FB friend S.B. posted this:
Let's see 'em try to spin THESE facts away!
C.K.: When are you going to stop blaming Bush and the Republicans for the stuff they did?
D.C.: @Christopher - when they stop believing and pushing "trickle down" economics.
R.S.: He's absolutely no fiscal conservative. The deficit and the spending trajectory of this country are very serious problems that need to be dealt with. His plan will only contribute to the problem while doing harm to many people.
Me: Ironic given the increase in the national debt since the democrats took over in 2007. Not saying the republicans aren't complicit. However, the debt never seems to be a problem when your guys are doing it.
R.S.: I suspect deficits don't matter UNTIL THEY REALLY MATTER. Hope that doesn't happen.
P.H.: You guys? It's not a f*cking team! WE ALL OWN IT. And it's a SHARED problem. And its going to require a higher level of intelligence, common sense, and sacrifice to fix it. It's a national embarrassment to have one guy (representing an entire party) with a bachelor of arts degree that's 20 years old and never been applied to business come up with an national economic plan that most experts in the field and in economics are saying will absolutely fail (and they no longer being polite about it). I'm going to say it straight out--any misinformed person who thinks that where we are at today is due to the last 3 years has a fundamental lack of understanding about how we got there to begin with. This is just too God-damned important. And peppering the populace with nonsense about building 12 million private sector jobs in 4 years (which is absolutely impossible with the economy we have today using methods that haven't worked even under the Republicans) and implementing Ryan's plan is not the answer. And by the way, THIS opinion does not come from a democrat!
Me: My quandry is if I respond to Ms. Hughes' corrosive diatribe, I will be accused of incivility. Anyway. Ms. Hughes may not have noticed that I said the republicans were complicit. That seems to obviate her first three sentences and sentence #5. Oh, and it really doesn't take a higher level of intelligence to solve the problem. I agree, sacrifice is needed. Greedy government, which has never been denied, needs to be cut off. Just spend less.
And by the way, THIS opinion does not come from a republican.
R.S.: Thinking the deficit problem can be solved simply by spending less is *slightly* naive. The government spends something like 22% of GDP. It takes in something like 15%. Plus the baby boomers are arriving at the starting gates of social security and medicare eligibility.
P.H.: I read the complicit comment and your absolutely right. Bad economics including deregulation within the financial sector started with Reagan and continued a terrible trend by most of the administrations after him (both republican and democrat). I was reacting to the comment about the "irony given the increase in the national debt since the democrats took over in 2007..." and mostly the follow up comment about "you guys." Go check out the historical precedence and what's happens to deficits when the country is at war (that was under Bush). And then factor in 40 years of eroding the matrix of the economy as Wall Street and the Fed took us for the ride of our life. They are still doing it using every instrument they can muster with the latest being the misuse of LIBOR. And then, a country who's unwilling to try and understand the very nature of the problem expects a president (forget who it is) to fix that problem in 3 years is just incomprehensible. I understand strong language is offensive. It's intended to get people out of their stupor.
Me: Thinking that less spending will not work is *slightly* naive, considering that giving them more money has never solved a budget problem. Indeed, SS is already bankrupt and the trust fund is empty, and medicare is unsustainable today, let alone 10 or 20 years from now.
Me: Bad economics did not start with Reagan, it started with FDR. And, my comment was "your guys," which means whoever "your" guys happen to be.
R.S.: Rich, what is coming through loud and clear through your posts is that you think in terms of "us" vs. "them", and Pam and I are clearly one of "them". Equally clear from Pam's posts is that she considers all of us to be in the "us" category. FDR practiced some bad economics, Johnson thought that he could eliminate poverty by simply throwing money at it, and Reagan "unchained" the financial sector so that it can engage in ridiculous shenanigans and then come back to the government to be bailed out when everything comes tumbling down. We have common ground. The choice doesn't have to be between Karl Marx and Ayn Rand. Let's all try to remain in touch with reality. Let's not let our ideologies think that mathematics can be ignored. Let's quit trying to just win arguments by getting in the last word.
Me: Despite me mentioning complicit republicans, and that I am not a republcian, I am the one who is "us vs. them?" Ok, you have your template. Fine. But I note that you have not complained about anyone but me, as if the first two comments on this thread don't exist.
No comments:
Post a Comment