HOWEVER, it's ******* ridiculous and disgraceful to say "I don't care about them." That says a lot more about you than you probably need to tell.
I have every right to feel however I'd like about the troops or their situation (or anything else in the world, for that matter). What IS ridiculous is for anyone else to tell me I'm not allowed to feel the way I feel, as you're apparently trying to do here.
Your problem here is you want to assign attributes to me that are not at all reflected in what I've said, which you indicate by saying "that says a lot more about you than you probably need to tell".
No, it doesn't. It says nothing about me except my opinion on the topic at hand. That's all. Anything else you read into it is your own (almost assuredly misguided) assumption. Usually those who make such assumptions then jump to incorrect conclusions and set themselves up to look foolish.
Looks to me that you're learning to be brief. Good job.
Then I guess you're really going to freak out when you read this one. Now THAT thought has me laughing again. Your comedy act never ends, does it?
If income taxes are eliminated, it won't be the government spending the money now will it?
I'd be in favor of making ALL taxes income taxes and streamlining the process so that you pay a certain percentage based upon your income (with the wealthy paying MUCH more than the middle and lower classes). This would also include the elimination of most or all deductions and other ways to artificially lower your tax rate. You pay the percentage no matter what. That would make sure everyone pays their fair share.
I'd rather deal with an extended recession now than a major security issue and potential total economic collapse 30 years in the future.
I don't want to see either, but an extended recession now would terribly harm those who are already on the brink of not being able to provide for their basic needs. We don't need more unemployment or people employed in jobs that don't pay an actual living wage. If we don't worry about now, the future won't matter.
If it were all tied up in bonds held within the country it's only a long-term economic risk, but when so much of it is owned by China and other nations that aren't particularly strong allies it is a long-term security risk.
Sure it can be a security risk, but ignoring the domestic economy in order to stop a potential risk in the future is only going to make worse problems in the US.
But that money is being used to employ people who use their paychecks to buy stuff. That's economic activity that is eliminated. Cut enough of it to actual impact the deficit and it becomes a major drag on the economy. Even Romney
said so.
It sounds like someone actually gets that the economy depends upon consumer spending if it is going to recover and function properly.
Nothing will ever improve the economy unless it improves consumer spending, and most of that is done by the middle class (as the rich tend to invest their money instead and the poor don't have it to spare to begin with).
One solution very few people actually think of or say is to encourage the wealthy to spend more of their money instead of investing it. Done by enough people with enough money, this would absolutely stimulate the economy. The problem is most wealthy individuals don't want to spend money unless it stands to make them more money, which is why they invest instead.
When the economy is slow because demand has fallen (what's been going on since 2008), cutting spending weakens demand further.
This is true as long as it ultimately means cutting CONSUMER spending (and cutting spending in other places often ends in that result). I'm glad someone can see how spending is linked to economic recovery and prosperity.
this is the last time I respond to you.... as you've been promoted to 'idiotic poster'. You and swamp are in an elite club together. congratulations!
When you disagree with someone but can't find a retort against the logical points they make, it's easier to simply call them names or insult them and then ignore them. After all, if you don't respond because they're a (insert childish name here), then you can claim a victory of sorts, when in reality you didn't make any argument against them at all.
I guess there is something good to be said - at least you're bowing out of a debate you didn't have the ability to win in the first place. It's oddly noble when people realize their limitations and shoot for goals they actually can achieve. Congratulations on that.
go research debt as a % of GDP... and it's impact on economic recoveries. fascinating stuff.
The U.S. debt to GDP ratio seems alarming when taken by itself, and while it would be better if the percentage were lower (more ability to pay off debt), it is actually lower than several other countries.
The problem for the U.S. is that its debt is held in a larger percentage by foreign countries rather than domestically.