Scroll down an inch or two to get to the meat and potatoes of the articles.
Vegetarians can scroll down an inch or two to get to the tofu and brown rice.
Just for fun: watch the 2 lines of header above and press your F5 key
"On the day President Bush took office, the national debt stood at $5.727 trillion. The latest number from the Treasury Department shows the national debt now stands at more than $9.849 trillion. That's a 71.9 percent increase on Mr. Bush's watch."
-- CBS News, 9/29/08
Don't fall for that Republican crap about how 'liberals' spend too much and tax you to pay for it. As we can see, 'conservatives' spend more, spend faster than 'liberals' do, and don't have a way to pay for it.
Mr. Bush's reckless fiscal policy (or lack of policy) passes the payment for today's spend-spend-spend onto tomorrow's taxpayers. Our children and our children's children will carry Bush's Burden - with compound interest piling on.
Which would you
really prefer: a tax-and-spend government or a borrow-and-spend government?
Labels: borrow-and-spend, conservative, national debt, reckless spending
To Republicans, lower taxes masquerade as fiscal responsibility. Tax cuts, in the right-wing delusion, solve everything.
Lower taxes don't solve anything (unless you are part of one of the special interest group at whom tax cuts are typically aimed). Interestingly, good things happen after tax increases. I'm not advocating high taxes, but I'm pragmatic: go with what works.
Republicans have always laid claim to fiscal responsibility.
That is a myth. The facts say otherwise.
First, a quick summary
- Republican presidents
1920-1932
income taxes - negligible
economy upward trend first 7 years
then the biggest economic crash in history
don't forget those really cool scandals & corruption
- Democratic presidents
1932-1940
higher income taxes on wealthiest
economy recovered, slowly but steadily
1941-1948
higher income taxes on nearly everyone
economy improved (war spending was a two-edged sword)
- Republican president
1952-1960
economy slowed
deep recession
- Democratic presidents
1961-1968
economy soared
- Republican presidents
1969-1972
economy leveled
1973-1976
"stagflation" - stagnant economy and high inflation
- Democratic president
1977-1980
stagflation subsided, but the resulting credit crunch persisted
- Republican president
1981-1992 borrow and spend like crazy under Reagan
1981- biggest income tax cut in history
budget deficits skyrocketed
economy went backwards
1982 - biggest income tax increase in history
economy recovered
1986 - shifted income tax burden away from wealthy to middle/lower classes
1987 - 2nd largest wall st crash in history
economy went into recession
1989-1992, recession continued and worsened
- Democratic president
1993-2001
income tax hike
economy went into best 9 years in historybudget deficits decreased every year, with 1997-2000 having budget surpluses (paid down national debt)
- Republican president
2001-2008
income tax cuts to wealthiest 10%
went from budget surplus to biggest budget deficits in history
economy slowed dramatically
economy went into and stayed in recession
Now, let's back up the claims:
To measure fiscal responsibility, let's consider the change in the relationship between federal debt and the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). That relationship demonstrates growth (or decrease) in the government's debt in the context of growth (or shrinkage) of the economy as a whole. In other words, when times are good, does an administration use that as an opportunity to pay down debt? Or the opposite? Does fiscal policy cause increases or decreases in debt when times are bad?
Running up debt:- Since 1945, every Democratic president presided over decreases in the debt-to-GDP ratio (that's good)
- Since 1945, every Republican president presided over
- in the best years, smaller decreases than under all Democrats
- in worst years (20 out of the last 36 years under Republicans), sharp INCREASES in the debt-to-GDP ratio (that's bad)
- 1977-1980, the Carter administration, was interesting in that
- his one term saw solid decrease in the debt-to-GDP ratio
- Nixon/Ford preceded him, and had deficit increases
- Reagan/Bush followed him, and had huge budget deficits
What about jobs?- From 1929 to the present, job growth (net annual increase in number of jobs)
- under EVERY Democratic president, significant net increases in creation of new jobs
- under EVERY Democratic president, increases in rate over rate under preceding Republican
- under EVERY Republican president, smaller net increases than under ANY democratic president with one exception: 1945-1948, the net increase (under a Democrat) was smaller than those in 1969-1972 and 1985-1988 (under Republicans)
- Under two Republican administrations (but ZERO Democratic administrations) there were net job losses during their terms: specifically, 1929-1932 and 2001-2004; if the economy continues to fall this year, the small increase of 2005- part of 2007 could be erased.
So... can we conclude
Taxes = evil
Tax cuts = sacred & honorable
???
No and No.
- Borrow-and-spend (increase the national debt) is far worse than tax-and-spend.
- Borrow-and-spend creates the illusion of something good happening, but leaves it for future taxpayers to pick up the tab.
The facts:
- Increases in income taxes always immediately precede economic improvement AND lower budget deficits.
- Decreases in income taxes usually precede economic downturns AND higher budget deficits
- Budget deficits fall, and the economy improves under Democratic presidents
- Budget deficits increase and the economy nearly always slows (or worse) under Republican presidents
Let's face it:
- conventional wisdom about taxes is wrong: 'lower' does not mean 'better' and 'higher' does not mean 'worse'
- what matters is how the economy is doing, how many jobs are out there, how much money you have left at the end of the pay period, and whether or not we've prepared for the future (national debt increases or decreases).
Sorry, Republicans. Ouch!
Labels: borrow-and-spend, depression, economy, GDP, higher taxes, jobs, lower taxes, national debt, no longer a republican, recession, republican, tax cut, tax-and-spend
My imaginary friend thinks I have sold out to the tax-and-spend liberals, to the terrorist-loving wimps, to the big government wimps, to those who prefer a sluggish economy.
I haven't sold out to anyone. I just looked at the facts.
Tax-and spend isn't the problem. Fiscal responsibility is what matters.
- My former fellow travelers talk a good game, but truth be told, Republicans have long been fiscally irresponsible. They are the ones who borrow-and-spend.... and spend way too much.
- Democrats are more included to spend less, and do a better job of pay-as-you-go.
Terrorists are a serious concern. Who has the good track record in dealing with terrorists? Whose record is dismal?- Terrorists have tested our mettle 3 times.
- Under one party's leadership, the perps of both events were caught promptly and brought to justice.
- The other party has botched everything and wound up with terrorist leaders regularly going on TV and mocking us. My prior party's leaders have the dismal record.
Who really grows government? Who really shrinks the size of government?- Small government sounds good, but the GOP consistently expands government, while the other side shrinks it.
Who wins wars? Who supports the troops? Who demonstrates the correct priorities?- I am embarrassed to say that like other Republicans, I parroted the party line. We were dead wrong. And deadly wrong, as well.
- Which party is in charge every time we did not win?
- Which party is in charge every time we DID win?
- On whose watch have we cut-and-run?
- If you want to prolong a war, who ya gonna call?
- When veterans get mistreated, who is supposed to be providing leadership?
- An easy one - who has the most blood on their hands from active duty troops and veterans committing suicide?
Are you pissed off yet? Stay tuned... the proof is coming.Labels: borrow-and-spend, do anything, greed, no longer a republican, racist, recovering republican, redneck, say anything, southern strategy, strong national defense, tax cut, tax-and-spend, zealot