Text 14317, 92 rader
Skriven 2007-05-09 22:56:37 av Kurt Ullman (687.babylon5)
     Kommentar till en text av rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Ärende: Re: OT: a proposal for increasing teachers' salaries
============================================================
In article <hti4439hpp855qtqmhrt957cguurb3vh9i@4ax.com>,
 Josh Hill <usereplyto@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 09 May 2007 11:40:27 GMT, Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> 
> >In article <1c5243dq8avm1q2fktm5o3k2djdjc0hmqp@4ax.com>,
> > Josh Hill <usereplyto@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> In Kennedy's case, yes. In Bush's case, no. Economists say that Bush's
> >> tax cuts /reduced/ revenues from what they otherwise would have been.
> >> 
> >> You just can't reduce this to a right-wing sound bite, Carl. Economics
> >> isn't that simple.
> >
> >  Yet you manage to do just that with unnamed economists and the 
> >assertion that there is some sort of consensus, if not unanimous 
> >agreement on this subject.
> 
> A reference to authority doesn't constitute simplification.
      Don't see a reference to anything remotely resembling an 
authority. Just unnamed and unnumbered "economists". who just so happen 
to agree with you.. or so you say. 

>  
> >> When the deficit is excessive from an economic perspective, you raise
> >> taxes or cut services.
> 
> >   No, you raise taxes. There never has been a time where they cut 
> >services or even eliminated programs that were no longer needed or 
> >working.
> 
> Programs have been cut numerous times. Overall spending increases, but
> that's to be expected, given that population increases and we grow
> wealthier and so better able to afford them.

      Other than military when the Dems are in power, name me one that 
is really cut. I don't mean in relation to what "should have been" with 
the last year plus basis, but a real honest-to-Gawd real money cut. BTW: 
Since we are better able to afford things, that means revenue is going 
up and the tax cuts worked. Glad you finally came around on that one. 

> 
> >> Not really. People's response is "reverse the tax cuts for the rich
> >> that have given us record deficits and indirectly increased taxes for
> >> the poor and middle class."
> 
> >   Again, the statements that fit in with your perspective but are 
> >pretty much entirely free of any actual substance. 
> 
> Are you saying that with a straight face? You've just made /two/ such
> statements in a row. I can't speak for others, but if you hope to
> convince me that I'm wrong, you will have to make an actual argument
> rather than criticizing my haircut.
      No, they were full of substance. The substance was that your posts 
lacked any. Some undefined "people's" are responding in a way that 
certainly agrees with you.  



> >> The Democrats are better than today's Republicans when it comes to
> >> pork, yes. Far from perfect, but better. Which is true of most of the
> >> choices we have in life, no?
> 
> >  I haven't seen any indication of that. Indeed, the last major Pork 
> >fest, the Transportation Bill, the Dems as well as the GOP. This bill 
> >alone makes the best argument for a balanced budget amendment precisely 
> >because they both did so well.
> 
> Pork soared under the Republican Congress and Administration, Kurt.
> That's been widely reported.
    Again. By whom? In what context? How was pork measured? Maybe you 
should at least pretend to throw a fact or two my way just to humour me. 

> 
> >> Our nation's best years occurred when one party controlled both the
> >> presidency and the Congress. We need two parties, but one of the
> >> reasons for that is that one will be better than the other. In
> >> Lincoln's day, it was the Republicans; in more recent years, it's been
> >> the Democrats.
> >
> >     Ahh, for most of Clinton's term there was a divided Congress you 
> >gonna say that was lousy time? Actually, especially since WWI, the times 
> >when the same party controlled both houses of Congress and the White 
> >House have been relatively few.
> 
> It would likely have been better had the Democrats controlled
> Congress.

     GUFFAW. You are shameless, me bucko.
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)