Cutting taxes is always a good idea, but to go to war the only responsible way to fund it is to attempt to curb some of the costs by not passing the buck onto future generations, but due to partisan staying power and expediency that is exactly what happened. Face it, none of these clowns want to do whats right and really cut spending, because they would not be reelected. Since being reelected is more important then doing whats right for this country, things will only really change when there is no other choice. Since you like to play partisan hack politics how about this. When Bush took office the national debt was 5.6 Trillion. It now stands at 9.6 Trillion and counting. How did this happen? Accumulated budget deficits, thats how. He came into the biggest surplus in history and he will leave office with the biggest deficit in history, that about sums it up. Oh and dont forget the record-high budget deficit of $482 billion gift Bush will leave either frick or frack. Open mindedness and free thinking is logical. Partisan and playing favorites is closed minded and flawed. And that is not funny anymore, its getting quite sad.
Doubtful it has much to do with Bush directly (he's not smart enough to be consulted on such issues) but certainly keeping the interest rates well below the rate of inflation (even the bogus gov't version) is politically motivated. Can't have a recession when there are 18-month-long election campaigns to worry about. Creating asset bubbles for political expedience was Greenspan's legacy.
Anybody remember the 2004 SOU when Bush bragged about home ownership at an all-time high? I'm sure if we sifted around, we could find at least one Rx Repub giving Bush all kinds of credit for the stat. Was that you, Willie?
Actually X, I'm not from the school of thought that Presidents micro manage the economy, that's a liberal thing because they need to believe some magic wand can improve their lives. I prefer to think I have more control over my own life, and I do BTW.
I am guilty of using economic facts to bash leftists who believe Bush ruined their lives. You see, if you are a person that believes the President micro manages your economy, then the economic facts don't support many conclusions haters arrive at, although the MSM certainly does agree with the haters.
Even my Bush Boom threads are partially in jest. I believe in the economic facts, but I give the credit to the American people and their pursuit of our way of life. We make our world. I believe the best the the government can do is not fuck it up. I think tax cuts play into that hand.
Yes, the haters have been molded, while calling self sufficient people like me "sheeple".
Anyhow, the "people of the world" should be happy Bush is bringing the price of oil down, get it?
I am guilty of using economic facts to bash leftists who believe Bush ruined their lives. You see, if you are a person that believes the President micro manages your economy, then the economic facts don't support many conclusions haters arrive at, although the MSM certainly does agree with the haters.
Even my Bush Boom threads are partially in jest. I believe in the economic facts, but I give the credit to the American people and their pursuit of our way of life. We make our world. I believe the best the the government can do is not fuck it up. I think tax cuts play into that hand.
Yes, the haters have been molded, while calling self sufficient people like me "sheeple".
Anyhow, the "people of the world" should be happy Bush is bringing the price of oil down, get it?
You still don't get it...the burden on Americans has been less under Bush than under Clinton.
Higher tax receipts lessened the burden...everything you said is Bull shit.
And our children don't have to pay it back...show me where we paid back the largest defecits in our history after WWII?
Show me how this effected you ...our mean old grandfathers stuck us with the largest defecit ...much much larger than today.Talk about sticking it to your grandchildren.
How did this effect you? Tell me the stories about how you had to pay it off.
You dodged my questions and ignored the fact that Bush took in more money than any President ever... through a major jump in tax receipts from his tax cuts and economic growth. Economic growth in effect pays down the defecit...if you continue to ignore that fact...you aren't really analysing the issue.
I know you don't understand how tax cuts bring in more money...but that is precisely why your arguments fall flat in the real world.
First of all, as Dick Cheney would say... "Go Fuck Yourself!". I think if there was a contest for the most vile scumbag on this forum, you would be one of the favorites to win.
Of course a credit card company can do this. Almost none ever do and only as a last resort. Most that were in a position to get out from that card, did so (typiclly with a balance transfer of some kind). The whole point of the rate hike was to get people to pay because WAMU was that desperate for cash. However, you have to be delusional to think there aren't people that couldn't get out of this card and are now paying double on their APR. If the company didn't get annialated in the mortgage business, they never would've resorted to this type of desperation. I've read that the shareholders are ready to rip those in charge of WAMU to shreds (stock went from 45 to 5). They have my endorsement to do so.
My situation is manageable. This really isn't about me. I only decided to learn more when I noticed that my APR doubled (about 14 months ago). It appeared to be out of the blue and I had never missed a payment or payed late. When the rate hike occured, my credit score dropped 60 points. For a while it was impossible to get an explanation from them. I then found some message boards where many others had a similar experience. It became clear to me what was going on when it was revealed that they lost billions in bad mortgages. My only regret is that the APR hikes were a sure sign that their stock was gonna nosedive and it was a great opportunity to short their stock (it went from 45 to 5).
Anyway, I'm pretty sure they have their ass covered legally. If there's ever a class action lawsuit, I'm in.
Furthermore, because of inflation and because of the trade deficit, real GDP numbers are only in the mid 11 trillion range and the debt is in the mid 9 Trillion range. So with all the bailouts and the money being pushed through the system how do you suppose we keep our heads above water? You annual increase of GDP has been about 200-300 billion per year under Bush. The Debt increase has risen over twice that amount each year. Its not quantum physics here. :missingte
No shit...and there isn't a problem by historical or present day generally accepted accounting standards followed by most of the free world.
Like I said...so what?
And if you think it is a problem...f'kin grow the economy...thats how you take care of it.
What are your solutions? Tax the hell out of it and kill it.
It still makes no sense to me.
The current inflation is due to all the energy inefficiencies within the market, courtesy govt mandates and regulations.
The ethanol scam, lack of drilling, lack of nuclear power..all these factors have contributed mainly to high gas and food prices: inflation.
You can place 100% of the blame at the feet of the Deindustrialization party and their eco-fascist puppet masters.
"Government is not the solution to our problems, government IS the problem."
MR MJ, don't work too hard, economics was never one of fletch's strong subjects. :nohead:
Inflation has been historically low for years now...one blip doesn't make your case.
Please point to the post where i have ever, EVER said anything about taxing anybody. Remember, im a "moonbat" i actually support the bare minimum of taxation. Your a neoconservative witch is nothing more then an undercover liberal. With your obvious clueless and unrelated response, i assume its safe to say your tapped out when it comes to the issue because that statement above relates nothing to me or what i have said on this board since day 1.
Inflation is an expansion of the money supply. Higher prices result from too many dollars chasing the same number of goods...simply, expanding the money supply increases aggregate demand, causing prices to rise in that currency, contracting the money supply decreases aggregate demand, causing prices to decrease.
Goods priced in US dollars (commodities) rose nearly in tandem with the credit expansion of the last eight years. If the rest of us let our currencies rise against the USD instead of adopting the lower-than-market interest rate mentality, price inflation would be a largely American problem.
Other variables like ethanol idiocy of course add to the problem, but they are product-specific. When all US dollar-denominated prices rise at the same time, it's due to money supply expansion, not singular policies or regulations.
Your M3 is running at 17%.
All that loose money made its way to the housing market, and look what happened to prices there. Have a boo at what oil, food, stocks, metals, and consumerables did during the same period.
Just because they say inflation is 3% doesn't make it so. Those calculations are seriously flawed. A quick comparison of your cost of living expenses from 2000 to the present, against official gov't stats, should make it clear.
