Author Topic: the "supposed" fiscal cliff  (Read 3693 times)

Offline Solar

  • '
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 34252
  • Gender: Male
Re: I post facts.
« Reply #60 on: January 31, 2013, 06:45:41 AM »
and thats just it solar, I never said that.  Please cut and paste where I said President Obama is balancing the budget.  Dont just repeat your claim. You got all bent out of shape over something you imagined or misinterpreted.   You'd be suprised how much that happens to me.  People cant argue what I post.
I agree with President Obama's policy of reducing the deficit prudently while growing the economy/

 And I’ve already answered your second question.  To “live within out means”,  in 2009, that would have required a 1.2 spending cut.  That is the  budget deficit President Obama inherited. And I answered it by saying if 300 billion in tax increases and 300 billion spending cuts is a fiscal cliff, what's a 1.2 trillion dollar spending cut.  (I implied it was bad. kram understood the point)
[/quote]

I have to assume your post previous to this was just BS as well since this one contradicts your claim re: my earlier question.
You claimed he isn't printing money, yet we have Qe3, so I have to assume you are lying and or, stupid, which is it?
I asked you if you thought spending more than you have is a good idea, you claim he isn't, yet here we are with an open ended Qe3.
So either you have no idea what in the Hell you're talking about and got in over your head, or are genuinely stupid?
I'm going with both.
Koolaid is for kids, TEA is for adults

Offline Vern

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Banned!
  • Posts: 105
Re: I post facts.
« Reply #61 on: January 31, 2013, 07:28:17 AM »
I agree with President Obama's policy of reducing the deficit prudently while growing the economy/

 I have to assume your post previous to this was just BS as well since this one contradicts your claim re: my earlier question.
You claimed he isn't printing money, yet we have Qe3, so I have to assume you are lying and or, stupid, which is it?
I asked you if you thought spending more than you have is a good idea, you claim he isn't, yet here we are with an open ended Qe3.
So either you have no idea what in the Hell you're talking about and got in over your head, or are genuinely stupid?
I'm going with both.

and thats exactly why I try to ignore you solar, you continue to respond to imaginary posts and not what I posted. And I objected to your non straightforward question. And please notice that you didnt cut and paste anything that backs up you are posting.

Please go back and read what I posted slowly and then see that you are 'responding' to things I did not post.

Offline Solar

  • '
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 34252
  • Gender: Male
Re: I post facts.
« Reply #62 on: January 31, 2013, 08:22:43 AM »
and thats exactly why I try to ignore you solar, you continue to respond to imaginary posts and not what I posted. And I objected to your non straightforward question. And please notice that you didnt cut and paste anything that backs up you are posting.

Please go back and read what I posted slowly and then see that you are 'responding' to things I did not post.
Those are your words son, I merely quoted what you said.

So you claim it was not a straight forward question?
Now that you've been educated on the subject of Qe3 and unending spending, I will ask again the question you didn't like and refused to answer , and I might add at your own peril, because no one likes a coward, especially an obfuscating coward.

Do you think Husein is using good policy to print money, borrow money endlessly all the while running up the tab?
Or would it be better to cut back on spending and live within your means all the while paying back your creditors?

And don't give me that 2009 BS, I'm talking about today, where he doesn't want a ceiling cap on borrowing.
So answer the damn question!
Koolaid is for kids, TEA is for adults

Offline Vern

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Banned!
  • Posts: 105
"er uh vern, he wants you to give him the answer he wants to hear"
« Reply #63 on: January 31, 2013, 09:59:23 AM »
….
So answer the damn question!

Two things, this is where I answered your non straightforward question .

Its not a straightforward question because President Obama is not borrowing money “endlessly”.  He’s reduced the deficit every year (as function of GDP) . And like all pubs you conveniently blame President Obama for FY 2009. Again its not straightforward but yes, I agree with President Obama's policy of reducing the deficit prudently while growing the economy

 And I’ve already answered your second question.  To “live within out means”,  in 2009, that would have required a 1.2 spending cut.  That is the  budget deficit President Obama inherited. And I answered it by saying if 300 billion in tax increases and 300 billion spending cuts is a fiscal cliff, what's a 1.2 trillion dollar spending cut.  (I implied it was bad. kram understood the point)


First , I’ve claimed all along it was not a straightforward question. And you can clearly see its based on the false narrative that spending is out of control and its only a spending problem.  And I’m still waiting for you to quote where I said President Obama was balancing the budget.  I know why you haven’t cut and pasted it, do you?

Now lets look at your “live within your means” rant.  The 2012 budget deficit was 1.1 trillion.  If cutting 300 billion in spending and raising 300 billion in taxes would cause a recession, what would a 1.1 trillion dollar budget cut do?  (the answer is recession)

So I agree with President Obama’s successful policy of reducing the deficit every year while avoiding a recession (not all countries have managed that).   

Offline Solar

  • '
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 34252
  • Gender: Male
Re: "er uh vern, he wants you to give him the answer he wants to hear"
« Reply #64 on: January 31, 2013, 10:36:42 AM »
Two things, this is where I answered your non straightforward question .


First , I’ve claimed all along it was not a straightforward question. And you can clearly see its based on the false narrative that spending is out of control and its only a spending problem.  And I’m still waiting for you to quote where I said President Obama was balancing the budget.  I know why you haven’t cut and pasted it, do you?

Now lets look at your “live within your means” rant.  The 2012 budget deficit was 1.1 trillion.  If cutting 300 billion in spending and raising 300 billion in taxes would cause a recession, what would a 1.1 trillion dollar budget cut do?  (the answer is recession)

So I agree with President Obama’s successful policy of reducing the deficit every year while avoiding a recession (not all countries have managed that).
Your willing ignorance is more than obvious, your claim my question is not straight forward is a blatant lie, one you have to state in avoidance of answering.
I posted your words, they are more than clear that you believe he is doing a good job by claiming my question is a false narrative.
Even a child could deduce from your posts that you believe he balanced the budget, if you didn't think he did, you'd say so, but that would be an admittance that my narrative is correct.

Son, you are out of your league here, continuing to dance as you do only gives us more fodder to fire back at your every response.

Now if you don't think Husein balanced the budget through Qe3, then you agree his spending is out of control, and that the best avenue would be to Live Within Our Means.
Thanks for playing.
Koolaid is for kids, TEA is for adults

Offline Vern

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Banned!
  • Posts: 105
Re: the "supposed" fiscal cliff
« Reply #65 on: January 31, 2013, 12:47:18 PM »
Solar

You’ve not understood one thing I’ve posted in this (or any) thread.  You started ranting at me with the false assertion that I said Obama balanced the budget.   I called you out on that statement and I clearly said don’t repeat it, cut and paste it.  And guess what you did. You repeated it.  Do you even understand why you were unable to cut and paste it?

 Ask your toadies here if I said President Obama has balanced the budget. 


And sorry, I’ve haven’t really learned anything from your Qe3 rant.  You should read my posts where I make a clear statement and back it up.  Check out the thread where I proved that the major cause of the current deficits is revenue destruction from the Great Bush Recession.


Now if you don't think Husein balanced the budget through Qe3, then you agree his spending is out of control, and that the best avenue would be to Live Within Our Means.
Thanks for playing.

do you consider that a straightforward question. I dont.  You have the false equivalency that “not balanced” equals “out of control”.   And how you pretend not to know that the biggest cause of the deficit is revenue destruction from the Great Bush REcession.

Offline Solar

  • '
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 34252
  • Gender: Male
Re: the "supposed" fiscal cliff
« Reply #66 on: January 31, 2013, 04:14:18 PM »
Solar

You’ve not understood one thing I’ve posted in this (or any) thread.  You started ranting at me with the false assertion that I said Obama balanced the budget.   I called you out on that statement and I clearly said don’t repeat it, cut and paste it.  And guess what you did. You repeated it.  Do you even understand why you were unable to cut and paste it?

 Ask your toadies here if I said President Obama has balanced the budget. 


And sorry, I’ve haven’t really learned anything from your Qe3 rant.  You should read my posts where I make a clear statement and back it up.  Check out the thread where I proved that the major cause of the current deficits is revenue destruction from the Great Bush Recession.

do you consider that a straightforward question. I dont.  You have the false equivalency that “not balanced” equals “out of control”.   And how you pretend not to know that the biggest cause of the deficit is revenue destruction from the Great Bush REcession.
Folks, I give you a perfect example as to why we are in this mess, complete ignorance on behalf of Husein's constituency!

I see no reason to continue discussing this issue with this complete and utter fool, his hatred of Bush and his Pavlov inspired devotion to Husein borders on insanity.

Koolaid is for kids, TEA is for adults

Offline Vern

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Banned!
  • Posts: 105
no vern, only solar can ask questions
« Reply #67 on: January 31, 2013, 05:10:15 PM »
so solar, what you are saying is that you wont be cutting and pasting the post where I said Obama is balancing the budget anytime soon.  You remember, you repeatedly accused me of posting it. 



Offline taxed

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14213
  • Gender: Male
  • At some point, the money is due.
Re: no vern, only solar can ask questions
« Reply #68 on: January 31, 2013, 11:12:03 PM »
so solar, what you are saying is that you wont be cutting and pasting the post where I said Obama is balancing the budget anytime soon.  You remember, you repeatedly accused me of posting it.

Vern, please take your medication before posting.  You have rambled incoherently, and are blaming Bush for inheriting Clinton's housing and tech mess.  You don't have a successful 401k, and you have no clue.  You didn't even know the Dems had the House during Carter, yet would post about Reagan.
"Many people want the government to protect the consumer. A much more urgent problem is to protect the consumer from the government."  -Milton Friedman

Offline Vern

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Banned!
  • Posts: 105
Re: no vern, only solar can ask questions
« Reply #69 on: February 01, 2013, 03:28:59 AM »
.  You didn't even know the Dems had the House during Carter, yet would post about Reagan.

I didnt care about the House durng carter because the CRA had nothing to do with the Bush Mortgage Bubble. You know, the one where bush told you it started in late 2004 because banks lowered their lending standards and Bush's regulators did nothing.  I posted the link. how could you forget?


Son, you are out of your league here, continuing to dance as you do only gives us more fodder to fire back at your every response.

yes, you guys do fire back at my every response.  and it seems to be about me instead of the facts I post.  Well sometimes its about things you imagine I post.   All cons do it because they cant argue the facts.  And that probably upsets you guys the most. I back up what I say.

Offline kramarat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Banned!
  • Posts: 5201
  • Gender: Male
Re: the "supposed" fiscal cliff
« Reply #70 on: February 01, 2013, 03:42:29 AM »
Quote
I didnt care about the House durng carter because the CRA had nothing to do with the Bush Mortgage Bubble. You know, the one where bush told you it started in late 2004 because banks lowered their lending standards and Bush's regulators did nothing.  I posted the link. how could you forget?

Why do you keep repeating that?

There are multiple links in your housing bubble thread that clearly show that lending standards were lowered under Clinton.

In fact, prior to your thread, I would have been inclined to agree with you. I wasn't aware of the degree to which Clinton policies contributed to the bust.

Thanks. :wink:

Offline supsalemgr

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3858
  • Gender: Male
Re: the "supposed" fiscal cliff
« Reply #71 on: February 01, 2013, 05:25:45 AM »
IMHO Vern is not worth our time.
"If you can't run with the big dawgs, stay on the porch!"

Offline Solar

  • '
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 34252
  • Gender: Male
Re: no vern, only solar can ask questions
« Reply #72 on: February 01, 2013, 05:56:10 AM »
Vern, please take your medication before posting.  You have rambled incoherently, and are blaming Bush for inheriting Clinton's housing and tech mess.  You don't have a successful 401k, and you have no clue.  You didn't even know the Dems had the House during Carter, yet would post about Reagan.
I can't tell if it's by design that he obfuscates, or is he actually that stupid?

Then I ask him a simple straight forward question, and all he can say is Husein inherited Bush's deficit, but I thought the Dims said the recession ended after Husein took office, so that was three years ago, and still Husein is spending like a drunken sailor and not living within our means.
Now if you were in debt and running up your credit cards, most sane people would see that as a bad move, but somehow my asking him what he thinks of it, is somehow not clear, or straight forward?

So maybe I can ask another way and see if he has even one honest bone in his body. :rolleyes:
Koolaid is for kids, TEA is for adults

Offline Solar

  • '
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 34252
  • Gender: Male
Re: the "supposed" fiscal cliff
« Reply #73 on: February 01, 2013, 06:00:39 AM »


do you consider that a straightforward question. I dont.  You have the false equivalency that “not balanced” equals “out of control”.   And how you pretend not to know that the biggest cause of the deficit is revenue destruction from the Great Bush REcession.
OK Ver let me ask it another way that even a child can understand.

Is it good policy to, borrow money endlessly all the while running up a tab?
Or would it be better to cut back on spending and live within your means all the while paying back your creditors?

That's a pretty straight forward question even children know the answer to, do you?
Koolaid is for kids, TEA is for adults

Offline Vern

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Banned!
  • Posts: 105
solid factual links seem to upset him too
« Reply #74 on: February 01, 2013, 06:35:14 AM »
solar, you know whats really funny.  You accuse of posting things I didnt post  (your claim that I said Obama balanced the budget) and then accuse of not posting things I did post. and I answered your question several times.  I even adjusted the answer using the deficit from 2012. You just dont like the answer because it doesnt fit your 'faith' based economic beliefs

Id say ask your toadies but even you know I answered it.  Lets face it solar, you dont like the facts I post.  You thought "bush tried to warn us about the bubble" and you've been ranting at me ever since.   

and if you are really really mad that we are not paying back our creditors, guess what, not paying back our creditors was one of the excuses for the Bush Tax cuts

Running surpluses without a debt, Greenspan warned, would result in the "longer-term fiscal policy issue" of a government paying off its debt, particularly long-term Treasury bonds, before the bonds mature — costing it extra money by buying back those securities from private investors before they mature. Which is very expensive — better to buy back only matured bonds, which won't be possible until at least 2011.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,96747,00.html

 

Powered by EzPortal