To be fair we all should be equal when it comes to money no one should make more the anyone else, so let set a national pay rate of 250,001 so we all can pay the same amount in taxes. This way no one will be poor and we will all live the good live.
1) Tax cuts do not cause deficits, for that to work, you would have to assume ALL income (including your pittance) is the government's money and they just let you keep it.
2) GOP Proposals = ????? = Burdened middle class! Top of the class logic you've got there.
3) I'd love to read that report direct from the CBO, please link. (No liberal blog bullshit)
4) More money does not equate to a better education, as is clearly evident by D.C.
@cashin1243 Tax cuts do not cause deficits, for that to work, you would have to assume ALL income (including your pittance) is the government's money and they just let you keep it.
False. Bush tax cuts for the wealthy cut Fed tax gains by $2.5 trillion over the last 10 years - how is that not causing the deficit? We'd have a smaller deficit by 2.5 trillion if Bush hadn't cut taxes on exclusively the wealthiest 10% of Americans.
@Adnihilo First off, the number you're using is completely wrong. The Department of Defense (including oversea operations) cost of operation is 682.8 billion. Not this 2.5 trillion dollar number you just magically made up. But what do I know, i'm just pulling these numbers from some crazy organization called "The Department of the Treasury"
@cashin1243 First off, the number you're using is completely wrong. The Department of Defense (including oversea operations) cost of operation is 682.8 billion. Not this 2.5 trillion dollar number you just magically made up.
Firstly I'm not 'magically' 'making up any numbers and 2ndly I didn't cite any 2.5 trillion dollar number in reference to the DoD budget. That's Total Outlays (Federal Funds): $2,650 billion
See warresisters . org piechart to understand what I'm talking about...
Give me a break. Going into 2007, America had 4.3% unemployment and a deficit in decline. But once Democrats gained control of both branches of Congress (and therefore all spending and legislation), unemployment began to skyrocket and the deficit in decline reversed itself. In 2009, Democrats obtained MORE power, and the economy got EVEN WORSE.
To the twinks who put this ad together...I'm sorry that the facts I presented blew away your class-warfare, neo-comm propaganda.
@HPLoveshaft To the twinks who put this ad together...I'm sorry that the facts I presented blew away your class-warfare, neo-comm propaganda.
At least your deluded arrogant mind they did;-] You seem to forget the total cost of Bush era Bailouts totaling a whopping $11.5 trillion [msn news] and a $150 billion in surplus that disappeared after he stole his office [Fl. literally stopped counting votes with 100,000 still to go to declare him winner - that's election theft]
@HPLoveshaft But once Democrats gained control of both branches of Congress (and therefore all spending and legislation), unemployment began to skyrocket and the deficit in decline reversed itself. In 2009
Unemployment does not magically 'sky rocket' as soon as Dems go into office and in fact it has been the opposite throughout our history - besides our corporatist gov't controlled by their corporate masters isn't a partisan issue
The plan will not "End Medicare" it will allow seniors to CHOOSE from the PRIVATE sector what plan they want!!!! Ok and where's the Democrats plan for Medicare??? Don't lie about the Ryan plan when you guys don't even have a plan. The Democrats are ending Medicare because they are going to let it go bankrupt!
What both parties don't understand is that we are sick and tired of the wealthiest few hiding behind these PACs that put these ads out pointing fingers at the other party. Americans are disgusted that the people we elect can't but their ideology aside and solve the problems we face. Money has stripped democracy away from this country.
There they go again - Democrats trying to scare the hell out of old folks ( hey, I'm one of them ). As far as I can see, Paul Ryan and his fellow Republicans at least had the courage to offer a plan to fix Americas dilemna. And the Democrats offer nothing but
the same old crap that they always through out to defend their tax and spend approach.
This is the same tired invalid and unfounded arguments the fascists use over and over again. They have no solutions other than to spend this nation into oblivion.
@mexipol1 When large corporations write the laws regarding their own regulations and tax laws; when those that are supposed to work for their constituents and the betterment of America, but instead work in favor of large American corporations that take jobs overseas, than THAT makes America a fascist country. This began under Reagan and grew stronger under "W". So, yes, America has turned into a fascist country, but not due to the Democrats.
Great points made by toby2thomas that's 'mostly true', but it's also dems who de-regulated like the Clinton era elimination of the glass-steagal act paving the way to the economic crash in 2008.
Maintaining class and 'partisan' warfare amongst its citizens is exactly what our corporatist gov't and their corporate overlords want to maintain this global corporate dystopia... We ALL have to admit there's a serious problem in the monetary system + debt based economy to solve it.
This constant political game of pitting the "middle class" against "the wealthy" has never worked, and it won't work in the future. Class warfare based on 5 lies in one ad is politics at its worst...something you fools accuse the Rove-funded ads of. Shameful
I'd say the ad is more about partisan war fare that class warfare, although it's republican politicians who are overwhelmingly committing class war on behalf of the wealthy and corporations against the poor and middle class...
@howedesign "Bush's wars?" you mean the congressional-approved measures to fulfill official US standing since 1998 (Clinton admin officially made regime change the policy in Iraq)? the wealthiest get off "scott free"? you do realize that the lower 50% of the spectrum pay ZERO income taxes, right? The top 50% pay 98%...and the top 1% pay more than anyone. So, you're confused by the idea of getting off "scott free."
the CBO numbers are based on two of the most UNLIKELY scenarios from Ryan
@jboze3131 "you do realize that the lower 50% of the spectrum pay ZERO income taxes"
Jeez, did ya ever think that's because the top 25% got [not earned because it's typically capital gains] the biggest share of the pie? The top 10% average only 3% more in taxes than the top 50 to 90% of income earners. The rest don't make enough to live on! Jeez, a worker still gets taxed 13% if making over a piddly $8500 a year - just 5% less than the top 10% of income earners.
@howedesign I'm sorry, the rankings HAVE indeed changed. 2009 OECD figures show switzerland slightly above the US. the US is second of all the nations as part of OECD. and no, we're very diff than most european nations...we spend more than all of them. in fact, the US keeps rising in the OECD figures. in 2004, we were THIRD, we've now risen to #2. like i said- spending is NOT the issue. the states that spend the highest should have the best students. that's not the case.
I just don't think 'republicans', ditto heads, or right wingers can comprehend a concept as simplistic as tax cuts causing larger deficits - they generally don't seem to understand cause and effect... I had the same problem over at watch?v=UDC8pmfmYc4 How The Bush Tax Cuts Blew Up The Deficit And Debt
@jboze3131 "the states that spend the highest should have the best students. that's not the case."
Since Drop out rates would likely indicate the 'worst students', Texas has the highest drop out rate while ranked 44th in spending per pupil. NY spends the most per student 'n is 5th in college degrees. This would indicate states should at least NOT cut spending, and even increase it in places like TX and in states w/a high drop out rate like FL and much of the south...
@howedesign also- spending has risen steadily since the 1960s and 70s. test scores are basically flat, however, across the board. if more money was the answer, you'd expect to see scores skyrocket. you don't see that.
exxon pays billions in taxes. in 2010, they paid, according to official figures $50 billion overseas and $7.7 billion US.
BofA had no liability because they had no revenue.
@jboze3131 Why is president Obama not responsible for the economy? He's been president for years now.
Well he is, but he didn't create the 2008 crash. De-regulation by both parties helped that along with Wall Street greed and corruption in regards to derivatives and sub prime mortgages.
@jboze3131 "Ryan's plan WILL NOT end medicare in any way, not "essentially" or at all. This is a flat outlie."
You're the one who is flat out lying. Ryan's 'voucher plan' ends medicare as we know and recognize it today. The GOP wants to replace Medicare with nothing more than a coupon book.
@jboze3131 "Education- the US spends more per student than any nation. So, spending isn't the issue."
Wrong again. Switzerland spends the most per student on their education of any nation at 9,348.00 per student. Austria is next at $8,163.00 per student and THEN the US at $7,764.00 per student [source nation master world statistics and country comparisons]
Seems as if YOU'RE the one who's lies need to be picked apart ;-]
@jboze3131 EVERYONE's taxes were lowered. "Big oil" pays billions in taxes already. More taxes won't solve the issues.
Exxon, the largest oil company in the world, had an effective tax rate of .4% from 2008 – 2010 and you think that's 'fair' taxation? And you're wrong again about taxes not solving the issues. Higher taxes on the only wealthy and 16 major US corporations back to even the percentages they were at during your hero's presidency, 'Dutch', WILL solve most of our deficit problems.
“We know the ads blaming President Obama for the economy are politics at its worst,”
Funny when will our President take ownership of anything, he's not voting present anymore he is the President and the one who has been setting the policies that have not pan out to what they said it would do. I think this ad would work a lot better if they would have said "is racism at its worst."
Geez, Medicare is dying...it's going to be dead and cold in a dozen years. So, what do the DUMBoCRAPs resort to...MediSCARE if course. Yep, you sure wouldn't want truth to get in the way of a good scary argument.
@adnihilo What are you an idiot? Defense spending only makes up 18% of the entire budget. Get your facts straight before you run your mouth. You can literally disband the Marines and the Air Force, sell off their assets and it still wouldn't balance the budget.
Perhaps when you pull your head out of the sand and start thinking with logic and reason rather than your bleeding heart, we can have an "Adult discussion."
@cashin1243 What are you an idiot? Defense spending only makes up 18% of the entire budget. Get your facts straight before you run your mouth.
Sure are an impolite SOB aren't ya? You're being duped by Gov't. Total Outlays (Fed Funds): $2,650 billion MILITARY: 54% and $1,449 billion NON-MILITARY: 46% and $1,210 billion
The figures are fed funds, which do not include trust funds — such as Social Security — that are raised and spent separately from income taxes.
@cashin1243 Perhaps when you pull your head out of the sand and start thinking with logic and reason rather than your bleeding heart, we can have an "Adult discussion."
Not with you acting like a bully on the school yard lot spewing your degrading ad hominems toward me seen above
My, my such a collection of deniers of truth. Both Republicans and Democrats have led to the demise of Medicare by allowing its unfettered expansion of benefits and spending the excess during the good years and replacing it with IOU's.
Second, Social Security age for the group Lieberman and Coburn's Medicare fix covers is ALREADY at age 67. They just bring it into sync. What the heck 60 has to do with anything is anybody's guess because Medicare doesn't start now till 65.
Lieberman and Coburn, rich from public money paid with our taxes and with socialized health care for all their lives and a secure retirement tell us that people should not get Medicare until they are 67.Because we all know how many companies give jobs to 60 years old with benefits, because we know hoe many insurance companies cover for cheap old people with preexisting conditions, and believe at 60 we all have preexisting conditions.
Might want to tell the truth about Medicare. I'm of the age that would be affected by the so called "killing" of Medicare. The only thing that kills Medicare is you and your Dems doing nothing.
Lieberman and Coburn put out a rational, reasonable proposal yesterday and what do Pelosi and Reid do? Trash it.
Time to grow up people. I already have to wait until 67 for Social Security, asking those even younger to wait until 67 for Medicare is not extreme. 2012 here we come.
You're letting the Repugs frame the message. Cutting the budget can't be discussed without cutting defense funding, which accounts for over 50% of the budget - yet repugs refuse to even consider any substantial cuts to the military while Dems refuse to bring it up in lieu of cuts to social entitlements..
@Adnihilo you might not want to use childish names like "repugs" if you're too lazy to do basic research. defense spending is less than 20% of the entire federal budget. social entitlements are the largest portions of the federal budget, by far...soc sec and medicare are the two largest as %'s. based on future spending, these %'s will rise to the point that nearly 100% of the federal budget will have to be paid to entitlements.
@jboze3131 That 18% Equates 5-700 Billion a year averaged out since we reckless entered our wars. That's not including foreign military aid and some other items. Bombs good taking care of our elderly, disabled and poor children bad! And you call yourself the "pro-life" party.
@joshuancts "reckless entered our wars"? iraq and afghanistan were wars voted on in congress and approved by large majorities. the iraq war was a mere extension of the official us policy of regime change (policy since 1998 under clinton).
look up what "reckless" means. these were in no way "reckless."
you've thrown up a false dichotomy. a nation can build bombs and take care of its citizens at the same time, and we do. doesn't change the spending figures and their continual climb upward
@jboze3131 "defense spending is less than 20% of the entire federal budget. social entitlements are the largest portions of the federal budget, by far...soc sec and medicare are the two largest as %'s."
False.Your percentages are wrong as the portion we pay out of our Fed Income Tax. Trust funds — such as Social Security — are raised and spent separately from income taxes. What you pay (or don’t pay) by April 15, 2008, goes to the federal funds portion of the budget.
The government practice of combining trust and federal funds began during the Vietnam War, thus making the human needs portion of the budget seem larger and the military portion smaller.
@Adnihilo: You repeatedly use the term "Repug", yet you whine about the apparent lack of civility here? Do you happen to know the textbook definition of "irony"?
And defense spending doesn't account for anything near 50% of the budget. You've either believed an easily refuted lie, or have intentionally perpetrated a lie. Either way, no one will trust you after that blithering nonsense.
@HPLoveshaft You repeatedly use the term "Repug", yet you whine about the apparent lack of civility here?
Repug is used by 1000s and is hardly uncivil - besides, it's a general term, and not directed personally to you. Directly calling me a child, stupid, lazy, and an idiot is downright rude only telling me you're a 1st class pompous, arrogant a-hole from the get go.
@HPLoveshaft And defense spending doesn't account for anything near 50% of the budget. You've either believed an easily refuted lie, or have intentionally perpetrated a lie. Either way, no one will trust you after that blithering nonsense.
You're the impolite a-hole that repeatedly personally attacked me from the get go... I'm talking about how Fed income tax dollars are spent and not how the gov't presents its distorted view of reality, just like inflation and unemployment.
The 20% figure you use is a distortion of how our income tax dollars are spent because it includes Trust Funds (e.g., Social Security), and the expenses of past military spending that are not distinguished from nonmilitary spending. Social Security is not funded by Fed Taxes so including it is irrelevant as a % of what citizens pay in Fed taxes.
Current military spending accounts for 36% including added amounts for Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Libya the Feds don't include in the 20% + 18% 'past military' spending not included = 54% of total spending minus social security [because it's not funded by fed income taxes] Total Outlays (Federal Funds): $2,650 billion
MILITARY: 54% and $1,449 billion NON-MILITARY: 46% and $1,210 billion
go to warresisters org for an explanation if you still don't comprehend.
Directly calling me a child, stupid, lazy, and an idiot is downright rude when I never personally and directly attacked either of you and only gives credence for the use of the term 'repug' in reference to repugnant republican.
Comment removed
howedesign 8 months ago 5
Comment removed
howedesign 8 months ago 2
To be fair we all should be equal when it comes to money no one should make more the anyone else, so let set a national pay rate of 250,001 so we all can pay the same amount in taxes. This way no one will be poor and we will all live the good live.
jeffofpa 8 months ago
Comment removed
cashin1243 8 months ago
Comment removed
howedesign 8 months ago 4
Comment removed
cashin1243 8 months ago
Comment removed
cashin1243 8 months ago
Comment removed
cashin1243 8 months ago
nice ad
justanotherpatriot 8 months ago
Sorry, Phlegm 'n Craps - nobody is buying your lies.
63utuber 8 months ago
@howedesign
1) Tax cuts do not cause deficits, for that to work, you would have to assume ALL income (including your pittance) is the government's money and they just let you keep it.
2) GOP Proposals = ????? = Burdened middle class! Top of the class logic you've got there.
3) I'd love to read that report direct from the CBO, please link. (No liberal blog bullshit)
4) More money does not equate to a better education, as is clearly evident by D.C.
5) Good business sense, why the hate?
cashin1243 8 months ago
@cashin1243 Tax cuts do not cause deficits, for that to work, you would have to assume ALL income (including your pittance) is the government's money and they just let you keep it.
False. Bush tax cuts for the wealthy cut Fed tax gains by $2.5 trillion over the last 10 years - how is that not causing the deficit? We'd have a smaller deficit by 2.5 trillion if Bush hadn't cut taxes on exclusively the wealthiest 10% of Americans.
Adnihilo 8 months ago
@Adnihilo First off, the number you're using is completely wrong. The Department of Defense (including oversea operations) cost of operation is 682.8 billion. Not this 2.5 trillion dollar number you just magically made up. But what do I know, i'm just pulling these numbers from some crazy organization called "The Department of the Treasury"
cashin1243 8 months ago
@cashin1243 First off, the number you're using is completely wrong. The Department of Defense (including oversea operations) cost of operation is 682.8 billion. Not this 2.5 trillion dollar number you just magically made up.
Firstly I'm not 'magically' 'making up any numbers and 2ndly I didn't cite any 2.5 trillion dollar number in reference to the DoD budget. That's Total Outlays (Federal Funds): $2,650 billion
See warresisters . org piechart to understand what I'm talking about...
Adnihilo 8 months ago
Give me a break. Going into 2007, America had 4.3% unemployment and a deficit in decline. But once Democrats gained control of both branches of Congress (and therefore all spending and legislation), unemployment began to skyrocket and the deficit in decline reversed itself. In 2009, Democrats obtained MORE power, and the economy got EVEN WORSE.
To the twinks who put this ad together...I'm sorry that the facts I presented blew away your class-warfare, neo-comm propaganda.
HPLoveshaft 8 months ago
@HPLoveshaft Give me a break. Going into 2007, America had 4.3% unemployment and a deficit in decline.
Actually it was 4.6% and if you go to lafn . org / gvdc / Natl _ Debt _ Chart . jpg you'll see a visualization of the reality over your fiction
Adnihilo 8 months ago
@HPLoveshaft To the twinks who put this ad together...I'm sorry that the facts I presented blew away your class-warfare, neo-comm propaganda.
At least your deluded arrogant mind they did;-] You seem to forget the total cost of Bush era Bailouts totaling a whopping $11.5 trillion [msn news] and a $150 billion in surplus that disappeared after he stole his office [Fl. literally stopped counting votes with 100,000 still to go to declare him winner - that's election theft]
Adnihilo 8 months ago
Comment removed
howedesign 8 months ago
@howedesign Please put other people's comments (to which you're responding) in quotes.
I put them right next to their name like you see above
Adnihilo 8 months ago
Comment removed
howedesign 8 months ago
@HPLoveshaft But once Democrats gained control of both branches of Congress (and therefore all spending and legislation), unemployment began to skyrocket and the deficit in decline reversed itself. In 2009
Unemployment does not magically 'sky rocket' as soon as Dems go into office and in fact it has been the opposite throughout our history - besides our corporatist gov't controlled by their corporate masters isn't a partisan issue
Adnihilo 8 months ago
The plan will not "End Medicare" it will allow seniors to CHOOSE from the PRIVATE sector what plan they want!!!! Ok and where's the Democrats plan for Medicare??? Don't lie about the Ryan plan when you guys don't even have a plan. The Democrats are ending Medicare because they are going to let it go bankrupt!
andrewjustvig 8 months ago
What both parties don't understand is that we are sick and tired of the wealthiest few hiding behind these PACs that put these ads out pointing fingers at the other party. Americans are disgusted that the people we elect can't but their ideology aside and solve the problems we face. Money has stripped democracy away from this country.
Vistamister 8 months ago
rpbole, here's a thought: learn to spell. "..they always through out..." ???
jmhansonfromSD 8 months ago
There they go again - Democrats trying to scare the hell out of old folks ( hey, I'm one of them ). As far as I can see, Paul Ryan and his fellow Republicans at least had the courage to offer a plan to fix Americas dilemna. And the Democrats offer nothing but
the same old crap that they always through out to defend their tax and spend approach.
rpbole 8 months ago
@rpbole I have a bridge for sale in Alaska, interested?
RazsterTW 8 months ago
@rpbole A dilemma they caused!
hawgey 8 months ago
That's a wonderful, simple and truthful ad. I hope we see more like it as the campaign season heats up.
yowowulu 8 months ago
This is the same tired invalid and unfounded arguments the fascists use over and over again. They have no solutions other than to spend this nation into oblivion.
mexipol1 8 months ago
@mexipol1 When large corporations write the laws regarding their own regulations and tax laws; when those that are supposed to work for their constituents and the betterment of America, but instead work in favor of large American corporations that take jobs overseas, than THAT makes America a fascist country. This began under Reagan and grew stronger under "W". So, yes, America has turned into a fascist country, but not due to the Democrats.
toby2thomas 8 months ago 2
@toby2thomas
Great points made by toby2thomas that's 'mostly true', but it's also dems who de-regulated like the Clinton era elimination of the glass-steagal act paving the way to the economic crash in 2008.
Maintaining class and 'partisan' warfare amongst its citizens is exactly what our corporatist gov't and their corporate overlords want to maintain this global corporate dystopia... We ALL have to admit there's a serious problem in the monetary system + debt based economy to solve it.
Adnihilo 8 months ago
This ad is full of more shit than a port-o-potty at the end of the day.
TheLastBrainLeft 8 months ago
@TheLastBrainLeft "This ad is full of more shit than a port-o-potty at the end of the day."
As well as what is spewing from what you arrogantly refer to as the 'last brain left' in your pseudonym ;- ] .
Adnihilo 8 months ago
This constant political game of pitting the "middle class" against "the wealthy" has never worked, and it won't work in the future. Class warfare based on 5 lies in one ad is politics at its worst...something you fools accuse the Rove-funded ads of. Shameful
jboze3131 8 months ago
@jboze3131
I'd say the ad is more about partisan war fare that class warfare, although it's republican politicians who are overwhelmingly committing class war on behalf of the wealthy and corporations against the poor and middle class...
Adnihilo 8 months ago
Let's take apart these lies.
1) Why is president Obama not responsible for the economy? He's been president for years now.
2) There are several GOP economic reforms on the table
3) Ryan's plan WILL NOT end medicare in any way, not "essentially" or at all. This is a flat outlie.
4) Education- the US spends more per student than any nation. So, spending isn't the issue.
5) EVERYONE's taxes were lowered. "Big oil" pays billions in taxes already. More taxes won't solve the issues.
jboze3131 8 months ago
Comment removed
howedesign 8 months ago
@howedesign "Bush's wars?" you mean the congressional-approved measures to fulfill official US standing since 1998 (Clinton admin officially made regime change the policy in Iraq)? the wealthiest get off "scott free"? you do realize that the lower 50% of the spectrum pay ZERO income taxes, right? The top 50% pay 98%...and the top 1% pay more than anyone. So, you're confused by the idea of getting off "scott free."
the CBO numbers are based on two of the most UNLIKELY scenarios from Ryan
jboze3131 8 months ago
@jboze3131 "Bush's wars?" you mean the congressional-approved measures to fulfill official US standing since 1998
Don't be ridiculous by trying to blame the Iraq and Afghanistan wars on Clinton.
Adnihilo 8 months ago 4
@jboze3131 "you do realize that the lower 50% of the spectrum pay ZERO income taxes"
Jeez, did ya ever think that's because the top 25% got [not earned because it's typically capital gains] the biggest share of the pie? The top 10% average only 3% more in taxes than the top 50 to 90% of income earners. The rest don't make enough to live on! Jeez, a worker still gets taxed 13% if making over a piddly $8500 a year - just 5% less than the top 10% of income earners.
Adnihilo 8 months ago
Comment removed
howedesign 8 months ago
@howedesign I'm sorry, the rankings HAVE indeed changed. 2009 OECD figures show switzerland slightly above the US. the US is second of all the nations as part of OECD. and no, we're very diff than most european nations...we spend more than all of them. in fact, the US keeps rising in the OECD figures. in 2004, we were THIRD, we've now risen to #2. like i said- spending is NOT the issue. the states that spend the highest should have the best students. that's not the case.
jboze3131 8 months ago
Comment removed
howedesign 8 months ago
Comment removed
howedesign 8 months ago
@howedesign
I just don't think 'republicans', ditto heads, or right wingers can comprehend a concept as simplistic as tax cuts causing larger deficits - they generally don't seem to understand cause and effect... I had the same problem over at watch?v=UDC8pmfmYc4 How The Bush Tax Cuts Blew Up The Deficit And Debt
Adnihilo 8 months ago
Comment removed
howedesign 8 months ago
@jboze3131 "the states that spend the highest should have the best students. that's not the case."
Since Drop out rates would likely indicate the 'worst students', Texas has the highest drop out rate while ranked 44th in spending per pupil. NY spends the most per student 'n is 5th in college degrees. This would indicate states should at least NOT cut spending, and even increase it in places like TX and in states w/a high drop out rate like FL and much of the south...
Adnihilo 8 months ago
@howedesign also- spending has risen steadily since the 1960s and 70s. test scores are basically flat, however, across the board. if more money was the answer, you'd expect to see scores skyrocket. you don't see that.
exxon pays billions in taxes. in 2010, they paid, according to official figures $50 billion overseas and $7.7 billion US.
BofA had no liability because they had no revenue.
jboze3131 8 months ago
@jboze3131 Why is president Obama not responsible for the economy? He's been president for years now.
Well he is, but he didn't create the 2008 crash. De-regulation by both parties helped that along with Wall Street greed and corruption in regards to derivatives and sub prime mortgages.
Adnihilo 8 months ago
@jboze3131 "Ryan's plan WILL NOT end medicare in any way, not "essentially" or at all. This is a flat outlie."
You're the one who is flat out lying. Ryan's 'voucher plan' ends medicare as we know and recognize it today. The GOP wants to replace Medicare with nothing more than a coupon book.
Adnihilo 8 months ago
@jboze3131 "Education- the US spends more per student than any nation. So, spending isn't the issue."
Wrong again. Switzerland spends the most per student on their education of any nation at 9,348.00 per student. Austria is next at $8,163.00 per student and THEN the US at $7,764.00 per student [source nation master world statistics and country comparisons]
Seems as if YOU'RE the one who's lies need to be picked apart ;-]
Adnihilo 8 months ago
@jboze3131 EVERYONE's taxes were lowered. "Big oil" pays billions in taxes already. More taxes won't solve the issues.
Exxon, the largest oil company in the world, had an effective tax rate of .4% from 2008 – 2010 and you think that's 'fair' taxation? And you're wrong again about taxes not solving the issues. Higher taxes on the only wealthy and 16 major US corporations back to even the percentages they were at during your hero's presidency, 'Dutch', WILL solve most of our deficit problems.
Adnihilo 8 months ago
“We know the ads blaming President Obama for the economy are politics at its worst,”
Funny when will our President take ownership of anything, he's not voting present anymore he is the President and the one who has been setting the policies that have not pan out to what they said it would do. I think this ad would work a lot better if they would have said "is racism at its worst."
jeffofpa 8 months ago
@jeffofpa We know the ads blaming President Obama for the economy are politics at its worst,”
That's right - if I smash your computer with a sledgehammer and you can't put it back together good as new, then it's YOUR fault that it's broken.
LODGE4444 8 months ago
@LODGE4444 You need to chill, and read the full post and see I was being sarcastic.
jeffofpa 8 months ago
Geez, Medicare is dying...it's going to be dead and cold in a dozen years. So, what do the DUMBoCRAPs resort to...MediSCARE if course. Yep, you sure wouldn't want truth to get in the way of a good scary argument.
JWCinPDX 8 months ago
@adnihilo What are you an idiot? Defense spending only makes up 18% of the entire budget. Get your facts straight before you run your mouth. You can literally disband the Marines and the Air Force, sell off their assets and it still wouldn't balance the budget.
Perhaps when you pull your head out of the sand and start thinking with logic and reason rather than your bleeding heart, we can have an "Adult discussion."
cashin1243 8 months ago
@cashin1243 What are you an idiot? Defense spending only makes up 18% of the entire budget. Get your facts straight before you run your mouth.
Sure are an impolite SOB aren't ya? You're being duped by Gov't. Total Outlays (Fed Funds): $2,650 billion MILITARY: 54% and $1,449 billion NON-MILITARY: 46% and $1,210 billion
The figures are fed funds, which do not include trust funds — such as Social Security — that are raised and spent separately from income taxes.
WarResisters . org
Adnihilo 8 months ago
@cashin1243 Perhaps when you pull your head out of the sand and start thinking with logic and reason rather than your bleeding heart, we can have an "Adult discussion."
Not with you acting like a bully on the school yard lot spewing your degrading ad hominems toward me seen above
Adnihilo 8 months ago
My, my such a collection of deniers of truth. Both Republicans and Democrats have led to the demise of Medicare by allowing its unfettered expansion of benefits and spending the excess during the good years and replacing it with IOU's.
Second, Social Security age for the group Lieberman and Coburn's Medicare fix covers is ALREADY at age 67. They just bring it into sync. What the heck 60 has to do with anything is anybody's guess because Medicare doesn't start now till 65.
poetikus 8 months ago
Lieberman and Coburn, rich from public money paid with our taxes and with socialized health care for all their lives and a secure retirement tell us that people should not get Medicare until they are 67.Because we all know how many companies give jobs to 60 years old with benefits, because we know hoe many insurance companies cover for cheap old people with preexisting conditions, and believe at 60 we all have preexisting conditions.
F*&^& THAT AND GO TH F*&% TO SLEEP MR LIEBERMAN
frigoria 8 months ago
Might want to tell the truth about Medicare. I'm of the age that would be affected by the so called "killing" of Medicare. The only thing that kills Medicare is you and your Dems doing nothing.
Lieberman and Coburn put out a rational, reasonable proposal yesterday and what do Pelosi and Reid do? Trash it.
Time to grow up people. I already have to wait until 67 for Social Security, asking those even younger to wait until 67 for Medicare is not extreme. 2012 here we come.
poetikus 8 months ago
@poetikus
Medicare appears to be in trouble because the LIE PIG li CON self loathers like you buy into their
silly extrapolations.
You have Dunning Kruger syndrome.
Seek help.
cmfluteguy 8 months ago
@poetikus
You're letting the Repugs frame the message. Cutting the budget can't be discussed without cutting defense funding, which accounts for over 50% of the budget - yet repugs refuse to even consider any substantial cuts to the military while Dems refuse to bring it up in lieu of cuts to social entitlements..
Adnihilo 8 months ago
@Adnihilo you might not want to use childish names like "repugs" if you're too lazy to do basic research. defense spending is less than 20% of the entire federal budget. social entitlements are the largest portions of the federal budget, by far...soc sec and medicare are the two largest as %'s. based on future spending, these %'s will rise to the point that nearly 100% of the federal budget will have to be paid to entitlements.
get your facts straight.
jboze3131 8 months ago
@jboze3131 That 18% Equates 5-700 Billion a year averaged out since we reckless entered our wars. That's not including foreign military aid and some other items. Bombs good taking care of our elderly, disabled and poor children bad! And you call yourself the "pro-life" party.
joshuancts 8 months ago 2
@joshuancts "reckless entered our wars"? iraq and afghanistan were wars voted on in congress and approved by large majorities. the iraq war was a mere extension of the official us policy of regime change (policy since 1998 under clinton).
look up what "reckless" means. these were in no way "reckless."
you've thrown up a false dichotomy. a nation can build bombs and take care of its citizens at the same time, and we do. doesn't change the spending figures and their continual climb upward
jboze3131 8 months ago
Comment removed
howedesign 8 months ago 3
@jboze3131 "defense spending is less than 20% of the entire federal budget. social entitlements are the largest portions of the federal budget, by far...soc sec and medicare are the two largest as %'s."
False.Your percentages are wrong as the portion we pay out of our Fed Income Tax. Trust funds — such as Social Security — are raised and spent separately from income taxes. What you pay (or don’t pay) by April 15, 2008, goes to the federal funds portion of the budget.
Adnihilo 8 months ago
The government practice of combining trust and federal funds began during the Vietnam War, thus making the human needs portion of the budget seem larger and the military portion smaller.
Total Outlays (Federal Funds): $2,650 billion
MILITARY: 54% and $1,449 billion
NON-MILITARY: 46% and $1,210 billion
Adnihilo 8 months ago 4
@Adnihilo: You repeatedly use the term "Repug", yet you whine about the apparent lack of civility here? Do you happen to know the textbook definition of "irony"?
And defense spending doesn't account for anything near 50% of the budget. You've either believed an easily refuted lie, or have intentionally perpetrated a lie. Either way, no one will trust you after that blithering nonsense.
HPLoveshaft 8 months ago
@HPLoveshaft You repeatedly use the term "Repug", yet you whine about the apparent lack of civility here?
Repug is used by 1000s and is hardly uncivil - besides, it's a general term, and not directed personally to you. Directly calling me a child, stupid, lazy, and an idiot is downright rude only telling me you're a 1st class pompous, arrogant a-hole from the get go.
Adnihilo 8 months ago
@HPLoveshaft And defense spending doesn't account for anything near 50% of the budget. You've either believed an easily refuted lie, or have intentionally perpetrated a lie. Either way, no one will trust you after that blithering nonsense.
You're the impolite a-hole that repeatedly personally attacked me from the get go... I'm talking about how Fed income tax dollars are spent and not how the gov't presents its distorted view of reality, just like inflation and unemployment.
Adnihilo 8 months ago
@HPLoveshaft
The 20% figure you use is a distortion of how our income tax dollars are spent because it includes Trust Funds (e.g., Social Security), and the expenses of past military spending that are not distinguished from nonmilitary spending. Social Security is not funded by Fed Taxes so including it is irrelevant as a % of what citizens pay in Fed taxes.
Adnihilo 8 months ago
@HPLoveshaft
Current military spending accounts for 36% including added amounts for Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Libya the Feds don't include in the 20% + 18% 'past military' spending not included = 54% of total spending minus social security [because it's not funded by fed income taxes] Total Outlays (Federal Funds): $2,650 billion
MILITARY: 54% and $1,449 billion NON-MILITARY: 46% and $1,210 billion
go to warresisters org for an explanation if you still don't comprehend.
Adnihilo 8 months ago
@HPLoveshaft & @poetikus
Directly calling me a child, stupid, lazy, and an idiot is downright rude when I never personally and directly attacked either of you and only gives credence for the use of the term 'repug' in reference to repugnant republican.
Adnihilo 8 months ago