XPost: alt.society.liberalism, alt.atheism, talk.politics.guns   
   From: me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net   
      
   "Free Lunch"  wrote in message   
   news:4cecp8dtq2tp55eiijkqjor6ml83pj1oig@4ax.com...   
   > On Thu, 16 May 2013 22:08:58 -0400, "Scout"   
   >  wrote in alt.atheism:   
   >   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>"Free Lunch"  wrote in message   
   >>news:kroap89c498pgk07js3e5cui1tq7od9edk@4ax.com...   
   >>> On Thu, 16 May 2013 18:24:10 -0400, "Scout"   
   >>>  wrote in alt.atheism:   
   >>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>"Free Lunch"  wrote in message   
   >>>>news:8fmap81ea903324epphsnlp94855m2l0o2@4ax.com...   
   >>>>> On Wed, 15 May 2013 20:49:30 -0500, RD Sandman   
   >>>>>  wrote in alt.atheism:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>Free Lunch  wrote in   
   >>>>>>news:fb48p8h4dheale4uoutm46c91a0ni7p8qc@4ax.com:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> On Wed, 15 May 2013 16:41:05 -0600, deep wrote in alt.atheism:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>On Wed, 15 May 2013 16:47:25 -0500, RD Sandman   
   >>>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> And I believe Obama signed into law some $800 Billion of   
   >>>>>>>>>> additional   
   >>>>>>>>>> spending into that budget while he was President.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Since they had already budgeted more than they had in revenue   
   >>>>>>>>>> shouldn't we calculate that entire amount added under Obama as   
   >>>>>>deficit   
   >>>>>>>>>> spending?   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>;)   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>Gee, and here I thought the budget was the responsiblity of the   
   >>>>>>>>House   
   >>>>>>>>of Representatives.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>Since when did The Executive write the budget?   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> The budget is just a plan. It has never had any meaning for   
   >>>>>>> congress,   
   >>>>>>> even if they pass it. The spending and tax bills are supposed to try   
   >>>>>>> to   
   >>>>>>> match the budget that might have been passed, but if they don't, no   
   >>>>>>> problem, only the spending and tax bills become law.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>And when compared to the budget, become deficits and surpluses which   
   >>>>>>add   
   >>>>>>to the debt.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Indeed they do. One of the biggest concerns in the West right now is   
   >>>>> that government spending has cut back too much, slowing the growth of   
   >>>>> the US, giving the Eurozone another recession and leaving the UK dead   
   >>>>> in   
   >>>>> the water. Deficits can be good or bad, depending on the rest of the   
   >>>>> economy. The national debt is already a sunk cost and can be generally   
   >>>>> ignored for short-term planning.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>Well, European countries are free to donate as much money as they like.   
   >>>>I'm   
   >>>>sure the Obama can find something to spend it on. He certainly hasn't   
   >>>>had   
   >>>>trouble spending far more than we have.   
   >>>>   
   >>> You don't seem to understand the problem. Austerity at this time hurts   
   >>> Europe and it hurts the US. Austerity supporters have demonstrated their   
   >>> ignorance of economics.   
   >>   
   >>I agree. Europe should borrow tons of money and give it to Obama so he can   
   >>spend it.   
   >>   
   >>After all. Obama is already running the US into the ground at a rate of   
   >>over   
   >>$1 Trillion dollars a year. Surely Europe should be able to match that if   
   >>they are really considered about declining US government spending.   
   >>   
   >>Now you were saying something about austerity?   
   >>   
   >>   
   > You keep reminding us that you understand nothing about economics or   
   > about the US deficit.   
      
   Oh, so you're telling us we need to be concerned with our massive deficits   
   and that we need to reduce government spending drastically so that we won't   
   run our economy into the ground with government debt and excessive taxation?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)