Originally posted by dbates
"For the war, billions more, but for the poor, not one dollar more."
Don't you love the way they spin this, and the crowd on hand just eats it up because that's what they wanted to hear.
I'll address your flawed math in a moment, but does anyone else take the above as somewhat rascist.....with that usage of THEY
THEY wanted to hear? You from the South, D?
First, apples are apples, oranges are oranges - to jump to equal line comparission of our Defense spending, which is exponentially higher than all
other 2nd tier world powers combined, to our Social programs spending, is disingenuous boardering on willfully misleading.
CBO’s projections From1994 to 2004, mandatory spending increased at an average annual rate of 5.6 percent. It grew by 6.7 percent in 2005.
Over the next 10 years, it is expected to climb at a faster rate than the economy—5.8 percent per year, on average
Mandatory spending is dominated by income-support payments and health care subsidies for the elderly, disabled, and the poor.
Question – what role do you believe demographics play in spend increases? Answer – a big one. Each of those categories is growing at an historic
pace during the GOP “Leadership” of the past 6 years, with the aging Boomers being the only one void of culpability for them. Dramatic increases
in the amount of working poor, uninsured Americans, and Americas living below the poverty line are going to spike a “needs” spend. Stuff like that
happens in the Trickle Down Economic model – no sustainable jobs for the mid through bottom castes create the out flow somewhere else, as in
Textbook fiscal economics says that when a government knows that its expenses will rise in the future, it should start running a surplus now. At
first, this surplus should be used to pay off debt, which reduces the government's future interest costs.( Instead, what are we running? Something
like $500 - $600 Billion deficits per year!?!) If the government runs out of debt to pay off, it can start to invest in assets such as stocks and
bonds, which will yield future income. That's exactly the path the Social Security system, though not the government as a whole, has been following.
( there is no SS crisis, but I’ve said that before). It was exactly the path government ran the last time we had sound fiscal management during the
Here’s the problem – we’re underfunding the US Government by 30 to 40%
– that’s a bigger issue than any sector either of us want to
focus on – the Military Industrial Complex or “Shiftless” why-can’t-they-grab-their-own-bootstraps-Social Programs.
We have to get some more revenue.
we're living in a fantasyland where we imagine that we can have it all- HUGE tax cuts for the top 5% + all
these social programs that middle class Americans count on + an aggressive/belligerent/empire expanding unilateralist foreign policy that costs
trillions of dollars……………… and it's not possible.