Busy Swingers Forum - everything you always wanted to know about swingers.
SwingLifeStyle Swingers Personal Ads. | SwingLifeStyle Swingers Clubs

Busy Swingers Forum

Everything you always wanted to know about swingers.

Create A Free Account

HELP
FORUMS General Discussions Politics The Swiftboating of Nancy Pelosi's Plane
TOPIC: The Swiftboating of Nancy Pelosi's Plane
GoTo Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Start   51 to 60 of 83   End
User Details are only visible to members.
Akron

That's such BS. Tax cuts don't create NEW customers....they came from another bank paying them less interest.

St Petersburg FL
Username hidden
(989 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
38

"Not exactly. his military buildup was costly but it was the Dems under Tip O Neil who declared the Reagan Budgets "Dead On Arrival" as they added tens of billions in new spending to his budgets. Govt spending under Reagan exploded but the Dems were the ones that loaded it up with spending on social programs. "

The policy of the democrat controlled congress under Reagan was to require spending cuts to offset tax cuts. Reagan for 8 years called for a balanced budget (which requires spending cuts) but he never ever submitted a balanced budget (the president submits the budget...not congress). Reagan pushed for tax cuts but never pushed for spending cuts. I don't remember a military buildup under Reagan; are you referring to his "star wars program"?

St Petersburg FL
Username hidden
(989 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Perfect

"Get it? "

Yep I get your example.....but those extra customers you got....they came from someone else (the other bank) who lost revenue to your pocket. There are only so many customers to go around. Your revenue went up at another's expense.

St Petersburg FL
Username hidden
(989 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
"Reagan and Bush policies increased revenues by pouring hundreds of billions of federal dollars into the economy more than they took in. It's akin to giving someone 100 dollars, having them give you 90 back, and then telling people you're making $90 more than you had before. "

And then borrowing more to make up for what they didn't take in.

St Petersburg FL
Username hidden
(989 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Akron

No I'm not kidding but you may be kidding yourself.

"You understand the ideas behind investment and capital? If I invest my money in capital instead of welfare I can create MORE jobs which in turn pay MORE taxes. "

If you're referring to corporations investing and adding capital I believe your dead wrong.....the extra cash ends up in the pockets of CEO and other upper management. The additions to capital are not taxed and only the earnings of the investments are taxed which in turn get a tax break.

In addition, corporation do not pay much of the tax burden. Corporate welfare far out stripps individual welfare. Individual welfare accounts for about $400 per year to each taxpayer while the cost of corporate welfare costs about $1400 per year per taxpayer.

St Petersburg FL
Username hidden
(989 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
uuforum dot org / deficit dot htm

St Petersburg FL
Username hidden
(989 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Perfect

"Atleast the Bush and Reagan policies drastically increased revenues via tax cuts. "

I'm still not so sure how you increase revenue by cutting your source of income....explain this. When my source of income is cut, my revenue is cut and if I continue to spend the same amount it gets paid for by borrowing.

Reagan and Bush never cut spending and borrowed to pay for it especially GW. The only recent president to cut any spending was Clinton and it resulted in less budget deficits and ultimately 230 billion surplus before GW took over.

St Petersburg FL
Username hidden
(989 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
38

"Conservatives didn't vote in November because we supported the Dems, because we don't"

Well who's fault is it that conservatives didn't vote?

"Less than 10% of the house seats changed hands and even less in the Senate. Most of the Senate changes were by very small margins. There was no "mandate" on the part of America for the Democratic agenda, far from it. "

Doesn't matter what the margin was just as in 2000, there wasn't a mandate then either. The margin also doesn't matter in that the dems did take majority of both houses whether it be by one member or more.

"Conservatives abandoned the GOP and especially GWB on a number of issues, Iraq being only one of them. "

I have no arguement with that statement.....I merely said that the administrations handling of the Iraq war was a MAJOR issue and I believe the number one issue.

"1. Govt Spending - GWB has been spending like a drunk sailor on leave. There is NO EXCUSE for him adding 3 trillion to the debt...."

GW's affect on the deficit is much more than $3 trillion, you're quoting his 2007 budget released last week and that is the budget not deficit. That's just the cost of spending as budgeted. Aus and I have posted two graph's comparing performance of the different presidents since Roosevelt. Bet a dollar to a donut you guys never looked at the graph. Reagan destroyed the total deficit (debt) and there is no descriptive word for what GW has done to the total deficit. He has been by far the biggest borrowing president....$300 and some billion in his first year I believe.

"3. Iraq - another politically correct war. We should have gone in and flattened the country, killed or arrested the insurgents like Al Sadr and blown up every mosque that terrorists used to hide in and attack from. Parts of Baghdad should have been destroyed at the same time we wiped out fallujah."

Well I don't know about all of that statement, I kinda agree with you except for flattening. I will say however we should have fought the damn war to win it instead of 3 plus years of fighting, taking territory and then fucking walking off.....what kind of warring policy is that? Now 3 plus years later we're going to send 21500 more troops in to do just that. This IMHO is a token force anyway as only about 1/3rd of the additional troops will be fighting at any one time. 1/3 would be on the way to the front, 1/3 coming back for R &R and 1/3 fighting.

"I can list more, but thats a few of the more important reasons. GWB isn't a Conservative and never has been. We will not support anybody who lies to us or betrays us, which clearly separates us from the Democrats."

He's been supported by somebody for 6 years!

St Petersburg FL
Username hidden
(989 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
DebJack

"Pete, as you libs spouted in 2000, the margin in 2006 was so slim it has no real meaning, no mandate, and the dems stole the election. The senate is already sticking it to pelosi. The fun begins! "

And it really didn't make a hill of beans difference that the margin was slim in 2000 just like it don't for you conservatives in 2006. Bush went to the white house and is still there and the dems took control of not one but both houses of congress. And yes, the fun now begins.....at least two years worth. Now GW will have to justify himself which he should have had too for 6 years.

St Petersburg FL
Username hidden
(989 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Hmmm

"GWB never learned that one can't be bi-partisan with the lunatic left wing. Thats why Conservatives abandoned him and the GOP last November. "

I thought you guys were under the belief that the people didn't vote for a change in November? It's refreshing to see a conservative agree that the republican base got pissed and voted against many of their republican representatives and put the dems back in majority. However, you got the wrong reason for the swing in the votes.....the number one issue was the administrations handling of the Iraq war not GW's abilities to be bi-partisan with the "lunatic left wing".

St Petersburg FL
Username hidden
(989 posts)
GoTo Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Start   51 to 60 of 83   End
TOPIC: The Swiftboating of Nancy Pelosi's Plane