You mean when you don't pay back the 17 trillion dollar principle???????? Or what happens when the 1/2 trillion way pay now to service that debt becomes 2 or 3 trillion annually with higher interest rates???? Stunning analysis you got there. Stick to asking for hot apple pies.
i don't need to, i remember the conversation very well i pointed out that president washington redistributed wealth, through taxes and you said i don't know the difference between taxes and wealth redistribution which is false, i've known for nearly 40 years that taxes are a form of wealth redistribution and then you made a bunch of looney post, as usual, to dodge answering the question about washington
No I didn't more lies on your part. I asked you who decides. Which are set by the Congress not the IRS they only enforce rates and the laws they don't decide what they will be. Only an idiot would deny it, so do you want to just trade insults or admit the IRS doesn't decide what is fair, Congress does that.
There is no glee about it it's called outrage and it's DEMOCRATS that are guilty of the continued economic mess we are in. They have been in control since 2008. - - - Updated - - - No, the response to it. Go back to your sandbox now.
yea!!! I just won 5 bucks by betting myself Obama's name would appear in the OP. Relax. I can personally assure you that he will never serve a 3rd term as president and will almost certainly retire from paid public service in the very near future. Whatever will you do then?
No such evidence at all as Obama proved again with the largest stimulus since the Great Depression one which also failed. It was during the austerity of Gingrich and Kaisch and then Bush and the Republicans that we had solid growth, full employment and soaring tax revenues some much that with the restrained spending the deficit directions turned downward and actually went into surplus in the late 90's.
Why when that doesn't work as evidenced by capital gains revenues historically? And when in an agreement with Republicans to cut spending in return for tax rate increases have the Democrats ever cut spending as promised?
Already exposed the phony use of the numbers no need to do again. What it actually shows is how Obama and the Democrats raised spending from 2008 to the levels of 2009, actually doesn't show the $400B from 2007 to 2008 and the non-cuts just continuing resolutions causing minor fluctuations and the expected huge increase to come. It ended 5 years ago your excuses are no longer operable. How much MORE spending would not have been austerity?
Yeah you did, that thing about who decides what rates are fair, the fair share. IRS only collects taxes and enforces compliance they don't decide how much your fair share of them is.
The 'austerity of Gingrich, Kasich (?) and Bush.' I guess that's the sort of looney claim dujac gives you grief for, but not me. Keep 'em coming, by all means. They are very entertaining.
Just goes to show that the corporatist, Reagan Republican... and How's that trickle down government voodoo working for ya after 33 years? there. fixed.
Nope. Go back and READ my posts again. All you remember is what you WANT to remember....... I CLEARLY and distinctly delineated between taxes used to provide government services and taxes that are used as wealth redistribution......
Good for you. Unless you have a Libertarian representative, write your Republican Tea Party and tell them to raise taxes to get a deficit reduction deal done. We need to to get a budget deal done to reduce the deficit and debt you pretend you're so concerned about.
How's that Tea Party austerity working out for ya? - - - Updated - - - Because raising taxes within historical parameters has resulted in a flood of additional revenues that reduces the deficit you pretend to be so concerned about. See 1993-2000, 2013.
Never refuted once. My numbers are direct from official sources and completely accurate, as you've admitted. 95% of the 2009 spending was already in place when Obama took office. What has happened with federal spending and government employment over the past four years, 2009-2013? The recovery ended 5 years ago? I'll pocket that claim. At least a level where actual spending wasn't decreasing but keeping up with inflation and closer to keeping up with GDP. - - - Updated - - - Could be.
Nonsense, the stimulus stymied the contraction in economic activity, was agree to by the IMF and folllowed by China and Brazil. There was no such austerity of Gingrich. Fiscal consolidation and reform has some support during an upturn when tax receipts are higher in any case, but even Gingrich himself is not an austerity advocate. And further most studies now undermine the claims of those who claim austerity is the historically worth the candle.
Actually yes. No one ever said we're not paying it off, but the question is when and how. Austerity has no historical foundation whatsoever anywhere in the world. Therefore it makes no sense to cut during bad times, instead it makes more sense to print and spend.
