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

So it's just a magical coincidence that you "evolved" (your words) your view on torture during the Obama years.
There was nothing magical about it. And again, it had nothing to do with Obama.

And why would you criticize the idea that I changed my mind about something? Do you think I have it wrong now? That would be something to criticize.
 
Too bad I’m a Bernie bro.
IllFortunateBoubou-size_restricted.gif
 
it had nothing to do with Obama.
Sure. We believe you. Honestly.
I can dig up the post if you want because it most certainly was during the Obama years.
 
Sure. We believe you. Honestly.
I can dig up the post if you want because it most certainly was during the Obama years.
So you won’t address the rest of my post? Homer is right, you’re a troll.

Btw, I didn’t say it wasn’t during the Obama years dummy.
 
It’s also creepy that you remember the post better than I do.
 
So you won’t address the rest of my post? Homer is right, you’re a troll.

Btw, I didn’t say it wasn’t during the Obama years dummy.
{<jimmies}
 
That’s revenue. Are you unaware taxes are currently lower now but receipts are higher?

Relative to GDP.

Are you saying high taxes are driving growth? — can we at least agree that would be a disingenuous question just like yours??

High taxation is a drag on GDP growth - see the Obama economy. There I said it again. Deal with it.

The "Obama economy" was marked by extremely low taxes and moderate growth. The point that you were unable to respond to was that tax levels don't appear correlated with growth rates.
 
Here again, do you have a point that has anything to do with what I was saying when you chose to engage me?

You are the one who disagreed with me based on Obama's first term.

But the fact remains as per TS article that if Republican tax cuts were repealed the country would be on a surplus.
 
Debt isn’t an issue unless it outpaces GDP. Which has not happened since the post WW2 recover... until Obama took office anyways.

You would need an entire book to go into detail why exactly it happened. But in the end we need to keep the GDP growth and cut the budget back.

Well, unless Bernie and his type take office. Then we’re screwed.

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-debt-to-gdp
 
There are people other than Saddam that should've been strung up for the Iraq deal. Unfortunate that will never happen. They are instead painting pictures in their retirement homes, and recognized as "great men" when they pass.
 
The point being that while paying interest sucks, most of us see the value of credit and debt. It's not necessarily a good or bad thing.

It's more just a matter of this being how the game is played. If nobody borrowed money the economy would crash.

Controllable debt . . . sure. And sometimes I really hate the game . . .
 
Your memory is a bit hazy.

In the Senate 22 Dems (half) but just one Repug voted against the war.

In the House 127 Democrats (vast majority) but just six Repugs voted against.

Long story short: if Repuglicans had voted like Democrats it would have failed the House and been a tie in the Senate.

Aka, no war.

Touche, but you had 48 democratic senators so it wouldn't have been a tie in the Senate.

Oh btw - Afghanistan was 98-0(S) and 420-1(H) and you still didn't address whether it was a good idea to have a security buildup after 9-11.
 
Back
Top