Maker Pro
Maker Pro

I'll trade one shrimp on a treadmill for

C

Charlie E.

Jan 1, 1970
0
There were years when we had a surplus. Why do you think that was? Do
you think it was because we cut spending dramatically? Do you think it
was because we raised taxed dramatically?

Neither, it was because the economy did well enough those years that
they unexpectedly received more than budgeted, and they didn't have an
opportunity to get it spent in time... ;-)
 
The managers all know that if they have money left before Oct. they
need to spend it all, so they will get more next year.

8% more than the pre-sequester money. Compound 8% increases over a
few decades and you get to a significant proportion of the GDP.
 
There were years when we had a surplus.

When, exactly, were these "years"?
Why do you think that was? Do
you think it was because we cut spending dramatically? Do you think it
was because we raised taxed dramatically?

No, dolt, the only *year* that could conceivably have anything called
a "surplus", was the peak of the .bomb bubble. It wasn't increased
taxes, it was a *way* overheated economy. Then it burst...
 
G

George Herold

Jan 1, 1970
0
Not quite.  Read the Constitution.  ALL spending bills must pass in
the House.

                                        ...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson                                 |    mens     |
| Analog Innovations                               |     et      |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems  |    manus    |
| Phoenix, Arizona  85048    Skype: Contacts Only  |             |
| Voice:(480)460-2350  Fax: Available upon request |  Brass Rat  |
| E-mail Icon athttp://www.analog-innovations.com|    1962     |

I love to cook with wine.     Sometimes I even put it in the food.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Our g'vment is so broken, it sickens me.
Would a revolt from the middle to pass the Simpson-Bowles 'thingie'.
and stop all this ...ing around,
have a chance?

George H.
 
G

George Herold

Jan 1, 1970
0
36:42 -0600, amdx <[email protected]>
wrote:
 one border guard or one airport security guard.
But I guess Barry wants to make spending cut as
painful as possible.
                                    Mikek
As I see it, if he were a responsible administrator, we should now
have on a web page somewhere EXACTLY how he will handle the sequester.
It should detail cuts to each department, how many positions or
furloughs this cut will involve, and how it will be administered.
imagine the out cry if he starts to micro manage every department in
every states that needs to cut spending
isn't figuring out how to make the budget add up, up to the
congress?
Instead of professionalism, we get doom and gloom, and the sense that
the word came down from the WH to make the cuts as painful as possible
to the american people...
It has always been like that, when faced with cuts people pick the
most
painful thing they can find in the hope that they can get the public
all
fired up and  scare the politicians to cancel the cuts
-Lasse
No, it is the EXECUTIVE branch that actually is supposed to do things..
All the legislative branch is supposed to do is APPROVE the budget.
Now, that may not be what has happened in recent years, but that is
more to do with power grabs by the congress, and timidity in the WH....
Not quite.  Read the Constitution.  ALL spending bills must pass in
the House.
                                        ...Jim Thompson
[snip]

Our g'vment is so broken, it sickens me.
Would a revolt from the middle to pass the Simpson-Bowles 'thingie'.
and stop all this ...ing around,
have a chance?
George H.

I think we have so many "beneficiaries" that there's no chance in hell
of reversal.  The United States as we once knew it is gone, and the
United States is doomed to total collapse.

We can always hope that it results in civil war... I want so much to
shoot a few liberals (and some horse's asses, no matter their
political flavor ;-)

                                        ...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson                                 |    mens     |
| Analog Innovations                               |     et      |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems  |    manus    |
| Phoenix, Arizona  85048    Skype: Contacts Only  |             |
| Voice:(480)460-2350  Fax: Available upon request |  Brass Rat  |
| E-mail Icon athttp://www.analog-innovations.com|    1962     |

I love to cook with wine.     Sometimes I even put it in the food.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Hmm OK, guess I'm just hopeful.

'total collapse' is in no one's best interst.

George H.
 
Yes, they have to PASS the house, but they don't have to originate
there.

All *revenue* bills must originate in the House, in theory. In
practice, no one cares about the Constitution.
In a company, you don't have the board of directories create
the budget, they just approve it...

In a company, the BoD doesn't create the money, either, and they sure
will change the budget based on the RoI and economic climate dictates.
 
Again, they AUTHORIZE it, often now in way too specific legislation.
It was all a power grab by the Congress to control the executive
branch by tightening the purse strings.

Neither branch is autonomous, nor can it be.
 
R

rickman

Jan 1, 1970
0
Neither, it was because the economy did well enough those years that
they unexpectedly received more than budgeted, and they didn't have an
opportunity to get it spent in time... ;-)

Bing, bing, bing! This student gets an A for the week! Well, for the
initial answer. The rest is just attitude and he will have to show up
in detention for that. If they didn't spend it because it was
unanticipated, then why did they have surpluses for four years running?
Could they really not see the trend? In the first half of the 2000
decade all the local governments saw the money rolling in and had no
trouble spending it so fast that they didn't know what hit them by the
time it went back to normal. The irony is that they don't explain the
"bubble" in the tax revenues that way (mostly property taxes). The just
complain about how much it dropped with the bubble burst.
 
R

rickman

Jan 1, 1970
0
When, exactly, were these "years"?


No, dolt, the only *year* that could conceivably have anything called
a "surplus", was the peak of the .bomb bubble. It wasn't increased
taxes, it was a *way* overheated economy. Then it burst...

Ok, this one is squarely on you. If you don't know any of the basic
facts about the economy and government there is no point discussing this
with you. Can you say "google"?

BTW, when you call someone a "dolt" and in the process show that you are
rather ignorant of the facts, it makes you look pretty bad. Maybe you
could ease off of using pejoratives from now on? Just a thought.
 
Ok, this one is squarely on you. If you don't know any of the basic
facts about the economy and government there is no point discussing this
with you. Can you say "google"?

I can say, "I know you lefties lie".
BTW, when you call someone a "dolt" and in the process show that you are
rather ignorant of the facts, it makes you look pretty bad. Maybe you
could ease off of using pejoratives from now on? Just a thought.

When I call someone a "dolt" it's only because they've proven, a
number of times, that they are. That would be you, dolt!
 
On Feb 27, 12:02 pm, Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@On-
My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
36:42 -0600, amdx <[email protected]>
wrote:
 one border guard or one airport security guard.
But I guess Barry wants to make spending cut as
painful as possible.
                                    Mikek
As I see it, if he were a responsible administrator, we should now
have on a web page somewhere EXACTLY how he will handle the sequester.
It should detail cuts to each department, how many positions or
furloughs this cut will involve, and how it will be administered..
imagine the out cry if he starts to micro manage every department in
every states that needs to cut spending
isn't figuring out how to make the budget add up, up to the
congress?
Instead of professionalism, we get doom and gloom, and the sensethat
the word came down from the WH to make the cuts as painful as possible
to the american people...
It has always been like that, when faced with cuts people pick the
most
painful thing they can find in the hope that they can get the public
all
fired up and  scare the politicians to cancel the cuts
-Lasse
No, it is the EXECUTIVE branch that actually is supposed to do things.
All the legislative branch is supposed to do is APPROVE the budget.
Now, that may not be what has happened in recent years, but that is
more to do with power grabs by the congress, and timidity in the WH....
Not quite.  Read the Constitution.  ALL spending bills must passin
the House.
                                        ...Jim Thompson [snip]
Our g'vment is so broken, it sickens me.
Would a revolt from the middle to pass the Simpson-Bowles 'thingie'.
and stop all this ...ing around,
have a chance?
George H.
I think we have so many "beneficiaries" that there's no chance in hell
of reversal.  The United States as we once knew it is gone, and the
United States is doomed to total collapse.
We can always hope that it results in civil war... I want so much to
shoot a few liberals (and some horse's asses, no matter their
political flavor ;-)


Hmm OK, guess I'm just hopeful.

'total collapse' is in no one's best interst.

Right, it's nasty. That's why I've been following the country's
finances and politics the past few years like never before. I read
the Treasury reports.

We're spending far, far more than we can afford. George, we were
spending $1.84 for every $1.00 in revenue the first two months of this
year. Yet, here's the President, telling us that spending 1.2% less
than he'd planned this year--which is still more than the previous
year--is impossible, that airplanes will fall from the sky, cats
sleeping with dogs, etc.

There isn't enough money on the planet--quite literally--to pay for
that. If we can't find a 1.2% efficiency improvement anywhere,
America's done.

And, instead of trying to save, to make the best use of the resources
we have, the President is deliberately trying to ensure the maximum
pain, chaos and fear, targeting vulnerable groups, colluding with Ray
LaHood and the union reps to disrupt air travel, defense, and more.

If a foreigner were trying to disrupt society--its infrastructure,
travel, and government services--for political aims, we'd call it
"terrorism."

It's getting ugly.

It all comes down to one fundamental misunderstanding, which the
President just repeated: half the country thinks the government is a
provider, without realizing that anything the government gives you
they have to take from someone first.

Obama said the economy will falter if the sequester takes effect
because people will have less money to spend, chopping demand for
goods and services. That's exactly wrong--deficit spending of
necessity takes money *from* the economy to fund its excesses, and
saddles us with debt.

The truth is the economy is already faltering, has never recovered,
and, on this course it's going to get worse. This redistribution
stuff doesn't fix the problems, it makes them worse. The Federalist
papers, Paine's Common Sense, Bastiat's "The Law," and many other
works all warned of it: a gov't used to take (forcibly) from some to
give to others is unstable, and leads to revolution.

Fortunately we all have cool jobs and fun toys.

James Arthur
 
J

josephkk

Jan 1, 1970
0
The real shame is, in 2012 the US Gov. spent 3.8 trillion dollars.
The tax revenue was 2.5 trillion dollars. The overspending was 1.3
trillion dollars.

And they want to cut 85 billion?

And even if they do that cut, they are spending more than in 2012.

It is sick.
It is my not humble opinion that the correct term is high treason. But
there will be nothing done, too much of Congress colluded.

?-)
 
Top