Why Do Liberals Only Admit That Government Spending Hurts The Economy When It’s Military Spending?

• August 14, 2008

Barack Obama is hitting McCain on Iraq war spending hurting America’s economy.
Here’s the ad:

“Economics … by John McCain,” says the announcer in the 30-second spot. “Support George Bush 95 percent of the time. Keep spending ten billion dollars a month for the war in Iraq while the Iraqis sell oil for record prices — giving Iraq a $79 billion oil surplus, and hurting our economy.
“Barack Obama’s plan: End the war responsibly. Better schools. No more tax breaks for oil companies. Barack Obama … the Middle Class first.”

The problem: Obama is trying to spin the success of the Bush administration’s policies in Iraq, which McCain has supported, by suggesting that Iraq war spending has been bad for our economy.
The truth? Iraq war spending is a fraction of our nation’s government spending. A tiny fraction at that.
But it is interesting that Obama is suggesting that government spending on military is bad for our economy. If that’s true, aren’t other types government spending bad for the economy as well? We’re spending $27,289 tax dollars per year on each and every senior citizen in America. Where’s Obama’s outrage over that?
If Obama were honest he’d admit that all government spending is a burden on the taxpayers which has a negative impact on the economy, and he’d also admit that it’s rather silly to point to Iraq war spending which is a tiny fraction of overall government spending (remember that America spends more on social entitlements alone than the entire world spent on all of its military and wars) while actually making campaign promises to increase other types of government spending.
It’s too bad Obama’s not honest.

Tags: Asshats, Domestic Issues, Politics, The Loony Left

http://Array James

Remember the following:

It was Democrats that started the borrowing from SS.
It was Democrats that started Taxing SS.
It was Democrats that denied investing some of your SS money.

I finally realized what the Wizard in the Wizard of Oz really symbolized. The evil facade is supposed to be Republicans and the one pulling all the strings is the Democrats.
studakota

When the issue of reparations comes up, as it surely will
during the first months of the presidency of “The One” I wish to make myself clear on the subject. First off, no one in my family even lived in the US before, or during, the times of slavery. The Southern plantation owners, and their descendents, are who should be, properly, presented with the bills. Perhaps something as simple as an additional addendum of $10.00 per Nascar ticket for three years would suffice.But of course Jesse and Al would want twenty years or, more likely, infinity. You didn’t think those 94% vote edges would come at no cost did you?
Bat One

In less than a decade, the annual Social Security outflow will exceed the amount taken in each year in taxes. At that point all those IUOs in the so-called “Trust Fund” will start to be due and payable to enable the government to make up the difference.

So, not only will the current “surplus” which is diverted to the General Fund and replaced with those IOUs no longer be available for Congress to spend, but the ever widening deficit between what is mandated in benefits and what is collected in Social Security withholdings will have to be made up from General Fund revenues to pay off the IOUs and fund the benefits.

Barack Obama’s “plan” to fix Social Security, known euphemistically as “the Donut” does no such thing at all, and may actually compound the problem of this huge, unfunded liability.

The federal government’s unfunded liabilities, Social Security, Medi-care and those of the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation, are the real threat to our economy and the fiscal stability of our country, not this lefty nonsense about military spending.

If Barack Obama and the Democrats actually understood any of this, or genuinely cared about the country’s financial health, he’d demand that taxes be lowered, not raised, that federal regulation of business and finance be diminished not increased, that the capital gains tax be indexed for inflation, and that sustained, robust, long-term economic growth should be the nation’s primary domestic objective. We cannot tax our way into prosperity and fiscal solvency.
http://magyartruth.blogspot.com/ Chief RZ

Whoever said that, I would like to debate them. Personally, I have put into SS more than I will get back. That is not “spending on a senior citizen” These people have decided to give away money to non-producers and illegal aliens. The legislature could easily rectify that problem.
http://magyartruth.blogspot.com/ Chief RZ

Bat One. Good summary. Or they would admit that they opened the “lock box” in 1964 and should also stop giving away SS money to those who only work ten years as well as the “crazy money” from SS II. For those who have never heard about this, children who are coached by their ?parents? to act crazy in school in order to qualify as a disability not only disrupt school, but further drain our hard earned SS money.
studakota

Wait a minute, I’m a senior citizen and no one is spending $27,289 on me per year. More like $8400, before deductions for insurance and such.I do agree that,were I wealthy I’d return that to the Gov. coffers unlike the very rich people who cash those checks, with glee, every month. Also there are those narcisstic elderly women who visit Drs. every week simply because they wish to talk to someone. Fear not though; one of these years Washington will realize the virtues of the Fair Tax”/ flat tax and everything will be “Hunky-Dorry”, much like some Eastern European countries are already doing.
http://www.valleydeals.com/cgi-bin/board2/YaBB.pl Kevin

We’re spending $27,289 tax dollars per year on each and every senior citizen in America.

That is a true wealth transfer, unlike buying oil from other countries.
Bat One

Neiman,

Your point about Democrat fear-mongering is well taken. Back in the 1990s Democrats screamed that the GOP was going to starve school children and let old people die, all because responsible GOP legislators wanted to reduce federal discretionary spending increases from 11 percent to 3 percent. And those were Clinton Democrats… the “moderates”!!!

There’s no telling what the response will be from the Obama radicals if we try to instill some semblance of fiscal sanity in Washington… starting with taxes and unfunded federal liabilities.
http://magyartruth.blogspot.com/ Chief RZ

Bat One. That would be call misrepresenting The Truth. A more understandable word would be: a lie.
Neiman

Bat: Because so many senior citizens are afraid they won’t have money to live on, even though it can be argued that SS was never a retirement plan and they should have planned better for their golden years; and even though it can be argued they need to better understand economics and the points you have made, fear has been driving many of them into the Democrat camp, because they are hoping that the lies of the Democrats are not lies and they will be able to stay off the streets until they die.

Fear is a great Democrat Weapon, racism, class warfare, the Right robbing senior citizens to help their rich friends and etcetera. People that are afraid vote their emotions, not on the facts.

So, the only hope I see is if the Republicans, through their candidates and community programs reach out in an educational campaign; otherwise, seniors will vote their fears and the Left has made it clear that Republicans want to take away their SS.

SayAnythingBlog.com

Why Do Liberals Only Admit That Government Spending Hurts The Economy When It’s Military Spending?

Create a SAB Readerblog

Recent Comments