Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
SK in CV
Participant[quote=markmax33][quote=SK in CV][quote=markmax33] The problem is there hasn’t been a President to have a balanced budget and THEREFORE could not lower taxes. [/quote]
Yes, there was. Clinton, his last 3 years in office. Better than balanced, a nominal surplus in excess of $400 billion his last 3 years, and even ignoring the huge SS surplus in those years, still had a surplus in each of those years. With tax rates higher than they are today. Those pesky facts.[/quote]
No those pesky facts don’t take into account the federal reserve lowering interest rates and creating the surplus. It had nothing to do with Clinton, just the business cycle. It was short lived as the tech bubble bust a year or two later.
Those pesky facts…[/quote]
First, your claim was simply false, regardless of the reason. You said “there hasn’t been a President with a balanced budget”. Just dead wrong.
And beyond that, the Fed didn’t lower interest rates. The average federal funds rate during the surplus years was 5.51%. The average for the 2 years before that was 5.43%. They RAISED rates on average. And before those 5 years? They raised rates by 2.5%. They didn’t begin lowering rates until the last 5 months of his final budget year (the last BETTER than balanced budget year) . When some other guy was already president.
Fail.
Participant[quote=sdduuuude]
I hope you know I was kidding.[/quote]
I did 🙂
Participant[quote=markmax33]”Ron Paul didn’t predict the housing bubble for the right reasons” – SK in CV
That is your lie. Even Rich agreed with the fact the fed and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were the enablers of the housing bubble. None of the rest of the crap could have happened without those things. In the end everybody abused it, but you have to root out the CAUSE.[/quote]
There could be differing opinions on that. I don’t recall Rich saying that GSE’s had much to do with it. (I thought he placed primary responsibility with the rating agencies.) If he did blame it on the GSE’s, he’s wrong. And I’m pretty sure tht what I said was that Paul predicted it would be the GSE’s, not the Fed. (They really are different entities. And even moreso when Paul predicted the housing bubble.)
And probably more important, it wouldn’t be a lie if I thought it was the truth, even if I was incorrect. A lie is intentionally telling an untruth. It was intentional. And it was the truth. Ergo, no lie. Keep trying.
Participant[quote=markmax33]
I have a better theory that walterwhite and SK in CV are the same person as they always seem to chime in right after one another.[/quote]
Wow. I’m really flattered. He’s younger, smarter, and hopefully better looking.
Participant[quote=sdduuuude]
Stop attacking me.[/quote]I’m not attacking you. Just the 3rd u in your name. Don’t take everything so personal.
Participant[quote=sdduuuude]
Just becuase the fed shouldn’t be done away with because they facilitated the bubble doesn’t mean there aren’t other reasons they should be done away with.[/quote]If I agree with that, does it mean I agree with Ron Paul? Oh shit!!!
November 10, 2011 at 11:43 AM in reply to: HUD to Roll Out Emergency Loan Program for Unemployed “Homeowners” by Year-End #732660Participant[quote=markmax33][quote=SK in CV][quote=markmax33]”In fact, Medicare fraud – estimated now to total about $60 billion a year – has become one of, if not the most profitable, crimes in America.”
Not only that, Medicare and Medicad drive the cost of procedures up. It creates inefficiency in the market place. How is that an “efficient market”? Those procedures would have dropped in price if it were privatized with little GOV regulation. Dare me to prove it?[/quote]
Totally non-responsive. Waste of time responding when you change the subject on every comment.[/quote]
Not really I articulated in 2 different ways why your statement, or implied statement, that medicare was more efficient was false. When you don’t like answers and can’t respond you run.[/quote]I haven’t run. I’m waiting for you to show me where I lied about Ron Paul.
(And you really don’t want to get into a debate with me about the costs of medical care. I won’t participate. You aren’t qualified.)
November 10, 2011 at 7:59 AM in reply to: HUD to Roll Out Emergency Loan Program for Unemployed “Homeowners” by Year-End #732630Participant[quote=markmax33]”In fact, Medicare fraud – estimated now to total about $60 billion a year – has become one of, if not the most profitable, crimes in America.”
Not only that, Medicare and Medicad drive the cost of procedures up. It creates inefficiency in the market place. How is that an “efficient market”? Those procedures would have dropped in price if it were privatized with little GOV regulation. Dare me to prove it?[/quote]
Totally non-responsive. Waste of time responding when you change the subject on every comment.
November 10, 2011 at 5:02 AM in reply to: HUD to Roll Out Emergency Loan Program for Unemployed “Homeowners” by Year-End #732622Participant[quote=markmax33][quote=SK in CV]
Medicare is more efficient than private insurance. Their administrative costs, on a per patient basis, are a tiny fraction of private insurance.[/quote]http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/10/23/60minutes/main5414390.shtml
Medicare isn’t a waste?????!!! You missed the 60 minutes special. Clearly you are lost. LOLOL at it being more efficient than the private market. Thanks for proving my point![/quote]
There you go again. Where did i say medicare doesn’t have waste? You just made that up.
Participant[quote=markmax33][quote=SK in CV][quote=markmax33] I was also getting attacked by SK and probably lashed out a little bit too hard.
[/quote]
I didn’t attack you. I attacked the lack of logic in your arguments. And the faulty assumptions and evidence used to reach your unsupported assertions. That’s all.[/quote]You attacked Ron Paul with blatant lies, therefore you attacked me. I can back all my logic for your pesky fact checking questions.[/quote]
Find a single lie and I’ll leave you alone. (and really…attacking Ron Paul is attacking you? I think you’ve identified way too closely with a candidate.)
November 9, 2011 at 8:55 PM in reply to: HUD to Roll Out Emergency Loan Program for Unemployed “Homeowners” by Year-End #732591Participant[quote=markmax33][quote=SK in CV] We have pretty solid evidence that all taxes do not take productivity out of the system.[/quote]
LOL! Okay mister fact checker, prove that taxing people does not take productivity out of the system. It by DEFINITION takes productivity out because the GOV ALWAYS spends money less efficiently than the private sector. Find one example where the GOV did something more efficient than the private sector could have and I’ll agree with your argument and more importantly the overall philosophy![/quote]
Pretty much impossible to prove a negative. But the way you worded it, it’s easy. We have taxes, we have production, therefore taxes have not taken productivity out of the system. (you really need to learn to word your questions more carefully.)
Find a definition from any source online that says: Taxes:
removes productivity out of the system. Medicare is more efficient than private insurance. Their administrative costs, on a per patient basis, are a tiny fraction of private insurance.
And stop with the stupid straw man arguments. asking for examples of where the government does things more efficiently than the private sector has absolutely nothing to do with anything that I have said. Zero. Leaping from topic to topic, most of which I probably agree with you, does not prove your point. I don’t know what your point is. You just screw up facts. Make outlandish assertions which are easily disproved and then explain them away by changing the subject. Stick to one. Deal with it. If you’re wrong (which you have been over and over again), acknowledge it and move on. Otherwise, you’re just digging yourself a deeper hole.
Participant[quote=markmax33] The problem is there hasn’t been a President to have a balanced budget and THEREFORE could not lower taxes. [/quote]
Yes, there was. Clinton, his last 3 years in office. Better than balanced, a nominal surplus in excess of $400 billion his last 3 years, and even ignoring the huge SS surplus in those years, still had a surplus in each of those years. With tax rates higher than they are today. Those pesky facts.
Participant[quote=markmax33] I was also getting attacked by SK and probably lashed out a little bit too hard.
[/quote]
I didn’t attack you. I attacked the lack of logic in your arguments. And the faulty assumptions and evidence used to reach your unsupported assertions. That’s all.November 9, 2011 at 5:03 PM in reply to: HUD to Roll Out Emergency Loan Program for Unemployed “Homeowners” by Year-End #732543Participant[quote=markmax33]
It’s not unemployment insurance, it’s the whole construct that programs LIKE that are okay. You either agree with the principal of them all or you don’t. If you agree with that $55 cost per employee, you agree with the social security tax, the this tax, the this tax, because people NEED THE GOV to support them and that takes productivity out of the system. Your example is just a small item but it leads to the huge philosophical problem in America and why we are in debt and why our economy isn’t functioning.[/quote]
There you are with the manichean thinking again. We have a recent past president that was obsessed with it. I don’t have to agree with all of them, I can agree with some of them. And you havent even explained what “them” are. (to quote RW Emerson…A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.) We have pretty solid evidence that all taxes do not take productivity out of the system. (See US, 1945 to 2011) The whole slippery slope logic is lazy. Birth leads to milk. Milk leads to coke. Coke leads to alcohol. Alcohol leads to marijuana. And pretty soon we’re all heroin addicts. And then we’re all dead! Oops!
-
AuthorPosts
