Surprised? Don't Be!

Straight Out Of The Dictionary

Harry's Answer Is To Raise Taxes

Of all the bumbling idiot politicians on Capitol Hill Harry Reid takes the cake, though Fancy Nancy gives him a run for the icing. This really shouldn't come as any great surprise that Harry and the Democrat's answer to the S&P downgrade of our nation's credit rating is to raise taxes to cover the excessive spending spree that they embarked on upon Obama's inauguration. It should be expected because of the nature of the Democratic motto - "Tax And Spend." It doesn't matter what order you put the words in as it all equates to the same thing.

So Harry wants to spin it again. He calls it a "balanced approach." I'll call it what it is - STUPIDITY. I'm beginning to wonder if these people can read and comprehend. You don't raise taxes during a recession and yes, we're still in one and heading south.

Here's what the S&P report said, "The political brinksmanship of recent months highlights what we see as America's governance and policy making becoming less stable, less effective, and less predictable than what we previously believed. The statutory debt ceiling and the threat of default have become political bargaining chips in the debate over fiscal policy. Despite this year's wide-ranging debate, in our view, the differences between political parties have proven to be extraordinarily difficult to bridge."

That's exactly what we just witnessed to a "T." Paul Ryan submitted a budget proposal that would have met with the satisfaction of all the credit reporting agencies. It went down in flames because Harry wouldn't hear of it. The Cut, Cap and Balance was submitted by the House. Harry tabled it and wouldn't allow debate in the Senate. Now then, go back up and read what S&P said one more time. They forewarned our government that they expected to see spending cut by at least the amount the Obama administration over spent during the first two years of his Presidency. They were ignored by this administration.

The expected shortfall this year is in the range of $1.5 trillion. Instead of addressing the problem in the short term, as was required, they played political theater again to raise the debt ceiling so that even more debt could be piled on without addressing the underlying issue. That issue is an out of control government spending more money rather than cutting the spending. So Harry's answer is to raise taxes to cover what should never occur in the first place.

So Harry pulls out Obama's favorite boogie men and announces, "The action by S&P reaffirms the need for a balanced approach to deficit reduction that combines spending cuts with revenue-raising measures like closing taxpayer-funded giveaways to billionaires, oil companies and corporate jet owners. This makes the work of the joint committee all the more important, and shows why leaders should appoint members who will approach the committee’s work with an open mind - instead of hardliners who have already ruled out the balanced approach that the markets and rating agencies like S&P are demanding."

That isn't what S&P is demanding (Harry's word) at all. Go back up and read what they said one more time, and see if you can equate Harry's nonsensical statement to what they said. They said not a word about raising taxes to do anything of the sort. Then the Treasury wants to cry foul ball with a 2 trillion dollar error. They (S&P) expected 4 trillion and really got 2.1 trillion according to the CBO analysis of what was done and that's stretched out over a 10 year period. They want real spending cuts, not smoke and mirrors. Even the majority of the American electorate sees it for what it is - horse hockey pucks.

Back Up The Van For More...

S&P requires affirmative action now to address the underlying issue of excessive spending by a large, bloated federal nanny state. Reid needs to go home permanently to the pomegranates and roses he so longs for. And someone please give him a roll of duct tape to wrap around his head in the lips area.

So which plan met the guidance issued by S&P to maintain our AAA rating? It was called Cut, Cap & Balance and was put on the table by The Tea Party caucus of the House, passed by the House and sent to the Senate where this very same Harry Reid tabled it. They seemed to have heard the message and if you aren't now listening, you should be.

As Always,

The Frog

More by this Author

  • "Ineptocracy" Is A Word
    18

    Ineptocracy is the new system of government that Obama-Biden ushered in. It is a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society...


Comments 87 comments

Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 5 years ago from Rural Arizona

Now that the cheers have quieted down for our highly paid idiots saving us from certain doom, the blame game starts all over again. Based on comments I have seen, the left has their guns loaded for bear, and the hunt is on.

All of this downgrade stuff has the talking heads running off at the mouth even more than following a hurricane or earthquake. Should be an interesting rest of the year.


Partisan Patriot 5 years ago

Redistribute, that's all Harry and Nancy and Barney and Little Chuckie Shumer and Dick Turbin and so on and so on and shoobie doobie doobie understand. Class warfare is their only hope to stay in power; damned the torpedoes of truth full speed ahead with our lies says Barrackie Boo and his merry band of Socialists!


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 5 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

OP - What you stated is exactly what S&P is talking about. More blame and stall and continue to spend. It's not going to raise our credit rating one iota.


Naomi's Banner profile image

Naomi's Banner 5 years ago from United States

I would vote your Hub funny Frog however the humor has left me for total disgust at the way our country is blindly following the decisions of this government. Thanks as always for pointing out the crap.


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 5 years ago from Rural Arizona

Wouldn't it be cool if they could actually sit down, create a real budget, eliminate some waste, and figure out exactly where we stand. They throw out numbers like Billions and Trillions, but none of these are truly based on income or "necessary" expense. The truth is they have no idea where we currently are financially.


breakfastpop profile image

breakfastpop 5 years ago

Right now my blood is boiling. Dems are placing the blame for the downgrade squarely on the shoulders of the Tea Party. This is exactly why S& P doesn't trust the U.S. to get their financial house in order.


Brupie profile image

Brupie 5 years ago

I'm astonished that this rant passes anyone's list for political discussion. All I see is a sustained attack on Democrats for the debt ceiling quagmire and credit downgrade. The Republicans got what they wanted, no tax increases and significant cuts. Nevermind that cutting "out of control" spending now is exactly the wrong medicine for an anemic economy.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 5 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

Brupie - Did you miss the point? The Democrats missed totally what S&P forewarned this administration would happen if they didn't hit the mark. Well, well, well...

They didn't even come close.

What Reid just said and what S&P said aren't the same thing. But I expect a Democrat to respond like a Democrat.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

"Nevermind that cutting "out of control" spending now is exactly the wrong medicine for an anemic economy."

I see...Government spending of even more money we don't have is the answer to the recession?

Did you ever consider writing fairy tales? You're quite good at it.


Stu Engelman 5 years ago

Really, the Dem's and GOP's are both playing the same game. Each submits bills to "look they are doing something," knowing that the other side will reject it. Dem's focus on nonsense like taxes on billionaries, which won't raise much money anyway, but will anger GOP's, and anyone who submits a serious spending reduction bill will get howls from the Democrats, and sometimes the GOP too, because the establishment does not want to lose the fiat power of the regulatory state (not to mention the fat salaries associated with running big agencies). In the meantime, we just keep sinking further and further into debt.

I fear that unless we set mandated constitutional limits on spending (percent of GNP), a BBA, and mandated constitutional annual surplus levels when we are in debt, this problem will never get solved. The "negotiation" process has been tried ad nauseum and it just doesn't work. At root, neither party wants it to work. Spending cuts reduce power and compensation for the feds, and higher tax revenue reduces reelection odds. The only way to make the math work is to force it constitutionally. A spending limit as a percent of GNP, plus a flexible tax rate that achieves a balanced budget when we are debt free, or a minimum surplus of 7.5% of ourstanding official debt when we are not, would nail the investor owned debt problem. This, in combination with a brisk phaseout of the federal entitlement programs, would allow us to rip up most of the off balance sheet debt.

I realize the above is very tough medicine, but we've been living above our means for years. At some point, if we don't act with seriousness, the corpus will become so large that no solution will work.


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 5 years ago from Rural Arizona

It looks like they are just not going to be able to play nice, and we will have to send them all to their rooms. I like what Stu had to say. We need constitutional spending limits or this will never be resolved.


Brupie profile image

Brupie 5 years ago

S&P didn't tell the administration it had to stop spending so much money, it told the administration it had to limit deficit spending. One can limit deficits in one of two ways: 1) Reduce spending or 2) Increase revenue (aka taxes). S&P didn't tell the administration it had to use exclusively solution #1 or solution #2.

The Republican leadership insisted that raising taxes was off the table. The top quintile of Americans are richer than ever, but they are the "job creators" and must be protected according to the Republicans. Unfortunately, they don't create many jobs.


rip van winkle 5 years ago

i think our liar in chief is trying to bankrupt our country and replace capitalism with socialism!


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 5 years ago from Rural Arizona

Brupie, are you saying it would have been a better solution to just raise taxes and forget about reducing some of the wasteful spending? That makes no sense to me.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

"S&P didn't tell the administration it had to stop spending so much money, it told the administration it had to limit deficit spending."

S&P didn't tell the admistration anything. That's not their job. Their job is to rate nations on their ability to pay their debts, and the US has a $14+ trillion dollar debt with no end in sight, and a lust for spending money we do not have.

Thus the downgrade.

Your answer (and the Democrat answer to everything!) is to increase taxes, a fool's game during a recession.

The private sector drives the economy, not government, so if we increase taxes, we take money out of the very private sector that's trying desperately to get back on its feet.


Harvey Stelman profile image

Harvey Stelman 5 years ago from Illinois

Froggy, Do you really ever expect these &%$&*^ to do what the country needs? The answer is simple, NO! They have to be voted out after we are downgraded to a "D." H


Becky 5 years ago

I would be willing to raise taxes but only after these idiots who want to raise taxes have given all of their money to the government to pay the deficit down.


Brupie profile image

Brupie 5 years ago

There is no dispute that the government has waste. One quarter of current Federal spending is defense related, about the same is health (medicaid), about 20% are pensions, we have a huge unemployment and underemployment problem and spend around 13% on welfare. We spend 18% for everything else (parks, education, debt servicing, the FBI). What should we cut?

Wealthy Americans pay less in taxes than the wealthy of nearly every other industrialized country. No kidding, I think taxes should be raised for them.

I think it is a bit like chicken little around here. With interest rates at the lowest in more than 40 years, borrowing money is a lot cheaper than a double dip recession will be even after the downgrade.


b. Malin profile image

b. Malin 5 years ago

I think I'd be Surprised if they DIDN'T WANT TO RAISE TAXES! And Government Waste is the ONLY way they know! Let them stop giving themselves Raises and let them pay for their own Health Insurance...give Them the Obama Plan...And let Nancy Pelosi drive Harry out of town!


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 5 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

Brupie - Since according to the US Constitution the primary role of the federal government is the defense of our nation, make your list from there. I'm wondering at this point if you've ever bothered to read the document. If you haven't, try picking it up and reading it.

As far as the S&P goes, Will said it correctly. They don't demand, they rate. Their rating was based upon the outline of reducing the excessive spending, not raising taxes. You could raise everyone's taxes to 65% and not cover the deficit for just this year.

The Frog


Pamela99 profile image

Pamela99 5 years ago from United States

I think the Cut, Cap and Balance should have been the bill to pass and we probably wouldn't be in this position. To table with bill without discussion tells me Reid has too much power! I think the tea party did put pressure on Congress to at least reduce some of their spending without raising taxes but I think we are in for a rough ride. I'm glad you wrote this hub and laid out the events so well. Rated awesome.


dallas93444 profile image

dallas93444 5 years ago from Bakersfield, CA

Great article and comments! Lots of options, but leaders do not have the will to lead...


marcoujor profile image

marcoujor 5 years ago from Jeffersonville PA

Hi Mr Frog,

As usual, this get my UP and UAI vote! I think something is wrong with me, though. I saw The Planet of the Apes yesterday and started siding with the monkeys. They made much more sense to me than most people I know, mar.


jwhitman profile image

jwhitman 5 years ago from Albany, New York

The more that I watch the news, scan the newspapers and read articles like yours, the more I am lead to believe that we need to have regular working class people running the show in Washington. I can't even fathom how they can mis-manage money so badly that the deficit reaches the trillions. Enoughs enough, if there were a stiff penalty for screwing up as badly as the current administration has, like getting cuffed and stuffed into a maximum security prison, maybe that would be enough to light a fire under their asses to friggin do the right thing and stop messing around.


Ghost32 5 years ago

Hub + comments = got this topic pretty well covered, Jim. Guess I'll just go Vote Up and Stuff....


Kathleen Cochran profile image

Kathleen Cochran 5 years ago from Atlanta, Georgia

Congrats on your Most Political recognition. Somebody has to speak for us little people! Keep up the good work!


Kathleen Cochran profile image

Kathleen Cochran 5 years ago from Atlanta, Georgia

Up the Revolution! Please, please remember all this anger at next election season and vote these clowns out of office. We get to have a revolution every two, four and six years. Don't re-elect any of this crowd - even the ones from your own state/district.


PoliticsNOW profile image

PoliticsNOW 5 years ago from New York

Maybe now they will get back to jobs but I doubt it?


wba108@yahoo.com profile image

wba108@yahoo.com 5 years ago from upstate, NY

You made a powerful case here:

" Paul Ryan submitted a budget proposal that would have met with the satisfaction of all the credit reporting agencies. It went down in flames because Harry wouldn't hear of it. The Cut, Cap and Balance was submitted by the House. Harry tabled it and wouldn't allow debate in the Senate."

That petty much makes it an open and shut case, the Democrats we're clearly in the wrong in this debate. The president said a short while ago that raising taxes during a recession is a bad thing, then he turns around and does it! He needs to be called on the carpet loud and clear!


Minnetonka Twin profile image

Minnetonka Twin 5 years ago from Minnesota

Hi Frog Prince-Thanks for the great article, clearly outlining what's not going right with this government. It's getting so depressing and scary. I appreciate your knowledge on this.


nicomp profile image

nicomp 5 years ago from Ohio, USA

I LOVE Cowboy Poetry.


PoliticsNOW profile image

PoliticsNOW 5 years ago from New York

Cut Cap and balance would have balanced th budget on the backs of the middle class, poor, old and sick. While giving more tax breaks to the rich. Its an evil and unfair plan and that is a fact.


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 5 years ago from Rural Arizona

PoliticsNOW - Interesting comment. Could you enlighten us as to what made you come to this conclusion? I hear it both ways and would be very interested in your reasoning.


PoliticsNOW profile image

PoliticsNOW 5 years ago from New York

Well Poolman they wanted to cut SS and Give people on Medicaid VOUCHER. If you are too sick and the voucher is not enough to cover you the expenses come out of your pocket. The want education cuts and EPA deregulation which will lead to more sickness high health costs and lower job performance. At it is higher level of Autism are connected to pesticides and they want less regulation? Plus the bush tax cuts that we spent 3 trillion on led to the loss of 8 million jobs. They are a waste of money. We could use that revenue to invest direstly into the USA and create jobs. Throwing more money at te rich that WE BORROW FROM CHINA will not create jobs as histoy has shown. They are a big part of the Ryan plan. But of course they neeed to please their corporate donars. Well Obama wants to end this and I support that. The Bush will NOT and never will create jobs.


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 5 years ago from Rural Arizona

PoliticsNOW - Thanks for your response to my question. As it is now, most people even with Medical Insurance end up paying some of the expense out of pocket.

If what you say is all true, what is Obama doing to correct this situation? I read different opinions on how we are going to get out of this mess, and would be interested in what you feel would be the right way to do this.


PoliticsNOW profile image

PoliticsNOW 5 years ago from New York

First I would end the Bush Tax cuts. We spent 3 trillion so far and lost millions of jobs under Bush. That was their Jobs plan and it failed. They just give the rich more money. If we end them now in 10 years our debt would be cut in half. All Obama is asking the top 2% is to pay 4.5% more. They can handle it. Where the Ryan plan would ask the poor to pay more and continue the Tax cuts. Its time to end them they are waste of tax payer money.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

"First I would end the Bush Tax cuts."

Then why didn't Obama and the Democrats end the Bush tax cuts? Why did they extend them?

Obama has now spent more than all other presidents combined. Why aren't you criticizing him?

And if we actually listen to the private sector on why they aren't hiring (what a novel idea!), they tell us that Obamacare is a major roadblock.

Since the majority of Americans favor repealing this piece of crap, and it's a major reason why we are still in a recession, why didn't Obama address it in his big speech?

My guess is, you don't care what the majority of Americans want anymore than Obama does!


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 5 years ago from Rural Arizona

Many comments stress raising the taxes on those who currently pay taxes. Almost never is anything said about getting some tax dollars from the large percentage that pay no taxes at all. That sure is an incentive to work hard and earn more, so you can pay more taxes.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

"Almost never is anything said about getting some tax dollars from the large percentage that pay no taxes at all."

This is where the left gets tricky. When we called such payroll deductions a hidden tax, the left said they were not taxes at all. They called them 'contributions', because, they claimed, those deductions went into that person's Social Security and Medicare accounts, so they weren't 'taxes'.

But when we later said that some people paid no income taxes, the left decided to call payroll deductions 'taxes' after all!

As I said, 'tricky'! :-)


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 5 years ago from Rural Arizona

I guess it is all in the name, and how it is applied. What works for them one day needs to be changed slightly to fit the situation at hand another day. They sure have this one figured out.


PoliticsNOW profile image

PoliticsNOW 5 years ago from New York

Will, Obama wanted to end the tax cuts. The GOP stuck to the pledge of Norquist and would not budge on it. Te GOP were willing to raise taxes on everybody to protect them. Obama wants them to end for the top 2% ONLY!


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

PoliticsNOW

How will raising taxes on the very people who create jobs spur the economy?

The theory that government spending money on itself will create jobs was proven to be a trillion dollar failure by the stimulus boondoggle.

When will you folks on the left ever admit that your beloved liberalism does not work? How many failures do you need?

And BTW, the current recession was not caused by Bush. It was caused by the Democrat's Freddie, Fannie, and CRA attempts to manipulate the housing and home loan markets.

Look it up.


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 5 years ago from Rural Arizona

PoliticsNOW - I'm guessing you are one of the lucky one's who pay little or no taxes at this time. Have you considered that the more taxes a large company is forced to pay, the less money they have to spend on employees? Putting new employees on the payroll would contribute far more to this failing economy than raising taxes on the so called wealthy. More people paying income tax would certainly be a big plus for the treasury.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

And what about the looming monster of Obamacare, PoliticsNOW?

Over and over, businesses cite it as the main reason they are hesitant to hire, the vast majority of Americans do not want it, and some 56% want it repealed!

Yet Obama refuses to even discuss it! He even admits he likes the sound of 'Obamacare'. There is a real ego in action...to hell with what the people want!


PoliticsNOW profile image

PoliticsNOW 5 years ago from New York

Run it like Romneycare it works in Mass right?

Poolman, we tried it your way and LOST 8 million jobs. They don't hire with the money. History has told us it will not work. Reagan raised taxes on the rich 11 times and we can't go back to the Clinton levels? A time we saw huge jobs growth and a surplus?

Truth be told we have a demand problem putting people back to work any way we can should be number one right now. Increase demand and companies will hire.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

"Run it like Romneycare it works in Mass right?"

And simply ignore the will of most Americans? How typically liberal of you.

As far as Bush losing jobs, he did not. You ignored this fact:

"And BTW, the current recession was not caused by Bush. It was caused by the Democrat's Freddie, Fannie, and CRA attempts to manipulate the housing and home loan markets.

Look it up."


PoliticsNOW profile image

PoliticsNOW 5 years ago from New York

Look at Bank of America, they are laying off 30,000 and they got HUGE tax breaks probably paid none or got money back. They are laying off due to crappy management and screwing us all while the Big Wigs walked away with millions Tax breaks have NOTHING to do with JOBS!

Funny since Mass is run by A REBUBLICAN Governor. A righty passed the Romneycare bill. I will not throw back an insult, its not worth it.

Wow you just left out Enron who were in bed with Bush 3 trillion tax cuts and another 2 on war. If you believe its all freddie and fanny you are missing 2/3 of the story.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

PoliticsNOW,

Now you're taking a desperation shotgun and hysterically trying to hit something, but you're making no sense.


PoliticsNOW profile image

PoliticsNOW 5 years ago from New York

Ok Will I will simplify if for you. Tax cuts DO NOT CREATE JOBS. History has shown us this.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

"Tax cuts DO NOT CREATE JOBS."

True, IF government spending is not cut at the same time. But if both taxes and spending are cut, the economy soars, and jobs are created.

Government produces nothing to sell, so all jobs created by government are temporary, and not self-sustaining like private sector employment. Freeing up money now being spent by government is the solution. Cut spending and taxes if you want to create real jobs.

As we have just witnessed, Keynesian economics has proved to be a flawed theory and a massive failure.


PoliticsNOW profile image

PoliticsNOW 5 years ago from New York

We would not be in this mess if not for the crooks on Wall St. and the banks. The GOP would probably have won again. Instead Bush handed Obama a MASSIVE crisis. Without the stim pack we would have fallen further. I KNOW it created jobs including OVER 45,000 for Perry in TX and almost 2 million over all.

The TP and GOP way of Creating jobs is tax breaks for the rich. That does not work. If we can spend 200B on fixing Iraq, we can sure do it here. Without stimulation and job growth we will be stuck in the same old rut of throwing money at the rich and pray for trickle down.

Keynesian economics had nothing to do with the crash of 2008. Going back to the old system will not work either. We need compromise from both sides.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

"Keynesian economics had nothing to do with the crash of 2008."

Nor did I say that. The failed stimulus (Obama now admits that it failed by admitting that the economy is no better) was Keynesian economics.

The stimulus failed because Obama claimed it would keep the unemployment rate below 8%. He was wrong. Now the left wants to move those goalposts by claiming it saved jobs, a completely unprovable claim.

The reason for the housing collapse of 2008 is now well known, and it is laid directly at the feet of Fannie, Freddie, and the Community Reinvestment act, all Democrat boondoggles.

BTW, the 'Jobs' bill is really just another stimulus, which is why it will not pass, nor was it ever intended to pass. It's just part of Obama's 2012 campaign.

Obama has no idea how to create jobs.


PoliticsNOW profile image

PoliticsNOW 5 years ago from New York

So creating 2 million jobs is a failure? That is what the stim did. Created 2 million more taxpayers Bush lost millions jobs. Where is he on your failure chart?

Some of the tea party members did not take the cash either. It needed to be a third bigger and better used. Most of it was tax breaks for people like you Will. Check out the truth here STATE BY STATE. Unless you know but are paid not to care. There is lots of that going around. I know I attended a lecture and wrote about it.

http://www.recovery.gov/Pages/default.aspx

What would you do Will, to create jobs.


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 5 years ago from Rural Arizona

As a small business owner, I can tell you that cutting my taxes would not encourage me to expand my business and hire more people. Most tax cuts are temporary at best, and if these were stopped I would be left holding the bag. The path to the future is so dark and with so many unknowns such as Obamacare, few in business are going to risk what they have left to expand their business at this time. I would need some assurance there are no big surprises around the next bend before I would risk it all on expansion.

The talk of tax breaks for employers hiring the unemployed and returning veterans sounds great, but in theory would be very hard to regulate. This would also be discriminatory toward someone who was currently working a minimum wage job, and wanted more pay and opportunity. These type of offers also make big government a partner in your business, with of course the forms to fill out and reports to send in. I don't have any partners in my business and don't want any, especially a government agency.

Just give private enterprise some good assurance there are no big surprises ahead in the form of higher taxes or increased regulations, and they in turn will begin expanding and hiring.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

You use Obama's official propaganda site as your source for the 'truth'?

(snicker!)

Virtually no one outside the Obama administration still claims the stimulus was a success, because it so obviously failed.

Except you.

If you won't even admit that, there's no longer any point in discussing it with you.


PoliticsNOW profile image

PoliticsNOW 5 years ago from New York

It actual real facts Will. Have a good one because I feel he same. Go ahead believe the corporate funded tea party.


PoliticsNOW profile image

PoliticsNOW 5 years ago from New York

The stimulus raised the GDP to + 1.9% from negative 8.9% in 2008-2009. and created over 2 million jobs. Actual facts from the CBO look it up. I have no reason to lie to hurt my country.


wba108@yahoo.com profile image

wba108@yahoo.com 5 years ago from upstate, NY

Great Hub Frog!

"Now then, go back up and read what S&P said one more time. They forewarned our government that they expected to see spending cut by at least the amount the Obama administration over spent during the first two years of his Presidency. They were ignored by this administration"

- This is proof that our nation is being run by politicians acting like gangsters and con men!-WBA


PoliticsNOW profile image

PoliticsNOW 5 years ago from New York

Obama has spent 1.4 Trillion so far. Most of it on the Bush war and tax cuts.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/pos...


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 5 years ago from Rural Arizona

PoliticsNOW - We don't spend money on tax cuts, they just reduce revenue. What particular tax cuts are you referring to? I may have missed out because I sure don't see mine getting any lower.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

"Paying" for tax cuts is typical liberal mumbo-jumbo.

It's akin to saying, "How will we pay for not putting our hands in the citizens pockets?"

It never occurs to them to just stop spending all that money! Nearly two out of every three dollars spent by government is on entitlements.

The federal government is now the largest employer in the United States, yet it produces NOTHING! Guess what's wrong with the economy.


wba108@yahoo.com profile image

wba108@yahoo.com 5 years ago from upstate, NY

WillStarr-

Thats a very good point that, "The federal government is now the largest employer in the United States, yet it produces NOTHING!" This is a very important and 100% true concept that should get alot more attention!


PoliticsNOW profile image

PoliticsNOW 5 years ago from New York

So you want to cut SS and medicaid for old people to pay for rich tax breaks that create NO JOBS! Great thinking. By the way when somone gets SS, they spend it unlike the tax breaks. The top 2% can aford to pay 4% more. They are making RECORD profits. Lets not stray away from the acts now will. Liberal thinking has nothing to do with it. Having a heart does YOU BAGGERS ad GOPERS need to see the Wizard and get one.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

"So you want to cut SS and medicaid for old people to pay for rich tax breaks that create NO JOBS!"

Another false projection? Do you ever run out?

What I want to do is stop spending money we do not have, start shrinking government, and start listening to the will of the people!

If we keep on going the way we are, we will collapse as a nation and Social Security/Medicare/Obamacare will collapse right along with it. Is that what you want?

What part of 'unsustainable' do you fail to understand?


Average American profile image

Average American 5 years ago from Las Vegas, Nevada

Froggy my man,

I am not the least bit surprised that my Senator (yes, I live in Nevada and did all I could to remove this moron) has misinterpreted what S&P said. He has been misinterpreting the US Constitution for 30 years. That would be another document written rather plainly. Yet this dip thinks he comprehends 22000 pages of a healthcare bill?

Great read FP.


PoliticsNOW profile image

PoliticsNOW 5 years ago from New York

What part of Bush Tax Cuts account for HALF the new debt don't you understand Will? As long as the smaller government you want does not lead to more corruption like we saw in 2008. I am all for it.


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 5 years ago from Rural Arizona

PoliticsNOW - I notice in your comments you blame all corruption on the GOP or the Right side of the aisle. Are you saying that none of the corruption has come from the Left side of the aisle?


PoliticsNOW profile image

PoliticsNOW 5 years ago from New York

You are right poolman, I should add the Blue Dog dems in there to.

Here is fact number one. 10 years of bus tax cuts 3 trillion spent and milions of jobs lost. They are a failed policy. Corporations are making RECORD profits and the top 2% can afford to pay more. Reagan raised taxes 11 times. 11 T I M E S!!


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 5 years ago from Rural Arizona

PoliticsNOW - Without getting into a bunch of facts and figures, all I believe is that if everyone paid their fair share we would not be in the shape we are in today. WillStarr has pointed out many times that if Corporations are forced to pay higher taxes, they just pass them on to the consumer, and you and I still end up paying their taxes. We know that somewhere around 50% of our citizens pay no taxes at this time. Some because they are not working and no income means no taxes. Some because they just never have and never will. I shy completely away from blaming any single party for our current situation, it is all of them combined that put us into this mess, and if they would start doing their jobs we might be able to get out of it.


PoliticsNOW profile image

PoliticsNOW 5 years ago from New York

That 50% makes less than 20K a year. Poolman they pay taxes, school, property,sales,payroll. That is a LIE the RW pushes. The very top 2% are making RECORD profits they can afford 4% more trust me. We should take that 4% and invest in the USA. Start fixing and building in the USA again. Insead they are selling our building to China right now. Yes the rich are getting HUGE tax breaks and at the same time selling their assests to CHINA.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

"That 50% makes less than 20K a year."

What's your source for that claim, because that means that half of all Americans are now in poverty under Obama.

Are you sure you want to say that?


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 5 years ago from Rural Arizona

That sure sounds like a bunch of people at or below the poverty level. Are you sure this is correct?


PoliticsNOW profile image

PoliticsNOW 5 years ago from New York

How cow you people don't get it. They pay taxes, maybe its a family of 4 making 40K or a single mom making 20K. THEY PAY TAXES GET IT?? The 2008 economic collapse caused by deregultion has increased poverty. With no JOBS bill in sight by the right and stalling on Obamas plan there is no hope until Obama gets a SUPPORTIVE CONGRESS. BUT THEY PAY T A X E S!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


PoliticsNOW profile image

PoliticsNOW 5 years ago from New York

I really find it odd you all support deregulation when that is what cause the 2008 collapse. Just does not make any sense to me. Especially when the very people profitting from it are spending MILLIONS to convince you its good. It cost us Trillions and we are still paying the price today.


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 5 years ago from Rural Arizona

I'm sorry but I'm missing the point on deregulation. If that came into this set of comments I missed it. What deregulation support are you referring to?


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

Mike,

This is a case of logic and evidence on the right and baseless ranting from the left.

Best to simply ignore and move on.


PoliticsNOW profile image

PoliticsNOW 5 years ago from New York

Go ahead ignore me, deregulation caused the 2008 collapse and now they want more. Not buying it but you can if you want. Tax cuts and dereg won't create jobs. Go ahead will ignore the truth, that is what your side does. "Conservative thinking" at its best.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

"...deregulation caused the 2008 collapse..."

Where's your evidence (and your opinion is NOT evidence!)?


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 5 years ago from Rural Arizona

Again, what deregulation are you talking about?


PoliticsNOW profile image

PoliticsNOW 5 years ago from New York

Evidence really its common sense. NO ONE WAS WATCHING OR REPORTING on the bad loans. WOW are you guys for real? They packaged and sold bad loans. Stop playing dumb please. Please enlighten me on what happened in 2008 if I am wrong. It was dereg that caused it, poolman you want details watch.

http://www.lifetuner.org/article/833-oscar_nominat...

Will, I know you will find a new angle or lie to go with.

The movie is called INSIDE JOB Please watch it


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

"NO ONE WAS WATCHING OR REPORTING on the bad loans."

Now why would a perfectly sane banker loan somebody money who had bad credit, and almost certainly would not pay it back?

Would you loan somebody money, knowing that you would almost certainly lose it?

So why do you think they did that?


PoliticsNOW profile image

PoliticsNOW 5 years ago from New York

Actual fact by the way Obama CARES mandates people get healthcare and they buy it from PRIVATE COMPANIES. They just can't deny you if you are TOO SICK!

Will you really are clueless man. Watch the movie INSIDE JOB and I am not joking learn some real truth please?? Stop defending the lies you know you are telling.

They do NO ONE ANY GOOD!

Bush and Cheney DEREGULATED wall ST so much they F@CKED us all!


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 5 years ago from Rural Arizona

PoliticsNOW - It has become very obvious that you have your view of the world, and no amount of facts or figures would ever change your mind on a single issue. You always speak of something you have heard, been told, or seen in a movie, but never come up with anything that can ever be discussed intelligently or debated.

I am through with this discussion with you, so please don't bother to respond.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

I agree, PoliticsNOW. You present only your own, very biased opinion, and claim that you don't need evidence.

You address none of the points presented to you.

There's no point in discussing anything with a closed mind.


PoliticsNOW profile image

PoliticsNOW 5 years ago from New York

Free speech and I will say what I please. I put just facts on the table its your choice to take a bite.


PoliticsNOW profile image

PoliticsNOW 5 years ago from New York

Think about this

Get rid of the debt ceiling, they should be adults enough to manage the debt. This way neither side can blackmail the other holding it up. No more WARS and TAX breaks on the CREDIT CARD!


PoliticsNOW profile image

PoliticsNOW 5 years ago from New York

Republican Voter living in a bubble

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GiWx1RSa8xM

Yo guys are in the bubble. As long as I don't say what you want to hear you won't listen.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working