NOYB wrote:
.... The government can
borrow ad infinitum because there will always be revenue coming in.


Don't you feel kinda strange, calling yourself a "conservative" and
posting things like this?

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
NOYB wrote:
.... The government can borrow ad infinitum because there will always be
revenue coming in.


Don't you feel kinda strange, calling yourself a "conservative" and
posting things like this?


I'm a social conservative, and fiscal moderate.

I don't mind spending money, as long as I see see the fruits of the
expenditures. Money paid towards a strong military, towards building the
nation's infrastructure, towards encouraging new business growth, and
towards education are worthwhile expenditures. Money paid to second and
third generation welfare recipients, and subsidies paid towards dying
technologies to keep them afloat are poor expenditures.

.... The government can borrow ad infinitum because there will always be
revenue coming in.


Don't you feel kinda strange, calling yourself a "conservative" and
posting things like this?



NOYB wrote:
I'm a social conservative, and fiscal moderate.

I don't mind spending money, as long as I see see the fruits of the
expenditures. Money paid towards a strong military,

How about money squandered on pointless slaughter, while obscene profits
are not only raked in by favored industries... and troops go without
needed equipment... but those same favored companies commit fraud &
outright theft?

... towards building the
nation's infrastructure,

Can you point to a single example of this in Bush/Cheney's budgets?

... towards encouraging new business growth

Ditto

... and
towards education are worthwhile expenditures.

Now this is funny. Are you familiar with the term 'unfunded mandate'? It
perfectly describes Bush/Cheney's federal education programs...

... Money paid to second and
third generation welfare recipients,

Hasn't happened since Clinton ended "welfare as we know it."

... and subsidies paid towards dying
technologies to keep them afloat are poor expenditures.


You mean like 1950s style oil bid'ness?

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
. ..
.... The government can borrow ad infinitum because there will always
be revenue coming in.


Don't you feel kinda strange, calling yourself a "conservative" and
posting things like this?



NOYB wrote:
I'm a social conservative, and fiscal moderate.

I don't mind spending money, as long as I see see the fruits of the
expenditures. Money paid towards a strong military,

How about money squandered on pointless slaughter, while obscene profits
are not only raked in by favored industries... and troops go without
needed equipment... but those same favored companies commit fraud &
outright theft?


You really have a warped view of what's really going on.


... towards building the nation's infrastructure,

Can you point to a single example of this in Bush/Cheney's budgets?

Just one? How 'bout lots:

Transportation:
a.. Provides full funding of the Highway "guarantee" level of $32.3
billion, o support state and local highway and bridge improvements. This
funding level includes $145 million for the President's New Freedom
Initiative to ensure transportation alternatives are available for the
disabled and increases research and development funding to support
congestion reduction technology initiatives.



b.. Includes full funding of the Mass Transit "guarantee" level of $6.7
billion, to expand mass transit programs.



c.. Provides full funding for the Aviation "firewall" level of $13.3
billion, to meet the Federal Aviation Administration's operating, safety and
security responsibilities and to minimize air traffic delays and modernize
the air traffic system.



d.. Proposes $5.1 billion for the Coast Guard, to support operational
requirements and begin rebuilding the Coast Guard's aging fleet of ships and
aircraft.



e.. Provides $521 million for Amtrak capital programs-a funding level that
supports the railroad's glidepath to achieve operational self-sufficiency.
Corps of Engineers:
a.. Targets funds for completing priority ongoing projects, such as the
environmental restoration work in the Florida Everglades.



b.. Reduces funding for studying potential new projects, given the $40
billion backlog of construction projects that are either ongoing or
authorized but not started.



c.. Provides a funding increase for the Corps' program for evaluating
proposed development in wetlands.



... towards encouraging new business growth

Ditto


According the the Natinal Federation of Independent Businesses, Bush has a
near 100% perfect record on issues affecting small businesses.



... and towards education are worthwhile expenditures.

Now this is funny. Are you familiar with the term 'unfunded mandate'? It
perfectly describes Bush/Cheney's federal education programs...


Look at this graph:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/usbud...mages/19-1.gif

"NOYB" wrote in message
k.net...

"DSK" wrote in message
. ..
.... The government can borrow ad infinitum because there will always
be revenue coming in.


Don't you feel kinda strange, calling yourself a "conservative" and
posting things like this?



NOYB wrote:
I'm a social conservative, and fiscal moderate.

I don't mind spending money, as long as I see see the fruits of the
expenditures. Money paid towards a strong military,

How about money squandered on pointless slaughter, while obscene profits
are not only raked in by favored industries... and troops go without
needed equipment... but those same favored companies commit fraud &
outright theft?


You really have a warped view of what's really going on.

You really have a warped view of economics. Does not matter what entity, it
can not borrow forever, no matter it's lifespan. You get to the condition
on countries of Brazil, 15-50% inflation. Germany, after WWII when the
paper was worth more than the money printed on it. Inflation is a tax!

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
ink.net...

"NOYB" wrote in message
k.net...

"DSK" wrote in message
. ..
.... The government can borrow ad infinitum because there will
always
be revenue coming in.


Don't you feel kinda strange, calling yourself a "conservative" and
posting things like this?



NOYB wrote:
I'm a social conservative, and fiscal moderate.

I don't mind spending money, as long as I see see the fruits of the
expenditures. Money paid towards a strong military,

How about money squandered on pointless slaughter, while obscene
profits
are not only raked in by favored industries... and troops go without
needed equipment... but those same favored companies commit fraud &
outright theft?


You really have a warped view of what's really going on.

You really have a warped view of economics. Does not matter what entity,
it
can not borrow forever, no matter it's lifespan.

But we're not "borrowing forever". A country will have economic ups and
downs. In the "down" years, net tax receipts fall, and deficits surge. In
the "up" years, net receipts rise, and the deficits shrink. Since a country
like the US has an infinite lifespan, *AND A CONSTANTLY EXPANDING ECONOMY*,
it can weather long, long periods of deficits without any adverse affects.



You get to the condition
on countries of Brazil, 15-50% inflation. Germany, after WWII when the
paper was worth more than the money printed on it. Inflation is a tax!


And what is the current inflation rate in the United States?

"NOYB" wrote in message
.net...

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
ink.net...

"NOYB" wrote in message
k.net...

"DSK" wrote in message
. ..
.... The government can borrow ad infinitum because there will
always
be revenue coming in.


Don't you feel kinda strange, calling yourself a "conservative" and
posting things like this?



NOYB wrote:
I'm a social conservative, and fiscal moderate.

I don't mind spending money, as long as I see see the fruits of the
expenditures. Money paid towards a strong military,

How about money squandered on pointless slaughter, while obscene
profits
are not only raked in by favored industries... and troops go without
needed equipment... but those same favored companies commit fraud &
outright theft?


You really have a warped view of what's really going on.

You really have a warped view of economics. Does not matter what
entity,
it
can not borrow forever, no matter it's lifespan.

But we're not "borrowing forever". A country will have economic ups and
downs. In the "down" years, net tax receipts fall, and deficits surge.
In
the "up" years, net receipts rise, and the deficits shrink. Since a
country
like the US has an infinite lifespan, *AND A CONSTANTLY EXPANDING
ECONOMY*,
it can weather long, long periods of deficits without any adverse affects.



You get to the condition
on countries of Brazil, 15-50% inflation. Germany, after WWII when the
paper was worth more than the money printed on it. Inflation is a tax!


And what is the current inflation rate in the United States?



About 2.5%. What was the unexceptable inflation rate when Nixon put in wage
and price controls? 3.5%. At 2.5% costs will double in 28 years.

How about money squandered on pointless slaughter, while obscene profits
are not only raked in by favored industries... and troops go without
needed equipment... but those same favored companies commit fraud &
outright theft?



NOYB wrote:
You really have a warped view of what's really going on.


You think so because you're looking through warped glasses.

Did several companies awarded no-bid contracts for the military...
awarded at the direction Cheney's office... either provide poor service
(a commonly reported example is spoiled food) or no service? Did any
companies "lose" gov't supplied equipment? Did any companies take
advantage of the billions of dollars loosely thrown around by the
provisional gov't in Iraq? Etc etc.

Nod your head yes. It will only hurt a little bit, and the truth is good
for you.




... towards building the nation's infrastructure,

Can you point to a single example of this in Bush/Cheney's budgets?


Just one? How 'bout lots:

Transportation:
a.. Provides full funding of the Highway "guarantee" level of $32.3
billion, o support state and local highway and bridge improvements. This
funding level includes $145 million for the President's New Freedom
Initiative to ensure transportation alternatives are available for the
disabled and increases research and development funding to support
congestion reduction technology initiatives.


Numbers like this are meaningless without a comparison of previous
annual expenditures on the same line item.

In short... a lot of ballyhooing about nothing... more hat, still no
cattle...

b.. Includes full funding of the Mass Transit "guarantee" level of $6.7
billion, to expand mass transit programs.


Ditto


c.. Provides full funding for the Aviation "firewall" level of $13.3
billion, to meet the Federal Aviation Administration's operating, safety and
security responsibilities and to minimize air traffic delays and modernize
the air traffic system.


If that's true, then why are all the pilots complaining publicly about
how the FAA *still* hasn't made any significant improvement in airline
security?


d.. Proposes $5.1 billion for the Coast Guard, to support operational
requirements and begin rebuilding the Coast Guard's aging fleet of ships and
aircraft.


If that's true, then how come all the Coasties I know (a fairly long
list) universally complain about getting heaped with more tasking ans
less funding? The ironic thing is that many of them are Bush supporters,
but none of them believe this "new budget" is any kind of improvement.



e.. Provides $521 million for Amtrak capital programs-a funding level that
supports the railroad's glidepath to achieve operational self-sufficiency.

A line of crapola from way back. Why should the railroads be
"self-supporting" when their main competition is nearly 100% subsidized?
However, *if* this number does actually represent an improvement in
funding then that's good.


Corps of Engineers:
a.. Targets funds for completing priority ongoing projects, such as the
environmental restoration work in the Florida Everglades.


Looking for oil?

b.. Reduces funding for studying potential new projects, given the $40
billion backlog of construction projects that are either ongoing or
authorized but not started.


Such as keeping the ICW open for commercial traffic?

c.. Provides a funding increase for the Corps' program for evaluating
proposed development in wetlands.


So that Bush pals can build expensive developments, thus killing off
what few wetlands remain?



According the the Natinal Federation of Independent Businesses, Bush has a
near 100% perfect record on issues affecting small businesses.


And this "Natinal Federation of Independent Businesses" is a Bush/Cheney
shill front, right?



... and towards education are worthwhile expenditures.

Now this is funny. Are you familiar with the term 'unfunded mandate'? It
perfectly describes Bush/Cheney's federal education programs...



Look at this graph:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/usbud...mages/19-1.gif


All bull****. Everybody that has *anything* to do with education knows
that the "No Child Left Behind Act" has been a calamity for education,
quite literally an unfunded mandate which has the effect of closing down
public education. The Bush/Cheney gang has also severely undercut
college loans and all but eliminated educational grants, while at the
same time slashing science funding. That's a good way to improve the
educational level of the nation, right?

Of course, why bother to look at the facts, when you can outright lie
and enough people will believe it?

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
. ..


According the the Natinal Federation of Independent Businesses, Bush has
a near 100% perfect record on issues affecting small businesses.


And this "Natinal Federation of Independent Businesses" is a Bush/Cheney
shill front, right?




NFIB is a small-business advocacy group with 600,000 small business people
as members.

http://www.nfib.com/page/home

NOYB wrote:
NFIB is a small-business advocacy group with 600,000 small business people
as members.

http://www.nfib.com/page/home


Interesting... if you try to get any actual business news, the links
peter out... if you click on politics, you get HUGE amounts of
cheerleading for Bush/Cheney... they do have small "bipartisan" content...

Verdict: it's a shill site, but a well constructed and almost subtle
one. I bet it's funded by one of those 527 groups.

BTW I noticed you had no further support for any of your previously
stated fantasies? Giving up kind of early? Or is the truth finally
beginning to sink in?

DSK