[excon]

Hello again, tom:

Ok, let's see how it works out. Am I pessimistic that the Republicans can get spending under control?? Yup.

excon

[tomder55]

Am I pessimistic that the Republicans can get spending under control?? Yup.

Me too . But I was more pessimistic before the people voted in Tea Party candidates.
Rand Paul unveils plan for $500B in budget cuts - BusinessWeek
Rand Paul introduced budget legislation that would slash $500 billion initially .
BothRand Paul and Ron Paul have resolutions for that long overdue audit of the Fed.

On Thursday, the House Republican Study Committee introduced a bill that the committee said would reduce spending by $2.5 trillion over a decade.
All this has been characterized as low hanging fruit (unless you are a Dem) .

Entitlements across the board have to be reformed .We can either start now or wait until we are forced to take measures like in Europe.

[excon]

We can either start now or wait until we are forced to take measures like in Europe.

Hello again, tom:

There's a kernel of truth in what you say... What we NEED to do is balance our budget. That would mean we need live within our means ACROSS the board.. It won't happen, though, if we attempt to balance our accounts on the backs of the poor and infirm - Republicans favorite villains. And, it certainly won't happen while we're fighting TWO - count 'em - TWO expensive wars of choice - no, let's make it THREE wars of choice if the drug war is included...

We can do this, but the cuts YOU'D make, and the cuts I'D make aren't remotely close. I'd even ask the rich to pitch in.

excon

[excon]

Hello again:

Interestingly, their FOURTH priority isn't about jobs either... John Boehner thinks it's about school vouchers. Whoda thunk that?

Still waiting...

excon

[excon]

Hello again,

Boy, you Republicans are NOT creating jobs so fast, it's hard to keep up. I was wrong above.. The Republicans FOURTH priority is, the "Small Business Paperwork Mandate Elimination Act of 2011". The one above is the FIFTH.

Wow! THAT'S an imperative before tackling jobs, huh? I wonder what the SIXTH will be...

excon

[tomder55]

Maybe they think that will create jobs... sorta like when the left says destroying energy industry jobs and banning their work will create jobs making (or tilting at)windmills .

By the way ,ending the silly mandates requiring small businesses to file forms to the IRS every time they make a $600 petty cash purchase is a top priority in my book . It should be in yours too if you are the businessman you say you are .

[speechlesstx]

Actually, that mandate on paperwork is a part of the Obacamare overhaul so you're still on no. 1 there.

[speechlesstx]

The first act was "Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act " so technically, jobs were the first thing the House addressed. But let's end the suspense and just list them...

2) H.R.3 No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act

3) H.R.4 Small Business Paperwork Mandate Elimination Act of 2011

4) H.R.5 Help Efficient, Accessible, Low-cost, Timely Healthcare (HEALTH) Act of 2011

5) H.R.10 Regulations From the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act of 2011

[excon]

Hello again:

So NAMING a bill "job killing" means it's a job killer?? Really?? I suppose the Patriot Act, meant that when your government forces you to bend over, you're a patriot.

NAMING stuff?? NAMING STUFF?? Dude!

excon

[tomder55]

And I suppose forcing small businesses to file more paperwork with the IRS means that both the business and the IRS will have to hire more accountants and auditors . That makes Obamacare a job stimulus bill !!!!!!!

[speechlesstx]

And PayGo means pay as you go, right?

[excon]

Hello again:

The Democrats suck... Pay go means whatever the Democrats want it to... So, the Republicans should do the SAME??

That's a big problem.

excon

[speechlesstx]

Nope, I want something besides renaming stuff. I don't care how many times Obama says he wants to "invest" he just means "spend."

[excon]

Nope, I want something besides renaming stuff. I don't care how many times Obama says he wants to "invest" he just means "spend."

Hello again, Steve:

The government can only do three things... It can pass laws.. It can give tax breaks (subsidy's). It can write checks...

A few years ago, here in Washington, the government wrote some checks for some dumb reactor program called WPPS, or something like that... It failed. Consequently, the checks the government wrote for that project, were nothing more than idle, wasteful spending...

A few years earlier in the other Washington, the government wrote some checks for our interstate highway system. It DIDN'T fail. Consequently, the checks the government wrote for that project, were an investment that has paid dividend, after dividend, after dividend.

It's EASY to say the government shouldn't write any more checks. It's just not realistic.

excon

[speechlesstx]

It's EASY to say the government shouldn't write any more checks. It's just not realistic.

No one said the government shouldn't write any more checks, just stop expanding it infinitely while blowing smoke up my a$$.

[excon]

No one said the government shouldn't write any more checks, just stop expanding it infinitely while blowing smoke up my a$$.

Hello again, Steve:

Look. I'm a fiscal conservative... Probably MORE than you are. I think the government should live within its budget. So, I'm willing to CUT. I'm willing to HAVE that conversation here with you. In fact, I think I STARTED it somewhere here recently, when I mentioned that we could put something like $19 BILLION in our pockets if we ended the war on pot. Not the war on DRUGS - the war on POT.

I didn't see anybody lining up.

So, if you want to have a conversation about actually putting our finances in order, I'll have that conversation... But, you want to blow smoke...

Let me ask you this. Do you think we need troops in Germany? How about Japan? Do you think we need a missile defense against the Russians? Do you think we need military programs that congress wants, but the military doesn't??

If you, like many conservatives, don't want to put any of that on the table, then our conversation about living within our means is OVER before it really gets started.

excon

[speechlesstx]

If you, like many conservatives, don't want to put any of that on the table, then our conversation about living within our means is OVER before it really gets started

Dude, I've said many times I have no objection to ending the war on pot. Everything else can be on the table, including entitlements, earmarks and all manner of pork. How's that?

[excon]

I've said many times I have no objection to ending the war on pot. How's that?

Hello again, Steve:

Well, it's better than nothing... But, if a mugger were whacking you on the head with a bat, I'll bet you'd say MORE than, I have no objection if you stop.

excon

[speechlesstx]

You sure have a funny of acknowledging when we agree, lol. I've also told you before, that's your cause... I have other causes.