“Republicans have to understand we have lost this battle, as I predicted weeks ago, that we would not be able to win because we were demanding something that was not achievable.”
You have been warned... and warned again.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
८६ टिप्पण्या:
With 24 votes in, there's only one voted for "very, very serious."
Who knew John McCain was lurking here, waiting for Althouse to put up the first post of they day?
Thanks for voting, Senator.
John McCain (D-Arizona), replacing Bob Dole as the tax collector for the welfare state. If only we had a Reagan to point this out.
The old line was: A billion here, a billion there, pretty soon you're talking real money.
The budget deficit this year is $600+ billion. The Federal debt is $16 trillion. There is no long term projection where it is ever paid down.
A billion here, a billion there is nothing.
One of the missed chances in recent years was the fact that John McCain was the Republican Presidential candidate in 2008 instead of Mitt Romney.
When the economy melted down you had two candidates with no understanding of finance both trying to scurry toward safety. Obama had the discipline to keep his mouth shut. McCain postured. He was like a squirrel in the path of an oncoming truck, trying to run to both sides of the road at once.
Romney would have done better.
“Republicans have to understand we have lost this battle, as I predicted weeks ago, that we would not be able to win because we were demanding something that was not achievable.”
-John McCain
"He Beat Us in War but Never in Battle"
- John McCain, on Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap
So what is McCain's sagacious strategy for winning the "war"?
If you need a man to lead you to defeat, John McCain is ready to serve.
I believe a dislike him even more than Obama.
The end game was not this battle, its mid term elections, when this health care plan continues to be a job killer and a joke. The GOP gets points for trying to kill it when they had a chance, and the democrats had a chance to delay it, most of them are against the medical devices tax themselves, but Reid is the QB. I have a feeling we will see who really pays at the polls come mid terms.
The end game was not this battle, its mid term elections, when this health care plan continues to be a job killer and a joke. The GOP gets points for trying to kill it when they had a chance, and the democrats had a chance to delay it, most of them are against the medical devices tax themselves, but Reid is the QB. I have a feeling we will see who really pays at the polls come mid terms.
One of my favorite Onion Headlines: Road-kill Squirrel remembered as frantic, indecisive
My favorite part of the article:
An earlier version of this article misspelled, on second reference, the surname of a representative. He is Charlie Dent, not Debt.
The tea party is balancing the budget, is all.
There's lots of money to avoid default unless, as somebody put it, Obama is actually evil.
There just isn't money to run the Department of Energy, HUD, the Department of Education, and so forth.
Send those guys home.
The lifting of the thousand cut regulations will grow the economy after 5 years of Obama deforestation.
Everybody admires McCain's sense of personal honor, if only it didn't attach itself to completely random causes.
John McCain, the star player of the Washington Generals.
rhhardin: Everybody admires McCain's sense of personal honor, if only it didn't attach itself to completely random causes.
Zing! That's even better than the mail carrier line.
He's a maverick, hardin.
It's pretty clear McCain attaches his sense of personal honor to the military, which is also admirable, but when a little humility, readjustment, and strategic reflection was and is necessary, we get angry maverick rhetoric whacko-bird talk, like now.
He's right about some of the strategy here, but totally out of touch with the why, and public sentiment, and much of his party.
He's right. Let's rape the middle class; transfer the wealth from one minority to another minority; and cover our tracks with a war, preferably with a global scale. Finally, let's enable an invading force to conquer the nation through reproduction. Such are the fruits of a selective or ambiguous rule of law.
If you were really going to be very, very serious in your Elmer Fudd voice, wouldn't you say "vewy, vewy, sewious?
I smell a fifth Fudd columnist.
I have maxed out my credit card, so the bank just raises my borrowing limit?
I do not think that would inspire confidence in the lender when I go to ask for a new car loan. I might well be denied or at least be required to pay a higher interest rate.
What will be the effects on the national economy when the interest rates go up requiring ever larger sums to "service" the national debt?
Capital has been devalued. Human life has been devalued. What is the threshold for "serious" in an "enlightened" civilization?
Democrats can barely speak a negative word about Filner, who was a serial sexual harasser and all-around sleazebag.
Republicans cannot wait to pounce on Ted Cruz because they are too weak to actually stand for anything.
Yeah, I'm done with Republicans. Screw the lot of them.
McCain is the last time I will ever hold my nose and vote for a party candidate. I voted for Romney because I genuinely liked him. If Christie or Bush run in 2016, I will happily not waste my time voting.
Yes, let's rob the poor young to pay for the wealthy old -- but in a way that insures that they hate your party in the process. Friggin' brilliant, McCain.
I think this is serious all right, but it is serious outside of Washington, where we live, inside the Beltway it is just theater.
"Republicans have to understand we have lost this battle, as I predicted weeks ago, that we would not be able to win because we were demanding something that was not achievable.”
"This war is lost."
"The GOP has poured gasoline on millions of American jobs, lit a match & is now brainstorming demands for not setting it all on fire."
The Lesson From Detroit
If bankruptcy can be avoided it should be avoided. But if bankruptcy is coming, it should happen as soon as possible because postponing it only means that even more debt is run up by irresponsible, corrupt politicians and their cronies before the inevitable happens. And in the US the labor-media complex is bringing about bankruptcy so the sooner it happens the better.
I call ignoring real problems and demonizing the political opposition that tries to deal with the problems "detroiting" and that's what is going on in the US. It isn't compassionate to postpone dealing problems so that the inevitable end result is delayed until a hard crash occurs. In a hard crash the poor and the old get their pensions slashed by 60% when if action had been taken sooner there would have been a soft crash in which the cut might have been 25%. Those who are now detroiting are bringing on a hard crash.
It's just like the Obamacare rollout. The problems should have been acknowledged and then there would have been a chance for them to be fixed. Now there is no chance. A million people a month have to sign up between now and March and after that the same system has to evaluate and pay their bills. It can't happen. It can't even happen badly - it can't happen at all. Because the fixers are detroiting.
And further more I think Obama has taken detroiting to new level which I call "chooming". When he was smoking dope in high school with his friends they would get in a car and close the windows so they inhaled all the smoke over and over. They called that "chooming". Well Obama and his minions are all in one room inhaling their smoke about their great Obamacare plan over and over. And so I predict that it won't ever get fixed because they don't even really see that it is broken. Think about it. If people ever do enroll then treatments have to be accepted. Well picture to yourself doctors' offices going on line and trying to find out what is accepted treatment. Then treating. Then the bill isn't accepted. The patient has to pay those huge deductibles. And can't. And then ...?
And by the way (new point)some say that the government will put everyone under government health insurance when Obamacare fails. After this mess, put the whole country in? I don't think so.
Kevin McCarthy is apparently supposed to be serving as the Majority Whip in the House.
He is doing a terrible job.
If Republicans in the House want a seat at the negotiating table, they need to make sure they have someone who can credibly negotiate for them. Without party discipline, they might as well be irrelevant. These situations where the leadership wants to bring a vote, lets the news leak, and then has to table it because of a back-bencher revolt are crippling the ability of the Republican majority in the House to serve as a meaningful counter to the President's excesses.
McCain is now just a senile old fool. If Boehner had any brains and balls he would adjourn the House until December 1st. Then Obama, Lew and Reid can play chicken amongst themselves. Next week the debt would have been serviced and nothing would have happened. Then when they come back they should insist on no continuing resolutions but rather a budget. That will drag out until the end of March when everyone who is required to be enrolled in ZeroCare is suitably pissed off at the hosing they are getting thanks to the Democrats. In the meantime other than pissed off vets with regards to the parks and monuments nobody has complained about the shutdown. The longer people go "without" government the less they will see the need to pay for it.
I have maxed out my credit card, so the bank just raises my borrowing limit?
Barry said raising the limit doesn't add debt, so .....
Krugman said your credit card is nothing like Uncle Sam's card because your Uncle has a printing press, so...
It is called "suspension of disbelief"!
McCain is McClellan without the ability to inspire.
Here's why I think it's "serious" but not a catastrophe: When the US reaches its debt limit at around $17 trillion tomorrow, that will not cause a default, because the US has plenty of money coming in to pay the interest on its debt(and of course, borrowing to pay off a maturing bond doesn't increase debt); so it's not a catastrophe. But whatever bad happens, the press will blame it on the Republicans. Even if Obama, in violation of his constitutional duties, decided not to pay the interest on Treasury instruments, even though the government has plenty of money to do that, so there actually were a default, the press would blame Republicans. That's why it's serious.
@cubanbob Until I read the news story below -- that the USDA has instructed states not to load EBT cards for November -- I would have agreed with you. The shutdown had been fairly painless.
But when King Obama starts starving folks, the GOP will snap and accept any Obamacare law, however flawed, over lawlessness. His wish is our command.
http://fox13now.com/2013/10/14/utah-families-on-food-stamps-could-be-cut-off-soon/
I see three problems:
1) Too many on the extremes don't understand that winning is more important than scoring political points with a minority. Lately this has infected the far right more than any other group.
2) The Republicans didn't prepare the battle space for this/ They had no strategy; instead just an idiotic notion that because they had a valid point, all their points were valid and everyone would see their brilliance.
3) Even had the Republicans had a strategy*, they failed to respect that Obama simply has nothing to lose by refusing to discuss anything with them.
*One strategy that would have worked would have been to construct a bill and argument that appealed to Obama's ego, except that would have required compromise, something far too many right wingers refuse to do and end up losing everything as a result. (We wouldn't be in this mess had so many on the right not stayed home last election.)
This is like the Romans in Pompeii arguing about the lead in their water pipes.
Serious, yes, but immaterial until a completely different perspective is taken.
McCain is just a Limousine RINO.
The hostage lives! The kidnapper wounded mortally. 2014 will be a good test to see if he still breaths.
The low information voter will not remember or care about the government "shut down" in ten months. It won't happen. There are dozens of things that can and will come up in the meantime that will have more appeal to them.
More tuned-in Independents are no longer fed their news by the networks and increasingly get their information from the web. They will remember the stupidly fenced monuments more than the idiotic rhetoric of the Democrats and the scare language of the President. Most importantly they will remember that not a single thing changed for them personally during the on-going sequester or the horrible terrible partial "shut down" of the USG.
@Godfather, @ Leit
I say piss on this I'm working for Mel Brooks. What is a going on here is Obama is reprising Clevon Little's scene in Blazing Saddles where the sheriff puts a gun to his own head.
What actually happens if the Republicans walk away until December and Prez Stompyfoot defaults on the debt? Big disruption in the markets to be sure but ultimately what will happen is that top quality equities become a better risk than US government paper. The markets will recover and boom as people cash out of treasuries and invest in equities. Smart and gutsy players will buy the treasuries at a discount and over time will make a killing. But while all that is playing out the government is going to have to pay real interest rates to attract lenders and that will squeeze government spending more than anything the Republicans can dream up. And that means all government spending other than bonds- the lenders won't sit still for another default-will be on the chopping block and that means everything. No more mandatory spending versus discretionary spending, all get cut. And not a light off the top cut but more like a buzz cut.
Does anyone one think Obama and Reid are going to purposefully undo a large part of The New Deal and The great Society? Leit if the EBT stunt (assuming it was intentional) were pulled again how long before merchants quit taking them? Republicans need to stop worrying about the default and need to start worrying about taxpayers, the people who might be inclined to vote for them. People pay taxes for services and not primarily for income redistribution.
Michael, the little people who were impacted by the shutdown will remember. People who saw this stupid fight over Obamacare almost bring down the country and the craziness of the TeaPublicans will remember, oh yes they will. You only hope they won't.
Cubanbob: Good analysis. Also, the Obamacare disaster will become impossible to ignore in the coming months and Republicans will be rewarded for not getting the one year delay in implementation. Voters are going to be mightily pissed at the increases in their premiums, the government is going to be shocked at how few of the young sign up and how many of the old. The Dems will be punished for ramming down this clusterfuck
Inga: We shall see. Ask any friend if they know if the sequester is still on and you will see the attention span of the voter. This isn't 1995 when the poor children's noses were pressed to the gates of the closed zoo and every television station was gasping at the Republican meanies. People have wised up to these bullshit stunts on the part of both parties. The stunts are harmless. The premiums that people will be paying are real.
How did almost wrecking our economy and the repercussions of that to us and the rest of the world, over an ideological sticking point help the US? We have yet to see what effects this second close call has done to our economy. It's natural that the wounded want to lick their wounds, so I'll let y'all get on with the licking. You got nothing at all out of this, because you fought dirty. Kidnapping is a crime.
A dearth of choices.
McCain; a Manchurian candidate.
While he was the better alternative, I'm truly ashamed of having voted for McCain in 2008. Nothing on Earth short of massive brain damage would've made me vote for Obama but McCain disgusts me.
I believe we dodged a hail of bullets when the electorate chose Obama over McCain. Sure, Barry was (and is) worse on paper, but it's better that we get stabbed in the front by Obama than stabbed in the back by McCain. I'm glad he lost.
Inga: I am sorry that Harry Reid's scary rhetoric scared you. It did not scare the bond or stock market, however, because for the most part those players recognize the difference between theatre and bullshit.
You wrote:"You got nothing at all out of this, because you fought dirty" Actually the Republicans got something, not a lot, but something. Now we will see if the President will veto an unclean bill as promised. Fighting dirty in negotiations is saying you will not negotiate. That is both intellectually unappealing and unproductive. And dirty.
Start waving goodbye to all the RINOs.
Inga is right. The Democrats have been extorting the taxpayers for 80 years. Muggers get pissed when the victims resist.
Micheal ObamaCare will fail simply because it's a Ponzi scheme except the marks are being dragged in at gunpoint.
It was passed to shore up Medicaid and Medicare in the near term. When ObamaCare implodes there will be panic in entitlement city. By March ObamaCare will be in a death spiral. The Republicans caved today for no reason but they will have their chance again in February when they should insist on a budget or a real shutdown. It's not like they have anything to lose.
The little people impacted by the shutdown will vote Democrat regardless. 2012 proved that beyond any shadow of a doubt. The Republican's advantage was that the shutdown would mostly affect the Democrat's base. As usual, they lost their nerve.
Hate is a strong word but I'm beginning to hate John McCain. I'm very sorry I ever voted for the guy.
Hate is a strong word but I'm beginning to hate John McCain. I'm very sorry I ever voted for the guy.
Hate is a strong word but I'm beginning to hate John McCain. I'm very sorry I ever voted for the guy.
Since we've decided to take even more money from young people for old people's healthcare, why can't we force said young people to take care of our lawns too? You know, the lawns that they can't afford because....
The older I get, the more that I see the wisdom of taking money from young people and giving to old people.
Doubtless there will be endless triumphalism from Democrats crowing over their "victory" over the Tea Party. I'm here to tell you the Tea Party achieved significant advantages in the last few weeks given the disastrous rollout of Obamacare. Face it, Ted Cruz knew he wasn't going to singlehandedly end the ACA, but he certainly took it out of the "done deals" column and moved it over to the "this ain't over" one. The federal exchanges will not improve, will not miraculously begin to work any time soon. Young people will avoid signing up in droves, premiums will be astronomical in spite of subsidies, coverage will suck, the federal budget will explode, and the IRS will be draconian in collecting fines from people who never had a legitimate chance to enroll. By November 2014 the shutdown will be a dim memory, but people will remember who fought implementation of the most destructive law in US history.
Andy Freeman said...
McCain is McClellan without the ability to inspire
Incisive.
Tyrone S: Agree. The ACA's horrible website is only the beginning. What company requires you to open an account before you can shop with them? How long do you think young people want to wait in line on a website? The thinking, as all government thinking goes, is that if you have to have it you will wait for it. Like yesterday in the post office. October 15, tax day, comes almost every year on....October 15. Do you think the Post Office would add staff so that they can TAKE YOUR MONEY? Why, no, you would not think that if you were in the employ of the USG. If you have to get a certified letter you will have to wait for a certified letter. If you have to get healthcare through the GOVT you will have to wait to get healthcare through the govt.
Rod Dreher: "Yes. I cannot believe I'm saying this, but I hope the House flips to the Democrats in 2014, so we can be rid of these nuts. Let Ted Cruz sit in the Senate stewing in his precious bodily fluids, and let Washington get back to the business of governing."
Say goodbye to the RINOS and you say goodbye to ever having a majority again...just sayin.
Michael, negotiation and extortion are two very different things. The real huge problem is that you don't understand this. It doesn't speak well for you or for TeaPublicans in general.
"Contrary to the widely repeated stories of out-of-control deficits and spending, deficits have plunged in the last four years falling from 10.1% of GDP in 2009 to just 4% of GDP in 2013. The Congressional Budget Office projects the deficit to be just 3.4% of GDP in 2014. The latest projections show the debt-to-GDP ratio falling for the rest of the decade.
"In other words, the story of out-of-control debts and deficits is just plain wrong. Less polite people would call it a lie, but it stands at the center of the public debate because the media consider it rude to point out a truth that would embarrass so many important politicians. The idea that we face a longer term deficit problem of enormous proportions has little better grounding in reality. First, it is worth noting that we have not had a constant upward path of spending as is widely asserted in Washington, and widely believed around the country, due to the incompetence of budget reporters."
Inga. If we approach a hard deadline and I refuse to negotiate I am as guilty of extortion as someone who demands a concession. The real problem is rhat you cut and paste your ideas from Democrat talking points.
And, by the way, the use of cute (copied) phrases like Teapublicans greatly diminish your otherwise already weak arguments.
Michael, I love that term, it's so apt. Negotiating with hostage takers time after time won't work. This isn't the first time. If you give kidnappers an inch , they will take a foot, maybe an ear first, then a finger, then a foot, then.....
Robert Cook: I presume you know the difference between debt and deficits. The article you paste from leaves out the historical relationship of deficit to gdp during, say, the evil Bush years. At which time it was 2.0% on average from 2001 to 2008. It jumped steeply to 2.7% taking the disastrous year of 2009. The Obama average from 2009 to 2012 is 9.1% and from 2010 to 2012 to 2012 it declined to 8.7%. These are from the Economic Report of the President, Feb. 2012
Your article conflates debt and deficits and says the former is not a problem based on its review of the latter.
Inga: You see that by adopting the scary words you undercut any validity of your position. A negotiator is not an evil kidnapper or hostage taker and only a very stupid populace would fall for those idiotic bits of scare rhetoric which were laid in front of those who dared to listen to Harry Reid. His repeating it over and over had its effect, as is clear, on people of low intelligence. Not so much on the rest of us.
My dear Michael, spin it! Maybe some here will believe it, maybe you believe it yourself. What happened was not negotiable. Get it?
Inga: I do get it. Do you? Non-negotiable means that you won't negotiate. But they did negotiate. So what does it mean to you?
BTW, you might want to remember that the house, senate and president pretty much can't say "non-negotiable" Get it?
Saying something is non-negotiable at the beginning of a negotiation is meaningful only if you are willing to walk away. Which the Democrats were not. Which the president was not. Scary scary.
Democrats gave nothing away that they wouldn't have at the beginning of this fiasco, which wasn't much and more than Republicans deserved. In the end they gave nothing of substance away, however Republicans and the TeaPublicans amongst them lost, BIG. Only time will tell just how big. Obama negotiated far too much with Republicans in the past. It's a proven fact he gave away far too much in those negotiations, those days are over.
Inga, you seem curiously desperate. Why?
Inga:"Democrats gave nothing away that they wouldn't have at the beginning of this fiasco, which wasn't much and more than Republicans deserved"
But you said it was non negotiable. Curious that the talking points haven't yet been updated. Leaves you in a bit of a jam, eh?
Desperate? Why would I be?
Of "substance" my dear Michael. I understand you and your brethren are trying to save face, it's understandable. I actually feel a little sad for you......nah.
Inga: Stand by. Talking points in the works.
Michael,
I will defer to Mr. Baker's expertise,
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dean_Baker),
which is far greater than mine.
As I understand it, the article points out that, contrary to popular myth, the deficit is dropping. His is not the only voice I've seen stating this apparent heresy.
As he says:
"...deficits have plunged in the last four years falling from 10.1% of GDP in 2009 to just 4% of GDP in 2013. The Congressional Budget Office projects the deficit to be just 3.4% of GDP in 2014."
The deficit may still be higher than the Bush years, but it is dropping now, not out of control, not uninterruptedly expanding, as we are being told is the case. The Republicans are lying in order to justify their political tantrums of the day, (is "tantrum" latin? would that be "tantra?"). It's an excuse to force their agenda, which includes cutting Social Security and Medicaid payments to seniors, when such draconian measures are not in the least called for.
Mr. Baker does discuss predictions of projected rises in the deficit over the next few years and asks why those who presume to serve us can see only one prescription to avert (their claims of) disaster:
"The real question is why the primary (ie non-interest) deficit rises and this is the story of the broken US healthcare system. We pay twice as much per person for our health care as the average for other rich countries, with nothing to show for this money in terms of outcomes. We pay 2.5 times as much as the UK. If our costs were at all in line with those in other wealthy countries, we would be looking at explosive budget surpluses running into the trillions of dollars annually.
"This fact raises the obvious question, why are projections of deficits based on unaffordable healthcare costs always treated in the media as a basis for cutting benefits to seniors rather than a reason for cutting payments to providers like doctors, drug companies, and medical device companies?"
Mr. Baker does not, as I understand it, argue here that the economy is healthy,, and in other articles he has been quite the Cassandra regarding possible calamity facing us, (due primarily to the incompetence and malfeasance of the heap big financial gurus who own the country and have their run of Washington). However, he is focused here on the propaganda-that-has-become-accepted-as-fact that circumstances are such that the only solution is to cut Social Security and Medicare.
I don't know why you should be. That's why I find it interesting that you come across as desperate. That's why I asked you: why?
Robert: I think the Republicans are much more focused on debt. The deficit resonates with kitchen table voters, the mass of people who, unlike the government, do not have printing presses and who know that living above their means on, say, a credit card is a bad idea.
I don't dispute that there is a decline in the deficits as a percentage of GDP principally because GDP had stalled and thus the denominator is lower causing slower increases to appear smaller than they nominally are.
On balance I would say that cutting the cost of healthcare by cutting Doctor costs is the wrong way to go, insane actually. The solution to health care costs is to get rid of health insurance entirely and have providers and users negotiate prices directly. It would take a while to wean ourselves from the current unworkable system but it would be a godsend both financially and in terms of the quality of service.
As usual you exclude the correct response:
John McCain is the joke. Or rather he's the punchline, the Arizona voters are the joke.
I'm so glad this clown wasn't elected president.
If McCain were President, would ACA exist? No.
Yet people are glad he wasn't elected because of the way he behaved with respect to ACA, specifically not aiding in killing it.
Baffling.
Say goodbye to the RINOS and you say goodbye to ever having a majority again...just sayin.
...which would change policies how, exactly?
If McCain were President, would ACA exist? No.
I have no reason to believe it wouldn't be. Reid and Pelosi would've still proposed it and he would've signed it because he's, you know, a moron.
Rich Galen, who writes the "Mullings" newsletter, had some great points to make this evening.
I strongly urge you read his column at www.mullings.com, but here, I think, are the essential take-aways from tonight's debacle.
1. The President and Senator Reid made NO concessions to reach this deal.
2. John Boehner capitulated on every point. I was about to say, "every point on the table", except that there was never ANYTHING "on the table". For Barack Obama, it was "his way or the highway".
3. Obama and Reid were willing to destroy the United States of America rather than to yield on ANY item.
4. Boehner was not.
I'm not a big fan of John Boehner - but I respect him more now than I did two weeks ago. Let's see if the rest of the GOP can manage to figure this out as well. The "mainstream media" will try to spin this as an enormous win for the President - but I'm not so sure. Let's see if we can't turn the tables next year.
But I would note that Mitch McConnell, in larding up the bill with 2 billion dollars of pork for Kentucky, has lost prestige in my eyes. Let's hope that a good primary challenger can show him the error of his ways.
Robert Cook: You are misinformed. The deficit is NOT dropping. Yes, it's down a bit from the whopping HUGE deficits of the couple of years, but it's still much higher than most GWB deficits, and enormously higher than any pre-GWB deficit. It's a fact that when Obama was elected, the total federal debt was about 10 trillion dollars; now it's 17 trillion dollars. Obama nearly doubled the national debt - in five short years.
Who's asking us to take John McCain seriously these days?
That's like asking us to take Joe Biden seriously.
Oh, wait....
Robert Cook, if the debt weren't increasing we wouldn't need to raise the debt ceiling.
This is just like changing the rules for calculating inflation or unemployment, at the bottom of the math you find the real value, and the debt is growing. Or there wouldn't BE the trouble everyone knows we're in.
@Robert Cook -- The deficit is dropping for the technical reason that the budget is recovering from the stimulus package.
Long term budget deficit projections already take this drop into account. The drop doesn't continue because it's derived from a one-time event.
You can do this at home. One month buy two TVs with no money down. Next month just buy one. Amazing. You cut your deficit spending in half. You're a fiscal genius. Just like Obama.
The Abject Failure of Reaganomics (revealing the bankruptcy of current Republican/Tea Party Dogma)
Dear RCook,
Clinton loves to claim he balanced the budget. But the debt limit went up every year of his presidency. In much the same way you are claiming the deficit has dropped. Have you looked at the Fed balance sheet over the last 4 years? If you do, you will find that's where the deficit is hiding. Up your game.
"The deficit is NOT dropping. Yes, it's down a bit from the whopping HUGE deficits of the couple of years,"--uh, "down a bit" means it's dropping--
"but it's still much higher than most GWB deficits...."
Even a decrease in the rate of increase is evidence of a dropping deficit. Imagine one is driving a car and steadily increases one's speed from 60 mph at 5:00 p.m. to 120 mph at 7:00 p.m., at which time one starts to slow down. One can say accurately that if one is traveling 100 mph at 7:30 p.m. that one is going faster than at the start of the drive 90 minutes previously, but it is just as accurate to say that one is slowing down.
Again, no rational economist claims our economy is healthy or that we don't have serious problems; however, it is incorrect to assert that the deficit is continuing to explode out of control and impossible to know that current trends won't continue, resulting in further reductions in deficits (or reductions in the rates of increase of deficits). It is all intended to swindle we, the people, into believing that we must surrender Social Security and Medicare in favor of continuing entitlements extended to the financial elites.
It's the age-old story: they will continue to pick our thread-bare, moth-eaten, lint-filled pockets to further fatten their silk purses and pig's appetites.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा