OT: US President (US Dom Players only)

[Tifone]

Originally Posted by NTJedi

The Borg provides the same thing. The government runs everything.
Except they're pro-gun.

So they're republicans.

And btw they're not pro-gun. They have inbuilt guns. How could they be against? That would be like you being against-your arm. (Not a trekker, I may be wrong)

Originally Posted by chrispedersen

Ironic that you think so, as the country that generates the highest percentage of its power in the world from nuclear energy is france - at over 70%.

Actually I was talking about my country on nuclear. But I wasn't clear enough I admit.
Even if looks like my government is now thinking about going for it.

[NTJedi]

Originally Posted by Tifone

So they're republicans.

And btw they're not pro-gun. They have inbuilt guns. How could they be against? That would be like you being against-your arm. (Not a trekker, I may be wrong)

Republicans do not want the government running everything... hence "more government is not the answer." Considering all the problems in government today we should not be giving our government more money and responsibilities until its current responsibilities are fixed.

Everyone has inbuilt guns this is pro-gun to an extreme. Basically the Borg government decided to arm everyone with guns, and chose the arm as its location. As part of the Borg you don't have the option to be against this decision because the Borg government runs everything.

[JimMorrison]

Originally Posted by NTJedi

Republicans do not want the government running everything... hence "more government is not the answer." Considering all the problems in government today we should not be giving our government more money and responsibilities until its current responsibilities are fixed.

Yet, Republicans consistently elect Presidents who increase spending at irresponsible, and unsustainable rates..... the irony is astounding.

[NTJedi]

Originally Posted by JimMorrison

Yet, Republicans consistently elect Presidents who increase spending at irresponsible, and unsustainable rates..... the irony is astounding.

Since the 90s republicans and democrats have BOTH been increasing taxes on the middle class, except Reagan who actually lowered taxes. There's plenty of charts showing who raised taxes and the democrats are not the 'pure good' which you believe.
The larger government grows the more it will need to raise taxes on its people and since the wealthy have loop holes the middle class people and middle class businesses will be suffering. The end result causes a smaller amount of middle class and a greater gap between the wealthy and the poor.

In any case the democrats now own the presidency, the majority of congress and the majority of governors... so let's see where we sit in 3 years.

[JimMorrison]

Originally Posted by NTJedi

Since the 90s republicans and democrats have BOTH been increasing taxes on the middle class, except Reagan who actually lowered taxes. There's plenty of charts showing who raised taxes and the democrats are not the 'pure good' which you believe.
The larger government grows the more it will need to raise taxes on its people and since the wealthy have loop holes the middle class people and middle class businesses will be suffering. The end result causes a smaller amount of middle class and a greater gap between the wealthy and the poor.

In any case the democrats now own the presidency, the majority of congress and the majority of governors... so let's see where we sit in 3 years.

I absolutely, never said that Democrats are "pure good". That is the only absolute I will offer you, other than this one.

However, statistically speaking, Republicans have consistently had greater rise in deficit spending, and in % of budget as deficit.

I don't care how much we get taxed, as long as there is something to show for it. But somehow Republicans manage to spend more, and do less. Explain that to me, please. I am sure you can, and I'm sure I'll disagree, but hey, evolution thrives on adversity.

[Agema]

I saw some stats collected from the Economic Report Of The President on the tax/spend trends of the two parties postwar. They suggest Republicans do indeed reduce taxes, but they don't actually reduce spending.

http://www.slate.com/id/2199810/

This is another article that suggests from the raw data that the US economy not only has historically grown more under the Democrats, but but more equally too.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/31/bu...in&oref=slogin

[JimMorrison]

In fact, they -increase- spending.

Of course, there are some who would argue that increasing wages is not indicative of a growing economy..... though, they are the same people who claim that providing tax breaks to the rich bolsters the economy, and leads to higher wages.

I think these figures are a bit misleading though. I'd venture to guess that under the Republicans, the top 5% does better than the NYT table shows, but through deregulation and tax loopholes, are more able to hide their income, during those administrations. :P Then when a Democrat takes office, they add some regulation back in, forcing the rich to declare more of their income.....


(Oh and Agema, apparently to Republicans, linking to Slate is something akin to how I might feel if they linked from O'Reilly..... Even if you are just trying to show them numbers that were compiled directly from the Economic Report to the President, complete with link to said document. )

[chrispedersen]

Originally Posted by JimMorrison

Yet, Republicans consistently elect Presidents who increase spending at irresponsible, and unsustainable rates..... the irony is astounding.

Jim,

Essentially, there is no way to fix our current problem.
If we elinated *every* government program, we still could not pay our current social security obligations. This is why when people release reports that say SS is broke, and WILL have to be fixed, this is what they mean.

On a somewhat different note..
I absolutely agree that the best of all possible worlds is spending less than our present taxes.

Deficit spending is not always a bad idea. This is why businesses take out loans - if you are going to make money on the transaction - its a good idea.

So for example deficit spending to fund the construction of the internet, or basic research - so long as their is a problable return is smart policy.

Deficit financing of consumption - ie., welfare, on the other hand is generally ridiculous.