|
Post by Poleon on Sept 3, 2004 9:12:49 GMT -5
LMAO! I've been around since FDR himself...The answer to your question is that "the other guys" will pay for it. All politicians propose the things that should be done and that will get them votes from various economic groups. The rich think that the poor and middle class will pay, the middleclass knows that they will pay a large share, but they hope the rich and poor will pay too and the poor just figure that the rich and the middle class will pay. What usually happens is the programs get watered down and everybody pays or the government just prints more money and the national debt to the Poleons grows! We like those tax free bonds! ;D
|
|
|
Post by txheel98 on Sept 3, 2004 9:12:52 GMT -5
Maybe he's found a leprechan and got his pot o gold!
|
|
|
Post by txheel98 on Sept 3, 2004 9:19:57 GMT -5
What usually happens is the programs get watered down and everybody pays or the government just prints more money and the national debt to the Poleons grows! We like those tax free bonds!
My point is though you can't just borrow the money forever! The reason Bush 41 had to raise taxes was because the massive amount of deficit spending Reagan did undermined the economy and threatened to raise interest rates. Sooner or later you have to pay the piper! Either the citizen finance it through tax increases or we pay for it when we go to borrow money. I guess you could just raise the SS Trust fund though! It wouldn't be the first time!
|
|
|
Post by txheel98 on Sept 3, 2004 9:21:21 GMT -5
Excuse me raid the SS Trust fund. Damn I need to proofread these things before I send them!
|
|
wordjockey
Veteran
UK 1st in wins, 1st in NCAA appearances, 7 Titles, etc. & counting!
Posts: 51
|
Post by wordjockey on Sept 3, 2004 9:43:16 GMT -5
As I stated two days ago, political conventions are all "show." I watched them both, and wasn't particularly impressed with either. I thought the Dems should have spent more time on what they would do, rather than harp on the Viet Nam service thing all the time. I liked Obama's speech for the Dems, and while puzzled by McCain's support for Bush, (I think he's positioning to run in '08) I like the guy. As for the GOP, there is no Bush administration record to run on: At home they've raided the treasury and looted the future of Social Security for tax cuts for the rich, and abroad they've squandered the support of the world and bungled the war on the perpetrators of 9/11. All the Republicans can do - is attack, attack, attack. They're trying to plant a little seed of terror in each voter's mind, hoping to freeze the opposition and persuade the undecided that they don't dare hope for anything better. Scariest of all is that it has a chance of working.
It's Labor day weekend, and after this, the real nasty stuff starts. I hope the campaigns start talking about domestic issues, and when talking about Iraq, ask realistic questions. We are going to have to be there for years, or face the fact a thocracy will take over, with a high likelihood of civil unrest for an extended period. It's a prime recruiting ground now for people that hate us. And what ever happened to Osama? Never did hear his name this week.
I'm dyspeptic. Off to take some Tums.
|
|
|
Post by txheel98 on Sept 3, 2004 9:53:59 GMT -5
I like for post Jockey! I do think you are correct about McCain in 2008, but I think he will run into the same roadblocks as before. If he follows his campaign finance reform legislation, he will be buried before it even starts. I don't think Petaki or Guilani are going to follow it (yes, their both running in '08). Also, he says very unpopular things that do not excite the base of the Rep. party. I would vote for him in a heartbeat though. Hopefully, we can get some real and hopefully civil dialogue going in the weeks ahead esp. at the debates. On a final note, does anyone know what the deal was with the two protestors? I turned off the tube just after the speech so I didn't get any commentary.
|
|
|
Post by longknocker5 on Sept 3, 2004 9:56:11 GMT -5
word do you ever listen to Joe Elliott on whas?
on his show this week he was having Kerry supporters call in and tell why people should vote for Kerry. Most of the responses were laughable. I dont think i heard anyone give even one good reason to vote for Kerry. if i were a democrat, i would be embarrassed
|
|
wordjockey
Veteran
UK 1st in wins, 1st in NCAA appearances, 7 Titles, etc. & counting!
Posts: 51
|
Post by wordjockey on Sept 3, 2004 10:08:35 GMT -5
txheel- I think you and I are alike. I would love for a McCain like person to run, or McCain himself, but feel that the hard-core right would trash him. There seems to be no place in politics for a straight shooter. This is a HUGE election, and I am not a big Kerry fan, but will probably vote that way, only because of Bush's bungling on the domestc issues and equating Saddam as the person who caused 9/11. Whoever gets in, there is a real mess, and there aren't any easy answers. The programs both are proposing will take money, so the deficit won't go away very quickly. The debates should be a hoot. If I were a betting man, I would say Bush has the edge, (it's hard to beat an incumbent) but the economy, jobs, and what happens in Iraq between now and November could swing it wildly in either direction.
|
|
wordjockey
Veteran
UK 1st in wins, 1st in NCAA appearances, 7 Titles, etc. & counting!
Posts: 51
|
Post by wordjockey on Sept 3, 2004 10:16:21 GMT -5
word do you ever listen to Joe Elliott on whas? on his show this week he was having Kerry supporters call in and tell why people should vote for Kerry. Most of the responses were laughable. I dont think i heard anyone give even one good reason to vote for Kerry. if i were a democrat, i would be embarrassed By the same note, if I were a Bush supporter, I would be embarassed as well. I don't claim Kerry is the be-all to end all, but Bush, in my humble(?) opinion, ain't cutting the mustard. I would have been impressed if Bush had shaken up the Defense department top brass (Rumy, Feith, etc.), and come out and admitted the war was not planned correctly. I think even left-leaners and centrists are a forgiving lot, and would give the guy a chance if he and his administration wasn't so adamant that "all is well" but we should "be scared" at the same time. Just my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by btcoop71 on Sept 3, 2004 10:17:53 GMT -5
I cut the mustard all the time........ It pisses my wife off something fierce though....
|
|
|
Post by txheel98 on Sept 3, 2004 10:25:40 GMT -5
I agree, I think we are very similar. I think Bush will probably win b/c Kerry and his campaign is strategically inept. I hope that the Congress doesn't not allow Bush to spend at will while at the same time cutting tax receipts. It is a recipe for future economic disaster! I do agree that someone should go in the cabinent b/c Iraq has not gone as planned. Has anyone heard if Powell will re-up as Secretary of State if Bush is re-elected?
|
|
wordjockey
Veteran
UK 1st in wins, 1st in NCAA appearances, 7 Titles, etc. & counting!
Posts: 51
|
Post by wordjockey on Sept 3, 2004 10:47:26 GMT -5
I think Powell will resign if Bush is re-elected, but do I have any proof? No. I think he's a good soldier who has been marginalized and embarassed, and will take the chance to take a powder.
As for your wife, DeeCee, she has my sympathies. Avoid the re-fried beans.
As for talk radio, I listen to a little, once in a while, just to see what the right is up to. I'm not surprised that no one had a good answer, consider the audience. Mostly talk radio is a lot of diatribe on steroids.
Go Wildcats!
|
|
|
Post by felton2unc on Sept 3, 2004 11:20:54 GMT -5
12 straight months of economic gain and 1.2 million jobs in the past year says he does have a record to run on, and says his policies are working, this "tax cut for the rich" is hilarious, under clinton the top 20% in earnings payed 68% of taxes, under bush that group pays 77.8% of taxes
|
|
|
Post by DeeCee on Sept 3, 2004 11:52:50 GMT -5
12 straight months of economic gain and 1.2 million jobs in the past year says he does have a record to run on, and says his policies are working, this "tax cut for the rich" is hilarious, under clinton the top 20% in earnings payed 68% of taxes, under bush that group pays 77.8% of taxes Where are you getting your statistics, Felton? Under George W. Bush, according to Michael Steele, more Black people have become home-owners...Duh, you dumb-ass!!! If over the past 4 years, two Black people purchased homes and only one Black person lost a home, then we have an increase in Black home-ownership. That's like giving the Republican party credit for the sun rising everyday for the past 4 years. Both of those things happened in spite of George W. Bush and the Republican party...not because of it... Another thing...this 'No Child Left Behind' Bullshit!!!! This is a man whose state was number 48 in the country in education.... NUMBER 48!!!! That was above Mississippi and either Georgia or Alabama... They want to take credit for minority test scores increasing...WTF?!?!?!? That is a PHUCKIN insult!!!! People like my mother and father who have been tutoring for FREE for the past 40 years deserve that credit...People like me and my friends that tutor for FREE in fellowship halls in the back of churches deserve that credit...People like me who will drive an hour (in one direction) to tutor a child for three hours and only charge the single-mother $20 (for gas money) deserve that credit!!!! We pay for these supplies out of our own pockets and rarely ask the parents for anything. Why won't the Republicans take some credit for some shit that they did do?
|
|
|
Post by roy_who on Sept 3, 2004 13:07:00 GMT -5
I watched that whole speech (my son and I had a rubber band shooting contest which I'm proud to say he won...)
A few random thoughts after seeing the last few comments:
"Raid the SS trust fund" - LOL, what trust fund? The only asset of SS is IOU's from the Federal Government.
Funny how Bush is trying to sound like a Democrat (increased Pell grants, spending more on education, etc.) while Kerry is trying to sound like a Republican (reduce the deficit)
I hope most intelligent Americans ignore Bush's attempt to define the decision to invade Iraq as "take the word of a madman" versus "protect America".
I did think Bush did his best job with the English language that I've seen recently.
|
|