Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Hojczyk

Krauthammer has been acting like a real jerk.

There is a huge difference between throwing porkulus funds into the gutter for your friends to fight over, and letting hard-working taxpayers keep their own money.

In reality, the first did not succeed in stimulating anything. In fact, it resulted in more job losses. The second won’t stimulate anything either—because we already HAVE the Bush tax cuts. But if we don’t keep them, then it will be like dropping a large rock on the remains of our economy. It will cost MORE millions of job losses.

Krauthammer does not understand that there is a difference between balancing the budget by raising taxes and by cutting spending. Raising taxes makes things worse. Cutting spending makes things better. Spending cuts are the only rational way to balance the budget in this disastrous economic collapse. It will hurt, but not permanently.


12 posted on 12/10/2010 8:42:54 AM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Cicero
Krauthammer does not understand that there is a difference between balancing the budget by raising taxes and by cutting spending. Raising taxes makes things worse. Cutting spending makes things better. Spending cuts are the only rational way to balance the budget in this disastrous economic collapse.

When did they ever cut spending except for the military?

13 posted on 12/10/2010 9:27:22 AM PST by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: Cicero

Yes. Stimulus per se is not a problem. The problem is whether the chosen “stimulus” effectively stimulates the economy!

Duh. Charles, we are all FOR stimulating the economy. Had Obambi proposed something that would actually work to stimulate the economy, we would have been all FOR it. But he didn’t. He threw money down Ratholes and simply called it “Stimulus.” That doesn’t cut it.

If, Charles, you are right that Obama has actually agreed, through extension of the Bush tax cuts, to a “Stimulus” that will effectively stimulate the economy, what in Hell’s Bells is the problem with that?

The Rats could care less about effectively stimulating the economy. They were for “Stimulus,” i.e. Porkulus, precisely because it was porkulus. It had nothing to do with whether or not it actually stimulated the economy.

The Rats are against (Charles’ term) the present “stimulus,” i.e. refusing to raise tax rates, precisely because they have absolute bloodlust for always, under every circumstance, RAISING TAXES. It has nothing to do with whether or not this actually will stimulate the economy.

You can’t blame Rats for not caring that Obambi, supposedly, got a “stimulus” package here. They DON’T care about stimulating the economy, period! They care about increasing government spending and increasing taxes, each of those as stand-alone goals and dreams.


23 posted on 12/10/2010 10:54:46 AM PST by fightinJAG (Americans: the only people in the world protesting AGAINST government "benefits.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson