Are we created equal?

So you are still trying to deny the facts....gotcha!
Me>> 52 months of full employment soaring tax revenues and solid GDP is a sucky economy?

Then this one must be REALLY sucky to you, why do you support Obama then?

Me >> And yes the economy and the recovery was much stronger than we knew at the time yet Clinton's tax rate increase slowed down that recovery and the resulting tax revenue growth from as strong upward curve which peaked at 9% and then fell to 7% at the higher rate. Are you going to again try to deny that fact?

Glad that you agree then perhaps you'll stop posting your fallacious nonsense about Clinton saving the economy and causing it to surge ahead when in fact his policies causes a drag on it.

- - - Updated - - -

ROFLMAO, so all you are left with is cherry picking it I see. He request lower spending in the budget than Congress authorized why do you attribute all of the increase to him alone?

That really the best you got, more dodges?

Already stated it and refuted it, prove me wrong.

 

Because I don't blame him for the great recession he inherited from Bush, nor the Tea Party austerity, nor the fact that the Republican dominated states eliminated close to 700,000 government jobs.

And because when Obama took office, the economy was tanking at a -9% real rate, losing 700,000+ jobs a month, unemployment was skyrocketing upward, and the stock markets were crashing in the worst recession in 80 years. The housing market was destroyed and the economy was headed straight for a depression.

But now the economy has been growing steadily for four straight years, the private sector has added more jobs every month for 48 months in a row, stock markets are up 150% from their recession lows to record highs, corporate profits have hit all time highs, the housing market is recovering, the unemployment rate has fallen from 10% to 6.7%, and over 8 million additional private sector jobs have been added since Jan 2010.

And this despite an obstructionist Tea Party Republican party whose stated top priority is not to work with the president to improve the economy, but get him out of office, and their austerity and uncertainty.

False RW propaganda bull(*)(*)(*)(*).

 

A false bull(*)(*)(*)(*) accusation followed by a complete dodge when requested to back it up. How unusual.

There was nothing "fallacious" with even one word in my post above. Bluesguy's dodge proves it.

 

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; ... To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes; ... To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.[/QUOTE]

I'm missing the PEOPLE part. The Tax and Spend clause does not authorize social spending for the PEOPLE, it authorizes the Congress to fund the proper functions of the government and to pay it debts and defend it's borders and take care of it's holdings and assets. The Constitution speaks of three separate enities, the United States the government, the States and the People and when it address any of them it does so directly.

 

Disagree with your interpretation. The United States certainly includes its people.

 

Try reading more slowly I specifically refuted your fallacious nonsense try a rebuttal instead of displaying your emotions.

 

Wrong, when the Constitution speaks of the citizens it says the PEOPLE, when it speaks of the states it says the STATES, when it speaks of the federal government it says the UNITED STATES.

No where does it authorize social welfare for the PEOPLE, the Tax and Spend clause is there to give Congress the power to tax to cover the authorized expenditures and to maintain the assets and operations of the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. It is not an unlimited power to spend money else the rest of the the Article would be superfluous and the writers were not superfluous in their language or design.

 

Here, your hypothesis falls apart.

I'm not enamored of it. First off, one man's freedom is another man's servitude. Second, righties believe (apparently) in the freedom to fail for most of us, but deny the freedom to fail to the 1% (or whatever %). Third, I'm happy Marie Antoinette lost her head.

 

My post Bluesguy claimed was "fallacious nonsense"

A false assertion followed by a false claim. What a surprise!

But go ahead. Since you claim you've already "refuted" the "fallacious nonsense" in my post, it should be easy to prove me wrong by stating exactly what I wrote in my post that you claim is "fallacious nonsense" and why. I made it easy for you by re-posting my post for you above.

Here's your chance to show the whole forum just how wrong I am and prove to everyone you're not make bull(*)(*)(*)(*), baseless accusations.

 

Disagree with your interpretation. The United States certainly includes its people.

Your argument doesn't even make sense. If it means "federal government" when it says "United States", we get this:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT; ... To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes; ... To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.​

Which of course no rational person could suggest it actually means.

 

Straw men made of straw, man

 

I've asked you before and never received an answer, so I'll try again.

In January of 2009, Barack Obama increased spending dramatically in the form of a 819billion stimulus. That would of been a 25% increase in spending from the previous year which was 3,239. But, since not all the spending was scheduled for 2009, It only raised spending by 17% bringing the total to 3,772. Spending has since come down to 3,455 for 2013 but is still more than 200billion dollare higher than it was when he took over. How can you credit him with reducing spending by 7.8% ?

Barack is who blew out the spending in 2009, and you frame it as if he inherited that spending level. Why? You have allowed what the President called a 1 TIME expense to become some new baseline to measure future spending against.

Fact: Barack Obama massively increased spending almost immediately after taking office. And it has taken him 5 years to come even close to bringing it down to what it was before he got here.

 

Your argument, conclusion, and question is founded upon a false premise. The Stimulus was not all spending as you posit, but included at least $350 billion in tax cuts. Further, only a small portion of the Stimulus spending was disbursed in 2009, most was disbursed in 2010 and 2011.

Spending never got to $3,772. It's max has been $3,598.1 billion in 2011.

Most of the increase in spending in 2009 was from programs put into place before Obama took office or spending caused by the GR.

But whatever the reason for the increase in 2009, it does not change the fact that in the four years since 2009 spending has actually dropped, unprecedented in modern history, and completely the opposite of the massive spending increases we had under Bush and Reagan in comparable time periods.

 

No, it's not. Exploitation of labor is what, uh, Lenin and Stalin did. ^_-

 

Your own chart shows that the growth of government slowed then reversed under Reagan:

Year - Spending:GDP
1970 18.2%
1971 18.0%
1972 18.0%
1973 17.2%
1974 17.4%
1975 19.7%
1976 19.8%
1977 19.6%
1978 19.5%
1979 19.1%
1980 20.6%
1981 21.1% <-Reagan takes office
1982 22.3%
1983 22.2%
1984 21.1%
1985 21.8%
1986 21.6%
1987 20.6%
1988 20.3%

You know how trends and liabilities over time and how they increase etc... Dont be coy. Now the states are spending more then before because the feds have been increasing spending despite sending things to the states.

http://galens.typepad.com/.a/6a0112796fbf2128a401156f0530d7970c-800wi

You would have to cut total government by 15% to get back to Reagan levels. The Dems cry when you dont grow government. Nevermind a 15% cut.

 

The left's understanding of equality is Marxist at heart. They're only now starting to come out of the closet about it.

 

Keep on building them.

 

They will deny this and argue there is no social Marxism and that you are a McCarthyist, and then they will go on and on about whites v blacks v Hispanics, men v women, rich v poor, wealth inequality etc... They don't understand that their tribalist views are Marxist just because they aren't full on Marxists.

 

apparently to the left-wing moonbats we aren't even "created" until we leave the womb.

 

Do you even know the difference between Marxism and socialism?

 

Yes. They are matters of degree of lefterism.

 

And the right wing moonbats say conception occurs two weeks before copulation. ~ Jan Brewer

- - - Updated - - -

Then why make foolish statements.

 

Because you have different degrees of Marxism in you. You are all Marxist light and drifting further into the abyss. We are nearly European style these days. No thanks, I don't want to see America go French.


Just a side not. Commie chinas government spends less as a percentage of GDP as the us government does, and has a lower tax burden, and lends us money, and builds more infrastructure then we do. If they have more freedom -hong kong style- they would already be the world economic power. But the commies make up dumb rules in efforts to control the economy like you fine people do obamacare, and they will be a few decades before they can catch up to us.

 

there's no such thing as a right wing moonbat. you fail

 

Do the right thing, get rid of corporate and foreign aid, cut the welfare military by 95%, and make the stock market and offshoring profits illegal.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh yeah there is!! You fail, and fail, fail again! LMAO!! Cons don't even know they are crazier than loons in the moon!