Conservative/Republican math!

Jarod said:
THat or, its just you!
Click to expand...

the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. We've had a government that has been using deficit spending as a means to jump start or grow an economy since Reagan and look where we're at. So, I hardly believe it's me if I can see that the practice of deficit spending over the last 30 years has only grown the national debt/deficit.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. We've had a government that has been using deficit spending as a means to jump start or grow an economy since Reagan and look where we're at. So, I hardly believe it's me if I can see that the practice of deficit spending over the last 30 years has only grown the national debt/deficit.
Click to expand...

1) Using deficate spending worked for most of the 80's, 90's and 00's.

2) The stimimlous package is different than simply "using defiate spending".
 
Jarod said:
Almost all economist agree, that is how you fix what Bush did! The debt is necessary because of and should be charged to BUSH, not Obama!
Click to expand...

That is fucking retarded.

Tell us genius... which Bush policies led to the financial sector's problems?

Look up Glass Steagall moron... Look to see which President repealed it.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. We've had a government that has been using deficit spending as a means to jump start or grow an economy since Reagan and look where we're at. So, I hardly believe it's me if I can see that the practice of deficit spending over the last 30 years has only grown the national debt/deficit.
Click to expand...

slight correction... deficit spending began under Kennedy.

Ike was the last President that did actually lowered our nations debt in a fiscal year.
 
Superfreak said:
That is fucking retarded.

Tell us genius... which Bush policies led to the financial sector's problems?

Look up Glass Steagall moron... Look to see which President repealed it.
Click to expand...

Cutting taxes in a time of war was the largest factor that led to the recession we are currently recovering from.
 
Jarod said:
1) Using deficate spending worked for most of the 80's, 90's and 00's.

2) The stimimlous package is different than simply "using defiate spending".
Click to expand...

Tell us how the stimulus package(s) is(are) somehow different than deficit spending.

Also... how much of a moron do you have to be to not only spell a word incorrectly, but to spell it incorrectly TWICE in two completely different ways?

Try sounding out the words as you type them... or switch to firefox (which will underline misspelled words for you so that you might actually LEARN rather than continually showing the world what a fucking retard you are.
 
Jarod said:
Cutting taxes in a time of war was the largest factor that led to the recession we are currently recovering from.
Click to expand...

You are 100% incorrect. That had NOTHING to do with the financial sector meltdown and the financial sector meltdown is without question the largest factor in the economic downturn we saw.
 
Jarod said:
We had a surplus in President Clinton's last year.
Click to expand...

No, we did not.

The national debt has risen every year since 1960.

Clinton had BUDGET surpluses. He did not have an ACTUAL surplus. They SPENT the BUDGET surpluses (and then some).

That said, Clinton did come the closest to being neutral in 2000 when the national debt increased a minuscule $19B.
 
Superfreak said:
Tell us how the stimulus package(s) is(are) somehow different than deficit spending.

Also... how much of a moron do you have to be to not only spell a word incorrectly, but to spell it incorrectly TWICE in two completely different ways?

Try sounding out the words as you type them... or switch to firefox (which will underline misspelled words for you so that you might actually LEARN rather than continually showing the world what a fucking retard you are.
Click to expand...

The difference is mostly in size and timing, and being specifically targeted at key industries as opposed to simply broad based spending across the board. It would take an economic treatise to explaine in depth the difference.
 
Jarod said:
The difference is mostly in size and timing, and being specifically targeted at key industries as opposed to simply broad based spending across the board. It would take an economic treatise to explaine in depth the difference.
Click to expand...

Once again you demonstrate your complete lack of knowledge with regards to economics. Size and timing have NOTHING to do with the FACT that the stimulus bill added to the deficit. It is still DEFICIT SPENDING... no matter how it is targeted or how large it was.
 
Superfreak said:
Once again you demonstrate your complete lack of knowledge with regards to economics. Size and timing have NOTHING to do with the FACT that the stimulus bill added to the deficit. It is still DEFICIT SPENDING... no matter how it is targeted or how large it was.
Click to expand...

I agree it is still deficit spending, never said it was not.

I could act like you and say, "Once again you demonstrate your complete lack of knoledge with regards to logic." But Im not a stupid ass who does not realize how badly such an attitude reflects someone....

I said it was deficate spending, yet it was different than the prior deficate spending... which it is.
 
Jarod said:
I agree it is still deficit spending, never said it was not.

I could act like you and say, "Once again you demonstrate your complete lack of knoledge with regards to logic." But Im not a stupid ass who does not realize how badly such an attitude reflects someone....

I said it was deficate spending, yet it was different than the prior deficate spending... which it is.
Click to expand...

this is what you stated:

"The stimimlous package is different than simply "using defiate spending".
Click to expand...

You stated it was different than simply using 'defiate spending'. I asked you HOW it was different and you have completely failed to provide any explanation.

Side note... the word is DEFICIT. Only a completely brain dead moron would see the word typed correctly dozens of times and then continue to spell it a myriad of ways without getting the correct spelling at least once.
 
Superfreak said:
this is what you stated:



You stated it was different than simply using 'defiate spending'. I asked you HOW it was different and you have completely failed to provide any explanation.

Side note... the word is DEFICIT. Only a completely brain dead moron would see the word typed correctly dozens of times and then continue to spell it a myriad of ways without getting the correct spelling at least once.
Click to expand...

Again my point is that it is administered differently , you let your inner anger cloud your judgement... Let the hate and anger go....
 
Jarod said:
Again my point is that it is administered differently , you let your inner anger cloud your judgement... Let the hate and anger go....
Click to expand...

you truly are a fucking idiot... you obviously have no clue about economics and thus are now relegated to trying to assign 'hate and anger' to words typed on a message board.

bottom line, you were wrong to state what you did. I called you out on it and you go into these moronic games of assigning feelings.
 
Superfreak said:
you truly are a fucking idiot... you obviously have no clue about economics and thus are now relegated to trying to assign 'hate and anger' to words typed on a message board.

bottom line, you were wrong to state what you did. I called you out on it and you go into these moronic games of assigning feelings.
Click to expand...

where is Topspin with his 'turbo-libs don't understand economics' comment when you need him?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top