Jump to content


Photo

GOP rediscovers the joys of deficit spending

politics

  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 Enid Puceflange

Enid Puceflange

    Old Squinty

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6591 posts

Posted 15 May 2014 - 04:22 AM

https://www.slate.co...urn_to_the.html

 

 

[color=rgb(40,27,33);font-family:'sl-ApresRegular';font-size:15px;]Put simply, after four years of pushing the austerity budgets of the Tea Party, Rubio—who is running for the Republican presidential nomination—is calling for low taxes[/color]and[color=rgb(40,27,33);font-family:'sl-ApresRegular';font-size:15px;] new spending, with little concern for the deficit.[/color]

As a message to the Republican base, which hates new spending, it’s a loser. But as a message for the general election, it’s perfect and proven. Before there was a Tea Party, there was George W. Bush, and as president he wasn’t overly concerned with squaring the circle of his priorities.

 


  • 0

#2 Clintama

Clintama

    No Life

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30244 posts
  • LocationRight Here

Posted 15 May 2014 - 04:28 AM

What's really better is what we now. Raise taxes and keep spending like there's no tomorrow. :banghead:


  • 0

#3 Enid Puceflange

Enid Puceflange

    Old Squinty

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6591 posts

Posted 15 May 2014 - 04:30 AM

What's really better is what we now. Raise taxes and keep spending like there's no tomorrow. :banghead:

I think that's basically called "continuity" - pretty much the same economic policies as we've had this last 20 years.


  • 0

#4 BlackBeerd

BlackBeerd

    Comptroller of Stain's Junk Posting

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 17992 posts
  • LocationA Drunken Stupor

Posted 15 May 2014 - 04:32 AM

I think that's basically called "continuity" - pretty much the same economic policies as we've had this last 20 years.

And look how unstable that's been. Thanks Bill Clinton!
  • 0

#5 zymot

zymot

    Comptroller of Small Amounts of Money

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 23248 posts
  • LocationMortville

Posted 15 May 2014 - 04:32 AM

Both parties are happy to spend their way into re-election. Both parties claim they are fiscally responsible. Nobody wants to make any cuts in spending or programs, everybody wants to bring the pork back home.To pretend anything different ignores history.
  • 0

#6 Enid Puceflange

Enid Puceflange

    Old Squinty

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6591 posts

Posted 15 May 2014 - 04:38 AM

Both parties are happy to spend their way into re-election. Both parties claim they are fiscally responsible. Nobody wants to make any cuts in spending or programs, everybody wants to bring the pork back home.To pretend anything different ignores history.

Well....and apologies in advance....but "Duh!". You don't get elected in this country promising an unrelenting diet of austerity and a reduction in government services. You can make a case for cutting one area of spending in preference to another, and fiercely defend "your" preferred spending, but an overall reduction isn't possible. And that's actually a good thing - so much of the economy depends on direct or indirect government spending that curtailing it, even by a relatively small percentage would drive the US (and about 2 days later the world) economy into a depression the like of which we have never seen.


  • 0

#7 Clintama

Clintama

    No Life

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30244 posts
  • LocationRight Here

Posted 15 May 2014 - 04:38 AM

I think that's basically called "continuity" - pretty much the same economic policies as we've had this last 20 years.

But you should love the spending part. More debt at low interest rates! Spend, Spend, Spend! WooHoo!!!


  • 0

#8 BlackBeerd

BlackBeerd

    Comptroller of Stain's Junk Posting

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 17992 posts
  • LocationA Drunken Stupor

Posted 15 May 2014 - 04:42 AM

Well....and apologies in advance....but "Duh!". You don't get elected in this country promising an unrelenting diet of austerity and a reduction in government services. You can make a case for cutting one area of spending in preference to another, and fiercely defend "your" preferred spending, but an overall reduction isn't possible. And that's actually a good thing - so much of the economy depends on direct or indirect government spending that curtailing it, even by a relatively small percentage would drive the US (and about 2 days later the world) economy into a depression the like of which we have never seen.

And that's a problem.
  • 0

#9 Enid Puceflange

Enid Puceflange

    Old Squinty

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6591 posts

Posted 15 May 2014 - 04:51 AM

And that's a problem.

To a certain extent I agree with you - I'd argue that the economy IS skewed too far to the government spending side. My problem with the proposed solutions is the severity of the "cure" - like amputating a leg to fix a hangnail. 


  • 0

#10 zymot

zymot

    Comptroller of Small Amounts of Money

  • Patron
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 23248 posts
  • LocationMortville

Posted 15 May 2014 - 04:52 AM

Well....and apologies in advance....but "Duh!". You don't get elected in this country promising an unrelenting diet of austerity and a reduction in government services. You can make a case for cutting one area of spending in preference to another, and fiercely defend "your" preferred spending, but an overall reduction isn't possible. And that's actually a good thing - so much of the economy depends on direct or indirect government spending that curtailing it, even by a relatively small percentage would drive the US (and about 2 days later the world) economy into a depression the like of which we have never seen.

Is this model sustainable? Can we do it for ever? Will we ever reach a point of no return and then it all comes crashing down?When/if that happens, Thom Hartmann will blame Regan. That I know.
  • 0

#11 Clintama

Clintama

    No Life

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30244 posts
  • LocationRight Here

Posted 15 May 2014 - 04:54 AM

To a certain extent I agree with you - I'd argue that the economy IS skewed too far to the government spending side. My problem with the proposed solutions is the severity of the "cure" - like amputating a leg to fix a hangnail. 

There are reductions and then there are reductions. We have to start somewhere. This house of cards will fall someday anyway, if we don't.


  • 0

#12 Enid Puceflange

Enid Puceflange

    Old Squinty

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6591 posts

Posted 15 May 2014 - 05:00 AM

Is this model sustainable? Can we do it for ever? Will we ever reach a point of no return and then it all comes crashing down?When/if that happens, Thom Hartmann will blame Regan. That I know.

Well, it has worked for the last 300 years here, and elsewhere for more than 700 years so I'll go out on  a limb and say "Yes, it's sustainable". 

 

As we've said over and over, the economics of countries are not the same as the economics of individuals, families and companies. If as an individual you spent more than you took in, you'd be in bankruptcy in a pretty short time. As a country, you can ALWAYS pay your debts, presuming that they are in your currency. If you are really really dumb, you borrow in someone else's currency (Argentina? I'm looking at you) and then you're screwed.

 

There's a nice way to know whether your borrowing is acceptable or not - how much interest you have to pay people to borrow their money. The invisible hand of the market and all that stuff :)

There are reductions and then there are reductions. We have to start somewhere. This house of cards will fall someday anyway, if we don't.

See, this statement "Doom is coming! Doom I tell you! It can't go on forever!" is at odds with history. It not only CAN go on forever, it pretty much HAS TO.


  • 0

#13 Clintama

Clintama

    No Life

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30244 posts
  • LocationRight Here

Posted 15 May 2014 - 05:03 AM

See, this statement "Doom is coming! Doom I tell you! It can't go on forever!" is at odds with history. It not only CAN go on forever, it pretty much HAS TO.

I honestly can't believe that anyone, with half a brain, thinks that continually increasing debt is not only a good thing, but that it can't be stopped in a reasonable manner.


  • 0

#14 Enid Puceflange

Enid Puceflange

    Old Squinty

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6591 posts

Posted 15 May 2014 - 05:08 AM

I honestly can't believe that anyone, with half a brain, thinks that continually increasing debt is not only a good thing, but that it can't be stopped in a reasonable manner.

And if you were talking about people, or businesses then you and I would agree wholeheartedly and we'd go off for a pint :)

 

In the case of a country, providing debt doesn't increase at a rate greater than inflation + GDP growth, it's fine. Actually, that's a pretty good indication of the level of borrowing that should be considered acceptable.


  • 0

#15 mach5

mach5

    Helibottle Comptroller

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 722 posts
  • LocationColumbia, PA

Posted 15 May 2014 - 05:19 AM

Vote Libertarian. Stop the madness.Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is the definition of insanity. If you vote Dem or Rep its the same. Try something new.
  • 0

#16 Clintama

Clintama

    No Life

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30244 posts
  • LocationRight Here

Posted 15 May 2014 - 05:26 AM

And if you were talking about people, or businesses then you and I would agree wholeheartedly and we'd go off for a pint :)

 

In the case of a country, providing debt doesn't increase at a rate greater than inflation + GDP growth, it's fine. Actually, that's a pretty good indication of the level of borrowing that should be considered acceptable.

You only drink with people that agree with you?


  • 0

#17 Enid Puceflange

Enid Puceflange

    Old Squinty

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6591 posts

Posted 15 May 2014 - 05:26 AM

Vote Libertarian. Stop the madness.Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is the definition of insanity. If you vote Dem or Rep its the same. Try something new.

With the greatest of respect voting Libertarian in the current political system is like pissing yourself in dark trousers - you get a warm feeling but nobody notices.

 

There are many possible solutions (some to real problems even) but the current grip on power is firmly held. I had kind-of hoped that the Tea Party could actually split the GOP, generating a real third party in the process, but that seems to be a forlorn hope. There will be no changes to the current political system until one of the parties believes that it can no longer win.


  • 0

#18 Clintama

Clintama

    No Life

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30244 posts
  • LocationRight Here

Posted 15 May 2014 - 05:28 AM

Posted Image


  • 0

#19 Enid Puceflange

Enid Puceflange

    Old Squinty

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 6591 posts

Posted 15 May 2014 - 05:30 AM

Posted Image

Now THAT was a fast image search  :cheers:

 

And no, BTW to your previous question - should you ever make it to Kentucky I'm sure we'd have a great deal to talk about, even if we don't see eye to eye on economics :)


  • 0

#20 Clintama

Clintama

    No Life

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 30244 posts
  • LocationRight Here

Posted 15 May 2014 - 05:31 AM

Now THAT was a fast image search  :cheers:

 

And no, BTW to your previous question - should you ever make it to Kentucky I'm sure we'd have a great deal to talk about, even if we don't see eye to eye on economics :)

We would probably do well by talking shop, literally, and staying away from politics. :)


  • 0



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: politics

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users