40% of the stimulus was your magic tax cuts.

T-riffic! What does that have to do with the fact that your own party has come out and said the stimulus didn’t work so lets do it again? You keep ignoring that fact.

Only the simple-minded believed we’d pull out of this mess quickly.

Really, was that why you guy’s were all for it in the beginning? Remember Zero saying we have to pass this right now with no debate or we would get sucked into a black hole. Now you want to pretend that “We all knew”! Bah, you can’t even be consistent from one day to the next. Who could expect you to be consistent from one month to the other.

Better get to work.

I’m at work, which right now means waiting for my flight to Maine. Fun times.

they grow up into a world of diminished opportunity and debt

They may have a diminished opportunities and we will have debt but its not from conservatism. You Dims are doing a good job at killing the golden goose. Don’t let facts get in the way of your Utopia Dino!

Too bad you people voted republican all those years and supported the policies that led us to ruin.

You mean like those Republicans that voted in SS and Medicare that make up the 62% of government spending (mandatory) that are leading us to ruin? Last time I checked that was a democrat boondoggle.

Funny Dino seems upset about Republican deficits but ignores the fact that
the Democrats are far worse.

Dino- “When we compared numbers, despite his making 4 times what i did, he paid a smaller percentage than i did.” Yah, and he pays smaller percentage of his income for a loaf of bread, a car, gasoline, ect. So what? What`s your point? From the taxfoundation.org today- For the first time, the top 1% of wage earners pay more income tax than THE BOTTOM 95%. 451 billion vs. 439 billion. Read it and weep. You lose.

Now that unemployment has topped 10 percent, some liberal-leaning economists see confirmation of their warnings that the $787 billion stimulus package President Obama signed into law last February was way too small. The economy needs a second big infusion, they say.

Dino, the very first paragraph of the article you linked to disagrees with you. The stimulus worked so well that we need a second big stimulus! Kinda agrees with what I said in the other thread. Democrats don’t really believe that the stimulus did anything so let’s do it again!

Congress finds the following:

(1) Our Nation continues to be hamstrung by a recession that led to the current jobless recovery and record deficits.

(2) The unemployment rate is now 10.2 percent and most economists expect it to climb higher.

(3) The Federal deficit has reached $1,400,000,000,000 for 2009.

(4) The jobless recovery suggests that the Federal Government must continue to prime the economy, but the record deficit is a real obstacle.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bi...

Spend a lotta money get nothing! Do it again!

The CBO predicted the economy would rise by now if we did nothing! So we’ve paid all this money to get nothing. Now you want us to pay even more!

Obfuscation.

Bottom line: There is little room to cut spending on non-defense items. Your ideas fall flat yet again.

As well they should since they control so much of the wealth.

Chances are good your kids end up chained to tables working for the top 1%.

Think I closed it.

Imagine, Dino, that the predictions of the Keynesians are wrong 90% of the time, which is why every jobs report is an “unexpected” change from the trend, and that maybe, just maybe, spending half a million bucks apiece to create jobs paying $60k on the average isn’t exactly a good idea.

Put differently, Keynes’ “Paradox of Thrift” runs aground on Bastiat’s “That which is not seen,” as any dollar I earn goes into spending, saving, taxes, or giving, no matter what, and does its work as revenue, borrowing, taxes, or giving in the same way. So to take a dollar out of my hands and put it into the grubby paws of a benevolent bureaucrat is simply to divert that dollar from its best use–and reduce the benefits of human action.

And Comrade Zero’s plan? Sorry, but if you want to stimulate the economy, you return (again, Bastiat, available free from the Mises Institute) those dollars to the private sector and reduce the government load on the economy. It worked for Kennedy, it worked for Reagan, it worked for Clinton, it worked for Bush, and it could even work for Dear Leader. Reducing government spending and debt is almost always a good idea.

DINO isn’t even smart enough to know what he doesn’t know. But yanking his chain every now and then is fun. He thinks his childish jibing and arguments mean something and maybe they do to him, but for the most part his rants are like farting in the wind, lots of noise, maybe a whiff of something foul, but it’s gone real fast.

The stimulus is widely accepted to have worked.

Imagine for a moment if Obama had done nothing and allowed the free fall to continue. To allow the economy, the GDP already having shrunk by 6%, to continue dropping. Even the idiot fratboy said government needed to spend like crazy to stop the bleeding. Want me to post that speech from Sept 2008 again?

That’s precisely what you wanted to happen. That the government collapse and be rendered totally ineffective so your wet dream of a free market Utopia would come to fruition. Makes me wonder about your sanity or how much you care about your families, most of whom would have suffered greatly at the hands of the capitalist predators a government collapse would unleash.

Too bad you people weren’t worried about deficit and debt when you ran the country.

Woulda, coulda, shoulda. None of which reflect reality. Just pure speculation.

Too bad you people voted republican all those years and supported the policies that led us to ruin. Now all you can do is predict what we should do and what might happen.

Not that anybody believes or cares what the losers think after the destruction they visited upon the country.

That’s like saying “Honey, 75% of what I make goes to food and shelter! Can’t we move into the streets and feed cat food to the kids?”

That money provides us with a great return on our money in quality of life and well, social security. Compare that to the trillions spent on defense that allowed a few guys with boxcutters to attack us.

Then again, I wouldn’t expect a conservative to understand the idea of quality of life beyond the material and monetary. People operating from the stem of the brain have little capacity to understand the higher needs of their fellow humans.

Well, a typical non-answer. What else is new? I didn’t ask about your prior conversations or anything more complex than this:

What percentage of your income do you think is your “fair” share to support your utopian collective society?

Give us a number Dino. I’m sure you won’t since you are undoubtedly one of the freeloaders that through class envy think that everyone else should pay but not you.

And again the topic of the thread was wasteful pseudo-stimulus spending of money that we don’t have and that will only do more of the same – nothing but buy votes for Democrats.

Typical liberal non-logic. What we did didn’t work because we just didn’t get to do enough of it. WSJ had it right, the best thing congress can do for the economy is stop doing things and go home for a year.

Your kids are screwed in any case. That’s what you get for voting republican.

Ah yes, hindsight. Not that you didn’t have 30 years of dominance to make your ideas work.

Be glad the government is helping support your mother. And by government I mean the rest of us.

Not that my mother has anything to do with this thread (as usual you throw that up to cover your inadequacy as an intelligent debater), but you more than likely support no one other than yourself if that. You are on the low-end of the wage earner curve so I’m guessing you’re one of the freeloaders who gets rebate and stimulus checks when you pay nothing in taxes to begin with. And you think that we that do pay the taxes in this country “owe” you something – wrong again, as always. So prove me wrong, put up your numbers or shut-up. I have asked you before and I am asking you again, how much as a percentage of your pitiful earnings are you willing to contribute. Either answer it or STFU.

Well, Dino, if half of 1 trillion is actually defense, that corresponds pretty well to what part of the budget actually is Constitutionally authorized.

And speaking of Article 1 of the Constitution, exactly what part of it gives Dear Leader the right to appropriate money of his own volition? TARP was written to bail out the banks, so arguably it is NOT intended by Congress to be used by Dear Leader as his own personal Daleyesque slush fund.

If he goes through with it, it’s impeachment time. The Constitution means something, dangit.

Dino – Still too complex a question for you I see.

I doubt that you support yourself let alone anyone else you freeloader. You’re just a typical liberal leech that wants everyone else to pay so you can have what you don’t have the brains, skills and balls to earn for yourself.

And FWIW – when YOUR tax bills go into multiple 6 figures you can lecture me about how I need to be grateful for others support. I’ve paid more money into the corrupt system in the last 6 months than you have in your entire life, and I know that I’ll never see a dime of it back, even though that’s the lie that the government tells people. Which means that if anyone is supporting my mom (and several others) it’s me.

Dino, are you seriously under the idea that we’re not going to need to rein in entitlement spending, for which responsible actuaries tell us the unfunded liabilities exceed the national wealth by a significant margin?

Sorry, but the liberal experiment has been tried, and the result is bankruptcy. Those who are doing their best to die in their forties may not give a ****, but those of us who have kids are starting to wake up to the damage that Roosevelt and Johnson did, and act accordingly.

Yes, you can start cutting entitlements. To not do so is to steal from today’s children, and those to be born. When you see a train wreck coming (called the “Great Society” and “New Deal”), you’re allowed to hit the brakes and cut the steam.

No room to cut spending? Baloney. 80% of federal spending is not specifically authorized by Article 1. That’s about three trillion dollars we can cut. Let’s start with the 22 members of the First Lady’s Staff, go on to the NEA, any money going to ACORN or Planned Parenthood, and keep going….

And reducing the tax load from 25% (including borrowing) to around 5% wouldn’t stimulate the economy? Come on; imagine a 20% raise and tell me that your spending/investing patterns wouldn’t change.