"The economy’s a mess, it’s dead flat. America has lost its Triple-A rating ... Barack Obama doesn't know how to be president. He's incompetent, an amateur." -- Bill Clinton -- Edward Klein’s, “The Amateur”
"..so Romney and the GOP Congress will balance the budget ya think?"
On day 1? No. But at least the Senate will once again be submitting an actual budget. I imagine they will hew closely to the Ryan plan. I'd much prefer more dramatic cuts , but that's as good as it will get as long as the American public remains clueless about the fiscal debt situation.
Ok, agreed, but that's better than "never" under Obama. Reid's Senate doesn't even bother to submit a budget, so the House GOP has nobody to negotiate with.
In any case, the static CBO says the federal deficit in actual nominal dollars would be reduced to $182 billion by 2017 under the Ryan plan. That's not balanced, but it's so much better than where we are now I would take it in a heartbeat. I suspect most people would. Shorter term, y-o-y spending would actually be cut for the next 2 fiscal yrs for the first time since the Eisenhower administration.
Again, I'd prefer more, but I have to choose between Obama's plan to run us over the cliff vs. the weak tea Ryan plan. No brainer.
"so Romney and the GOP Congress will balance the budget ya think?"...
Well larry g I don't believe the marching R.I.N.O. band has the stones to do what needs to be done, dump entitlements...
A couple of years ago the then newly minted Sen. Rand Paul made some rather modest proposals to cut $500 billion from the budget and with the hue and cry from both sides of the political asile one would've thought that he had cold bloodedly gunned down a troop of girl scouts who were out selling cookies...
Quite frankly, I don't really like either candidate. I don't see much of a difference between one and the other. I lived in MA under Romney and now in the US under Obama. Unless he blows me away with a VP pick, I'll most likely vote 3rd party this election.
interest costs on the debt will surpass military spending by abound 2018.
Is there any doubt in anyone's mind that the Fed will continue to throttle interest rates, then? To steal from the creditor and give to the borrower until their manipulation no longer works (which it historically hasn't)?
As Jim Grant says, "Though governments can repress, the cannot permanently subdue".
Is there any doubt in anyone's mind that the Fed will continue to throttle interest rates, then? It's ultimately not about the Fed. It's about the fiscal side.
The way I view this election is this: The chances that Obama will take the country, fiscally, in the right direction? 0%. The chances he will increase spending and gov? 100%. There's no doubt about what you're going to get with Obama.
The chances Romney will decrease spending and government? 10%. The chances he will keep things stable? 60%. The chances he will fail and gov will increase? 30%
They're better odds.
Odds Ron Paul or Garry Johnson will win an election? 0%. So why bother with impossibilities.
"Is there any doubt in anyone's mind that the Fed will continue to throttle interest rates, then?"
I've been pondering the same thing. According to Sen Tom Coburn, a return to the historical average interest rates would add about $600 billion a yr to our overhead.
I agree with AIG about the Fed, it's only the trillions in govt spending and debt that Paul points out which matter. This cartoon misleads for its joke: there are always other candidates. I have never voted for anyone other than the Libertarian Party candidate for President, even when I didn't know who that candidate was. :) I check the polls each Presidential election and as long as one of the major-party candidates has a double-digit lead in my state, as they always do, I don't "throw away" my vote on them and I vote Libertarian instead. At this point however, I'm not sure it matters what the polls say: we need to break the duopoly and not vote for either no matter what. In any case, I'll gladly vote for Gary Johnson this time.
Well, technically, the second or third time, but just because you're dead wrong about education and some other things doesn't mean you're wrong about everything. ;)
"The economy’s a mess, it’s dead flat. America has lost its Triple-A rating ... Barack Obama doesn't know how to be president. He's incompetent, an amateur." -- Bill Clinton -- Edward Klein’s, “The Amateur”
ReplyDeleteHe's not an amateur. he's very good at what he does. It's just that what he does, isn't being president of the US.
ReplyDeleteRomney, however, is looking better every day. Might actually make me vote this time.
this may end up being one of the more interesting contests.
ReplyDeleteI don't think Obama is going to lie down....
they're going way back on both candidates.
Barrack eats dogs.. and Romney abuses them.
Romney hazes college buddies..
who knows what dark secrets Obama has...
now that we have Citizens United - you can bet we'd know every time either one of them picked their nose or scratched their ass...
who knows what dark secrets Obama has...
ReplyDeleteIs having around with communists and terrorists...not dark enough?
I prefer "caroon"
ReplyDeleteCaroon - a cartoon about careening toward disaster.
"He's not an amateur. he's very good at what he does"...
ReplyDeleteWho?
what would be truly revealing....
ReplyDeleteRomney wins and the GOP keeps the house and wins the Senate...
then what?
be careful for what you wish for.
Bush III ?
"Bush III ?"...
ReplyDeleteWell for all his myriad flaws Bush II was a far better deal than the first dose of the Kenyan Kommie Klown...
so Romney and the GOP Congress will balance the budget ya think?
ReplyDeleteLarry,
ReplyDelete"..so Romney and the GOP Congress will balance the budget ya think?"
On day 1? No. But at least the Senate will once again be submitting an actual budget. I imagine they will hew closely to the Ryan plan. I'd much prefer more dramatic cuts , but that's as good as it will get as long as the American public remains clueless about the fiscal debt situation.
Ryan ...day 1... how about year 20?
ReplyDeleteIf they are going to actually balance the budget, they're gonna have to do better than Ryan's "plan".
I just don't see how they do it without cuts to DOD.
Larry,
ReplyDelete"Ryan ...day 1... how about year 20?"
Ok, agreed, but that's better than "never" under Obama. Reid's Senate doesn't even bother to submit a budget, so the House GOP has nobody to negotiate with.
In any case, the static CBO says the federal deficit in actual nominal dollars would be reduced to $182 billion by 2017 under the Ryan plan. That's not balanced, but it's so much better than where we are now I would take it in a heartbeat. I suspect most people would. Shorter term, y-o-y spending would actually be cut for the next 2 fiscal yrs for the first time since the Eisenhower administration.
Again, I'd prefer more, but I have to choose between Obama's plan to run us over the cliff vs. the weak tea Ryan plan. No brainer.
are you familiar with the "sequester"?
ReplyDeletewon't that also get to balance?
and the tax cuts expire in Dec?
between that and the sequester budget - balance should be fairly soon I would think.
"so Romney and the GOP Congress will balance the budget ya think?"...
ReplyDeleteWell larry g I don't believe the marching R.I.N.O. band has the stones to do what needs to be done, dump entitlements...
A couple of years ago the then newly minted Sen. Rand Paul made some rather modest proposals to cut $500 billion from the budget and with the hue and cry from both sides of the political asile one would've thought that he had cold bloodedly gunned down a troop of girl scouts who were out selling cookies...
Larry,
ReplyDeleteThe sequester cuts 1.2 trillion over 10 years. We run trillion dollar deficits every year nowadays. Still a long way off.
As for taxes, I pay enough in taxes already. All the tax hikes will do is kick the legs out from under the already struggling economy.
"Still a long way off"...
ReplyDeleteWell paul what about accruing interest on the larger and larger unpaid portion?
Juandos,
ReplyDeleteYep, terrifying. According to Mark Steyn, interest costs on the debt will surpass military spending by abound 2018.
Quite frankly, I don't really like either candidate. I don't see much of a difference between one and the other. I lived in MA under Romney and now in the US under Obama. Unless he blows me away with a VP pick, I'll most likely vote 3rd party this election.
ReplyDeleteinterest costs on the debt will surpass military spending by abound 2018.
ReplyDeleteIs there any doubt in anyone's mind that the Fed will continue to throttle interest rates, then? To steal from the creditor and give to the borrower until their manipulation no longer works (which it historically hasn't)?
As Jim Grant says, "Though governments can repress, the cannot permanently subdue".
Then the fun starts.
Is there any doubt in anyone's mind that the Fed will continue to throttle interest rates, then?
ReplyDeleteIt's ultimately not about the Fed. It's about the fiscal side.
The way I view this election is this: The chances that Obama will take the country, fiscally, in the right direction? 0%. The chances he will increase spending and gov? 100%. There's no doubt about what you're going to get with Obama.
The chances Romney will decrease spending and government? 10%. The chances he will keep things stable? 60%. The chances he will fail and gov will increase? 30%
They're better odds.
Odds Ron Paul or Garry Johnson will win an election? 0%. So why bother with impossibilities.
Methinks,
ReplyDelete"Is there any doubt in anyone's mind that the Fed will continue to throttle interest rates, then?"
I've been pondering the same thing. According to Sen Tom Coburn, a return to the historical average interest rates would add about $600 billion a yr to our overhead.
Paul,
ReplyDeleteI'm with Grant. I think the Fed will continue to manipulate the market until ultimately loses control of it (as it always does).
Only retards will not answer this question with "Obama".
ReplyDelete"Quite frankly, I don't really like either candidate. I don't see much of a difference between one and the other"...
ReplyDeleteI do believe you have a valid point there jon murphy...
Still 'mittens' has skill sets that have on occassion proven to be useful whereas the 'community agitator' has proven he has none...
Hey paul, you might find the problems a Romney supporter is experiencing interesting...
ReplyDeleteI agree with AIG about the Fed, it's only the trillions in govt spending and debt that Paul points out which matter. This cartoon misleads for its joke: there are always other candidates. I have never voted for anyone other than the Libertarian Party candidate for President, even when I didn't know who that candidate was. :) I check the polls each Presidential election and as long as one of the major-party candidates has a double-digit lead in my state, as they always do, I don't "throw away" my vote on them and I vote Libertarian instead. At this point however, I'm not sure it matters what the polls say: we need to break the duopoly and not vote for either no matter what. In any case, I'll gladly vote for Gary Johnson this time.
ReplyDeleteI agree with AIG
ReplyDeleteThere's a first time for everything! :)
Well, technically, the second or third time, but just because you're dead wrong about education and some other things doesn't mean you're wrong about everything. ;)
ReplyDelete