So what do the election results mean

Started by xmarksthespot5 pages

Originally posted by Soleran
Tax cuts aren't equal to = dollars spent
That's nice but irrelevant considering the entire time I've framed tax cuts as revenue lost.

tax cuts 2001

Iraq war 2003

Iraq war is a significant cause of deficit and would be the cause of deficit with or without the loss of tax revenue.

And I never denied the Iraq war has had a significant impact on budget deficit.

Conversely:

Originally posted by Soleran
The war is the burden the tax cuts are nothing as compared to that.

They don't even deserve to be mentioned in the same sentance or thought in conjunction with the war costs.

Yes indeedy

like I said tax cuts are significantly different then dollars spent

The war is the burden

Originally posted by Soleran
Yes indeedy

like I said tax cuts are significantly different then dollars spent

The war is the burden

And tax cuts won't ease that burdan, but rather make it that little bit heavier.

Originally posted by Soleran
Yes indeedy

like I said tax cuts are significantly different then dollars spent

The war is the burden

Fascinating. So in the face of contradicting information one can still maintain incorrect assertion that the Iraq war is the only and primary significant cause of budget deficit.

Spending in 2005 including ongoing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan 18.62% of GDP as opposed to 16.13% in 2000.

The decrease in revenue however accounts for a change of 4.04%. Making decrease in revenue a more significant effect than increase in spending, including Iraq and Afghanistan.

Fascinating. So in the face of contradicting information one can still maintain incorrect assertion that the Iraq war is the only and primary significant cause of budget deficit.

I said you shouldn't place tax cuts and the war in Iraq in the same piece when talking about the deficit at this point.

To which I responded with my rationale.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
They're both poor decisions by this Administration, approved by it's rubberstamp congress, that have contributed to a record budget deficit.

Originally posted by Alliance
Bush will not be inpeached.

No he won't. Nor should he be. That can only be viewed as revenge tactics. And hopefully the democrats are smarter than that. I doubt it, but who knows?

Originally posted by Mr Krieger
I have now lost the remaining respect I had for Bush and his administration, he isn't going to fight for anything, and is now becoming a puppet of the Senate, Republicans didn't fight for anything, they let this happen, and now our tax cuts go bye bye, Gas/store prices increase, and Al Quada can rebuild.

This is a sad day in America's history, which will be finalized when they impeach Bush. I'm looking forward to 4 years in hell

The only good thing coming out of this is Liberals can show America what they really can do fear

Guess what sweet cheeks, Bush was never "fighting" for a damned thing. You might buy into that, but you would be the minority that fell for it last night. He's ass raping you just like he is the rest of us. Vote on biblical, economical or social issues all you want. But in the end, you're grasping at straws.

As for gas prices, isn't it interesting that they've hit recent quater rock-bottom prices since an election was coming? You can't be that naive.

Tax cuts?! Are you serious? It's six years of tax cuts that have gotten us into this mess. Sure, it's fun to say that the national debt isn't our problem. But it is. Especially for all those people crying about illegalizing abortion. You don't wanna axe your baby now? Fine. Let him be born into a national debt. It's like planned parenthood in reverse.

As for alQueda, it's been rebuilding for a long time. That might have something to do with wasting American resources by looting Iraq.

a puppet of the Senate? Are you serious? If nothing else, this administration has been willing to present itself as one thing while acting as another. It will CERTAINLY blame the democrats(not that they will be beyond reproach) for the lack of progress. Every lameduck president does. But it won't be the Democrats alone.

Originally posted by Fawne
is everyone her really this much of a jerk?

The ones who use slander instead of facts, yes. The ones who use facts instead of slander, no.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
To which I responded with my rationale.

lol fair enough 😛

Eliminating superfulous tax cuts are an easy step to tak eot balancing the budget. Iraq war spending can't really be cut. We have men on the ground who need all the protection we can give them and the Iraquis need all the help we can give.

The two ways we can reduce spending in Iraq:

1. Cut Iraqi corruption which is siphoning off funds for private use.

2. Cut back on troop levels.

I think #1 is a good palce to start.

It probably falls under #1 and I'm not sure if it's still ongoing but elimination of nepotistic no-bid contracts would probably help too.

Yes. The government should start following its own rules.

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
Guess what sweet cheeks, Bush was never "fighting" for a damned thing. You might buy into that, but you would be the minority that fell for it last night. He's ass raping you just like he is the rest of us. Vote on biblical, economical or social issues all you want. But in the end, you're grasping at straws.

As for gas prices, isn't it interesting that they've hit recent quater rock-bottom prices since an election was coming? You can't be that naive.

Tax cuts?! Are you serious? It's six years of tax cuts that have gotten us into this mess. Sure, it's fun to say that the national debt isn't our problem. But it is. Especially for all those people crying about illegalizing abortion. You don't wanna axe your baby now? Fine. Let him be born into a national debt. It's like planned parenthood in reverse.

As for alQueda, it's been rebuilding for a long time. That might have something to do with wasting American resources by looting Iraq.

a puppet of the Senate? Are you serious? If nothing else, this administration has been willing to present itself as one thing while acting as another. It will CERTAINLY blame the democrats(not that they will be beyond reproach) for the lack of progress. Every lameduck president does. But it won't be the Democrats alone.

Bush actually tried to get laws passed, policys changed, etc etc, that would be fighting, he announced in his little speech he's going to give the Democrats their shit, and don't even place me in the Mindless Republican batch that you speak of.

Gas Prices will go up, because of the liberal idea of Taxing the Gas Companies to pay for new fuels, guess what happens when they get taxed, prices go up!

Tax Cuts have not put us anywhere, except out of debt, the mess was there long before, instead of using a nice little shortcut by over taxing everyone, it's much smarter to take away tax, letting the poor get jobs, companys grow, so that everyone else gets more, then you have more employees, and guess what, you get more money from taxes than before, because there's more people paying them.

Al Quada has been slowly dying out since our intervention into Afghanistan, their leadership is destroyed, the majority of their members are stuck in the mountains fighting us, they have lost their safe havens. Iraq is only strengthening them by giving them support, yet their followers are getting killed everyday they try fighting us.

Puppet of the Democratic Senate, yes, so he can get his damn points up before he leaves, he is going to let them do whatever they want, so when they screw up, it won't be his idea.

I'm just going to reiterate what I said above as it's still applicable, essentially your entire statement is nonsense.

Originally posted by Mr Krieger
Bush actually tried to get laws passed, policys changed, etc etc, that would be fighting, he announced in his little speech he's going to give the Democrats their shit, and don't even place me in the Mindless Republican batch that you speak of.

Considering the Republicans had control of congress up till this election that doesn't sound right. You make it sound as if Bush is some Noble crusader who has been battling to push through laws that will benefit everyone....

Al Quada has been slowly dying out since our intervention into Afghanistan, their leadership is destroyed, the majority of their members are stuck in the mountains fighting us, they have lost their safe havens. Iraq is only strengthening them by giving them support, yet their followers are getting killed everyday they try fighting us.

Which flies in the face of all expert analysis on the subject that indicates no terrorist organisation is anywhere near death, that terrorist attacks in Iraq have not declined in the least bit, intelligence reports that indicate Iraq has created the next generation of terrorists, that the T.O are actually evolving in even harder to fight forms - home grown terrorists.

Yes, I am afraid what you have just said is not factual. Especially when there were no terrorists in Iraq to begin with.

Puppet of the Democratic Senate, yes, so he can get his damn points up before he leaves, he is going to let them do whatever they want, so when they screw up, it won't be his idea.

That sounds awfully bitter. And it seems to imply things will somehow be worse now then before, and I find that hard to believe.

lol so true.

Im generally republican, but I dont see anything terrible about letting someone else have there way for once...I dont like some of the things that could happen, and most will be ok and good, but if they do make bad decisions -then maybe we'll learn a lesson or two...

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
I'm just going to reiterate what I said above as it's still applicable, essentially your entire statement is nonsense.

Indeed. I'll waste lots of words on him/her/it. But would it be any better than wasting them on Jackie?

See that's why I simply chose to recycle the same words. It's cost effective and good for the ozone layer.