WHY do you worry about Socialism?

[sunman]

BeanCounter and Dan40


The is where the surplus numbers come from.

Cnn, Sept 27, 2000, six weeks before elections,

Pres Clinton announced,

$2,025 billion fed taxs collected fiscal year 2000
$1,800 billion fed budget fiscal year 2000
$225 billion surplus

In 1999 they claimed $123 billion surplus.

I don't make up the news I just read it.

Yes as a accounting method this is a crock!!! This is THEIR idea of surplus/ deficit not mine.

But, if this would have continued and the extra money was applied to the fed debt, it would of been reduced assuming it was larger than the interest.

The question was "but where is this surplus the liberals always refer to ?"

Answer, it was the difference between taxes collected and the fed budget. It was very short lived and now is history.

Sunman

[computerworks]

Originally Posted by fastd

Jamo and Computerworks,

I must say that you guys give Excalibur a pretty wide berth to push the envelope. Quick to shut me down a couple of times when I supposedly cross the line - what is going on here?

Tenure.

[Excaliber]

How is ObamaCare going to relieve us from current economic conditions?

A rehtorical question I take it. What assurance do you or any other parent have that your children will even be able to afford health care in the future? Well now they have that possibility, regardless of how well you may or may not have provided for them. At some point they, and millions like them, will have to fend for themselves. They will have access to health care in ways ALL previous generations have never had. I'm willing to pay more, personally, to give that advantage to the next generation. Over 80% of Americans agree we need Health Care reform. We, the USA, have been trying to get this done for a 100 years. Through depressions, recessions, war's and budget shortfalls. If not now, WHEN? I'm willing to pay more so YOUR child can grow up with adequate Health coverage. Sounds like your not...

The liberals want to control 16% of our GDP.

More numbers, plenty numbers, the web is FILLED with numbers. They are meaningless until there are researched, put into context and understood. I could cite numbers and poll's all day long that would counter any number and polls the next guy could post. Generally speaking "numbers" used in the manner they are used here have only one purpose, political outrage. They are designed to stir up anger and gain support for "your side". See my signature line for further clarity on this issue.

How is Cap and Trade legislation going to do anything but hurt the current economic climate?

Thats a deep question, get back to me when it becomes clearer what is going on with this issue. Do you have a crystal ball that says "YES", it will pass into law? I don't have one, where'd you get yours?

The so-called stimulus bill has done what for small business owners?

The question is better phrased; What has it done to save our entire economy? Are you not happy we have come from the very brink of financial ruin, WORLD WIDE, and survived that moment? Do you think Bush was wrong to institute TARP? Had GM been allowed to fail how many "small business" would have failed along with them? Hundreds? Thousands? It was for the sake of those small business' that GM not be allowed to fail. That's just one example, there are plenty more, for those willing to think and consider the alternatives.

[Joe Wicked]

Originally Posted by sunman

BeanCounter and Dan40


The is where the surplus numbers come from.

Cnn, Sept 27, 2000, six weeks before elections,

Pres Clinton announced,

$2,025 billion fed taxs collected fiscal year 2000
$1,800 billion fed budget fiscal year 2000
$225 billion surplus

In 1999 they claimed $123 billion surplus.

I don't make up the news I just read it.

Yes as a accounting method this is a crock!!! This is THEIR idea of surplus/ deficit not mine.

But, if this would have continued and the extra money was applied to the fed debt, it would of been reduced assuming it was larger than the interest.

The question was "but where is this surplus the liberals always refer to ?"

Answer, it was the difference between taxes collected and the fed budget. It was very short lived and now is history.

Sunman

Maybe I am off here, but since this states BUDGET, and not actual expenditures, it is meaningless. When was the last time the government (whoever was in charge) spent just the BUDGET. Give me the actual expenses vs taxes and I bet that surplus turns into a deficit.

[sunman]

Joe Wicked,

That is my point too. I don't trust any of the numbers. The Federal Budget Office is the source of the numbers for 1999 and 2000. I did not say they were real. They put nuke weapons under the Dept of Energy.

Sunman

[Ron61]

Didn't any of you ever hear of Negative Logic? I think California has been operating on it for the past few years. We really aren't in debt, it just looks that way.

Ron

[Dan40]

Originally Posted by sunman

BeanCounter and Dan40


The is where the surplus numbers come from.

Cnn, Sept 27, 2000, six weeks before elections,

Pres Clinton announced,

$2,025 billion fed taxs collected fiscal year 2000
$1,800 billion fed budget fiscal year 2000
$225 billion surplus

In 1999 they claimed $123 billion surplus.

I don't make up the news I just read it.

Yes as a accounting method this is a crock!!! This is THEIR idea of surplus/ deficit not mine.

But, if this would have continued and the extra money was applied to the fed debt, it would of been reduced assuming it was larger than the interest.

The question was "but where is this surplus the liberals always refer to ?"

Answer, it was the difference between taxes collected and the fed budget. It was very short lived and now is history.

Sunman

Did we owe more at the end of the fiscal year or did we owe less?

[fastd]

Originally Posted by computerworks

Tenure.

As good a reason as any...

[Dan40]

Am I a right wing hate monger? NO, but I love what my country was and will fight those that wish to overthrow the American way of life. Sadly many rank and file liberals do not realize that liberal ideology is as dangerous, and more insidious, than the Muslim jihadists.
Extrapolate liberals ideals and eventually you end up with all having all wants satisfied. That is incompatible with a free society,,,,,,,,,,,,,,incompatible with reality also.
our Gov't. is charged to promote the general welfare.
Allowing tax breaks for charitable donations and charitable organizations is 'promoting' the general welfare. TAKING money from those that earned it and giving it to those that cannot and will not earn it is providing, not promoting, the very less than general, welfare.

[fastd]

FYI to all, the General Welfare clause in the preamble to the Constitution is meaningless - that's right I said it, meaningless. James Madison was asked about it directly some years after the Constitution was adopted and he said as much.

In addition, the body of the Constitution lays out specifically the limited powers of the government; it is a total contradiction to impute any meaning the General Welfare clause because if one did, it would become an unlimited powers of the government. Simple logic.

[Excaliber]

My concern lately has been the "slide" toward facism based on comments from the right. Facism in this case should be confused with Hitler. I use the term to mean those willing to use force to achieve their goals, regardless of who get's hurt, dam the torpedoes, for God and Country the end justifies the means. Use of force includes intimidation without any real or implied threat, hard to nail down, but like "porn", I know it when I see it. Then there are those who sincerely believe they need to use physical force to achieve their goals, for "God and for Country". They are sincerely mistaken in that regard when it is applied to ordinary citizens.

I don't know that I would say the

ideology is as dangerous, and more insidious, than the Muslim jihadists.

, but it is pretty dangerous. I put the extremists Muslims in a group all to themselves they are so radical!

[Buzz]

Originally Posted by Dan40

...liberal ideology is as dangerous, and more insidious, than the Muslim jihadists.

Do you actually believe that bull?
You think Oinie's mindset is more dangerous than Bin Laden's??
Generally, your posts indicate a reasonably high level of education and intelligence, but emotionally, you drag yourself back to the brink of drooling moronitude. It's a pity because you're probably a good guy, but your idea of of winning an argument is bludgeoning the other person with canned rhetoric.
Wash that foam out of your mouth Dan, and wipe the dribble off your chin. You have the tools to make a strong persuasive argument without resorting to statements that destroy your credibility.

[fastd]

Ex,

You are stepping way over the line here...you are unwilling to entertain the notion that we are moving even slightly to the left as nation; and now here comes the Fascist rhetoric...?

[Excaliber]

I agree in part fastd, we need to be ever watchful of those in power. I DO have faith in our system that a "slide" toward socialism will not take us INTO socialism.

By the same token, we need to be ever watchful of those who would use fear, intimidation and force as what I see a "slide" toward facism. I remain confident that America will find the right path in either case.

[fastd]

I have no idea what you are talking about...

[Excaliber]

You mean you haven't seen the radicalized posters at various "rallies"? Heard the harsh rhetoric in dialog? Sometimes they cross the line, into facism territory. Some posts and threads here on CC do as well. I don't need to be spit on, intimidated or called names because my beliefs do not coincide with yours. I find myself guilty of using the same tactics from time to time, and I don't like it, gonna try and change that.

[Excaliber]

Having said that, above:

I DO like a spirited discourse, with the occasional flame here and there. I wouldn't want it to be all vanilla and such. It's a difficult thing to moderate, but like porn, the moderaters seem to know it when they see it.

[sunman]

Dan40

22 years service, 2 years on a mountain top in Turkey and 2 in the Aleutian Islands remote without my wife and kids "fighting those that wish to overthrow the American way of life." I always thought I was conservative. Thanks for straighting me out.

sunman

[fastd]

You seem to be shouting the loudest...spiting, radicalizing, calling names and intimidating...

[Jamo]

ahem....again

I meant that for everyone involved in the discussion the first time, as I do now.

If anyone's trying to test/question our application of moderation...don't. As if it's anyone's business, Ernie has been suspended more times than just about anyone, and is down for the second longest suspension ever handed out (three months)...the longest one being a seven year suspension I handed out a year or so ago. Obviously, I'm not including folks who have been permanantly banned.

I will not clear my throat a third time.