TheAnvil 0 #101 August 4, 2008 Nope. I read it just fine. I didn't read about any initiative to change that law, though. Perhaps I missed it. You don't like my jig dancing idea, I take it? You could sing in the legally obligated portion...wouldn't even require a backup singer. You could get a banjo and hit the steps of the capital - or how about the Mall - if the weather's nice. I'll help you. EVERYONE knows the tune to Old McDonald had a farm! "Bubba Clinton Had a surplus Good, good Bubba Clinton! And with that surplus he bought bonds - Bought them from himself! With a bond bond here and an IOU there Here a bond, there a bond, everywhere a bond bond Ole Bill Clinton had a Surplus Good good ole Bill Clinton! The law made the gov't issue some bonds. Damned damned laws they did! With a bond bond here and an IOU there Here a bond, there a bond, everywhere a bond bond Ole Bill Clinton had a surplus! Yes he really did! The debt increased, anyway we got deeper in the hole! With a bond bond here and an IOU there Here a bond, there a bond, everywhere a bond bond Bubba Clinton had a surplus! Eeee aaayyyeeee eeeee aayyyeee oooooooohhh!" Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #102 August 4, 2008 Quote Nope. I read it just fine. I didn't read about any initiative to change that law, though. Perhaps I missed it. You don't like my jig dancing idea, I take it? You could sing in the legally obligated portion...wouldn't even require a backup singer. You could get a banjo and hit the steps of the capital - or how about the Mall - if the weather's nice. I'll help you. EVERYONE knows the tune to Old McDonald had a farm! Perhaps you should lay off the tequila, Vinny. Maybe you should also consider taking an intro to financial accounting before trying to analyze government spending. It will help you understand what all those big numbers mean. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #103 August 4, 2008 Ooooh! Accounting! Where one may learn the folly of anyone writing themselves bonds? Goody goody goody! Maybe if you record my brilliant song, an accounting class could use it as a learning tool! Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #104 August 4, 2008 QuoteOoooh! Accounting! Where one may learn the folly of anyone writing themselves bonds? Goody goody goody! Maybe if you record my brilliant song, an accounting class could use it as a learning tool! Brilliance, Vinny, is not something typically associated with your posts.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #105 August 4, 2008 Oooooh! How nice. And maybe after your future performance on the Mall, you can stop in and tell all those Congressmen your theory on how no congressman can accomplish a damned thing! That'll surely make the bonds not come due! What was the bond total in the one report? $678 billion in FY00 or FY99? I forget. But by God it was a surplus! Yaaaahhhhooooo!!!! No! Wait! It's: "EEEEEEE aaaayyyyeee eeee aayyyyeee ooooooooooohhhhh!" Bwaaaaaahahahahahahaaaaaaa! Bonds? What bonds? Why - they're assets! Backed by the U.S. government no less! They're an asset AND a liability at the same time! And there WAS A SURPLUS! Don't forget it! We had a surplus dammit! Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #106 August 4, 2008 Quote Oooooh! How nice. And maybe after your future performance on the Mall, you can stop in and tell all those Congressmen your theory on how no congressman can accomplish a damned thing! That'll surely make the bonds not come due! What was the bond total in the one report? $678 billion in FY00 or FY99? I forget. But by God it was a surplus! Yaaaahhhhooooo!!!! No! Wait! It's: "EEEEEEE aaaayyyyeee eeee aayyyyeee ooooooooooohhhhh!" Bwaaaaaahahahahahahaaaaaaa! Bonds? What bonds? Why - they're assets! Backed by the U.S. government no less! They're an asset AND a liability at the same time! And there WAS A SURPLUS! Don't forget it! We had a surplus dammit! Why do you avoid answering the following SIMPLE question which I've asked you several times already? "Since you're so well informed, please tell us why the deficit (and debt) suddenly surged when Bush took over from Clinton, with the GOP still in charge of both parts of Congress."... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #107 August 4, 2008 QuoteBush II would be at the top of my list...but he probably wouldn't be alone. I'll let you guess who his co-placement would be. MMMMMMMKKKKKK...........................RIIIIIIIGHT He has done such a stellar job.....as opposed to your everpresent references to CLinton.. and the job he got. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #108 August 5, 2008 Quoteyou can stop in and tell all those Congressmen your theory on how no congressman can accomplish a damned thing! I never said any such thing. You do seem to like making shit up when you're wrong, don't you? QuoteWhat was the bond total in the one report? $678 billion in FY00 or FY99? I forget. But by God it was a surplus! … Bwaaaaaahahahahahahaaaaaaa! Bonds? What bonds? Why - they're assets! Backed by the U.S. government no less! They're an asset AND a liability at the same time! And there WAS A SURPLUS! Don't forget it! We had a surplus dammit! You're showing off your ignorance again, Vinny. When the funds in federal accounts increases by more than the debt increases while all operating expenses are met, that is a surplus. The bond values were offset by the debt incurred selling them. They were essentially a zero sum proposition. Funds in federal accounts still increased by more than debt increased. That can only happen with a surplus.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #109 August 5, 2008 QuoteQuoteBush II would be at the top of my list...but he probably wouldn't be alone. I'll let you guess who his co-placement would be. MMMMMMMKKKKKK...........................RIIIIIIIGHT He has done such a stellar job.....as opposed to your everpresent references to CLinton.. and the job he got. I'm glad I'm not the only one to notice that mnealtx claims Bush II tops the list as worst president, yet defends him against pretty much any accusations.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #110 August 5, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteBush II would be at the top of my list...but he probably wouldn't be alone. I'll let you guess who his co-placement would be. MMMMMMMKKKKKK...........................RIIIIIIIGHT He has done such a stellar job.....as opposed to your everpresent references to CLinton.. and the job he got. I'm glad I'm not the only one to notice that mnealtx claims Bush II tops the list as worst president, yet defends him against pretty much any accusations. OMG... I didn't jump on the "OMG THE REPUBES ARE SOOOOOOOOO BAD" circle jerk, so I *MUST* be defending them. Grow the fuck up, people - this isn't a popularity contest in jr. high. If you don't like the fact that I show how the Dems do the exact same thing that you scream about the Repubs doing, then don't read my posts - that simple.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #111 August 5, 2008 Uhhhh...because he spent more and took in fewer revenues for the first couple of years...then spending kept going even though revenues came back up as the economy improved... Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #112 August 5, 2008 Quote If you don't like the fact that I show how the Dems do the exact same thing that you scream about the Repubs doing, then don't read my posts - that simple. But I find your (lack of) logic so entertaining. You attack one side, defend the other, and claim that their both bad. The mental gymnastics you have to do to rationalize such posts must be exhausting.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #113 August 5, 2008 Quote Quote If you don't like the fact that I show how the Dems do the exact same thing that you scream about the Repubs doing, then don't read my posts - that simple. But I find your (lack of) logic so entertaining. You attack one side, defend the other, and claim that their both bad. The mental gymnastics you have to do to rationalize such posts must be exhausting. Ah, must be liberal 'logic' - that's the only way I can see how saying both sides are a bunch of fuckwits is "defending one side and attacking the other". Now THERE'S some 'mental gymnastics' for ya.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #114 August 5, 2008 If it wasn't you then I wonder who it WAS that I was getting a good chuckle out of a few weeks ago in some thread in here. If not - oops. I'm pretty sure it was you stating that any congressman couldn't point to a single accomplishment because Congress as a whole and not any one person within it causes a legislative action. Untenable argument - I thought you were the one making it. My memory might be incorrect. I'm not wrong: - EJC had a budget surplus - EJC left more debt than he came in with (ooohhh...yes....he did...and nothing you can say will make that fact go away) - EJC - and preceding and following administrations - wrote themselves IOUs via government bonds - those same IOUs will come due for more $$ than which they were purchased - writing yourself IOUs will set your accountant's heart and temper afire. Exactly what's incorrect? Nada. Get used to it. Now every time someone spouts 'Clinton left a surplus' you're going to get 'and he left more debt than he inherited' right along with it. Awwww.... Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #115 August 5, 2008 QuoteAh, must be liberal 'logic' - that's the only way I can see how saying both sides are a bunch of fuckwits is "defending one side and attacking the other". Now THERE'S some 'mental gymnastics' for ya. I agree that both parties are a bunch of fuckwits. One party are the major fuckwits, and one party are the minor fuckwits. The magnitude of the fuckwittedness of the two are significantly different, yet you seem to be under the illusion that it's the same. on top of that, you seem to have a complete inability to be able to discuss GWB's screwups on their own merits, needing to remind us all that Clinton wasn't perfect. No shit. Clinton made his share of mistakes, but he also had his share of successes. Bush, OTOH, has fucked up nearly everything he's touched. Tell us, how has Bush benefited the US?Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #116 August 5, 2008 >then spending kept going even though revenues came back up as >the economy improved... And is now in a downswing again, thus causing revenues to once again droop. Any sane economic plan can't hope for a magic sustained economic bubble to keep the government afloat; it has to balance income with expenses in the long term. (Ironically, the failure to appreciate that simple fact is one of the things that _led_ to this current economic decline.) That's one reason I dread the possibility of a McCain presidency. His continuation of the Iraq war coupled with his proposed tax cuts could be the final nail in our coffin when it comes to our debt. (Obama's tax plan does not save the day by any means, but it's far less out of kilter than McCain's.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #117 August 5, 2008 Quote If it wasn't you then I wonder who it WAS that I was getting a good chuckle out of a few weeks ago in some thread in here. If not - oops. I'm pretty sure it was you stating that any congressman couldn't point to a single accomplishment because Congress as a whole and not any one person within it causes a legislative action. Sorry, I read congressmen in your post when you wrote congressman. My bad. That was me that said that, and it's true. Congress is a team and accomplish things as such. I'd have no problem saying the same thing to any Congressman. Quote - EJC had a budget surplus - EJC left more debt than he came in with (ooohhh...yes....he did...and nothing you can say will make that fact go away) Nor did I ever deny that or claim otherwise. Just because you build a straw man to knock down Quote - EJC - and preceding and following administrations - wrote themselves IOUs via government bonds Bzzzz … wrong answer. Investing cash assets of a trust fund in government bonds as required by law is hardly the same as writing themselves IOU's. During the years pertinent to this discussion (199-2000), those funds from the bond sales were not used for any operating expenses. Quote - those same IOUs will come due for more $$ than which they were purchased Not necessarily true when the time value of money is taken into consideration, i.e. $1 a year from now is not worth as much as $1 now, even with zero inflation. Quote - writing yourself IOUs will set your accountant's heart and temper afire. The financial accountants need only record the debits and credits, and can do so without passion or prejudice. Quote Exactly what's incorrect? The claim you made (first made by lawrocket, though he had integrity enough to admit he was incorrect), and conveniently left out of this post, that Clinton's surpluses were all caused by off budget surpluses large enough to cover on budget deficits (true in 1998 and 2001). Despite all the straw men you've built up in this thread, that has been the only point I've made or defended, i.e. in 1999 and 2000 there were on and off budget surpluses. Yet you've continued to throw up smokescreens and try to explain all the ways the numbers lie. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #118 August 5, 2008 I don't think the key resides in either of the tax plans, rather in a complete revamping of all spending. - Mandatory spending (i.e. entitlement programs) - need to be on the table for examination. All of it. Add PBGC in there as well. - Discretionary spending needs to shift from DoD-centric to internal improvements. Quickly. And it needs to decrease in magnitude. Both of those are necessary - and Sen. Obama might do the latter; the former he will not touch and we all know it. It's the more critical of the two. Even very disciplined people become foaming-at-the-mouth-fucktards when confronted with an entitlement going away. That is going to be a VERY unpleasant undertaking politically. McCain would be far more likely to do it. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #119 August 5, 2008 I'm chuckling yet again at the absurdity of your avoidance mechanism WRT Sen. Obama's inexperience. Read up about the $$$ for the bonds. And remember...Clinton left more debt than he inherited. (I know he had a surplus). Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #120 August 5, 2008 >Mandatory spending (i.e. entitlement programs) - need to be on the table >for examination. All of it. Add PBGC in there as well. That's great - but "examination" is a long way from "removal." >Discretionary spending needs to shift from DoD-centric to internal >improvements. Quickly. And it needs to decrease in magnitude. I agree - but again, neither side will make that happen. >Even very disciplined people become foaming-at-the-mouth-fucktards >when confronted with an entitlement going away. A more general statement would be that well disciplined people become fucktards when confronted with their program going away, whether it's an entitlement, a corporate benefit, their favorite tax cut, their favorite educational benefit, their favorite war etc. It is the basic problem of government spending, and neither candidate will address it more than obliquely. However, the deficit will grow more slowly under Obama, based purely on their spending proposals so far. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #121 August 5, 2008 Quote Read up about the $$$ for the bonds. Me reading up on them further won't help you understand. Quote (I know he had a surplus). At least you've finally decided to admit that.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #122 August 5, 2008 Quote I don't think the key resides in either of the tax plans, rather in a complete revamping of all spending. - Mandatory spending (i.e. entitlement programs) - need to be on the table for examination. All of it. Add PBGC in there as well. - Discretionary spending needs to shift from DoD-centric to internal improvements. Quickly. And it needs to decrease in magnitude. Both of those are necessary - and Sen. Obama might do the latter; the former he will not touch and we all know it. It's the more critical of the two. Even very disciplined people become foaming-at-the-mouth-fucktards when confronted with an entitlement going away. That is going to be a VERY unpleasant undertaking politically. McCain would be far more likely to do it. Based on history of the last 30 years, your expectations of any GOP administration are badly misplaced. Past IS prologue.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #123 August 6, 2008 Hmm...you haven't followed McCain much, have you? Given the content of the Congress, I highly suspect either COA to come to fruition. However, when thinking of budgetary responsibility, anyone who seeks to socialize health care really doesn't have credibility, eh? Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #124 August 6, 2008 Quote Based on history of the last 30 years, your expectations of any GOP administration are badly misplaced. Past IS prologue. Quote Hmm...you haven't followed McCain much, have you? There's already been a McCain administration during the past 30 years? Wow, when was he in office, Vinnie?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #125 August 6, 2008 >There's already been a McCain administration during the past 30 years? Just the last 8, for all intents and purposes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
