Steve
8/28/2012 9:20:00 AM
On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 03:12:48 +0000 (UTC), 3159 Dead <dead@gone.com>
wrote:
>On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 18:14:38 -0700, MattB wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 00:40:31 +0000 (UTC), 3159 Dead <dead@gone.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 13:27:18 -0700, MattB wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 12:51:55 -0700 (PDT), wy <wy_@myself.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Aug 27, 2:51?pm, MattB <trdell1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 11:11:55 -0700 (PDT), wy <w...@myself.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >On Aug 27, 1:57?pm, jane <jane.pla...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >> On Aug 24, 8:20?pm, Don't make my brown eyes China Blue
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >> <chine.b...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >> > In article <l64g38hutp3691qo7cp5vv7dhk2ftbf...@4ax.com>,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >> > ?MattB <trdell1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >> > > Compounding the problem are the baby boomers. The first of
>>>>>> >> > > the tidal
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >> > So toys for the military aren't contributing to the debt?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >> > --
>>>>>> >> > My name Indigo Montoya. ?\\ ? ? ? ?Annoying Usenet one post at
>>>>>> >> > a time. You flamed my father. ? ? \' ? ? ? ? At least I can
>>>>>> >> > stay in character. Prepare to be spanked. ? // ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
>>>>>> >> > When you look into the void,
>>>>>> >> > Stop posting that! ? ? ?`/ ?the void looks into you, and
>>>>>> >> > fulfills you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >> Of course, the military contributes to the deficit. ?However, to
>>>>>> >> illustrate how bad it is, if you eliminated every single
>>>>>> >> government department, every single government employee, the
>>>>>> >> entire security portion of government, including the military and
>>>>>> >> you paid nothing but entitlement programs and interest on the
>>>>>> >> debt, you still would not eliminate the deficit; the deficit it
>>>>>> >> THAT huge.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >You'd have no deficit at all under that scenario. ?The deficit for
>>>>>> >last year was $1.3 trillion. ?Subtract defense spending of $928
>>>>>> >billion and everything else, except the exceptions you mentioned,
>>>>>> >amounting to $483 billion and you get $1.411 trillion, or a surplus
>>>>>> >of $111 billion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well the debt is at about 16 trillion at 111 billion a year it will
>>>>>> take how long to pay off what we owe?
>>>>>
>>>>>Not as long as you think if the CBO said back in 2000 that if Bush
>>>>>continued with Clinton's economic policies, the debt would've been
>>>>>paid off by 2010. Using that assessment, at $16 trillion, and by
>>>>>going back to Clinton's policies, it would take at least 30 years to
>>>>>pay off.
>>>>
>>>> Well to me we need to overhaul every Dept in Government. Defense to
>>>> entitlement. Look for waste and possible cuts. Then revoke the Bush
>>>> tax cuts completely. They were to be temporary. Correct?
>>>>
>>>Coreect.
>>>
>>>> As I understand it some of the financial crisis can be linked to
>>>> changes made by Clinton.
>>>
>>>Yes, and the bills he signed effectively deregulating the banks and Wall
>>>Street need to be repealed.
>>>>
>>>> We also need a good work ethic in this country something Obama seems
>>>> to oppose.
>>>
>>>Now you're just spewing your racist nonsense. They's all lazy and
>>>shiftless, right?
>>
>> So all Democrats are minorities? Think it is you that are racist.
>> Obama does not want a work ethic. Long term use of such would hurt the
>> liberal base?
>
>And Obama doesn't want a work ethic because he is shiftless and lazy,
>right, bubbles?
Actually, Obama doesn't want a work ethic because so many of his
followers are shiftless and lazy.... such as you, Jamieson.