Report: If not for Republican Policies, Federal Govt. Would Run a Surplus

We were in a recession with interest rates as low as they can go. They actually cut taxes for the poor and middle class, and then when it made sense to increase taxes, Republicans were in a position to block it.

Wasn't possible to set increases to take effect down the road?
 
Don't worry guys, we'll just print more money.

<{1-1}>
 
This report was created by the MINORITY STAFF, not the entire staff and thus it is biased.

This is why they are not saying how much money is going to democrat related policies. Fuck I hate party whores on all sides. All of you are causing this mess.

Remove all social services, AKA Democrat policies and guess what? We have a surplus. But no, all of America have to deal with both Tweedledum and his retarded ass brother Tweedledee also know as Republicans and Democrats doing the same god damn thing, take our money and spend 13x that amount so we go in debt so idiot ass sheep keep voting only for them.

Sure as fuck one day soon people stop this shit and vote 3rd party so we can get rid of BOTH of your policies.
 
lol
So many holes in this "report." Poor Higus getting trolled again.
 
Military is like 17% of total government spending. Social security and health care are 60%.
 
Its all republican's fault and no one else!!!1
sjw.png



--------------------------


https://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-signs-bill-to-extend-bush-tax-cuts
25Rt.gif
 
This report was created by the MINORITY STAFF, not the entire staff and thus it is biased.

This is why they are not saying how much money is going to democrat related policies. Fuck I hate party whores on all sides. All of you are causing this mess.

Remove all social services, AKA Democrat policies and guess what? We have a surplus. But no, all of America have to deal with both Tweedledum and his retarded ass brother Tweedledee also know as Republicans and Democrats doing the same god damn thing, take our money and spend 13x that amount so we go in debt so idiot ass sheep keep voting only for them.

Sure as fuck one day soon people stop this shit and vote 3rd party so we can get rid of BOTH of your policies.
Did you find anything wrong with the analysis, or is just the association with a political party is enough justification to ignore the argument?
 
Wasn't possible to set increases to take effect down the road?

A tax hike that doesn't take effect until a few years later? I suppose it wouldn't be technically impossible, but it would get rightly slammed by the press and opposition, and I can't imagine anyone going through with it. It would also almost certainly get repealed before it took effect.
 
Did you find anything wrong with the analysis, or is just the association with a political party is enough justification to ignore the argument?

You do know that the group exists for a reason right? If that reason is tampered with in any way, it should in fact be scrutinized for it.

When the "Majority" makes a report, it should be scrutinized for the same reasons...its only when its a FULL report, done by both sides is when you get an UNBIASED report with all data.

As is, the entire thing is a POS because it leaves everything out that conflicts with the narrative they wanted.
 
War is not a Republican Policy, it was a response to a terrorist attack. An attack, by the way, that Clinton could have avoided and that Obama could have ended sooner. How many attacks on US soil have you heard about since Trump took office?
 
You do know that the group exists for a reason right? If that reason is tampered with in any way, it should in fact be scrutinized for it.

When the "Majority" makes a report, it should be scrutinized for the same reasons...its only when its a FULL report, done by both sides is when you get an UNBIASED report with all data.

As is, the entire thing is a POS because it leaves everything out that conflicts with the narrative they wanted.
>>>mrw you say that the reason you don't bother to refute the content of the argument is because the content deserves scrutiny
{<huh}<{MindBrown}><{walkerwhut}>
 
War is not a Republican Policy, it was a response to a terrorist attack. An attack, by the way, that Clinton could have avoided and that Obama could have ended sooner. How many attacks on US soil have you heard about since Trump took office?

 
Back
Top