Alright Senate, now do your fucking job

The democrats would have spent more... that's the problem, the GOP used to be about cutting and smaller government now they are for growing it too…

And yes I know this isn't the annual budget, but it's what it's based on... and when you tout dodge and don't have any of their cuts in there, it's a joke... and I'll believe we will have spending cuts in the cr in September when I see it... the GOP is spineless.
 
we’re all concerned about it for both Democrat and Republican administrations.

My irritation is you guys seem to lose track of it when a Republican is in charge sort of like…. now

for the bitching you guys do about the deficit not one of you called that out as a concern on this thread you don’t have to take my word for it just look
 
Last edited:
Goduckies said:
The democrats would have spent more... that's the problem, the GOP used to be about cutting and smaller government now they are for growing it too…

And yes I know this isn't the annual budget, but it's what it's based on... and when you tout dodge and don't have any of their cuts in there, it's a joke... and I'll believe we will have spending cuts in the cr in September when I see it... the GOP is spineless.
Click to expand...
The fact you have not allowed the past 45 years to disabuse you of the notion that the GOP was ever about "cutting and smaller government" is perhaps the single best proof that you really CAN fool some of the people all of the time.
 
And fuck yes I want taxes cut more. Which increases revenue but don't let facts get in your way
 
RaceBannon said:
And fuck yes I want taxes cut more. Which increases revenue but don't let facts get in your way
Click to expand...
Every tax policy we've ever had coincided with increased revenues. Because the American economy, stupid. It isn't even in doubt that revenues would be higher but for the Bush and Trump tax cuts—the tax cuts that actually put us on the path to an unsustainable and ever-growing deficit. And yes, it's politically difficult to raise taxes; much easier to put everything on a credit card.
 
Last edited:
So cutting taxes isn't cutting revenue. Glad we cleared that up
So the people you voted for didn't want to repeal the tax cut and that's my problem?
I'm sure a trillion dollar green energy boondoggle helped the deficit
The voters are on to the democrats bullshit Sally
 
I love suppressors being removed from NFA but they needed to keep SBR's on the bill too!
 
RaceBannon said:
So cutting taxes isn't cutting revenue. Glad we cleared that up
So the people you voted for didn't want to repeal the tax cut and that's my problem?
I'm sure a trillion dollar green energy boondoggle helped the deficit
The voters are on to the democrats bullshit Sally
Click to expand...

It isn't even in doubt that revenues would be higher but for the Bush and Trump tax cuts
I'm perfectly happy to see your entitlements cut in order to compensate.
 
HHusky said:
RaceBannon said:
So cutting taxes isn't cutting revenue. Glad we cleared that up
So the people you voted for didn't want to repeal the tax cut and that's my problem?
I'm sure a trillion dollar green energy boondoggle helped the deficit
The voters are on to the democrats bullshit Sally
Click to expand...

It isn't even in doubt that revenues would be higher but for the Bush and Trump tax cuts
I'm perfectly happy to see your entitlements cut in order to compensate.
Click to expand...
Average life expectancy when social security was started was about 62 years of age. It's now over 79. Raise the age for SS payments as a starting point. Pretty simple.
 
BleachedAnusDawg said:
HHusky said:
RaceBannon said:
So cutting taxes isn't cutting revenue. Glad we cleared that up
So the people you voted for didn't want to repeal the tax cut and that's my problem?
I'm sure a trillion dollar green energy boondoggle helped the deficit
The voters are on to the democrats bullshit Sally
Click to expand...

It isn't even in doubt that revenues would be higher but for the Bush and Trump tax cuts
I'm perfectly happy to see your entitlements cut in order to compensate.
Click to expand...
Average life expectancy when social security was started was about 62 years of age. It's now over 79. Raise the age for SS payments as a starting point. Pretty simple.
Click to expand...
That's a little misleading because the average life expectancy for someone who had reached working age adulthood was much higher than 62 even in the 1930s. But a further raising of the age for payments is one option. So is raising the amount of income subject to social security tax.
 
You're advocating for higher income tax. I'm shocked.
Structure it like the lottery where you can take a one lump payout at a reduced rate, or take annualized payments. Make SS an actual investment program. Think of ways to grow the pie that don't involve taking more money out of the pockets of Americans.
 
Goduckies said:
The democrats would have spent more... that's the problem, the GOP used to be about cutting and smaller government now they are for growing it too…

And yes I know this isn't the annual budget, but it's what it's based on... and when you tout dodge and don't have any of their cuts in there, it's a joke... and I'll believe we will have spending cuts in the cr in September when I see it... the GOP is spineless.
Click to expand...
”the democrats would have spent more” is the new excuse for fucking the deficit yet again. Just like term 1
 
HHusky said:
Goduckies said:
The democrats would have spent more... that's the problem, the GOP used to be about cutting and smaller government now they are for growing it too…

And yes I know this isn't the annual budget, but it's what it's based on... and when you tout dodge and don't have any of their cuts in there, it's a joke... and I'll believe we will have spending cuts in the cr in September when I see it... the GOP is spineless.
Click to expand...
The fact you have not allowed the past 45 years to disabuse you of the notion that the GOP was ever about "cutting and smaller government" is perhaps the single best proof that you really CAN fool some of the people all of the time.
Click to expand...
So with this logic, you must agree that Dems don't actually support abortion, right?
 
Cutting the zillions of illegals and fraudsters from social security and Medicare should have taken care of the problem.
 
Last edited:
HHusky said:
RaceBannon said:
So cutting taxes isn't cutting revenue. Glad we cleared that up
So the people you voted for didn't want to repeal the tax cut and that's my problem?
I'm sure a trillion dollar green energy boondoggle helped the deficit
The voters are on to the democrats bullshit Sally
Click to expand...

It isn't even in doubt that revenues would be higher but for the Bush and Trump tax cuts
I'm perfectly happy to see your entitlements cut in order to compensate.
Click to expand...
I'm sure you are but they don't need to be
Democrats accuse the GOP of cutting benefits while H says benefits have to be cut
I'll let him debate himself further
Tax cuts raise revenue. So does cutting spending
Which was what DOGE was about but for some reason you girls wanted to burn Tesla dealerships
 
BleachedAnusDawg said:
You're advocating for higher income tax. I'm shocked.
Structure it like the lottery where you can take a one lump payout at a reduced rate, or take annualized payments. Make SS an actual investment program. Think of ways to grow the pie that don't involve taking more money out of the pockets of Americans.
Click to expand...
It's not gambling or an investment program. It's more akin to insurance.
I do like your idea of doing things with the age of claiming benefits. For example, I'm not taking Social Security before I reach age 70 because payments increase 8% for every year I don't. At age 70, I have no incentive not to take my benefits, even though I won't need them in order to live comfortably. If I had the option of deferring benefits beyond age 70, with benefits still increasing by some percentage, I might choose to bet on my own longevity by waiting. If the fear of most retirees is outliving their money, it seems like an idea worth considering.
 
HHusky said:
BleachedAnusDawg said:
You're advocating for higher income tax. I'm shocked.
Structure it like the lottery where you can take a one lump payout at a reduced rate, or take annualized payments. Make SS an actual investment program. Think of ways to grow the pie that don't involve taking more money out of the pockets of Americans.
Click to expand...
It's not gambling or an investment program. It's more akin to insurance.
I do like your idea of doing things with the age of claiming benefits. For example, I'm not taking Social Security before I reach age 70 because payments increase 8% for every year I don't. At age 70, I have no incentive not to take my benefits, even though I won't need them in order to live comfortably. If I had the option of deferring benefits beyond age 70, with benefits still increasing by some percentage, I might choose to bet on my own longevity by waiting. If the fear of most retirees is outliving their money, it seems like an idea worth considering.
Click to expand...
That's the "how we've always done it" argument. When was the last actual SS reform? 1983? It can be modernized. Allowing people to take a reduced sum all at once, versus a longer payout, is not gambling.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top