Author Topic: Question for jeffy  (Read 5769 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mortons toe

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 324
    • View Profile
Re: Question for jeffy (aka right wing lunatic)
« Reply #50 on: May 02, 2010, 11:09:22 PM »
Good thing Clinton had help from the Republicans  :thumbsup:




Maybe so, but we all saw what the Republicans did when they had total control. They racked up the largest budget deficit in US history and bankrupted the US treasury.
 



:thumbsup:





I seem to recall a record budget deficit happening under a dem controlled congress in '08? :amiwrong:

Offline pike

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5138
  • BIG GREEN EGG!!!!
    • View Profile
Re: Question for jeffy (aka right wing lunatic)
« Reply #51 on: May 02, 2010, 11:36:28 PM »
Lower taxes and then get extra tax revenue from higher output, duh. The reason it didn't work under Bush and the Reps is because they started two illegal wars that have now cost hundreds of billions of dollars.On the other hand you could just put the burden on businesses and just kill the economy through higher taxes, which seems to be what we're headed to under health care reform and God forbid cap and trade




Are you still trying to pimp the "trickle down" economic approach?  You really are clueless.  The Clinton administration proved that raising taxes on the upper fringe and lowering taxes on the middle class is the way to go.  The middle class drives the economy and has the most influence on domestic consumption.  Not sure if you've noticed, but the corporations and the insanely rich have been outsourcing jobs to countries like India and China.  They're not creating any jobs or investing in domestic goods.  Trickle down economics is a washed up approach that has never worked and will never work.  


Reagan proved that trickle down does work. Facts are facts.



You are absolutely clueless.



:lol:   :lol:   :lol:





This coming from a tard that doesn't even think 9/11 was an inside job.

But keep your head up your ass. Reaganomics provided the greatest economic boom in history.

 


:facepalm:




Also, you are wrong about Reaganomics.  The federal debt from his economic policies tripled from $930 billion in 1981 to $2.6 trillion in 1988.  The real economic growth took place during the "dot com" boom of the 1990's, which we all know happened during the Clinton adminstration. 





Oh yeah, Al Gore invented the internet, right?

 :facepalm:

Offline Jeffy

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1590
  • Hello Wilbur.
    • View Profile
Re: Question for jeffy
« Reply #52 on: May 02, 2010, 11:56:11 PM »
Good grief, Ben.  Pull that multiplier out of your back side.

Offline OregonSmock

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 8512
  • Mashing 'taters like an Old Country Buffet
    • View Profile
Re: Question for jeffy (aka right wing lunatic)
« Reply #53 on: May 03, 2010, 12:52:49 AM »
Lower taxes and then get extra tax revenue from higher output, duh. The reason it didn't work under Bush and the Reps is because they started two illegal wars that have now cost hundreds of billions of dollars.On the other hand you could just put the burden on businesses and just kill the economy through higher taxes, which seems to be what we're headed to under health care reform and God forbid cap and trade




Are you still trying to pimp the "trickle down" economic approach?  You really are clueless.  The Clinton administration proved that raising taxes on the upper fringe and lowering taxes on the middle class is the way to go.  The middle class drives the economy and has the most influence on domestic consumption.  Not sure if you've noticed, but the corporations and the insanely rich have been outsourcing jobs to countries like India and China.  They're not creating any jobs or investing in domestic goods.  Trickle down economics is a washed up approach that has never worked and will never work.  


Reagan proved that trickle down does work. Facts are facts.



You are absolutely clueless.



:lol:   :lol:   :lol:





This coming from a tard that doesn't even think 9/11 was an inside job.

But keep your head up your ass. Reaganomics provided the greatest economic boom in history.

 


:facepalm:




Also, you are wrong about Reaganomics.  The federal debt from his economic policies tripled from $930 billion in 1981 to $2.6 trillion in 1988.  The real economic growth took place during the "dot com" boom of the 1990's, which we all know happened during the Clinton adminstration. 





Oh yeah, Al Gore invented the internet, right?

 :facepalm:




Translation:   

Offline pike

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5138
  • BIG GREEN EGG!!!!
    • View Profile
Re: Question for jeffy
« Reply #54 on: May 03, 2010, 01:06:04 AM »
I love when dems try and credit the Clinton admin with the advent of the internet. Total LOL

Offline OregonSmock

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 8512
  • Mashing 'taters like an Old Country Buffet
    • View Profile
Re: Question for jeffy
« Reply #55 on: May 03, 2010, 01:09:32 AM »
I love when dems try and credit the Clinton admin with the advent of the internet. Total LOL



Where did I credit the Clinton administration for inventing the internet?  You are in classic defense mechanism mode right now, clinging to your Rush Limbaugh talking points like a dingleberry on the tip of Mangino's nut sack.    

The42Yardstick

  • Guest
Re: Question for jeffy
« Reply #56 on: May 03, 2010, 01:30:38 AM »
like a dingleberry on the tip of Mangino's nut sack.    

this is some pretty elite bbs'n

Offline Dirty Sanchez

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1749
    • View Profile
Re: Question for jeffy
« Reply #57 on: May 03, 2010, 06:55:01 AM »
like a dingleberry on the tip of Mangino's nut sack.    

this is some pretty elite bbs'n

I was thinking it sounds more like ben's ultimate masturbatory fantasy.

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 29474
    • View Profile
Re: Question for jeffy
« Reply #58 on: May 03, 2010, 07:18:55 AM »
Public + Intergovernmental Holdings ='s National Debt

Every year of the Clinton Presidency the National Debt Increased.

In the Final 3 Fiscal Years, the years we had all those "surpluses", the National Debt was increased by about $260 Billion Dollars. 

Why??  Because over the last 3 Fiscal Years, Congress and the Clinton Administration stuffed the various "trust funds" with over a half a Trillion Dollars worth of IOU's.   So by borrowing internally instead of externally they were able to propagate the myth that they had a budget surplus.   

Sadly, unless they want to kill all of those trust funds, like Social Security, all of that Intergovernmental Debt has to be paid back.   

So, if the Federal Government dissolves Social Security, and all the other trust funds that the Federal Government has billions if not trillions of dollars worth of IOU's written to, than yes I will concede that Clinton ran a surplus.  Until those programs are wiped out or written off, you can't say that.

So, they ran a "surplus" but still increased the national debt by about $260 Billion Dollars over the Final 3 Fiscal Years . . . only in Washington D.C. is that called an accomplishment.   






« Last Edit: May 03, 2010, 07:41:20 AM by sonofdaxjones »
Back in the day I used to crank this song to annoy the old people, now I crank it to annoy the young people

Offline OregonSmock

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 8512
  • Mashing 'taters like an Old Country Buffet
    • View Profile
Re: Question for jeffy
« Reply #59 on: May 03, 2010, 02:07:36 PM »
Care to back all that garbage up with anything tangible, 'Pad?  A link, a graph, anything?
 




:confused:


Offline Havs

  • Taco Walk'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 3172
    • View Profile
    • Twitter
Re: Question for jeffy
« Reply #60 on: May 03, 2010, 02:47:53 PM »
Here's what it all comes down to...

Republicans are assholes....
Democrats are assholes....

Offline pike

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5138
  • BIG GREEN EGG!!!!
    • View Profile
Re: Question for jeffy
« Reply #61 on: May 03, 2010, 04:54:58 PM »
Here's what it all comes down to...

Republicans are assholes....
Democrats are assholes....

I can qft to that

Offline Dirty Sanchez

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1749
    • View Profile
Re: Question for jeffy
« Reply #62 on: May 03, 2010, 07:12:14 PM »
Here's what it all comes down to...

Republicans are assholes....
Democrats are assholes....

Winner winner stupid red bird riding in a tornado (wtf is that?!?!?!) dinner.

Offline OregonSmock

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 8512
  • Mashing 'taters like an Old Country Buffet
    • View Profile
Re: Question for jeffy
« Reply #63 on: May 03, 2010, 08:11:21 PM »
Clinton was about as close to a moderate Republican as you can get.  I'm an Independent, FWIW.

Sugar Dick

  • Guest
Re: Question for jeffy
« Reply #64 on: May 03, 2010, 08:30:42 PM »
Clinton was about as close to a moderate Republican as you can get.  I'm an Independent, FWIW.

Clinton was a Democrat (having a red congress forced him to be more moderate)

You are a Liberal, but because you are ashamed at how stupid liberal policies (if there is such a thing, seems more like complaining and finger pointing) are, you pretend to be an independent and vote democrat.

Offline Jeffy

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1590
  • Hello Wilbur.
    • View Profile
Re: Question for jeffy
« Reply #65 on: May 03, 2010, 08:58:33 PM »
Clinton was about as close to a moderate Republican as you can get.  I'm an Independent, FWIW.

Clinton was a Democrat (having a red congress forced him to be more moderate)

You are a Liberal, but because you are ashamed at how stupid liberal policies (if there is such a thing, seems more like complaining and finger pointing) are, you pretend to be an independent and vote democrat.

+1

wetwillie

  • Guest
Re: Question for jeffy
« Reply #66 on: May 03, 2010, 10:15:53 PM »
Damn when you think about Clinton in the light of eight years of bush and potentially eight years of Obama, slick willie looks like Abe rough ridin' Lincoln

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 29474
    • View Profile
Re: Question for jeffy
« Reply #67 on: May 03, 2010, 11:30:02 PM »
Care to back all that garbage up with anything tangible, 'Pad?  A link, a graph, anything?
 




:confused:



I gave you the national debt numbers Ben, they came right from the U.S. treasury.

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np

Type in the dates of the end of the FY

9/30/1997

9/30/1998

9/30/1999

9/29/2000

9/28/2001

Every year the National Debt Increased.   

Check out Table 6 Schedule D

http://fms.treas.gov/mts/mts0900.pdf

Summary:

TRUST FUND SURPLUSES IN 2000 (table 6 schedule D)
Social Security   $152.3 billion
Civil Service Retirement Fund   $30.9 billion
Federal supplementary medical insurance Trust fund   $18.5 billion
Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund   $15.0 billion
Unemployment Trust Fund   $9.0 billion
Military Retirement Fund   $8.2 billion
Transportation Trust Funds   $3.8 billion
Employee life insurance & retirement   $1.8 billion
Other   $7.0 billion
TOTAL   $246.5 billion

The problem is while Social Security is off budget, the most of the rest on on budget and thus even though the Federal Government is reporting them as non tax income, in reality they are borrowing the money and have to repay it at a later date. 

Modern accounting requires that corporations, state governments and local governments count expenses immediately when a transaction occurs, even if the payment will be made later.

The federal government does not follow the rule, so promises for Social Security and Medicare don't show up when the government reports its financial condition. 


http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20070529/1a_lede29.art.htm






Back in the day I used to crank this song to annoy the old people, now I crank it to annoy the young people

Offline Jeffy

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1590
  • Hello Wilbur.
    • View Profile
Re: Question for jeffy
« Reply #68 on: May 03, 2010, 11:59:42 PM »
Care to back all that garbage up with anything tangible, 'Pad?  A link, a graph, anything?
 




:confused:



I gave you the national debt numbers Ben, they came right from the U.S. treasury.

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np

Type in the dates of the end of the FY

9/30/1997

9/30/1998

9/30/1999

9/29/2000

9/28/2001

Every year the National Debt Increased.   

Check out Table 6 Schedule D

http://fms.treas.gov/mts/mts0900.pdf

Summary:

TRUST FUND SURPLUSES IN 2000 (table 6 schedule D)
Social Security   $152.3 billion
Civil Service Retirement Fund   $30.9 billion
Federal supplementary medical insurance Trust fund   $18.5 billion
Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund   $15.0 billion
Unemployment Trust Fund   $9.0 billion
Military Retirement Fund   $8.2 billion
Transportation Trust Funds   $3.8 billion
Employee life insurance & retirement   $1.8 billion
Other   $7.0 billion
TOTAL   $246.5 billion

The problem is while Social Security is off budget, the most of the rest on on budget and thus even though the Federal Government is reporting them as non tax income, in reality they are borrowing the money and have to repay it at a later date. 

Modern accounting requires that corporations, state governments and local governments count expenses immediately when a transaction occurs, even if the payment will be made later.

The federal government does not follow the rule, so promises for Social Security and Medicare don't show up when the government reports its financial condition. 


http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20070529/1a_lede29.art.htm









Offline OregonSmock

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 8512
  • Mashing 'taters like an Old Country Buffet
    • View Profile
Re: Question for jeffy
« Reply #69 on: May 04, 2010, 12:15:59 AM »
Clinton was about as close to a moderate Republican as you can get.  I'm an Independent, FWIW.

Clinton was a Democrat (having a red congress forced him to be more moderate)

You are a Liberal, but because you are ashamed at how stupid liberal policies (if there is such a thing, seems more like complaining and finger pointing) are, you pretend to be an independent and vote democrat.



Clinton was a moderate Republican disguised as a Democrat.  He's the closest thing we've had to a true conservative since Teddy Roosevelt.  As for me, I'm an Independent that tends to lean progressive when it comes to social issues, and conservative when it comes to the economy. 

Offline pike

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5138
  • BIG GREEN EGG!!!!
    • View Profile
Re: Question for jeffy
« Reply #70 on: May 04, 2010, 12:29:29 AM »
Clinton was about as close to a moderate Republican as you can get.  I'm an Independent, FWIW.

Clinton was a Democrat (having a red congress forced him to be more moderate)

You are a Liberal, but because you are ashamed at how stupid liberal policies (if there is such a thing, seems more like complaining and finger pointing) are, you pretend to be an independent and vote democrat.



Clinton was a moderate Republican disguised as a Democrat.  He's the closest thing we've had to a true conservative since Teddy Roosevelt.  As for me, I'm an Independent that tends to lean progressive when it comes to social issues, and conservative when it comes to the economy. 

You just contradicted yourself on about every post you've made in my conspiracy corner

Offline OregonSmock

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 8512
  • Mashing 'taters like an Old Country Buffet
    • View Profile
Re: Question for jeffy
« Reply #71 on: May 04, 2010, 12:49:55 AM »
Clinton was about as close to a moderate Republican as you can get.  I'm an Independent, FWIW.

Clinton was a Democrat (having a red congress forced him to be more moderate)

You are a Liberal, but because you are ashamed at how stupid liberal policies (if there is such a thing, seems more like complaining and finger pointing) are, you pretend to be an independent and vote democrat.



Clinton was a moderate Republican disguised as a Democrat.  He's the closest thing we've had to a true conservative since Teddy Roosevelt.  As for me, I'm an Independent that tends to lean progressive when it comes to social issues, and conservative when it comes to the economy. 

You just contradicted yourself on about every post you've made in my conspiracy corner




How so?

Offline pike

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5138
  • BIG GREEN EGG!!!!
    • View Profile
Re: Question for jeffy
« Reply #72 on: May 04, 2010, 12:57:37 AM »
Clinton was about as close to a moderate Republican as you can get.  I'm an Independent, FWIW.

Clinton was a Democrat (having a red congress forced him to be more moderate)

You are a Liberal, but because you are ashamed at how stupid liberal policies (if there is such a thing, seems more like complaining and finger pointing) are, you pretend to be an independent and vote democrat.



Clinton was a moderate Republican disguised as a Democrat.  He's the closest thing we've had to a true conservative since Teddy Roosevelt.  As for me, I'm an Independent that tends to lean progressive when it comes to social issues, and conservative when it comes to the economy. 

You just contradicted yourself on about every post you've made in my conspiracy corner




How so?

Take from the rich give to the poor!!

Offline OregonSmock

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 8512
  • Mashing 'taters like an Old Country Buffet
    • View Profile
Re: Question for jeffy
« Reply #73 on: May 04, 2010, 02:10:50 AM »
Clinton was about as close to a moderate Republican as you can get.  I'm an Independent, FWIW.

Clinton was a Democrat (having a red congress forced him to be more moderate)

You are a Liberal, but because you are ashamed at how stupid liberal policies (if there is such a thing, seems more like complaining and finger pointing) are, you pretend to be an independent and vote democrat.



Clinton was a moderate Republican disguised as a Democrat.  He's the closest thing we've had to a true conservative since Teddy Roosevelt.  As for me, I'm an Independent that tends to lean progressive when it comes to social issues, and conservative when it comes to the economy.  

You just contradicted yourself on about every post you've made in my conspiracy corner




How so?

Take from the rich give to the poor!!



Not really.  I'm in support of going back to the Clinton tax policy of taxing the top 1% and cutting taxes for the middle class.  Balance the federal budget and start paying off the national debt.
 



:dunno:
« Last Edit: May 04, 2010, 02:12:21 AM by BMWJhawk »

Offline Dirty Sanchez

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1749
    • View Profile
Re: Question for jeffy
« Reply #74 on: May 04, 2010, 07:05:53 AM »
Clinton was about as close to a moderate Republican as you can get.  I'm an Independent, FWIW.

Clinton was a Democrat (having a red congress forced him to be more moderate)

You are a Liberal, but because you are ashamed at how stupid liberal policies (if there is such a thing, seems more like complaining and finger pointing) are, you pretend to be an independent and vote democrat.



Clinton was a moderate Republican disguised as a Democrat.  He's the closest thing we've had to a true conservative since Teddy Roosevelt.  As for me, I'm an Independent that tends to lean progressive when it comes to social issues, and conservative when it comes to the economy.  

You just contradicted yourself on about every post you've made in my conspiracy corner




How so?

Take from the rich give to the poor!!



Not really.  I'm in support of going back to the Clinton tax policy of taxing the top 1% and cutting taxes for the middle class.  Balance the federal budget and start paying off the national debt.
 



:dunno:

but most likely you'll still support what the messiah is going to do.