glen Posted May 29, 2003 Share Posted May 29, 2003 Oops! He left it out again... I guess it's just 'Fuzzy Math'. Another for the american people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted May 29, 2003 Share Posted May 29, 2003 What do you guys who thought it was OK to lie to us about why we were going to war in Iraq think about this? Sure Saddam is a bad guy and you may say that the ends justified the means, but is a lie used to promote a tax cut OK? (Whether an active lie or a passive "lie of omission" it is still a lie if you say or don't say something in a manner where you know people will rely upon your statement or would difinitely want to know about the matter you are not revealing.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catbirdseat Posted May 29, 2003 Share Posted May 29, 2003 Bush really is us over. $44 trillion! Yickes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted May 29, 2003 Share Posted May 29, 2003 is there a better way to cut what's left of social programs than to bankrupt federal government? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter_Puget Posted May 29, 2003 Share Posted May 29, 2003 Read and learn! Man wouldn't hire me but he is still my hero! PP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iain Posted May 29, 2003 Share Posted May 29, 2003 lame to see Reading Rainbow may be cut due to lack of funding btw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glen Posted May 29, 2003 Author Share Posted May 29, 2003 Interesting that Greenspan has been saying some of the same things as the 'Crackpot' on PP's page as of late... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted May 29, 2003 Share Posted May 29, 2003 It reminds me of when the Bush team presented a budget to Congress that made no mention of any expense associated with the Iraq war, even though by then they had already spent - what was it? - $30 billion or something on the war preparations? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chucK Posted May 29, 2003 Share Posted May 29, 2003 Matt, If the Democrats get in the White House or take control of congress it will be very bad for the country. Perhaps worse than what would have happened if Saddam Hussein's government was not toppled. Thus, it seems obvious, EVEN TO AN IDIOT, why it is OK for the Republicans to lie about anything that might make them look bad and help the democrats regain power. As for the omission of the war cost in the budget, I think it's fair that they wait until, as they say in baseball, the "book is closed" before they add up the numbers. Once this little Iraq thing is all cleaned up, we can see it as an item in the budget, perhaps about the time a new regime is in the White House. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan_Harris Posted May 29, 2003 Share Posted May 29, 2003 The newspaper desribed the study as "the most comprehensive assessment of how the US government is at risk of being overwhelmed by the 'baby boom' generation's future healthcare and retirement costs." How and why did it becomes the governments responsibilty to pay for these things? I look at my family and my wife's family and all are doing well without nanny government having to take care of them. If I keep more of my money, then I can, and do, contribute to charities that take care of people that actually can't take care of themselves. We have become such a nation of victims that it seems no one can take care of themselves any more. We seem also to have abandoned the idea of family and neighbor helping each other because impersonal big brother government will do it for us. Spray on! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted May 29, 2003 Share Posted May 29, 2003 An honest budget discussion would at least have included the following line item: Iraq War: $30b + Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chucK Posted May 29, 2003 Share Posted May 29, 2003 But then how would you phrase the estimated Federal budget deficit? 150 billion$ - infinity? You see how this is a sticky point? If you estimate an upper level on the war cost, then the demos will make hay with that. If you start espousing an infinite budget, there would be real problems there, major one being Bush probably doesn't understand the concept and probably can't even pronounce the word. Then the damn liberally biased media would make fun of him. And we can't have that because we're in a war here and we need to support our troops. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iain Posted May 29, 2003 Share Posted May 29, 2003 I just want to see the line item: Sick multi high-def plasma display press briefing platform/podium $250,000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erik Posted May 29, 2003 Share Posted May 29, 2003 god bless lying Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-rock Posted May 29, 2003 Share Posted May 29, 2003 Peter_Puget said: Read and learn! Man wouldn't hire me but he is still my hero! PP Puget, just so you know. The link you gave is to a site full of unintelligible gibberish. They may be arguing an interesting point, but it's extremely difficult to tell what it is because many of the sentences are completely out of context and some are grammatically incorrect. for example: "10 will you get 1 that this argument gets repeated in the liberal media a dozen times before the week is out." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa_Eagle Posted May 29, 2003 Share Posted May 29, 2003 ChucK, you're almost as much of a moron as our unfortunate leader. "it's OK to lie to keep the democrats out of control of the country" "we should lie about the budget" "we don't need to count it in our budget until after we've already spent it" "it's a war, and we shouldn't worry about cost" it's almost amusing, really Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-rock Posted May 29, 2003 Share Posted May 29, 2003 Post deleted by E-rock Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chucK Posted May 29, 2003 Share Posted May 29, 2003 Nice comeback . I never wrote we shouldn't worry about the cost. Why don't you refute my points instead of just calling me a name, loser. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chucK Posted May 29, 2003 Share Posted May 29, 2003 E-rock said: He's joking Oops, sorry Ursa. I didn't realize you were joking. No offense I hope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glen Posted May 29, 2003 Author Share Posted May 29, 2003 I think that there may have been a tinge of sarcasm mixed in with some of chucK's comments... Ask people who will be on Social Security in 15 years what they think of this accounting. The tax cut applies most strongly to the upper economic ranks. It is classic Reganomics, aka trickle-down economics. The money has to come from somewhere to fund programs that are committed to. As we decrease income to the gov't, and increase military spending it seems that Bush will have an increasingly difficult time funding other programs including education. It is a bit difficult to swallow the increased demands on schools (read 'accountability' by standardized testing) by the feds in the face of decreased federal funding. Granted, most of K12 funding is from the state level. IMO, education is a staple of a successful society. I fear that with the direction that the fiscal structure of our gov't is taking, social programs, including education, will see a cut. If you can afford education independent of public schooling, this probably doesn't get you all in a twist. If you don't have parents that can afford it, this puts you at a serious disadvantage. I fear that the full impacts of the current fiscal policy will rear their heads long after Shrubya is gone and forgotten. I'll end the ramble session now... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chucK Posted May 29, 2003 Share Posted May 29, 2003 glen said: IMO, education is a staple of a successful society. I fear that with the direction that the fiscal structure of our gov't is taking, social programs, including education, will see a cut. If you can afford education independent of public schooling, this probably doesn't get you all in a twist. If you don't have parents that can afford it, this puts you at a serious disadvantage. I fear that the full impacts of the current fiscal policy will rear their heads long after Shrubya is gone and forgotten. Even if you do have parents who can afford private education, it should get you all in a twist. Public schooling is about making everyone else around you educated enough to contribute positively to our society. Giving your money to public schooling is not altruistic. It should be looked at as a selfish effort to improve one's environment. You can only run so far. Sooner or later you're going to have to venture out of the gates of your security compound to get a six pack or something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Off_White Posted May 29, 2003 Share Posted May 29, 2003 erik said: god bless lying god is a lie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erik Posted May 29, 2003 Share Posted May 29, 2003 Off_White said: erik said: god bless lying god is a lie. lying is godly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Szyjakowski Posted May 29, 2003 Share Posted May 29, 2003 erik said: Off_White said: erik said: god bless lying god is a lie. lying is godly? goddamnit Laydown! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glen Posted May 29, 2003 Author Share Posted May 29, 2003 Even if you do have parents who can afford private education, it should get you all in a twist. Public schooling is about making everyone else around you educated enough to contribute positively to our society. Giving your money to public schooling is not altruistic. It should be looked at as a selfish effort to improve one's environment. I agree completely, and that is part of why it is a staple of the society. However, people usually think on a shorter time scale, ie the time scale of balancing a checkbook and that is why middle to upper class families are less likely to get in a twist about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.