Idiot Republicans tried to cut SNAP and ending up expanding it.
Idiot Republicans tried to cut SNAP and ending up expanding it.
Originally posted by: tom
You said obama's costs were paid for. I merely pointed that was not correct
Since the cost of Obamacare includes the present and the future, the correct term is "BUDGETED for." And Obamacare costs are indeed budgeted for.
Stupid Tommie-poo.
Originally posted by: Jerry Ice 33
What is going on in 22/24/26/28 in this graph? Looks like 50% increase over '20.
The future increases are obviously projected, and the primary reasons for those projected increases are interest payments on the greatly increased government borrowing caused by the Trump deficit and an increase in Social Security and Medicare costs due to an aging population.
The conservitard "party of fiscal responsibility" knew damn well that due to that aging of the population and an overall shrinkage (percentage-wise) of the workforce, government revenues would have to increase; yet, they lined up to lick Trump's balls, starved the government of revenue, and borrowed borrowed borrowed to make up the deficit. And now, they're whining about the effects of that "policy."
And by the way...that aging of the population is an excellent reason to admit immigrants, both temporary and permanent, as they now and historically have proved to be younger than the overall population. CBO studies have shown that a liberal immigration policy can delay the collapse of Social Security by a decade or more. We have as a warning the serious trouble Japan is in--for decades, they've been xenophobic and have admitted very few immigrants, and now their economy is in deep trouble, as the workers:retired ratio has fallen below 2:1.
Tom, Boiler, Millerscum, and the rest of their gang's race hatred isn't only stupid and evil; it's also expensive.
admit immigrants, both temporary and permanent, as they now and historically have proved to be younger than the overall population.
Only if they work..Right now all they are doing is sucking at the government tit
Originally posted by: PJ Stroh
Now for Tom being full of shit ! He plays the same game he always does with Obama's numbers by including W's last year of budgeting which was spent during Obama's first year in office. And that was caused by the massive spending to dig out of the Republican Banking collapse and the unpaid Iraq war that Tom supported.
But Obama's spending growth was nothing compared to the Republicans on either side of his term - both of which hypocrite Tom voted for twice (each).
Graph literate people know the truth
Spending is Trump's fault during for 8 years after he's out of office, yet it was Trump's fault months after Obama left office. That's seems about right for our resident Liberals.
Here are three important truths.
1. Both parties are spending too much money.
2. Deficit as a percentage of GNP as a far better measure than the data above.
3. Employee participation rate is far better than the unemployment rate.
Originally posted by: Boilerman
Spending is Trump's fault during for 8 years after he's out of office, yet it was Trump's fault months after Obama left office. That's seems about right for our resident Liberals.
Here are three important truths.
1. Both parties are spending too much money.
2. Deficit as a percentage of GNP as a far better measure than the data above.
3. Employee participation rate is far better than the unemployment rate.
"Employee participation rate" is a garbage measure, because someone out of work isn't anyone's employee. Therefore the measure depends on the definition of who's an employee and who isn't.
To truly measure the significance of the deficit, one has to calculate the COST OF CARRYING it versus GDP, not the raw amount itself.
What constitutes "too much spending" is certainly a matter of opinion and ideology, but I notice that the "savings" trumpeted by the RepubliQ, such as choking off the IRS and slashing SNAP benefits, are penny wise, pound foolish; they'll cost far more than they save.
Originally posted by: tom
admit immigrants, both temporary and permanent, as they now and historically have proved to be younger than the overall population.
Only if they work..Right now all they are doing is sucking at the government tit
And you know this...how?
Stupid Tommie-poo.
Originally posted by: tom
admit immigrants, both temporary and permanent, as they now and historically have proved to be younger than the overall population.
Only if they work..Right now all they are doing is sucking at the government tit
Tom's endorsed idea of building a wall didnt fix this problem. And Tom doesnt want to implement a comprehensive solution that would do among other things fast-track processing of these people so they can work. Sooooooo.....Tom really doesnt have anything to offer but sour grapes.
What do you say to people who bitch about problems whilst adamantly being oppossed to solving them?
The wall was never finished, biden cancelled it, but he had a wall built around his beach house & pelosi put a fence up around the Capitol. Prisons have walls.
Walls work when they are completed
How many illegals are the liberals putting up in their homes? I bet that number is zero. When they were sent to marthas vineyard, the liberals couldn't get rid of them fast enough.
Liberals are in favor of things as long as though things don't affect them
Originally posted by: tom
The wall was never finished, biden cancelled it, but he had a wall built around his beach house & pelosi put a fence up around the Capitol. Prisons have walls.
Walls work when they are completed
How many illegals are the liberals putting up in their homes? I bet that number is zero. When they were sent to marthas vineyard, the liberals couldn't get rid of them fast enough.
Liberals are in favor of things as long as though things don't affect them
Actually, walls don't work. Gun turrets work. Guards work. Enforcement works.
Did you see how quickly the Berlin Wall came down? That's what happens to a wall without the manpower necessary to do the job.
