Comments by "" (@A86) on "Why Cenk Uygur Left MSNBC - Part 1" video.

@JohnnyBravoCentral - "Boehner and Cantor are ALMOST as bad as Obama!" I would argue they're as bad or worse since they're responsible for a lot of the most destructive concessions that Obama has made. Like continuing the destructive tax cuts and passing huge increases in military spending.
1
@JohnnyBravoCentral - Yes, because George W. Bush and John Boehner balanced the country's budget so well. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
1
@JohnnyBravoCentral - BS. Bush spent an amazing $11.5 Trillion during his presidency. By his last two years in office he was passing budgets around $3 trillion/year.
1
@BMcbugger - But since the tax cuts are disproportionate it's not only insulting in numbers it's insulting in impact since that puts most of the tax burden on the middle class when the middle class isn't even the group making most of the money in the country. It's part of the reason why our wages aren't going up and it puts a squeeze on small businesses to make up for the slack - and small businesses are who most Americans are employed by.
1
@JohnnyBravoCentral - Look at the situation we're in now. The median household income is lower in 2009 than it was in 1999 and adjusted for inflation most people in the bottom 95%'s income hasn't increased since 1980. Hence why we have so many people on welfare now. Yeah, not having a higher minimum wage has worked so well. Just like the Bush tax cuts worked so well. *eyeroll* Don't tell me you actually believe in Reaganomics? We're now seeing how well that worked out. Lol
1
@JohnnyBravoCentral - Complete bullshit. National debt as of 01/20/2009 - $10,626,877,048,913.08 National debt as of 07/21/2011 - $14,342,884,944,996.28 The national debt has increased by about ~$3.65 Trillion since Obama took office. Less than double. National debt as of 01/20/2001 - $5,727,776,738,304.64 It doubled under Bush. To get technical half of the FY 2009 Budget was Bush's. The FY 2009 Budget was already passed before Obama took office. Obama simply changed a few things.
1
@BMcbugger - The end of tax cuts would solve most of the Social Security problem. Medicare Parts C and D should be reformed since they're the most expensive parts. I think tax cuts should only be given to businesses which create jobs in the US and hire American workers. I also think corporate tax loopholes should be closed and sales and some excise taxes can be cut slightly. If there was a higher minimum wage we could also do away with some welfare programs.
1
@BMcbugger - "That blank check has to end" You can't really say that if you're a supporter of the biggest blank check of all - military spending. As for social programs what do you propose? That we go back to the era of the 1860s-1920s where "retirement" was either death or having to move in with your adult children or grandchildren? Back in the days when people made a dollar a day in dangerous work and 3/5 of Americans were illiterate because they had to drop out at 14 and work in the mines?
1
@BMcbugger - The main problem to me is that the tax cuts ARE A DRAIN ON THE ECONOMY. They're not paid for and every red cent of the tax cuts will be added to the national debt. You can't claim to care about the national debt when you support one of the main things adding to the debt. It's mostly the tax cuts, the bailouts and the military spending adding to the debt. Medicare and Social Security aren't the main culprits (though they add to some of it).
1
@JohnnyBravoCentral - Bush spent $11.5 Trillion in 8 years, dumbass. Not $5 Trillion. 5 trillion is how much the debt increased, which is not the same as how much money was spent total: articles (.) moneycentral (.) msn (.) com / Investing / StockInvestingTrading / cost - of - the - bush - era - 11 - point - 5 - trillion (.) aspx Whether you're defending Bush or not some of what you said is inaccurate. That's what my issue was with.
1
@JohnnyBravoCentral - BTW, net expenditures are calculated by expenditures + revenue - deficits. That's how Bush's spending comes to $11.5 trillion instead of over $20 trillion - because some of his expenditures generated revenue (though most Americans never saw the majority of it). You don't just calculate expenditures and assume there is $0 revenue from the expenditures. Take an Econ lesson before trying to lecture an economist on how to calculate budget revenues. Lol
1
@BMcbugger - I disagree that it's the only thing the government should be involved in but really? You can't cut it? And why the heck not? The military needs $1.5 trillion/year? To do what? Why is that much money needed to kill 200 guys in the desert? If you need that much goddamn money for something like that either you're horribly inefficient or this is a money-making racket (and it is a jobs program for the Military-Industrial Complex).
1
@JohnnyBravoCentral - "The only thing that matters is here and now!" Yeah, because now we're talking about the fuck-ups of a guy you voted for. I'm quite sure you don't limit yourself to the here and now. You probably still blame stuff on Clinton and Carter I'll bet. Besides, things don't work purely on a "here and now" basis. If I nuke your neighborhood the damage I did will continue long after I'm gone. Speaking of the here and now how many jobs have Boehner and Cantor created?
1
@JohnnyBravoCentral - Obama's only true budgets are the FY 2010 and FY 2011 budgets. Obama was responsible for only about 1/3 of the FY 2009 budget which was passed by George W. Bush back in October of 2008. ~$1.2 trillion (counting the Stimulus and Bailouts) + $3.552 trillion + $3.82 trillion = $8.572 trillion for Obama You fail at math. Whatever crappy homeschooling you received from your parents failed you. If you actually went to school you should get your money back.
1
@JohnnyBravoCentral - Boyfriend? Lol You really don't know me, do you? I have no more love for Obama than I do for Bush. They're about the same to me. That's why I teased you and claimed Bush is your "boytoy" since you attempting to be a stickler of facts about him is what I'm doing about Obama and you claimed he's my "boyfriend" just because I corrected your hyperbole. So Obama HAS to be worse than Bush or else he's your boyfriend? Weird logic you've got there.
1
@JohnnyBravoCentral - Bush spent significantly more from late 2006 through 2009 than he did from 2001 to mid-quarter 2006. Your argument also presumes Obama will continue spending at the rate he does now. Obama's projection for the FY 2012 Budget is a comparatively lower rate of spending than the FY 2010 and 2011 Budgets. A $3.7 trillion budget for 2012 as opposed to his 2011 $3.9 trillion budget.
1
@JohnnyBravoCentral - Am I insinuating Obama will do the same? According to Obama his projection for future FY budgets are to be smaller than the FY 2011 budget. Whether or not that will prove true remains to be seen. "I used the money he spend" The problem is 2/3 of the FY 2009 was created by the Bush Admin before Obama even won the election. Another problem is you're calculating raw expenditures, you're not subtracting the revenue returns.
1
@JohnnyBravoCentral - "already spend more than half of what Bush did" Using your method of calculation Obama has spent around $8 trillion. Maybe $9 trillion at most if I blame some more of Bush's budget for 2009 on Obama. $8 trillion is more than half of $20 trillion? Lol Like I said - you failed math. I'm sorry I slammed your boytoy Bush but facts are facts. Unlike you I don't have a dog in this fight.
1
@BMcbugger - I agree with your last sentiment but you also can't spend less by increasing funding for corporate welfare (or "subsidies" as they like to call it), passing unpaid-for tax cuts (which increased the national debt by another $900 billion) and passing huge increases in military spending. Personally I think military spending should be cut by 50-70%, corporate welfare by 90% and I say get rid of most tax cuts. That would generate a couple trillion in revenue right there.
1
@BMcbugger - "The evil isn't in that the wealthiest received such a disproportionate tax cut" That is evil when the top 10% owns 80% of the nation's financial assets but only pay around 30-something percent of its total taxes, and their only punishment for not paying taxes is a reduced bill. If I, an everyday citizen, don't pay my taxes I get hauled off to jail or have a lien placed on my assets or property. But that's not even the main reason I criticized the tax cuts.
1
@JohnnyBravoCentral - "When was the last time you were in favor of increasing your OWN tax" Right now. I'm no hypocrite, when I said get rid of the Bush/Obama tax cuts I meant ALL OF THEM. Including for the bottom 95% of wage-earners. That means myself included. Yes, a higher minimum wage. We had a comparatively higher minimum wage (adjusted for inflation and PPP) in the 50s and 60s and we had significantly higher upward mobility. The minimum wage hasn't really gone up for over a decade.
1