...if you’re electing Democrats to control government spending....
By Rob on May 16, 2008 at 10:38 am
Surely you and P.J. O’Rourke, do not suggest that the Republicans did, and or can do any better, do you?
If yes, than that is a cruel joke played on the backs of the citizen taxpayers.
ellinas - 11:05am on 05/16/2008
I’d marry Angelina Jolie for other reasons although my wife would hate it.
Maybe I could do that Polygamy thingy.
Gene - 11:05am on 05/16/2008
Clinton Surplus to Bush Deficits.
Bush expansion of gov’t and expansion of national debt.
Angelina Jolie---Libby Dole
WOOF - 11:05am on 05/16/2008
Woof,
How do you equate private contractors with gov’t bureaucracy?
An increase in spending does not a bureaucracy make.
The size of government is not measured by the money it confiscates or spends but by the size of the bureaucracy and the reach of its authority. It may be that more money is necessary to increase the size of gov’t, but is not true that more bureaucracy is necessary for gov’t to spend more money.
HG - 12:05pm on 05/16/2008
Hey it is kind of like trusting a Republicans to do the right thing, not the illegal thing!
billybob68 - 12:05pm on 05/16/2008
HG, contractors are “temporary” government employees.
If they (government) have to hire more people, including contractors to do the peoples buisiness, it is a roundabout (slick) way of increasing the size of the government. This way you are able to say that the size of the bureaucracy has not increased, yet the truth is very different.
ellinas - 01:05pm on 05/16/2008
Surely you and P.J. O’Rourke, do not suggest that the Republicans did, and or can do any better, do you?
If yes, than that is a cruel joke played on the backs of the citizen taxpayers.
The entire decrease in growth during the Clinton years was due to the Republican congress. Then Bush took power and cut taxes in addition. HOORAY!
Even in their most spendfree days, the Republicans cannot match up to teh Democrats.
HG, contractors are “temporary” government employees.
If they (government) have to hire more people, including contractors to do the peoples buisiness, it is a roundabout (slick) way of increasing the size of the government.
One example of this is that MODOT has started hiring private construction companies to do road repairs. If anything this limits the scope of government, as it has private groups do what the government would normally do. and while the price tag of MODOT has went up, the per project tag and timeline has gone down. This no more increases beaurocracy than if you call a plumber to fix your sink.
Kenny - 02:05pm on 05/16/2008
The entire decrease in growth during the Clinton years was due to the Republican congress.
Kenny,
Really? And here I thought AlGore did that in his spare time in between discovering Love Canal, fighting forest fires in West Texas, and raising illegal campaign contributions from poverty-stricken Buddhist monks. My bad!
Bat One - 02:05pm on 05/16/2008
Kenny. He cut taxes,and increased borrowing. How ist it beneficial to saddle future generations with such a debt? Are you going to spend like there is no tommorow, and leave the bills to your children?
Because that is what is happening with our government right now.
ellinas - 02:05pm on 05/16/2008
Are you going to spend like there is no tommorow, and leave the bills to your children?
Because that is what is happening with our government right now.
That’d seem more convincing if the other side didn’t want to do it more. It would seem even a LITTLE convincing if the bills that Bush signed that call for such massive spending weren’t written by liberals (NCLB, Medicare Prescription Drug Law, et al). And it wouldn’t sound like complete jackassery if tax receipts hadn’t shot through the roof...so lower taxation is clearly not the problem, and has indeed been part of the solution.
The defecit has been shrinking like crazy, btw, DESPITE increased spending.
Or the shorter version: You’re dead wrong on everything.
...if you’re electing Democrats to control government spending....
By Rob on May 16, 2008 at 10:38 am
Surely you and P.J. O’Rourke, do not suggest that the Republicans did, and or can do any better, do you?
If yes, than that is a cruel joke played on the backs of the citizen taxpayers.
I’d marry Angelina Jolie for other reasons although my wife would hate it.
Maybe I could do that Polygamy thingy.
Clinton Surplus to Bush Deficits.
Bush expansion of gov’t and expansion of national debt.
Angelina Jolie---Libby Dole
Woof,
How do you equate private contractors with gov’t bureaucracy?
An increase in spending does not a bureaucracy make.
The size of government is not measured by the money it confiscates or spends but by the size of the bureaucracy and the reach of its authority. It may be that more money is necessary to increase the size of gov’t, but is not true that more bureaucracy is necessary for gov’t to spend more money.
Hey it is kind of like trusting a Republicans to do the right thing, not the illegal thing!
HG, contractors are “temporary” government employees.
If they (government) have to hire more people, including contractors to do the peoples buisiness, it is a roundabout (slick) way of increasing the size of the government. This way you are able to say that the size of the bureaucracy has not increased, yet the truth is very different.
The entire decrease in growth during the Clinton years was due to the Republican congress. Then Bush took power and cut taxes in addition. HOORAY!
Even in their most spendfree days, the Republicans cannot match up to teh Democrats.
One example of this is that MODOT has started hiring private construction companies to do road repairs. If anything this limits the scope of government, as it has private groups do what the government would normally do. and while the price tag of MODOT has went up, the per project tag and timeline has gone down. This no more increases beaurocracy than if you call a plumber to fix your sink.
Kenny,
Really? And here I thought AlGore did that in his spare time in between discovering Love Canal, fighting forest fires in West Texas, and raising illegal campaign contributions from poverty-stricken Buddhist monks. My bad!
Kenny. He cut taxes,and increased borrowing. How ist it beneficial to saddle future generations with such a debt? Are you going to spend like there is no tommorow, and leave the bills to your children?
Because that is what is happening with our government right now.
That’d seem more convincing if the other side didn’t want to do it more. It would seem even a LITTLE convincing if the bills that Bush signed that call for such massive spending weren’t written by liberals (NCLB, Medicare Prescription Drug Law, et al). And it wouldn’t sound like complete jackassery if tax receipts hadn’t shot through the roof...so lower taxation is clearly not the problem, and has indeed been part of the solution.
The defecit has been shrinking like crazy, btw, DESPITE increased spending.
Or the shorter version: You’re dead wrong on everything.