Market crash: are we there yet ?

[erps]

Our conservative friends have this recurring fantasy where they get to not pay taxes but the roads are still smooth, the police force is still big and well equipped, and the schools are still as good as anywhere. Unfortunately, their unwillingness to actually pay for these things means it isnt true anymore. Hell, they dont even want to pay for health care for CHILDREN for Gods sake.

really? heartless bastards. Should folks have any say on how much they're taxed?

[SailKing1]

The repubs on the other hand dont want to pay the taxes but keep right on with the spending. Meanwhile constantly shouting about deficits. Who is the hypocrite?

Seems to me if my memory is correct it was the democrats the Obama tried to fill his cabinet with that couldn't pass muster because of failure to pay taxes. One after another after another. Dems like to spend they just don't like to pay. They want to force a health care plan on everyone else yet they won't even except for themselves. Talk about hypocrites.

[therapy23]

Originally Posted by sck5

http://www.centrists.org/images/char...gdp_boskin.gif


!

Who was responsible for the spending drop from 1990-2000?

[sck5]

"Who was responsible for the spending drop from 1990-2000?"

that would be the clinton administration. he was a dem.


erps - sure they should have a say in how much they are taxed. what I am saying is that the tax decision should be connected to the spending decisions. that is, if you are a responsible adult you do two things

1. Pay for what you spend with taxes that are enough to cover the bill

2. Spend enough maintaining our capital (both human and physical) so that our kids have as good a deal left to them as was left to us.

The republican party continuously harps on taxes without ever seeming to pay any attention to the fact that taxes and spending need to be balanced. It aint done by magic, you have to pay attention like Clinton did.

[therapy23]

Originally Posted by sck5

"Who was responsible for the spending drop from 1990-2000?"

that would be the clinton administration. he was a dem.


.

I did not know he was in office for 10 years.

Someone else told me Regan was president before him and since changes take time the effects were not immediately noticeable but continued on for a while.

[erps]

I did not know he was in office for 10 years.

Someone else told me Regan was president before him and since changes take time the effects were not immediately noticeable but continued on for a while.

Actually, I think it was the other Bush, and then the Republicans held both houses during the later half of Clinton's time, but that wouldn't have had any affect because congress only makes the budgets, but Clinton signed them.

[therapy23]

Originally Posted by erps

Actually, I think it was the other Bush, and then the Republicans held both houses during the later half of Clinton's time, but that wouldn't have had any affect because congress only makes the budgets, but Clinton signed them.

So the Republicans are responsible for the downward trend in spending?

[Stillraining]

Well said and Right on the nail head..all of it..

And one the few but greatest disappointments in Bush myself.

Originally Posted by camaraderie

No Rick...we've been down this path before. Bush's Tax cuts increased revenues to all time highs. That didn't reduce the deficits because spending increased FASTER than the revenues...and Republicans ARE to blame for this just in case you think I'm trying to dodge that one! THAT is Bush's really terrible legacy...that he allowed a Republican controlled Congress to act like Democrats and spent us into deficit hell with his signatures. That is why they lost control of Congress in 2006...and contributed greatly to the continuing dissatisfaction in 2008.
Nevertheless...the lowered tax rates and business incentives spurred the economy and increased tax revenues.
We need to make some hard decisions as we simply cannot afford to continue the way we are and that means both dicretionaey and non-discretionary spending needs to be cut...and obviously there will be plenty of pain.
But nothing like the pain a real depression will bring
We can minimize the pain that we must go through as a citizenry by expanding the economy only. The government can do that though interest rates...(tried that!) .... and through tax policy. We cannot deficit spend our way to recovery...it will just make a depression inevitable...which is what I think we are seeing continue to develop. On this I think we agree. We need to stop doing stupid stuff like Cap and Trade and Adding another trillion to the debt (with many trillions to come later) with health care when we are facing an economic crisis that is potentially much worse than we had in the 1930's .

[TropicCat]

Ive sat on the sidelines in the health care debate because I'm torn on the idea of a public option. I don't buy those arguments that the government can't do it cheaper than the health insurance companies.

Medicare works. It's government. The health plan our military has is great, and it's also government run. Congress has essentially the same plan.

On the other hand, I've experienced first hand denied insurance claims, hell, I'm sure we all have. We've all heard the stories about long term illnesses being denied insurance coverage. Time Magazine did a cover story on how 1/3 of all Bankruptcies are caused by unpaid medical bills. It's now getting to the point that only the wealthy can afford to remain healthy and I do have a problem with that.

It's just than I can't see a way to pay for a good government run plan. That is the issue. $ trillion deficits and the debt servicing they require have insured that we simply can't afford it. My opinion has absolutely nothing to do with those 'bussed in' conservatives destroying the democracy of recent town meetings on this subject. Those guys are fascists as far as I'm concerned.

[camaraderie]

medicare works? 60% of doctors won't accept a new medicare patient and the accumulated deficit projection for the program NOW is $38 TRILLION!! (According to the Medicare Trustees!! That is 7 times more than the broken Social Security program!! That is what you call working??
Not saying don't reform...that is the subject for a different thread...but couldn't let "medicare works" stand unchallenged.
I do agree with you that there is no way to pay for ANY more healthcare in our current financial straits. We CAN have an impact on costs though by reforming the system.

Coming from the "home team" for Americas Community Organizer in Chief...your comments about busing in protesters (which is largely a fiction anyway) is pretty ironic. Can you say "Acorn" or perhaps "Code Pink"?