I think we have to admit that McCain does bare some resemblance to Smeagol.
I think the problem with the Tea Partiers is that they see it as being their way or nothing. I understand their perspective and conviction but I think the issue is that they want to do it ALL at once. No compromise, every vote they make must include everything they think has to be done for the next 20 years of government. I think the problem is if we do it their way the whole economy is going to come crashing down. People compl
I think the Tea Party is upset that no one is actually cutting anything though. It's not like this is a legitimate plan that either side is presenting that puts us on a path to a balanced budget. Both plans don't even come close to balancing the budget within 10 years and still ad tons of money to the deficit and even the cuts that they do make are years down the road when there's no guarantee they happen. Personally, I'm a huge advocate for cuts. Even though I am a pure federalist and advocate any downsizi
The Tea Party has made it damned clear they won't tolerate tax increases. Despite Boehner's whining about compromise, the people he can't convince to make a compromise aren't the Democrats, but the Tea Party. That bunch of crazies is fucking the GOP over seriously.
Despitebrepublican claims to the contrary, the Bush tax cuts did not increase government revenues by stimulating the economy. Those cuts have resulted in a direct reduction of revenue around 1.8 trillion dollars. in any case, we need massive spending cuts and some tax increases to get out of the mess. The tea party has neither the integrity or the knowledge to play any role in balancing the budget.
The misguided people who voted in these "ordinary people" should have looked for reasonable ordinary people
You can argue their effectiveness and impact but the facts are that federal revenues did increase after the original Bush tax cuts, and at a historic rate.
Some people have hypothesized that they would have increased at a higher rate if not for the cuts and some have hypothesized the opposite, and both have some evidence to back their claims, but the hard numbers do show a rise in revenues above the norm. The problem was there was also a rise in spending to offset any revenue gains.
Citation needed. Please show me, in writing, from a reputable source, how the US economy is doing better now than it was when Clinton was still in office.
Are you even in the right thread? We were discussing Bush tax cuts and revenue, not the Clinton vs. Obama economies.
But for the record both Clinton and the Republican Congress lucked out in that the economy they oversaw was riding high on both the tech and start of the housing bubbles without ever really having to deal with the downturns. It was a dream time in the US economy before people started to wake up and realize that maybe some of these companies who produced no real goods and had no real income s
Smeagol (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The Tea Party has made it damned clear they won't tolerate tax increases. Despite Boehner's whining about compromise, the people he can't convince to make a compromise aren't the Democrats, but the Tea Party. That bunch of crazies is fucking the GOP over seriously.
Re: (Score:2)
Despitebrepublican claims to the contrary, the Bush tax cuts did not increase government revenues by stimulating the economy. Those cuts have resulted in a direct reduction of revenue around 1.8 trillion dollars. in any case, we need massive spending cuts and some tax increases to get out of the mess. The tea party has neither the integrity or the knowledge to play any role in balancing the budget.
The misguided people who voted in these "ordinary people" should have looked for reasonable ordinary people
Re: (Score:2)
You can argue their effectiveness and impact but the facts are that federal revenues did increase after the original Bush tax cuts, and at a historic rate.
Some people have hypothesized that they would have increased at a higher rate if not for the cuts and some have hypothesized the opposite, and both have some evidence to back their claims, but the hard numbers do show a rise in revenues above the norm. The problem was there was also a rise in spending to offset any revenue gains.
Re:Smeagol (Score:2)
Citation needed. Please show me, in writing, from a reputable source, how the US economy is doing better now than it was when Clinton was still in office.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you even in the right thread? We were discussing Bush tax cuts and revenue, not the Clinton vs. Obama economies.
But for the record both Clinton and the Republican Congress lucked out in that the economy they oversaw was riding high on both the tech and start of the housing bubbles without ever really having to deal with the downturns. It was a dream time in the US economy before people started to wake up and realize that maybe some of these companies who produced no real goods and had no real income s