Trump's war

[Fulltimer]

Well, Don, that thinking is curiously quaint, but an anachronism relative to thinking so dimly remembered by both parties as to be a party joke. As long as some people and/or institutions harbor the fictions that go behind the dollar’s value, and have no better place to invest, we will stumble ahead into the darkness until reality dawns. I hope fantasy prevails a few more years anyway, while we are entertained with passing fads and the day’s political piccadillos like who boffed a sex worker a decade ago or chances of repealing a Bill of Rights Amendment.

The last time we had a surplus in the revenue the decision was whether to use it to pay down the National Debt or return it as a tax cut to the wealthy.

The more conservative position was to pay down the debt but we chose to return it.

That was not so bad the first year and the excess was returned. But then the Fiscal Liberals in the Republican party decided to start borrowing huge amounts to continue "paying back" what had already been paid. It took President Obama his whole term to bring the nation out of the recession that Bush's "Tax Cuts" caused.

Now we are back on that same old slide of Borrow and Spend Republican policy.

Let's get back to a conservative fiscal policy.

[TxMusky]

You are wrong. Maybe the terrorists knocking down the WTC and the bust that was caused by the lending on money to people who had no way of paying their mortgages caused that. Tax cuts did not. AGain I ask, who the hell are you or the Dems to regulate how much tax we pay? The politicians need to quit spending OUR money, yet they vote themselves a raise every time.

Obama added about 9 trillion to the bill himself with his failed policies. His obamaCare fiasco itself added over a trillion dollars down the drain. Those idiots could not even get a simple website up and running with over a billion dollars. Try again, you are full of it.

Oh and by the way, the wealthy are people to.

[Fulltimer]

You are wrong. Maybe the terrorists knocking down the WTC and the bust that was caused by the lending on money to people who had no way of paying their mortgages caused that. Tax cuts did not. AGain I ask, who the hell are you or the Dems to regulate how much tax we pay? The politicians need to quit spending OUR money, yet they vote themselves a raise every time.

Obama added about 9 trillion to the bill himself with his failed policies. His obamaCare fiasco itself added over a trillion dollars down the drain. Those idiots could not even get a simple website up and running with over a billion dollars. Try again, you are full of it.

Oh and by the way, the wealthy are people to.

It is the Congress that determines how much the government spends and how much revenue is raised to pay for those expenditures.

The GOP is the Borrow and Spend Liberal party.
The Democrats are the Tax and Spend Conservative party.

I don't care what Congress wants to spend as long as the revenue to cover those expenditures is raised. That is the Conservative position.

By insisting all programs are paid for through existing revenue the frivolous ones are repealed.

You want a war? Raise taxes.

You want a parade? Raise taxes.

Do not expect the next generation to pay your bills and extravagances.

[wacojoe]

Hog wash. You were/are 100% in favor of the yuugely expensive Obamacare program that dumps gigantic funds into it to support people who cannot/will not pay for their premiums without any call from you to balance that drain on the treasury to my best belief. I await your reference to your outrage over the borrowed funds to make premium gifts to favored people on just that one Uncle Sugar program.

I also will suggest your objections to a multitude of Trump proposals have zip to do with borrowed funds and you would be against The Wall even if Trump funded it himself out of his pocket. I call bull**** on your professed fiscal rectitude.

[Fulltimer]

Hog wash. You were/are 100% in favor of the yuugely expensive Obamacare program that dumps gigantic funds into it to support people who cannot/will not pay for their premiums without any call from you to balance that drain on the treasury to my best belief. I await your reference to your outrage over the borrowed funds to make premium gifts to favored people on just that one Uncle Sugar program.

I also will suggest your objections to a multitude of Trump proposals have zip to do with borrowed funds and you would be against The Wall even if Trump funded it himself out of his pocket. I call bull**** on your professed fiscal rectitude.

How would you know what my position was regarding the Affordable Care Act? Wasn't I banned during all that? I think I was.... Was that passed before the summer of the 2012 presidential election? That was when I was kicked off.

I admit I did and do support regulation on health insurance companies as does the President it seems. The President also seems to support the subsidies. He is continuing them.

The only thing he has repealed is the requirement, under threat of tax penalties, for everyone to carry health insurance which would actually be a revenue source for the federal government. Another tax cut.

The Wall is an extreme waste of money but if Congress produces legislation to build it and appropriates the funds to do so with a tax increase I would not argue with it. Only on the wisdom of doing it.

Borrowing the money to build it is a Liberal Fiscal act.

[wacojoe]

Your proposition that Trump favors Obamacare because he and his allies failed by the one vote of his inter-party arch-rival, John McCain’s vote, to repeal it is one your most insincere and ludicrous offerings...and that is a hard category in which to get to the top.

Incidentally, you were quite active during the Obamacare debate in late 2009, early 2010 during its passage, and although I did not peruse nearly all your posts, I saw enough that you highly favored its passage and saw no sign of complaint of the debt implications of its subsidy of premiums for low-income recipients. You were posting into 2012.

[TxMusky]

He should be thankful that Trump was elected because his cherished union cadillac plan was going to be taxed as income by the Dems who wrote ObamaCare. If he was livid over a little school tax to benefit the kids in school, he would have chit down both legs paying for that golden plan healthcare tax.

Speaking of fiscal, ObamaCare was a huge costly beast that filed miserably. He rants against the insurance companies but Obama made sure they made double, triple and more in some instances, so his point on that is BS. My PPO plan was discontinued, the monthly premium was 488.00 and the next HMO plan they gave me was 600.00. The next time it came up it went to 1,400.00 per month. I quit and have had no insurance for several years now as I refuse to pay more for an "Affordable Healthcare Plan" every month than I do for a house payment.

That was just dumb and screwed the majority of the hard working American people and was a big reason why the Dems have been suffering defeats at all of the following elections.

[Fulltimer]

Your proposition that Trump favors Obamacare because he and his allies failed by the one vote of his inter-party arch-rival, John McCain’s vote, to repeal it is one your most insincere and ludicrous offerings...and that is a hard category in which to get to the top.

Incidentally, you were quite active during the Obamacare debate in late 2009, early 2010 during its passage, and although I did not peruse nearly all your posts, I saw enough that you highly favored its passage and saw no sign of complaint of the debt implications of its subsidy of premiums for low-income recipients. You were posting into 2012.

I am sorry you had to spend so much time and energy searching through all those old posts. There are some federal programs I do and did support but I have never supported deficit spending.

I have been consistent in my views on fiscal restraint from the time I first joined this board to now.
I admit I have bounced around from Libertarian to Republican to Democratic based on who was running for a particular office but I am fickle that way.

In looking at the history here I am surprised at the number of personal attacks that were directed at me over the years and yet I still continued to participate in discussions. I'm not sure if it because there are fewer here today or whether most folks have calmed down but the discussions today seem less about the personality and more about issues.

But I continue to have the same political philosophy today as I did when I posted this 14 years ago

I think there are probably some social programs that are a cost effective method to achieve a worthy and wanted goal.

Those programs should be enacted and paid for by the citizens of America.

The problem today is those and other less cost effective programs are being funded by deficit spending. The citizens who are going to have to pay for them have no say in whether they are done or not.

This is indeed "Taxation without Representation". Those grandchildren of ours that will have to pay the bill have no elected Representative in Congress and they are not allowed to vote in any election.

Deficit spending is welfare no matter what it is used for.

If the citizens wish to support a government program they should be willing to pay taxes to fund it.

Don

http://www.crackerbarrelphilosophers...tive-A-Liberal

[wacojoe]

If you are for the PPACA, then you are for massive deficit spending...and you are.