3 more years till the kids graduate hgh school, then I'll get serious about moving somewhere else. FedUp2003
Re: Re: Re: Thanks, Mr. President. SOMEWHAT CREDIT RELATED..."IF" I GET A CHECK...I WILL PAY A CREDIT CARD!!!
Re: Re: Re: Thanks, Mr. President. Know what you mean! I was in the Army for 7 1/2 years, and I feel that part of the reason I'm behind the financial curve of others my age is because I sacrificed my current career and finacial success in order to serve in the Military. Unless you were an Officer in the Military, the pay really sucks. Not many people realize just how underpaid the Military is, and starting out your life that way is certainly no way to get ahead. When I got out and started at MCI, I was making at age 25 what others starting making at age 20. So, in theory I was already behind by about 5 years as far as earning power and starting a 401(k) and stuff like that. The Military is good for getting an education and seeing the world, and esp. good if you plan on staying in till retirement, but circumstances preventing me from staying in for 20 (i.e., marraige going South VERY quickly), and so when I got out, I was starting out from square one. Still, I've been to Berlin, Germany and other parts of Germany, France, Belgium, Italy, Luxemburg, England, Holland, and Spain. Don't think I could have ever done that had I not joined. FedUp2003
Uh, I think this thread somehow got a little off-topic and has degenerated into a pissing contest. Oh well, I think what I wanted to say was in reference to a a couple of posts back from RedDevil, about Social Security being gone by the time we retire. I kinda doubt that. It may not be the SS that we know of today, are may have another name, but Congress, somehow, someway, will perserve some sort of system and I'm sure that when we retire in 20-40 years from now, that something will be there. Call me dumb or hopelessly optimistic, but at this time I still have enough trust in our government that they will figure this problem out. Now, about people placing money into their own retirement account, even at 1% interest. Here's how you solve it. You don't put it into to SS per se, but the individual is still not able to just "take" their money, it still is deducted from their paycheck, it's just that it goes into some type of retirement account that earn interest. And for those who say look at what happened recently to the stock market, well, I'm sure there is some blend of mutual fund and/or bond fund and/or an Index fund that has earned at least "some" positive percentage. I know that there are proven formulas or strategies out there, that depending on the economy (bear or bull) and the Fed rates, etc ... that dictate whether to invest in stocks, bonds, funds, or Treasury notes. Sure, by mixing and alternating every couple of years or so, the annualized rate of return is not all that high, but it is always a positve gain. The Govt. can set up some kind of investment strategy or rule to follow, and invest our now SS dollars instead into a Retirement account, and I think we will have a WHOLE lot more money in the future and it will becaome self-funding ... Oh, my thoughts on the matter. I'm no Accountant or Financial major, but I do read a lot FedUp2003
Re: Re: Re: Re: Thanks, Mr. President. My husband has been in for 19 yrs, he is an LDO(worked his way up from E3). We have been through it all as far as the $500.00 paycheck every two weeks. But you can not beat the housing, insurance, TSP and other benefits that the military gives us. His retirement in 6-8 yrs will be enough that he can fish 8hrs a day in stead of going out to sea for months at a time. We love the tax cut. Plain and simple- it puts more money in our pocket.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Thanks, Mr. President. I love how liberals always claim that the rich got richer! PROVE IT! Unemployment rose. Yep, when the DOT COMS which multiplied like rabbits during the CLINTON ERA went belly up! Then there are all the job losses due to ENRON, WORLDCOM, et al.....Companies did all that wonderful accounting irregularities during the reign of the democrats! It simply blew up in their faces during Bush's administration. In the mean time, interest rates are at an ALL TIME LOW! and let's see..... when did we see the first double digit interest rates? OH YEAH! When JIMMY CARTER a DEMOCRAT was in office! Here the Democrats gave your money to the poor and to the BANKS. I'd rather they gave it back to ME! The democrats love to wail on the Republicans. Was it Bushs fault that 9-11 happened or the Democrats who GUTTED our defense?!?! Trust me, I am sure we could go on and on about this one! Try doing your own research and get the FACTS before you type blanket rhetoric of the democratic party!
I agree that the housing and and other benefits of being in the Military help, but it still isn't enough. It's not like you can go to your Commander and ask for a raise, or come up with a way to increase productivity or save the "company" money and then get a raise or promotion that way. In the Military, you pretty much have to do your time, be proficient in your tasks, pass your tests, and when the Promotion Cutoff points come down low enough that you become eligible to be promoted, then that's all you can do. There are still plenty of soldiers based in California, the D.C. area, and other places or qualify for and ARE on food stamps, WIC, and other welfare programs. I, or rather my wife at the time, was on WIC when we were stationed at Ft. Bragg, NC. I was an E-4, but there was no available on-base housing for us and rent on the civillian economy was not cheap, and with my pay, we qualified for WIC and food stamps. Kinda a crappy way to treat the uniformed men and women who at any moment can get called to war and who receive highly technical training and are responsible for millions of dollars worth of equipment, yet they get paid so little that they are on welfare. FedUp2003
I didn't read this entire thread. It's too long (I'm on dial up). Everyone is getting really DEEP. I THINK that this was a bad idea. I Believe that this is going to cause inflation to increase at a faster rate than it already is. I hate economics! It can complex, yet so simple. Yeah, thanks Mr. President....
Inflation? What inflation? The reason the Fed keeps cutting interest rates is because there is no inflation to speak of (or at least, it is very low by historical standards). Start looking for inflation when you see them jacking the rates back up. Regards.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Thanks, Mr. President. ALL THOSE LEFT-WING LIBERALS ARE MILLIONAIRES!!! They don't want the RICH to get RICHER???
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Thanks, Mr. President. OH NEVER-MIND...THEY JUST DON'T WANT THE RIGHT-WING CONSERVATIVES TO GET RICHER...
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Thanks, Mr. President. No they (Dems/Repubs) just don't want you getting any richer. They have all they will ever need. Thanks to the public treasury and the millions of us who focus on and argue over the "two parties" bickering while the public trasury get's looted. Nice distraction.
