[talaniman]

Thank you. Then how about we discuss what's actually on the table instead of baseless, emotional arguments like Romney is going to take food and diapers from babies?

Romney's budget is on the table, and on line. Why won't you read it so we can have a factual debate about what it says. Educate US!!

[tomder55]

dontknownuthin... well said!!

[tomder55]

Romney will say --- by the tax revenues generated as the money gained by lower taxes is invested in the economy (thereby generating tax revenue).

This is the standard reply. Only problem is - nobody has ever proven the truth of this theory. It originated with a fellow by the name of Arthur Laffer (the Laffer curve) whose theories have been called voodoo economics. Even the Wall Street Journal, hardly an icon of the Left, dismissed Laffer's ideas during the Reagan administration.

The only evidence I saw was 25 years of sustained growth with 2 minor recessions in the time between 1983 and 2008 . The 7 years of the 1980s when Laffer and Reagan policies kicked in saw expansions of over 6% .Compare that to the possible double dip we are likely to see before the end of the year ;and I'll put supply side theories against Keynesianism any day.

[Athos]

The only evidence I saw was 25 years of sustained growth with 2 minor recessions in the time between 1983 and 2008 . The 7 years of the 1980s when Laffer and Reagan policies kicked in saw expansions of over 6% .Compare that to the possible double dip we are likely to see before the end of the year ;and I'll put supply side theories against Keynesianism any day.

You're referring to GDP (GNP) - not always the best way to look at economics. For example, one million minimum wage jobs increase GDP. That's what Reagan "accomplished". Not a lot of tax revenue there.

After a big tax reduction when he entered office, he soon followed that by a big tax increase because the Laffer theory didn't work. (You could look it up).

It's amazing how the right-wing (Republicans) continue to promote failed economic policies. Very few of them seem to give any deep thought to important issues.

The latest example is Congressman Akin. Think, for a moment, just what this character said. It's medieval - women's bodies have an anti-rape mechanism. His apology, please note, did nothing to dispel this bizarre belief. Shall I throw in Herman Cain? Nice guy, but another piece of the Republican bizarro world.

Now Ryan. Another nice guy...

[tomder55]

If I accept the min wage #s then that is in the context of 20 million job growth in Reagan's years.
The tax increases that he signed later were part of a budget deal with the majority Dem Congress ,that of course the Dems renaged on regarding budget reductions. Also you fail to mention that his initial marginal tax rate cuts were huge compared to the modest increases later . Reagan left office with Americans dramatically paying less in net taxes than when he entered office.When Reagan took office there were 16 tax brackets ranging from 0% to 70% When Reagan left office there were 2 brackets: 15% and 28% .He flattend the tax code and s a result revenues increased from $517.1 billion to $909.2 billion.
The Laffer theory worked because marginal tax rates were slashed... combined with sound monetary policy ,which resulted in growth ;and increased tax revenues .( I bet Obama would love to boast of a 6-7% growth as opposed to the sluggish so called recovery we've experienced in his term)

[paraclete]

.( I bet Obama would love to boast of a 6-7% growth as opposed to the sluggish so called recovery we've experienced in his term)

Are you still blaming Obama for the lack of recovery. You can't do anything when your hands are tied behind your back by a regressive congress.

[talaniman]

You mean you can see republican obstructionism all the way in Aussieland?

Originally Posted by tomder55
.( I bet Obama would love to boast of a 6-7% growth as opposed to the sluggish so called recovery we've experienced in his term)

All of us would.

[tomder55]

are you still blaming Obama for the lack of recovery. You can't do anything when your hands are tied behind your back by a regressive congress.

That is the only excuse the Obots have for their poor performance. What you are seeing from them is nothing new. Roosevelt blamed the rich that his recovery program was not taking the country out of the Depression.Truman blamed Congress for his lackluster domestic performance. Both won ,so the President has a template for victory if this year's electorate is simularily gullible .

[paraclete]

You mean you can see republican obstructionism all the way in Aussieland?

All of us would.

Oh yes Tal we have excellent news services here and I watch PBS and even NBC often as well as logging into various US news services. You see we are better informed about you than you are about us, we always keep an eye out for developing threats. We have a broadcasting service called the Special Broadcasting Service which airs programs from all over the world, it's what you do in a truly multicultural society, you should try Al Jazerria some time or Deuche Vella or even the Chinese News

[tomder55]

PBS and even NBC = Al Jazerria

[talaniman]

That is the only excuse the Obots have for their poor performance. What you are seeing from them is nothing new. Roosevelt blamed the rich that his recovery program was not taking the country out of the Depression.Truman blamed Congress for his lackluster domestic performance. Both won ,so the President has a template for victory if this year's electorate is simularily gullible .

As much as you guys hate to admit it, blaming the congress works because its TRUE. Reagan was a deficit spending supply sider who was also flexible, and fast acting. He brought down unemployment by growing government, and was not adverse to cutting taxes, or raising them when needed. He worked with his congress and they worked with him. He still ran up some debts, but on a whole, he always had a responsive plan, and we still have that Iran hostage thing that helped him, and the Iran/Contra thing that hurt him.

Today, and I have no doubt Hillary or any democrat would have faced the same thing, we have a republican party that decided they would say no to EVERYTHING, filibuster EVERYTHING, and blame the president. Indeed the repubs have been masterful about pushing there agenda, while blaming Obama for anything but a full recover that they themselves are standing in the way of.

You can deny all you want, but this is what THEY (republican politicians) are saying. To bad you need the far right loonies for this to succeed, because they have already put the main stream republican party on notice, if they get power, they will tell ROMNEY what to do, and he better do it!!

Ask Boehner how that works.

[speechlesstx]

we have a republican party that decided they would say no to EVERYTHING, filibuster EVERYTHING, and blame the president.

The only thing I have to add to this is this:

Madeleine Albright: Dems should blame George W. Bush ‘forever’

So how long do you think Americans will fall for that?

[talaniman]

He was to blame, but now it's the other republicans being blamed, and rightfully so! Forever?? As long as it takes!!

[Magpie95]

I can say that, as a woman born and raised in Texas, the Republican Party has alienated me. If left to there own divices people do use prejudice when making decisions, like pay, etc.. We NEED civil rights in this country. It is sad but true that they are not just understood. Look at other countries that do not have the same rights outlined for the historically oppressed... Like Saudi Arabia, India and Indonesia, countries who gave rights to women (the fact we have to be given them in any country including the US is ridiculous) but still can not drive a car, vote and can be beaten by their husbands. So, YES, we need it.
Republicans would like to take my rights to my body away from making abortions illegal or very limited... and would like to make it so I can't get assistance for the child I was forced not to abort. Catch 22... all against the woman... because the man.. lets face it, can just walk away.
The Republican Party has turned me away. I am a Libertarian for the most part and I must vote democratic just for sake of avoiding the misguided religious zealots that plague the republican party. John Adams would roll over in his grave.
Yeah I would like a smaller government, and a balanced budget, and a lot of the things the party stands for... but I don't want it at the cost of my rights.
Besides regulating a woman's womb IS big government.

Yours Truly,
A woman who'd like the choice of abortion in the case of legitimate rape or not.

[tomder55]

John Adams rolled over in his grave when he learned abortion was available on demand in the country he helped form .
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. (John Adams )

[talaniman]

Adams was wrong. Well half wrong, religion is encompassing all religions, or did he intend it to mean just Christian religion? Or just colonial Christian morality? We sure knew he wasn't talking freedom for ALL men, and forget it for woman.

Poor guy has probably turned over in his grave many times over the centuries. Who cares? Its his grave ain't it? He has a right to turn over in it whenever he wants!

The thing that bugs me to death, is all the laws apply only to woman not endowed with the means to pay for safe responsible abortions since those that can afford it have a private doctor to rely on to not only prevent pregnancy, but handle it early enough as to not have to inform any one.

Why do rich and poor play by different rules? Have different rights?

[NeedKarma]

John Adams rolled over in his grave when he learned abortion was available on demand in the country he helped form .
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. (John Adams )

Guess he was wrong. People are slowly waking up and realizing they either don't need religion or they don't need the bastardized way that religion is used as a tool in the US. People can be both religious and have an abortion, it's not mutually exclusive.

[Magpie95]

John adams and Thomas Jefferson were for separation of church and state for specifically this reason. It's a religious people. There are a gazillion religions. And who says abortion is immoral? Last I checked science had not proven a soul exists let alone when it forms. I for one like to believe it does exist... but I humbly admit it can not be proven. So, who knows. The fact that every child isn't wanted is something no one wants to admit in this country. If it weren't a fact that they are not, we wouldn't be over run with foster children and state raised teenagers. And what of all the folks going to get IVF? They destroy all the unused embryos.. is that too immoral? Dang. It is arrogant for anyone to believe they have some natural right to make decisions regarding a woman's body. Its ours. Period.
Why don't we have discussions like this about Rape (another violation of the body that happens to be illegal)... Oh but wait... we have to decide first if it is legitimate or not. LOL.

[speechlesstx]

He was to blame, but now its the other republicans being blamed, and rightfully so! Forever??? As long as it takes!!!

As long as it takes for what?? A complete takeover??

[tomder55]

Magpie95 please... Since Roe v Wade there have been over 50 million babies murdered . We are at Stalin and Mao levels of genocide . Is killing babies what 'moral people' do ?