It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Are Democrats really better at reducing the deficit?

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: JAGStorm

No, they really aren't. If they were, they would have done it with their supermajority and Obama.

The main problem and dirty little secret is that the main things raising the deficit are the things no one can touch because they are red-hot radioactive - entitlements like Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security. Contrary to what they would have you believe, they make up more of our budget than any other single spending category, even defense.


Oh dear spending the lions share of public money on the public. How awful!



It's not the lion's share.

They're spending more than they can reasonably expect to take in. You want to know where the deficit comes from? It comes mainly from these sorts of programs. The government does have way more responsibilities than those programs it cannot afford.


Tiny, small countries, with comparatively tiny economies seem to be able to do it. Why is it so hard for one of the wealthiest countries in the world to divide its budget equitably and reduce its debt?




posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: JAGStorm

No, they really aren't. If they were, they would have done it with their supermajority and Obama.

The main problem and dirty little secret is that the main things raising the deficit are the things no one can touch because they are red-hot radioactive - entitlements like Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security. Contrary to what they would have you believe, they make up more of our budget than any other single spending category, even defense.


Oh dear spending the lions share of public money on the public. How awful!



It's not the lion's share.

They're spending more than they can reasonably expect to take in. You want to know where the deficit comes from? It comes mainly from these sorts of programs. The government does have way more responsibilities than those programs it cannot afford.


Tiny, small countries, with comparatively tiny economies seem to be able to do it. Why is it so hard for one of the wealthiest countries in the world to divide its budget equitably and reduce its debt?


You answered your own question. Tiny small countries with homogenous populations vs a country with 350 million people and a very diverse population.

The US also has a very progressive tax rate in which the poor and lower middle incomes pay next to nothing in taxes. The only way to afford those programs is that they'd have to start taxing the lower incomes.

Finally, many of those tiny countries don't have much of any military spending and depend on the US.

While I don't agree with it, the US has to act as the world's police force. Who is going to protect those tiny countries? Canada? New Zealand?



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:15 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueJacket

People forget almost every disaster signed under a Democrat president was a conservative policy pushed by conservatives..


Glasdegal was under Clinton, but a conservative policy..

For example



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:19 PM
link   
I'm laughing my a$$ off here. There was never a budget surplus. It was all a bookkeeping gimmick. There was money in designated accounts (Airport Improvement Program, Federal Highway Improvement Program, etc. etc). Clinton just had that money moved into the General Fund and Presto instant surplus.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:22 PM
link   
Nobody, Dems or GOP, cares about reducing the deficit. They just use it in speeches.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: JAGStorm

No, they really aren't. If they were, they would have done it with their supermajority and Obama.

The main problem and dirty little secret is that the main things raising the deficit are the things no one can touch because they are red-hot radioactive - entitlements like Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security. Contrary to what they would have you believe, they make up more of our budget than any other single spending category, even defense.


Oh dear spending the lions share of public money on the public. How awful!



It's not the lion's share.

They're spending more than they can reasonably expect to take in. You want to know where the deficit comes from? It comes mainly from these sorts of programs. The government does have way more responsibilities than those programs it cannot afford.


Tiny, small countries, with comparatively tiny economies seem to be able to do it. Why is it so hard for one of the wealthiest countries in the world to divide its budget equitably and reduce its debt?


You answered your own question. Tiny small countries with homogenous populations vs a country with 350 million people and a very diverse population.

The US also has a very progressive tax rate in which the poor and lower middle incomes pay next to nothing in taxes. The only way to afford those programs is that they'd have to start taxing the lower incomes.

Finally, many of those tiny countries don't have much of any military spending and depend on the US.

While I don't agree with it, the US has to act as the world's police force. Who is going to protect those tiny countries? Canada? New Zealand?


Oh come on. When has the US defended the interests of any other country other than its own?

The whole of Europe, its allies, were being decimated for years by the Nazi's and the US did almost nothing until the US itself was attacked.

As far as world police, that would have to be Interpol and the UN.

The US has historically failed in its international duties and has even created and supported regimes that were the opposite of fair and reasonable democracies embracing human rights.

The truth is that the US government is full of embedded greedy people. It is a coalition of the captains of capitalism whose wealth is so vast that their daily 'walking around money' is such that average American will probably never even see that much cash in their entire lifetimes.

edit on 9/9/2019 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:23 PM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

Neither party reduces the deficit, much less the debt. That is a sad, but accurate fact.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:28 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

The next time you are the target of a natural disaster, we will not send any aid your way ... noted. Since we fail at it, we'd just make your situation worse anyway.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

The US has one of the least progressive tax systems and one of the worst social safety nets of the modern western countries, by a grip..


The only thing I see that fundamentally stops the same systems in less homogeneous populations , is the ability to scape goat those groups to demagogue the sheeple..

Other than that I see no way the math is different.



Any way it goes conservatism is F’ed, because automation is gonnna just destroy the American labor system..

And it will be destroyed by progress regardless of who is in charge..

We were always gonna reach a tipping point where it was no longer profitable to employ human labor no matter how good their work ethic.


How does boot strap conservatism survive 60-70% of your population being unemployed because period there is no work..

What did you say?!?!


“learn to code??”


It won’t take that long for computers to make coding so easy it is no longer a valuable skill either..



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: JustJohnny
a reply to: BlueJacket

People forget almost every disaster signed under a Democrat president was a conservative policy pushed by conservatives..


Glasdegal was under Clinton, but a conservative policy..

For example



HOLY GOD MAN!!! It help make your point look at least a little bit intelligent if you can at least come close to the actual name of the Act you're flexing with in an attempt to make it seem like you have a rat's ass hair worth of knowledge on a subject, enough to warrant anyone paying your point some consideration.

Glass-Steagall is what I assume you were attempting to appear educated about...



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:35 PM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

I think both parties are great at adding to the deficit... It pretty much trends up equally no matter which party holds office.


Trump doesn't look to be helping it.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: schuyler
Nobody, Dems or GOP, cares about reducing the deficit. They just use it in speeches.


I agree with this 22 trillion times



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:38 PM
link   
Republicans get really worked up about the deficit when there's a dem in office.
They seem to forget all about it when it's their turn, though.
They spent money like a college freshman with a credit card when they got a supermajority under Bush; they passed tax cuts for the rich (standard) and completely blew the budget. Some of them actually had the guts to admit it later.
They've pretty much done the same thing under Trump. The deficit is increasing, but you won't hear a peep about it.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:38 PM
link   
Americans having been engineered to only embrace capitalism and, as the website shows constantly, have zero understanding of economic systems.
Democrats, right-wing capitalist pig dogs with a smile generally get in power after the economy has been wrecked do their best to balance the books, massage the numbers and give tax breaks to the richest because, money. Clinton and Obama managed to pick everything up after the flat tax disaster of reagan and two bushes and someone will after the resident retard goes.
Republicans get in to power after the economy has picked up. They promise even bigger tax breaks to the richest who in turn demand their minions make it so, a conspiracy website that apparently wants the average joes voice to be heard attests to that. The richest tell you that you've never had it as good and the idiot masses applaud until, reality kicks in and the other side get in power.
Wash, rinse, repeat.

What we're in is end game capitalism, the rich can't get much richer, they own the buildings and the land, automation long term means less need for us peons which is gonna cause mass unemployment, whats a good answer or distraction for the easily manipulated public?
Try a fairer system maybe even the playing field a little?
Or, turn society on one another with buzzwords. Any economic model that could lose billionaires a penny should be given a name, let's say left. How do we manipulate people into hating this new buzzword, what's popular with gullible types?
Well they don't like to face reality so lets get conspiracy theorists onboard, when did alex jones stop blaming the new world order/illuminati for his ever increasing waistband and decry the left? What else is popular? Well not education, we can tell them to not trust experts and scientists because theyre also left. Fantasy plays well, anyone that doesn't go to church daily is left. These guys can't get laid so we'll take misogyny and they don't like the idea of anyone getting laid so we'll hates the queers too.
A Lot of this sounds fascistic, well it's handy because many of these guys are racist, white supremacists, we just need a buzzword for anyone that disagrees but, typing anti-fascist is tricky for the dumb horde, can we shorten it?

America's screwy economy has a knock on effect around the world and, have a look around the world, the richest are all clamouring to demean the word left, though not thankfully calling anti-fascists the enemy, just yet.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: chr0naut

The next time you are the target of a natural disaster, we will not send any aid your way ... noted. Since we fail at it, we'd just make your situation worse anyway.


New Zealand got some reconstruction aid from the US after the second world war. Since then, nada.

And we have had cities and towns leveled by earthquakes and volcanic eruptions.

But check out what aid the US supplies to New Zealand here: U.S. Relations With New Zealand - US Department of State



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: JustJohnny

How does boot strap conservatism survive 60-70% of your population being unemployed because period there is no work..



You just described the entire world before the industrial revolution, there were zero government programs to help anyone before the new deal. America did just fine.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:49 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

You said it yourself, you don't want us to help you. So good on you for doing it all alone. As you said, anything we sent would only screw you up.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 01:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Notoneofyou

But doesn't their voting base want Trump out of office? Seems to me to be the case. I sure do, not that I'm supporting a lot of what the Democrats support. However, they are the only ones who are trying to get that done. The Republicans, of which I have been a registered member of for over 40 years seemed to have buckled to this guy and mostly sit by and almost never speak out against him.

There are a few Republicans who want to mount primary campaigns against him and this is good. However there are a number of conservative states that have decided in their Republican Party to not hold primary votes in their states, thus just preventing any Republicans to vote against him. This is real, states are cancelling their primary voting in favor of just letting Trump go unopposed within his own party.

thehill.com...



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 02:02 PM
link   
a reply to: contextual
Your'e right. End game capitalism. Without an acceptable alternative to supplant it, the only possible future is a reversion back to feudalism, though this time it will not be under people who are labeled kings and emperors but instead called CEOs ....



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 02:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: JAGStorm
www.politifact.com...




"(Bill) Clinton got it to zero." This is true. During his presidency, Clinton managed to zero out the deficit and end his term with a $128.2 billion surplus.


Right now the deficit is 22 trillion and growing. That is 22,000,000,000,000 + Wow, that 70 billion under Reagan seems like chump change now.

I put this in the mud pit because I have a simple question... What has Trump done to help, reduce or even slow the deficit? Anything?
When we look back in the past, a lot will be forgotten. Dumb attacks on a person because he used a sharpie, outbursts on twitter, etc.
What will not be forgotten is how a president left his office and the people he served. Right now it looks bad.





They are talking about the Deficit, not the national debt. Trump increased military spending and that adds to the national debt. Trump is about a trillion a year in deficit, much of that coming from the increases of interest paid on the national debt which has been growing for a while pretty fast. Obama may not have had much of a deficit on paper, but he increased the national debt by trillions of dollars during his presidency, more than they reported as deficit.

Those economists working for the government can really deceive the people by twisting the numbers and changing the way things are done. It is hard to say what the true impact is. Both parties spend lots of money, it is just what type of programs they blow it on that is an issue. The Republicans like to keep people working so they can make a living. The Democrats like to do socialistic spending to help the needy, but the money they give goes to the rich. Obama Care increased the money going to healthcare who used the money to order unneeded tests to torture people with.







 
5
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join