"The Republicans’ war on science and reason"


Looks flawed to me.

If you exclude defence related spending (Defence, Homeland Security, VA) and mandatory spending (Spending that is required by existing laws, that the president doesn’t get a say in) the total US spending is a little over $400 billion.

Now, as you your point about SS etc being responsible for the US debt, you logic is clearly tortured and flawed. Debt comes from not being willing to pay for all the programs you want, no one program is any more responsible than any other. The exception to this is SS and Medicare which is paid for with separate deductions from your pay.
 
Can I coin this the "No True President Fallacy"?

BTW, why would Roosevelt NOT be relevant?

Not at all
First, there is a notable change in US politics in the 1960’s that make Democrat vs Republican comparisons to today much less relevant.

Second, Roosevelt’s spending was in reaction to 2 extreme events, WWII and the Great depression. The only other President to face anything remotely similar is Obama.

Three there is a notable shift in Republican budgeting habits after the Ford Administration that needs to be reflected. Given the fact that Obama has generally governed farther right than the Republican administrations prior to 1976, again we are probably looking at a political shift that negates direct political comparisons.
 
Second, Roosevelt’s spending was in reaction to 2 extreme events, WWII and the Great depression.

I'm not that familiar with that era.

I did just read a book on the Great Depression. Both now and then, no one could agree whether the massive spending and new Gov't programs helped or delayed the recovery. I don't know enough to take a firm position on way or another.

But I again despair at this "Blame Game". Right now we have to decide, going forward, whether to continue with stimulus and spending and gov't projects, or whether to rein in spending and entitlements - or some combination of both. The voters will decide in a year or so which direction to go.
 
I'm not that familiar with that era.

I did just read a book on the Great Depression. Both now and then, no one could agree whether the massive spending and new Gov't programs helped or delayed the recovery. I don't know enough to take a firm position on way or another..

Irrelevant since we are not discussing what action Roosevelt “should” have taken to deal with the Great Depression. He incurred some debt as a direct response to the great depression and a great deal more in response to WWII. These events are unique enough that he doesn’t make a good candidate for comparison.

(For what he should have done, well you are correct, there is no universally accepted formula but what he did do undoubtedly helped, the numbers are pretty clear on that. In the current recession the focus has been much more weighted to monetary stimulus which was largely missing in the great depression. This too has helped, but again not enough. Most likely both are required as well as some more targeted response at specific underlying issues which will undoubtedly change from crisis to crisis.)

But I again despair at this "Blame Game".
Why? As long as done in accordance with the facts, why shouldn’t we look at the track record of Republicans and Democrats? It seems to me that if we don’t we end up with the useless position that “they are both bad so I’m free to support my chosen side without questioning.”

It’s also worth noting that it’s at the very least bad optics for you to ignore unfounded complaints “that it’s the democrats fault” only to complain that “we shouldn’t play the blame game” when people come forward with actually numbers to support the position that the Republicans may be more at fault.

Right now we have to decide, going forward, whether to continue with stimulus and spending and gov't projects, or whether to rein in spending and entitlements - or some combination of both. The voters will decide in a year or so which direction to go.

Just as an FYI, the private sector has produced ~ 2.5 million jobs in the last 12-18 months. Over that same time the public sector has declined by ~1 million jobs. IOW rather that engaging in stimulus and government projects, reductions in overall government spending (Federal, State and Local) ate far and away the biggest drag on the US economy.
 
Looks flawed to me.

If you exclude defence related spending (Defence, Homeland Security, VA) and mandatory spending (Spending that is required by existing laws, that the president doesn’t get a say in) the total US spending is a little over $400 billion.

Now, as you your point about SS etc being responsible for the US debt, you logic is clearly tortured and flawed. Debt comes from not being willing to pay for all the programs you want, no one program is any more responsible than any other. The exception to this is SS and Medicare which is paid for with separate deductions from your pay.

There's nothing separate about it.
 


Here's how it looks organized by department. Figures are from this 268-page PDF financial report on the 2010 fiscal year produced by the GAO .

The net operating cost for each federal department in billions of dollars:

889.2 - Defense
857.7 - Health and Human Services
753.9 - Social Security
372.9 - Treasury
235.5 - Veterans Affairs
214.8 - Interest on Treasury Securities held by public
179.0 - Labor
130.6 - Agriculture
89.5 - Education
79.8 - Transportation
55.4 - Housing and Urban Development
50.0 - Homeland Security
31.5 - Justice
25.5 - Office of Personnel Management
25.1 - Energy
22.0 - NASA
21.7 - State
18.3 - Interior
14.2 - Commerce
12.2 - Environmental Protection Agency
10.5 - Agency for International Development
9.0 - Federal Communications Commission
8.8 - Railroad Retirement Board
6.9 - National Science Foundation
5.0 - Small Business Administration
3.8 - Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation
2.1 - National Credit Union Administration
0.8 - Smithsonian Institution
0.7 - Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
0.3 - Nuclear Regulatory Commission
46.6 - All other entities

On the other side of the ledger, here is the report's breakdown of revenue by type in billions of dollars:

1732.9 - Individual income tax and tax withholdings
179.6 - Corporate income taxes
71.6 - Excise taxes
45.2 - Unemployment taxes
25.1 - Customs duties
18.8 - Estate and gift taxes
15.8 - Misc. earned revenues
127.5 - Other taxes and receipts
 
Last edited:
Here's how it looks organized by department. Figures are from this 268-page PDF financial report on the 2010 fiscal year produced by the GAO .

The net operating cost for each federal department in billions of dollars:

889.2 - Defense
857.7 - Health and Human Services
753.9 - Social Security
372.9 - Treasury
235.5 - Veterans Affairs
214.8 - Interest on Treasury Securities held by public
179.0 - Labor
130.6 - Agriculture
89.5 - Education
79.8 - Transportation
55.4 - Housing and Urban Development
50.0 - Homeland Security
31.5 - Justice
25.5 - Office of Personnel Management
25.1 - Energy
22.0 - NASA
21.7 - State
18.3 - Interior
14.2 - Commerce
12.2 - Environmental Protection Agency
10.5 - Agency for International Development
9.0 - Federal Communications Commission
8.8 - Railroad Retirement Board
6.9 - National Science Foundation
5.0 - Small Business Administration
3.8 - Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation
2.1 - National Credit Union Administration
0.8 - Smithsonian Institution
0.7 - Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
0.3 - Nuclear Regulatory Commission
46.6 - All other entities

On the other side of the ledger, here is the report's breakdown of revenue by type in billions of dollars:

1732.9 - Individual income tax and tax withholdings
179.6 - Corporate income taxes
71.6 - Excise taxes
45.2 - Unemployment taxes
25.1 - Customs duties
18.8 - Estate and gift taxes
15.8 - Misc. earned revenues
127.5 - Other taxes and receipts

And so, your point is...???
 
And so, your point is...???


It's another way of presenting the data. Different methods of presentation can yield better understanding and allow for a different mode of analysis.

Also, it shows that more money was spent on the Department of Defense than any other single U.S. federal government department (though the Department of Health and Human Services came a close second).
 
So my pay stub has false information on it?

You got it. It's all just one big slush fund. Not even SS is self-sustaining. Soon we will all be like Greece -- rioting in the streets for freebies we haven't earned or deserve. And the Great Unwashed will say, "Let's get the rich."
 
There's nothing separate about it.
Please do not post falsehoods as facts and expect to be held in especially high regard for your wisdom or integrity.

We are taxed at a givben rate up to a limiited amount of income to fund these programs, and how much we pay into ther system determines how much we draw upon retirement.

To suggest otherwise is simply a lie.
 
You got it. It's all just one big slush fund. Not even SS is self-sustaining. Soon we will all be like Greece -- rioting in the streets for freebies we haven't earned or deserve. And the Great Unwashed will say, "Let's get the rich."

If, by that crap, you mean my Social Security benefits, what I would like to say to you would get me suspended, and would still not say enough.
 
You got it. It's all just one big slush fund. Not even SS is self-sustaining. Soon we will all be like Greece -- rioting in the streets for freebies we haven't earned or deserve. And the Great Unwashed will say, "Let's get the rich."

So, we didn't pay SS tax or Medicare Tax?

Please explain.

Did YOU pay SS tax or Medicare Tax? If not, (presuming you'er a US Citizen) how did you avoid that?
 
If, by that crap, you mean my Social Security benefits, what I would like to say to you would get me suspended, and would still not say enough.

I second that.

I think this sort of person wants to see riots. Makes them feel superior.

I hope that some day people like this wind up on SS and Medicare and are unable to make ends meet. They need to find out what it's like to eat Alpo, and to take life-preserving medication every other day because they cannot afford it.

Because it does not matter how carefully you plan for your future, you can still wind up penniless and old and unable to stay alive except for public entitlements.
 
I second that.

I think this sort of person wants to see riots. Makes them feel superior.

I hope that some day people like this wind up on SS and Medicare and are unable to make ends meet. They need to find out what it's like to eat Alpo, and to take life-preserving medication every other day because they cannot afford it.

Because it does not matter how carefully you plan for your future, you can still wind up penniless and old and unable to stay alive except for public entitlements.

I can't believe that there is a single person in america who hasn't themselves or had a relative that has benefited from public entitlements.
 
You got it. It's all just one big slush fund. Not even SS is self-sustaining. Soon we will all be like Greece -- rioting in the streets for freebies we haven't earned or deserve. And the Great Unwashed will say, "Let's get the rich."

Have any evidence to support your lies assertions?
 

Back
Top Bottom