Quote:
|
Originally Posted by sob
Simple, all right. Simply wrong.
It was pretty easy for Clinton to cut the military after Reagan ended the cold war. Especially when Clinton did NOTHING about the threat of terrorism. You're very fond of ignoring the enormous expenses generated by 9/11.
|
I'm not an idiot. I know there were expenses generated by 9/11. I also know that a great many more dollars were spent elsewhere than on 9/11 cleanup.
BTW, Reagan did not win the cold war. The USSR went bankrupt - Reagan got lucky. If anyone won the cold war it was bin Laden because he drove them to bankruptcy because they were stupid enough to dick around in the middle east. . . oh wait, that's what we're doing now, isn't it.
Quote:
|
Besides being essentially redundant, that's untrue. Have you taken a look at what the national debt did under Clinton? He raided SS just like everyone else.
|
There is a difference between deficit and debt. If you don't know that basic fact, then you need to study more before you are qualified to discuss the economy.
Quote:
|
And if you're giving him credit for all that, why haven't you given him the blame for the stock market crash, which occurred on his watch, and was the REAL reason the deficit returned?
|
because it wasn't the real reason the deficit returned. Bush's out of control spending was the reason the deficit returned.
Quote:
|
Yes. Cutting taxes raises government income. You said it yourself, in post #16 of this thread.
|
Uh, no I didn't. Let's work on reading posts correctly right after we work on economics 101. Cutting taxes reduces government income. Trickledown theory says it will increase it in the long run, but trickledown theory is wrong. It makes assumptions about human nature that are simply untrue.
Quote:
|
But I like the part about cutting spending. You're very fond of saying we should cut military spending. How about cutting money to people who don't work? I've been putting up with that for years but that's okay with people such as you. Can you explain to me the justification for taking money from one citizen to give it to another? How about if we do it with your money, not mine?
|
We are doing it with my money. And once again you're taking the tactic of assuming that because I agree with the democrats on one point, I must agree with them on every point. I don't like the way wellfare works now either.
Quote:
|
The problems you mention have been dogging us for a lot longer than four years, and they weren't fixed when Democrats were in power. The Democrats seem to operate on the principle that if you rob Peter to pay Paul, you can always count on Paul's vote.
|
How is cutting taxes on the rich while expecting the poor and middle class to shoulder the tax burden NOT robbing Peter to pay Paul?
Quote:
|
And they're willing to import voters to do it, even if it means letting criminals and terrorists into the country. How economically sound is that?
|
What the hell are you talking about? I have never heard a democrat advocate inviting terrorists into the country. Would you care to cite a source? Hint: Marvel Comics does not count.