This is what you support.
Now you seem mentally ill. You think republicans are the ones dividing people. Which party portrays the rich as villains who need to be stopped from doing evil? Which party wants to disarm law-abiding citizens?
Stein is an idiot. She should have never been a serious candidate.
I’ll do a tutorial on democrat math:
tax revenue - spending = budget deficit (let’s face it we’ve rarely run a surplus since 1932)
Democrats always assume if the budget deficit increases, then it must be because revenue decreased. It’s the logic applied to discredit the work of Laffer and the Laffer curve. You see this logic applied to show tax cuts are bad, because the deficit increased after the tax cuts. The assumption is tax cuts lowered revenue which caused the deficit to increase. The equation shows there are 2 possible causes of a higher deficit (less revenue or more spending). Real data shows tax revenue increases after tax cuts. People never look at the tax revenue data, and the media makes sure to only show budget deficit data. The reason the budget deficit increases is spending grows faster than revenue.
They get away with the horrible math, since intuitively it makes sense lower tax rates would lower tax revenue. People don’t question it the way they don’t question rising interest rates would cause home prices to fall. At first pass, it seems right. However, both are over simplifications of the situation that lead to the wrong conclusion.
It’s embarrassing the public is so misinformed.
The last time I remember us running a surplus was during the Clinton administration.
Yup, fueled by a reduction in capital gains tax rates and a red hot stock market creating more taxable income.
And Bush had to wage two wars, cut taxes and create a brand new entitlement program to ruin it.
Deficit will soar with the trump tax cut. GOP conveniently forgot the deficit when they cut corporate taxes. I am sure they will suddenly care about the deficit again when they cut benefits for the poor.
The projected deficit is 2.5% of total budget for next year. It gets even smaller as a percent of budget, since spending is growing so fast. If your net worth increases by 2.5%, is it soaring? If your income increases by 2.5%, is it soaring? It’s sensational wording that makes something sound much worse than it is.
The surplus was due to higher tax revenue thanks to the dotcom bubble. Tax revenue declined once the recession started.
If you look at spending as a percent of GDP, notice how it fell under Clinton? That was thanks to faster GDP growth and entitlement reforms. Imagine that a democrat campaigned on welfare reform and requiring welfare recipients to work. What happened to that party?
Notice spending as a percent of GDP under Bush was still lower than the 70’s and 80’s? Notice the huge increase under Obama? How was GDP growth after the recession Bush had vs. after the recession Obama had?
I know, you’re going to blame the Bush tax cuts.
Notice 2004 income tax revenue is higher than 2003?
How is that possible when this happened in 2003?
Which recession is deeper in your opinion?
Obama and congrsss didn’t push thru a bigger fiscal stimulus. Financial crisis and zero interests bound means monetary policy is not going be very effective and that was exactly what happened. Compare that with China which pushed thru a huge fiscal stimulus package.
Sharp fall usually followed by sharp rise.
Exactly. History has shown the more severe the recession the faster the growth after. If we deviate fast from the mean, then we usually bounce back to the mean faster.
Instead of broad tax cuts, Obama opted for stimulus spending. The most optimistic evaluation is we spent $278K/job created. Normal GDP growth creates a job every $45K.
Right. Because president Hillary Clinton’s emails is the most pressing problem in the country. How many years and iterations of this do we have to go thru? Meanwhile GOP is calling for Mueller’s head for an investigation that’s not even one year old and already resulting in multiple indictments.
He hasn’t found what he was supposed to find. He is supposed to find collusion between Russia and the Trump team on the 2016 election. So far, all communication was after the election and part of the transition.
So it doesn’t bother you at all that the lead investigator into Hillary’s email was sending anti-Trump and pro-Hillary texts to other people? You just trust that he did a fair and impartial job even though he specifically changed the wording of the statement, so Hillary would avoid criminal liability. You’re perfectly ok with that?
[quote=“marcus335, post:3, topic:3704, full:true”]
Nice job @buyinghouse for contributing information completely unrelated to the topic. [/quote]
You were saying what? Making an opinion unrelated on a topic what?
Guys: Why are you wasting your time with a Trumputin supporter that is never finding any mistakes, nothing wrong with the way the republicans and his daddy are robbing America. But he knows lots of BS about democrats and Clintons and Obama. He is so fair on his opinions, he is like Fox news, you know, fair and balanced.
Watch how he never says “this government, this administration”. We have the prototype of Sanders from the white house on this forum. Everything is rosy!
It’s directly related to the credibility of Mueller and his investigation. He had to remove someone due to their political bias.
How are they robbing America?
That FBI agent was fired right afterwards. I haven’t seen any evidence of impartialness.
Watergate, despite many people’s imagination otherwise, took years to unfold. We are talking about investigations of the most powerful man in the republic. Of course it will take time. That means we should all be patient and give Mueller all the support and resources he needs to get the job done.
If you support multi year of nothing burger investigations into Clinton’s email why would you not support Mueller?
He made the remarks pre-election. He was on the Mueller team until summer. He was able to spend months on the team influencing things before he was finally removed.
My anger with the Hillary thing is the outcome. If you or I deleted records after subpoena was served, we’d go to jail. Comey even said if someone else had done the same with email this didn’t mean they wouldn’t file charges in a future case. Now we are seeing why charges weren’t pursued. Everyone was in on the cover up from the FBI to the DOJ when Lynch had the secret meeting with Bill Clinton on a tarmac.
LOL…My anger with Hillary. What a deflection. The Putin lover is in denial.