| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59
Comments:
<0> sorry 'bout that. kick if ya want
<1> wiretapp I would guess yes
<2> `nicos you don't like rolling stone
<3> yes
<3> but don't cut off the man in black
<4> Something must be up this year, worst tourism season in upstate NY in recorded history for a memorial day weekend
<3> that ain't cool
<3> respect the music
<3> :>
<2> my 45
<5> KoBushi then we have no common agreements and are unable to debate with eachother
<2> had a scratch
<2> I need a dimond needle
<6> WotGorila its the Hillary factor...
<3> you're playing 45s?
<2> ya
<1> But, the national debt isn't new to the Bush Admin, running a deficit isn't new to this admin, the admin cannot cancel old spending propgrams just t support new ones, it is a growing collection of expenditures, that is why both parties are responsible.
<3> dang
<0> ezwinner: no, I'm saying that if a significant amount of soldiers actually *care* what a bunch of whiny protestors think, then America's army is in worse shape than I'd have thought
<5> I'm not debating anybody who beleive Al Gore would have launched a preemptive invasion of Iraq
<3> no
<3> if al gore were prez, we would not be in Iraq
<2> why not
<4> could be, NY is messed up bad, I wouldn't elect ANYONE for president that was a politician in NY
<3> because it was bush's master plan
<1> I think we would have gone into Iraq later with Gore, but I suspet we'd still have gone, but probably with more international help
<2> `nicos pnac
<2> was not bush plan
<3> yea it was...he had Iraq planned since day 1
<1> But, it's all speculation, there is no way to know.
<1> wiretapp but what we CAN know, is the history of US economics, and what has caused were we are :)
<6> tweek the whole problem results from the media giving a tiny minority of malcontents a huge voice in the press. Evidence Cindy Sheehan....
<7> nicos, put your analyst on danger money
<5> I blame Reaganomics
<0> the media will air whatever the **** they think will attract attention.
<0> Sheehan is probably the biggest attention whore in the history of the world.
<4> well, everyone in this channel said long before Bush was elected that if he was president, gas prices would go up and we would be at war with iraq...so most of us expected it I guess
<0> put two and two together.
<1> wiretapp but sure, the majority party is primarily responsible for the latest addition to the deficit; but it's not like the Bush Admin made up spending more tan is brought in :P
<8> Bush was just following the law, which called for regime change in Iraq, before he ever became president
<1> wiretapp the US has operated at a deficite since the 50s
<1> it didn't start with reagan
<2> `nicos janis jalplin
<3> ok
<3> you're half way there
<2> I won't cut the lp
<5> Bush is running RECORD deficits
<5> and the WAR IN IRAQ is a major reason
<1> wiretapp not as % of GDP
<3> let it play, and play one for cash afterward man, then the rock Gods will be pleased with you
<2> it the long play, `436Hemi should I play it at 74
<3> :)
<6> wiretapp yeah, Reaganomics was terrible..it was much better with Carter. I especially loved the 18% inflation rate and the 12% unemployment. And don't forget the interest rates thru the roof...yeah, Carter was much better.
<5> we are paying more in interest than ever
<1> wiretapp you have to adjust for inflation and GDP
<9> I think the government should spend more on prisons
<1> interest rates are lower than under clinton wiretapp :P
<5> nobody said carter was the epitome of good economic theory
<9> and more on sending people to prisons longer
<9> when they deserve it
<2> `nicos hmm 74 speed rocks
<9> like Child rapists
<0> anyway I don't really think much of people that think that slapping a ****ing magnetic yellow ribbon on their car will do **** for anyone
<9> no reason they don't go to prison for 40+ years
<9> and drug dealers
<6> wiretapp Bush deficiets are a smaller percentage of GDP than was Clintons.
<5> KoBushi I'm talking about interest as % of the national debty
<1> wiretapp but, if you want to say "the republicans have fcked up our economy" sure, I'll agree to that... but I would also add that they haven't ****ed it up any worse than the democrats :)
<0> and I'm not trying some bull**** antiwar tactic, like calling for a draft
<3> **** goppp
<3> lol
<5> not national debt but as percentage of budget
<1> wiretapp the deficit as % of GDP is lower than it was under Clinton
<2> `436Hemi I hit the wrong button on the turntable
<0> I have a brother that wants one specifically because it'd improve his chances of going to Iraq as a soldier of some type
<2> `nicos I hit the wrong button on the turntable
<5> GDP means nothing here we are talking about budgets
<1> wiretapp GDP means everything :)
<1> we use fiat currency remember?
<3> do you have any dylan or doors, gopp?
<2> Johnny Cash - Hurt
<4> I think instead of fines, we should send speeders to prison too since they kill more people that drug dealers
<2> `nicos sure
<3> ah good one
<2> `nicos I got dylan
<3> the Gods are satisfied.
<6> wiretapp unfortunately politicians have come to believe that every time the economy grows, so should the budget... blame socialist spending.
<10> Wot: yes/no. unsafe drivers kill people.
<5> no GDP means nothing they just used it when it wasn't conventient to count GNP anymore
<1> GDP is directly related to the value of the USD
<3> lay lady lay?
<2> `nicos are you hurt
<3> nope
<4> mandatory 1 year prison work camp for speeders
<1> And, therefor, is directly related to how much running a deficit hurts us
<3> good song though
<1> If we didn't use fiat currency, I'd agree that GDP didn't matter, but we do use fiat currency, so it matters greatly
<5> yes but I amd talking about how much % of our national budget goes to paying interest on our debt
<5> you are talking about some strange calculations republicans came up with as a talking point
<1> really? what republican came up with it?
<8> there goes wiretapp yammering off at the mouth again
<5> **** if I know
<1> And, where has it been used by republicans as a "talking point"
<5> In here two seconds ago
<1> wiretapp I see, so then you admit you don't know what you are talking about.
<6> wiretapp the economy seems to be strong right now..why worry about deficiet spending as long as inflation is low and unemployment is high?
<1> Really? When has a Republican mentioned deficit as % of GDP in here?
<1> I'm the only one who has mentioned it in here today... and I am not a Republican
<6> KoBushi nope, I mentioned it before you.
<2> `nicos opps
<2> the needle got stuck
<1> ezwinner hum, I didn't see that then
<5> In describing the mounting national debt as "a phony issue," CNN host and syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak stated that the debt "is smaller as a percentage of GDP [gross domestic product] than any of our other -- than it has ever been."
<5> In fact, the national debt as a percentage of GDP (Excel document) has grown every year since President George W. Bush has been in office. In 2004, the $7.4 trillion national debt constituted 62.9 percent of GDP; in 2001 when Bush took office, the debt was 57.3 percent of GDP. In 1981, it was 32.9 percent of GDP
<3> where do you do that, gopp
<5> in 1929, the earliest year for which the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis lists GDP figures, it was just 16.3 percent. The 2004 figure of 62.9 percent is close to double that of 1981 and nearly four times that of 1929.
<6> no metter,,truth si always welcome, early or late.
<2> from my place
<3> start an internet radio station
<3> ?
<3> is there a site for it
<1> wiretapp and of what political orientation is Robert D Novak?
<5> who cares he was wrong
<5> thats the point
<2> `nicos Bob Dylan - Masters of War
<2> next song is alice copper
<2> school out
<2> if I can find the lp
<11> Interesting Fukuyama article from back in February: http://www.slate.com/id/2136964/
<2> dam needle
<1> Anyway, your claim about % of national budget being paid to national debt interest is a bit of a misnomer, since we don't always pay down all of the interest even :)
<2> I almost brokeit
<5> And they only reason it was lower when he first took office is because Clinton lowered it!
<7> clinton didn't lower anything!
<7> the president does not do the spending -- that is the congress
<2> `nicos my mom almost broke the lp once, she didn't like the saintanic song of alice copper
<1> BillFrugg bingo
<5> anyways you were wrong quit listening to FoxNews and Novak
<3> lol gopp you rebel
<1> wiretapp but, I agree that the natinoal debt is a problem in the long-term, eventually the US will have to stop borrowing and start spending down the debt...
<2> well my parnets are consertive
<6> wiretapp clinton never said no to anything regarding spending...the GOP takeover of congress in '94 cut the rate of increase in spending. but not enough.
<5> Just like peole in here spouting that non-sense about volcanoes cause more pollution than we do
<2> wiretapp he was not wrong you where wrong
<1> I don't watch fox news, nor have I ever heard of novak
<2> I proved you where wrong
<1> The inf you posted is incorrect though btw :)
<2> `436Hemi you switched my station
<5> gopp you weren't even here what are you talking about lol
Return to
#politics
or
Go to some related
logs:
#delphi
#red
#worldcup
#computers
unioned data
gothchick irc
#linuxhelp
blueraydisc
how to do autocommit after 1000 records
#beginner
|
|