Except it was only 5% of the population that enjoyed it.

The Bush administration's fiscal record
One of the other takeaways from the Congressional Budget Office's long-term budget outlook is that the Bush administration really wasn't fiscally responsible, while the Obama administration pretty much has been.
The major domestic initiatives of the Bush years -- the tax cuts and the Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit -- made the budget picture much, much worse. The Obama administration's health-care reform proposal has, by contrast, made the budget picture much better. (You could say that the stimulus wasn't paid for, but that was sort of the point of the thing. And if we want to put emergency measures into the mix, we also have all costs related to 9/11 and TARP accruing to Bush. And I've been nice and haven't mentioned Iraq so far. Oops.) In fact, there's no high-priced initiative from the Bush years that improved the budget situation, or was even paid for.
This has, I think, had a psychological effect on Washington. One reason people are so skeptical that the government will actually pay for health-care reform -- as it is now statutorily obligated to do -- is because people got used, under the Bush administration, to seeing the government routinely shirk its fiscal duties. And the fact that the same people who voted for all that shirking are now screaming about deficits just makes observers less willing to credit the commitments made by politicians.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-k ... fisca.html
I never said the Bush administration was fiscally responsible. I said the tax cuts helped the economy. Those are two entirely different issues.Martok wrote:The Bush administration's fiscal record
One of the other takeaways from the Congressional Budget Office's long-term budget outlook is that the Bush administration really wasn't fiscally responsible, while the Obama administration pretty much has been.
The major domestic initiatives of the Bush years -- the tax cuts and the Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit -- made the budget picture much, much worse. The Obama administration's health-care reform proposal has, by contrast, made the budget picture much better. (You could say that the stimulus wasn't paid for, but that was sort of the point of the thing. And if we want to put emergency measures into the mix, we also have all costs related to 9/11 and TARP accruing to Bush. And I've been nice and haven't mentioned Iraq so far. Oops.) In fact, there's no high-priced initiative from the Bush years that improved the budget situation, or was even paid for.
This has, I think, had a psychological effect on Washington. One reason people are so skeptical that the government will actually pay for health-care reform -- as it is now statutorily obligated to do -- is because people got used, under the Bush administration, to seeing the government routinely shirk its fiscal duties. And the fact that the same people who voted for all that shirking are now screaming about deficits just makes observers less willing to credit the commitments made by politicians.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-k ... fisca.html
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=37893Last night [July 1], as part of a procedural vote on the emergency war supplemental bill, House Democrats attached a document that "deemed as passed" a non-existent $1.12 trillion budget. The execution of the "deeming" document allows Democrats to start spending money for Fiscal Year 2011 without the pesky constraints of a budget.
38 Democrats crossing the aisle to vote against deeming the faux budget resolution passed.
They are part of the same issue.Coito ergo sum wrote: I never said the Bush administration was fiscally responsible. I said the tax cuts helped the economy. Those are two entirely different issues.
Have you been living under a rock for the last 11 years? The republicans controlled congress for six of Bush's eight years as president. He didn't veto a single spending bill the republicans sent to him, but once the democrats took control of congress Bush all of sudden wanted to become a fiscal conservative.Democrats in Congress loved George Bush because he never vetoed their spending bills. It was spend-a-rama, and pork-barrel politics extraordinaire. Who knew that the very next administration wold make him look stingy by comparison.
"If the Democrats want to test us, that's why they give the president the veto. I'm looking forward to vetoing excessive spending, and I'm looking forward to having the United States Congress support my veto."
Bush plans to veto the Homeland Security appropriations bill nearing final passage, followed by vetoes of eight more money bills sent him by the Democratic-controlled Congress
That constitutes a veto onslaught of historic proportions from a president who did not reject a single bill during his first term....
Bush was the first president since John Quincy Adams not to exercise his veto power during a complete four-year term, even though the Republican-controlled Congress was on a spending spree. He has vetoed two bills in his second term, rejecting only the Iraq war money bill since Democrats took control....
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articl ... nsive.html
on.With the US trapped in depression, this really is starting to feel like 1932
The US workforce shrank by 652,000 in June, one of the sharpest contractions ever. The rate of hourly earnings fell 0.1pc. Wages are flirting with deflation
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comm ... -1932.html"The economy is still in the gravitational pull of the Great Recession," said Robert Reich, former US labour secretary. "All the booster rockets for getting us beyond it are failing."
http://www.cnbc.com/id/38092759The Dow Jones Industrial Average is repeating a pattern that appeared just before markets fell during the Great Depression, Daryl Guppy, CEO at Guppytraders.com, told CNBC Monday.
“Those who don’t remember history are doomed to repeat it…there was a head and shoulders pattern that developed before the Depression in 1929, then with the recovery in 1930 we had another head and shoulders pattern that preceded a fall in the market, and in the current Dow situation we see an exact repeat of that environment,” Guppy said.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/fb933f08-885b ... abdc0.htmlInvestors fear rising risk of US regional defaults
By Nicole Bullock in New York
Published: July 5 2010 19:30 | Last updated: July 5 2010 20:21
Investors are worried that the risk of default for US local governments is growing, amid signs that some regions are facing the same type of difficulty in curbing pension and budget deficits as some eurozone countries.
The yield attached to some forms of infrastructure municipal bonds has risen relative to US Treasury bonds because of fears that cash-strapped local governments will struggle to repay these loans.
Because only the rich go to tanning salons...Some customers heated over indoor 'tan tax,' which was part of health-care law
Only the rich go to tanning salons what are you on about.Coito ergo sum wrote:Tax the rich!
Because only the rich go to tanning salons...Some customers heated over indoor 'tan tax,' which was part of health-care law
One way to bolster the economy is to raise prices by 10%. Higher prices make people buy more goods and services.
http://money.cnn.com/2010/03/24/news/ec ... nning_tax/Pensioner wrote:Only the rich go to tanning salons what are you on about.Coito ergo sum wrote:Tax the rich!
Because only the rich go to tanning salons...Some customers heated over indoor 'tan tax,' which was part of health-care law
One way to bolster the economy is to raise prices by 10%. Higher prices make people buy more goods and services.
Sarcasm.Pensioner wrote:[
Raise prices by 10% and you think people will buy more, what fucking planet do you live on?
Yep, all lousy news.Coito ergo sum wrote:BUDGET DEFICIT TO REACH RECORD $1.47 TRILLION... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100723/ap_ ... _deficit_2
WH: A 'FISCAL SITUATION THAT REQUIRES ATTENTION'...
Understate much? Yes, why don't you give that a little bit of attention.....?
Bank failure tally passes 100 for year... 100 banks this year - and we're only half done - have failed. Unbelievable....
$30,000 price tag to attend Obama's birthday party -- http://www.suntimes.com/news/sneed/2526 ... 23.article DOUCHE!
Congress' tab for bottled water up to $604,000 in 9 months.... http://www.aolnews.com/house-money/arti ... g/19541719 -- Ummm....dickfaces.....STOP SPENDING LIKE DRUNKEN SAILORS! And, stop wasting time on piles of nonsense!!!! http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100723/ap_ ... ts_bills_1 Traitorous whores!!!!!
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 20 guests