Don't F--- With The White House Bob!!

[CBWx2]

It's hilarious that you three idiots have never heard of inflation. Almost every year during the non-recession economy the US breaks it's revenue record because of inflation and population growth. True story. Look it up. The only reason this is news is because the recession caused the opposite trend to occur over the last few years. Inflation typically causes the dollar amount to be higher, but not the buying power, you morons. Oh, the buffoonery!

So you trying to say that the increase in Congressional spending is inflationary?

Not entirely, but in large part, yes. Simply looking at the dollar amount gives a hugely inaccurate reflection. For example, Vinny Peanut's article states that tax receipts are higher than they have ever been in history. But what if I was to tell you that since the global recession, tax receipts in relation to GDP have been the lowest that they have been since 1950? What if I was to tell you that the last 4 years have been the longest stretch that tax receipts have been under 16% of GDP since the Great Depression? Kinda puts a different "spin" on things, doesn't it?

[VinBucFan]

Has the WH denied Woodward's claim. The "threat" is only the issue to those trying to distract from the reporting.

hahaha  -- The White House ADMITS that Woodward is right:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/sperling-admits-obama-misled-debate-president-did-propose-sequester_705015.html


This ^^^^ is why certain people put so much emphasis on whether or not Woodward  was threatened rather than on whether his report was correct.  Call it whatever you want, but the WH tried to stop Woodward from reporting thyat the President moved the goal posts.  The same person in this video said that Woodward would regret reporting as much.  Regret reporting the truth?

By the way, the person being interviewed went to the CBW School of Truth Telling, so you have to watch through all the spin to see him finally admit it at the end.

And people wonder if our country is doomed? With people like this guy involved, and equally idiotic people on the other side as well, all focused on spin over truth . . .  is that really even a legitimate question?

CBW - Woodward was right and the President lied

Lol

[spartan]

It's hilarious that you three idiots have never heard of inflation. Almost every year during the non-recession economy the US breaks it's revenue record because of inflation and population growth. True story. Look it up. The only reason this is news is because the recession caused the opposite trend to occur over the last few years. Inflation typically causes the dollar amount to be higher, but not the buying power, you morons. Oh, the buffoonery!

So you trying to say that the increase in Congressional spending is inflationary?

Not entirely, but in large part, yes. Simply looking at the dollar amount gives a hugely inaccurate reflection. For example, Vinny Peanut's article states that tax receipts are higher than they have ever been in history. But what if I was to tell you that since the global recession, tax receipts in relation to GDP have been the lowest that they have been since 1950? What if I was to tell you that the last 4 years have been the longest stretch that tax receipts have been under 16% of GDP since the Great Depression? Kinda puts a different "spin" on things, doesn't it?

So what has the amount of money taken in, got anything to do with the amount spent?

If we were talking about the deficit or the National Debt, you might have a point, but we are not.

[VinBucFan]

It's hilarious that you three idiots have never heard of inflation. Almost every year during the non-recession economy the US breaks it's revenue record because of inflation and population growth. True story. Look it up. The only reason this is news is because the recession caused the opposite trend to occur over the last few years. Inflation typically causes the dollar amount to be higher, but not the buying power, you morons. Oh, the buffoonery!

So you trying to say that the increase in Congressional spending is inflationary?

Not entirely, but in large part, yes. Simply looking at the dollar amount gives a hugely inaccurate reflection. For example, Vinny Peanut's article states that tax receipts are higher than they have ever been in history. But what if I was to tell you that since the global recession, tax receipts in relation to GDP have been the lowest that they have been since 1950? What if I was to tell you that the last 4 years have been the longest stretch that tax receipts have been under 16% of GDP since the Great Depression? Kinda puts a different "spin" on things, doesn't it?

This ^^^ is classic CBW. The reason record breaking revenues is significant is because it undercuts the WH argument that more revenues were essential to avoiding sequester/reducing deficit rather than just cutting spending. Because CBW doesn't want to discuss that simple point, he offers a discussion about inflation. Lol. Here are a couple lessons from recent events:

1. The world did not come to and end with sequester, despite WH claims to the contrary
2. Sequester was the WH's plan, despite WH claims to the contrary
3 We don't need more revenues,despite WH claims to the contrary?

Seeing a trend here?

[spartan]

3 We don't need more revenues,despite WH claims to the contrary?

Actually, what we need to do is balance the outgoings with the incomings. In all honesty that can be done one of two ways, spend less or tax more (or a combination of both). The answer of course lies in your belief that either Congress is spending like drunken sailors or the rich aren't paying their fair share.

[VinBucFan]

3 We don't need more revenues,despite WH claims to the contrary?

Actually, what we need to do is balance the outgoings with the incomings. In all honesty that can be done one of two ways, spend less or tax more (or a combination of both). The answer of course lies in your belief that either Congress is spending like drunken sailors or the rich aren't paying their fair share.

I actually agree, but clearly the WH does not because it has been claiming that the sequestor cuts would crush America and, apparently, even sent word out to at least one agency asking them to NOT mitigate any harm caused by the cuts

http://www.pewterreport.com/Boards/index.php/topic,1303507.0.html

[dbucfan]

Makes one wonder if all these folks have ever seen corporate budgets - especially when it is determined the business needs to bring expenses under control.  The complaining about this less then 2% cut would make folks who work in the corporate world would make folks laugh.

[VinBucFan]

They all know what real budgets are. They just have no interest in them because actual fiscal responsibility is for someone else to deal with when the country is in full on crisis mode (now?). Most are just interest in their own jobs, which means fidelity to party politics above all.

[dbucfan]

I wonder how many have actually been a part of budgets being tightened/reduced. 

[VinBucFan]

I wonder how many have actually been a part of budgets being tightened/reduced.

That's an interesting question. Part of the term limits concept was that successful people from various fields, including businesses, would "give back" at the end of their career by serving in Congress. We definitely don't have that now as there are a lot if career politicians. Still, I assume there are some who had real private sector experience.

[Dolorous Jason]

But ...but ..... Because the Federal Reserve has caused Inflation  and a devaluing of our currency , we need to raise taxes . Come on guys , get with it. The Useful Idiot has already spoken on this matter.

[spartan]

The thing that really gets me, is that it is a 2% cut after the annual increase. We will still be spending more money than last year. That's "baseline" spending for you.

[dbucfan]

The thing that really gets me, is that it is a 2% cut after the annual increase. We will still be spending more money than last year. That's "baseline" spending for you.

I have explained baseline budgeting to literally hundreds of folks over the past several years - with so many folks completely unaware that one wonders how it is possible.

[VinBucFan]

I doubt anyone outside the agencies with those budgets would say that is a smart practice

[dbucfan]

Those folks, and the Congressional members who serve their 'friends' via Federal financing