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.

 

The "fiscal responsibility" myth

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 07:57 PM
link   
I hear time and time again as to how economically "responsible" conservative candidates are and as to how economically irrisponsible those "darn socialist liberals" are... Its the "spend spend spend" tag that liberals are labelled with every single. Democrats have had their fairshare of government mishandling however the bragging rightwing need to get a reality check for the past 40 years.

So the question is, does history back this claim from conservatives? let have a look back over a period of 40 years.

National debt per presidential administration

(1969–1974) Nixon administration: 50 billion +
(1974-1977) Ford administration: 56 billion +
(1977 to 1981) Carter administration: 430 billion +
(1981–1989) Reagan administration: 1.6 trillion +
(1989–1993) Bush snr administration: 1.4 trillion +
(1993-2001) Clinton administration: 1.6 trillion +
(2001-2009) Bush Jnr administration: 3.2 trillion +

www.brillig.com...

media.mcclatchydc.com...

www.nospeedbumps.com...

There was never a real surplus left by Clinton in 2001 however in the first in 40 years the debt that had been increasing began to become stable turn and began to decrease... actually it was on its way to decrease had things being left the way they were. Unfortunatly the campaign of "fiscal responsibility" falter began even before 2001, the debt began to sharply rise again that time.... higher than any other term. I remember a time in 2000 when this "fiscal responsibility" argument came from Bush supporters again like the ones before. Real funny at that... the irony.

In 2003 the Bush administration stated an invasion of Iraq would cost $50 billion, around the same time as the first Iraq invasion in 91'. In addition the time of occupation was stated to be around 3 years or so. Boy how inaccurate that was.

Unemployment rate per presidential administration

unemployment from start of term towards end

(1969–1974) Nixon administration: 3.4%-4.9%
(1974-1977) Ford administration: 5%-7.9%
(1977 to 1981) Carter administration: 7.8%-7.2%
(1981–1989) Reagan administration: 7.2%-5.8%
(1989–1993) Bush snr administration: 5.8%-7.75%
(1993-2001) Clinton administration: 7.8%-4%
(2001-2009) Bush Jnr administration: 4%-5%

static.seekingalpha.com...

upload.wikimedia.org...

As indicated, the conservative administrations did slightly worse in this field. Again in indicates that when it came to fiscal responsibility the elected conservative presidents fell short.

So government spending hasnt really changed between the conservative administrations, if anything the liberal administrations have done a better job at lowering spending, though not significant. Im not going to say here that the liberal-centrist administrations of the past did no bad when it came to debt or spending, however the performance from conservatives in the whitehouse, considering the "fiscal" argument from the right as if there were no wrong from them in the past is well very inaccurate.

As I see it, if your going to argue fiscal responsibility or play the "spend spend spend" tag on every non-conservative administration, especially one we are yet to full see perform, you gotta have a clean plate behind you.

[edit on 23-1-2009 by southern_Guardian]




posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 08:31 PM
link   
I will only speak for myself and my family. I am a registered republican, as is my wife. We are conservative. We expect the government to be run the way we run our household. If we can't afford it, we don't buy it, unless we have some productive way to raise the money. (Productive does not mean raising taxes. It means finding a way of producing goods and services that produce income.)
I think, if you ask the people who are out there holding down full time jobs, busting our butts to bring home a paycheck and pay our bills, I believe that you will find that those people will feel the way I do.



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 08:54 PM
link   
You might want to examine the mechanics and process of management of our Social Security fund.... It's a Ponzi scheme. We haven't saved a penny, they took it all and replaced it with debt!



posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 09:02 PM
link   
Well yeah they've both made mistakes. Huge ones. But what is this thread really about?

Justification for spending because the other guys did it?

That's what it looks like to me. Or is this a hypocrite thread? Both parties are hypocrites so that wouldn't be a surprise.

I could care less about which "side" did the most wrongs...they both put us in the position we are in today.

They both put us in the 53 trillion dollar hole that we are looking at.

The only solution both "sides" have for the economy is more spending which only adds to the ridiculously huge debt we have.

Yet nothing changes...same garbage. Same spending by both parties...they only differ on how to spend taxpayer money.




posted on Jan, 23 2009 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by David9176
Well yeah they've both made mistakes. Huge ones. But what is this thread really about?


Its about this age old argument from conservatives that all democrats do is spend spend spend. We've heard it in every single election from the right since 1980 and funny enough looking at the stats conservative government have either done no better or worse than their democratic counterparts. How can you make the "socialist" or "overspending" argument when you have nothing really to show for it on yourside.


Justification for spending because the other guys did it?


I didnt say that david, but typical of you fellas to once again prove that when their no real argument yourside, you just make up things on the spot.

Now we are yet to see president Obamas term in its full, we are yet to see the effects of his governing, the anti-Obamanians seem to use the "socialist overspending ploy" everytime, obviously they dont have history to back them up... neither do they have a time machine



That's what it looks like to me. Or is this a hypocrite thread? Both parties are hypocrites so that wouldn't be a surprise.


Where was I hypocrite? I never justified the mishandling from previous democrat administrations, why do you feel the need to lie about what I said?


I could care less about which "side" did the most wrongs...they both put us in the position we are in today.


Good for you david, why dont you show us from now on.


They both put us in the 53 trillion dollar hole that we are looking at.

And most of us are to blame for voting these idiots in. Where were you in 2000 David? How about 88'? 76'?


The only solution both "sides" have for the economy is more spending which only adds to the ridiculously huge debt we have.

Yet nothing changes...same garbage. Same spending by both parties...they only differ on how to spend taxpayer money.


Seriously now cry me a river david. We have a new president, it was a bitter campaign I admit, maybe you had a candidate like ron paul that didnt get close and your angry, thats your deal, doesnt necessarily mean the world will end in 4years. The best thing for us to do is argue the issues and how we, not just the government, are ganna solve it... not just tag speculation on some administration we dont personally like... especially when we dont have history to back us up.





Wonderful, maybe one day you can come back to me and actually have something that happened to argue to me about.

[edit on 23-1-2009 by southern_Guardian]



posted on Jan, 24 2009 @ 12:00 AM
link   
reply to post by southern_Guardian
 





How can you make the "socialist" or "overspending" argument when you have nothing really to show for it on yourside.


What side do you think I'm on? Why do u think I even have a side? Because i'm critical of what our government does? What if i told you I was a Democrat? Would that make you look at me differently? Why do you think I'm a Republican? Do you think i'm just critical of Democrats?



I didnt say that david, but typical of you fellas to once again prove that when their no real argument yourside, you just make up things on the spot


Look at your OP. Your bias bleeds through out the whole thing. It's in almost every single post i read of yours. For whatever reason you think that anyone who disagrees with you is anti-democrat. You deliberately made this thread in the first place to make an argument where...as you say...none exists.

Did it ever strike you that maybe some of them think both Rep/Dem are full of BS?

I see the type of person you are. You are the "If you aren't with me, then you're against me' type.

You are defiant to the end so much that you make a thread to justify being defiant.




Where was I hypocrite? I never justified the mishandling from previous democrat administrations, why do you feel the need to lie about what I said?



I don't believe I am stating a lie. When I was typing it i knew you would come back with this. I even had an answer all thought out for you ahead of time. You are doing the same thing Republicans do. I don't know what fantasy world you are living in but both Democrats and Republicans do the same thing. Criticize the other side and try to justify the same wrongs for your own. That's what this was. Yeah...we screwed up...but Republicans screwed up worse.



Good for you david, why dont you show us from now on.



LOL...I don't have to. Why? Because both of the Republicans and Democrats beat each up so much in the news and here on ATS that it's there for all to see. It's not my fault that you won't see it for what it is.



And most of us are to blame for voting these idiots in. Where were you in 2000 David? How about 88'? 76'?


How old do u think I am? I was born in 76. Sorry couldn't vote then. Wasn't old enough in 88 either. I wasn't old enough to vote for President till 1996. I voted for Clinton. I did not vote for Bush or Gore in 2000 because i thought they were both bums. Same in 2004. Why should i vote for someone i don't confidence in? 2008? No one. I didn't know about RP until after it was too late and even if i did he never had a chance to win anyway because he doesn't get the media coverage.



doesnt necessarily mean the world will end in 4years. The best thing for us to do is argue the issues and how we, not just the government, are ganna solve it... not just tag speculation on some administration we dont personally like... especially when we dont have history to back us up.


I'm not worried about the world ending in 4 years because it's not. Tag speculation? How is increasing spending with a gigantic debt and pushing for a large increase of troops from Iraq to Afghanistan speculation?

It's what he wants to do. This isn't a secret.



posted on Jan, 24 2009 @ 12:27 AM
link   
The republican's stupidity has already cost us billion if not trillions that so far hasn't gone into any of our pocket and I remember in the 80's them saying deficits didn't matter. This is all ideology, not based on historical examples or real economic numbers. Frankly, I look at republicans as a lower IQ species.



posted on Jan, 24 2009 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by David9176
What side do you think I'm on?


I dont know david you tell me, you seem to spend the vast majority of the time speculating on what this new administration is going to do and its if you dont give a damn about the last 8years. Aint nothing new. Why dont you be helpful and actually think up the relevant issues, not dooms day speculation on the new administration.


Because i'm critical of what our government does?


Your not critical of the government david, your critical when your candidate doesnt get in and thats that. All iv seen you and afew fellas do here is go on and on about how bad this candidate will be and completely ignore the relevant issues to fixing this mess, actually debating important issues, not just "oh their allll bad".


What if i told you I was a Democrat? Would that make you look at me differently?


Half the anti-Obamanians here are democrats buddy... reagan democrats. It aint ganna make me debate with you and be critical any differently.


Do you think i'm just critical of Democrats?


Im yet to see you actually be critical of the conservative base of this country david.



Look at your OP. Your bias bleeds through out the whole thing.


Bias? As far as I could see it I never referenced any partisan blogs like other have here, Iv did not paint the democrats as "spotless" in the OP. I simply proved that the "fiscal responsible" and "spend spend spend" argument from the right does not hold up from their side.


It's in almost every single post i read of yours. For whatever reason you think that anyone who disagrees with you is anti-democrat.


All the posts Iv countered so far have being as a result of the propaganda flowing through the net, and you seem to contribute to this david. You dont have to be a republican to do so.


You deliberately made this thread in the first place to make an argument


The OP only shows the facts, I am yet to see anybody counter them or defend the "fiscal responsible" argument republican/conservatives always have.


Did it ever strike you that maybe some of them think both Rep/Dem are full of BS?


Yes, both sides have their BS, I never argued that one side was spotless david. The thing is, Im a liberal and I believe in liberal values and when there is obvious crap being thrown I will speak out david.


I see the type of person you are. You are the "If you aren't with me, then you're against me' type.


Nope, I never once said that david, Iv mainly being on the defensive to the propaganda rightwing crap you and the others here have so readily taken in. Infact if you read my posts Iv always stated that its time to united and think up solutions, no just bicker continously on government this and that, this candidate and that, unfortunatly this is all you and afew others seem to do david.

[edit on 24-1-2009 by southern_Guardian]



posted on Jan, 24 2009 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by southern_Guardian
 





I hear time and time again as to how economically "responsible" conservative candidates are and as to how economically irrisponsible those "darn socialist liberals" are... Its the "spend spend spend" tag that liberals are labelled with every single. Democrats have had their fairshare of government mishandling however the bragging rightwing need to get a reality check for the past 40 years. So the question is, does history back this claim from conservatives? let have a look back over a period of 40 years.

Do you have a news source or a reliable link that states what "you've heard time and again"? It seems rather odd to put up what many consider a straw man, and then knock it down. If YOU think that conservatives are NOT responsible, and liberals ARE, then you would tend to be upset whenever you hear something to the contrary. On the other hand, anything that fits with your point of view just reinforces that view, and is not examined for any flaws.

Regardless, I will respond to your posted figures. To me, what they show is that BOTH conservative and liberal administrations recently have been very loose with taxpayer money.

When you look at the Bailout Bills, both liberals and conservatives, to varying degrees voted for that treasonous act.

People like Ron Paul have been consistently claiming, and correctly, I might add, that both sides are squandering away America's wealth and it's future.

We need to stop playing the "left versus right" game, and understand that the two party system is a sham, a diversion, a way to keep the public engaged in a phony "us versus them" game, while TPTB raid the cookie jar.

We need to eliminate the Federal Reserve.
We need to throw all the crooks out.
We need to return to responsibility for all.
That means that we don't bail out people that bought houses that they really knew they couldn't afford. That means we need to stop giving banks money for loans, when we know that they have no intention of providing loans to those who CAN afford them. We need to put the Wall Street crooks in prison, where they belong, and not give them multi-million dollar parachutes for a months work.
We need to stop putting people like Geithner in the most important job in the cabinet, watching over the US Treasury and the IRS, when he isn't honest enough to pay $48,000 in income taxes and penalties that he owed, without being forced to.

We need to realize that 95% of the people in power are crooked, on the take from lobbyists, and clueless as to the real issues this country faces.

As long as this game of "conservatives versus iberal", democrats versus republicans, Christians versus Jews, Believers versus non-believers, goes on, the REAL powers will continue to take us to the cleaners.

Before you wage war, you need to know WHO the REAL enemy is.



posted on Jan, 24 2009 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfEmeritus
 





We need to stop playing the "left versus right" game, and understand that the two party system is a sham, a diversion, a way to keep the public engaged in a phony "us versus them" game, while TPTB raid the cookie jar


Stated perfectly. This is what i was trying to point out, but as i did it was completely turned around into a conservative/liberal argument.

SG: I could reply once again to your last post point for point but i know what will happen. The same exact response. It leads no where.

I'll let it end here.



posted on Jan, 24 2009 @ 06:51 PM
link   
Thats all fine david, we'll leave it there.

I made this thread the disprove the rightwing "fiscal responsibility" myth, the fiscal argument against the liberal cause which I outright believe in, and the argument which history disproves. I couldnt really care what negativity other members may have for the future of this new administration and all other government or parties, however iv learned to always give a chance to a new administration and reserve my critism to when that administration outright lies or misleads the people in war etc.

I wasnt too happy with the Bush-Cheney win in 2000 but I got over it and gave them a chance, I reserved speculating because I wanted to give them a chance. In 2001 I stood behind them in the war on terror and even though these attacks happened under their watch considering their "defense" argument in the campaign of 2000, I outright supported them. It was in 2003, towards then end of Bushs term that I realized how full of crap they were, but never the less I gave them a chance.

Im not going to label every candidate, especially a new president, as somehow "just another one" or "part of a greater conspiracy"... actions speak louder that words and I will give him a chance till then. I supported Obama because I agree with his policies, Iv supported the man all this time and now that his president, I will, just like iv done in the past, give him his term to do what he intends to do and judge him on that. If Ron Paul was elected you folks would be acting totally different now, and anybody who said "his just another one" I would hear a totally different tone from you folks, you would probably argue that we are yet to see his full term or what now.

If you want to speculate one every politician and every new administration, especially when its not your candidate, thats your deal, maybe the past 8years got you to not trust any form of government, but as said earlier, I will judge on his or her actions in their term, not on what is speculated or by what others have done.

Ron Paul is a conservative apologist and thats what he is. Theres this cult movement on the internet for the man and yet all Iv seen thus is him making excuses on behalf of the free market, instead of actually think up realistic solutions. The man holds true conservative ideals unlike these other fakers, I give him that, but in opinion the man expects to solve the muck up made by the "rightwing free market" policy on this nations economy by making it more extreme and im sorry, I just dont agree with that, and to be frank I dont think this "their all bad" excuse really counters the OP as where I have already stated theyv both had their bad sides, but the argument of fiscal responsibility from the right and ron paulers simply dont hold up.

[edit on 24-1-2009 by southern_Guardian]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 01:29 AM
link   
I don't care what party a person belongs too. I want to know if they can manage their household income. If they can't pay off their credit cards every month, pay their mortgage on time, have some savings for a rainy day, and some investments for the future, then I sure don't want them involved in government.
And I want them to run the government the way most of us run our households. As I've already said, if I can't afford it, I have to do with out it.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join