What's wrong with this thinking?

[kellychaos]

President Bush promises tax cuts to get elected. So far, that's normal. Every candidate has made a variety of promises that he learns, while in office, he can't realistically keep. We know that, the president USUALLY knows that, we get screwed by the "promise breaking" and yet everyone still lives happily ever after because we're pretty much used to this standard ploy. Yet this idiot, against the advise of his own hand-picked treasurer, chooses to go through with his tax cut program with the full knowledge that it's going to further befuck the social security program down the road. This is all for the sake of keeping a campaign promise. In a way, I respect his desire to keep his promises but in another way ... how totally freaking daft can you be?! Of course, the task now seems to be to further discredit this same treasurer on other issues so that when the issue comes up in the future (After his presidency, for posterity's sake!), it will seem that the issue of the tax cut, while apparently a flaw in judgement by the president, cannot be held accountable to the president since many of the financial counseling received from this treasurer were just looney. How was the president to differentiate which were the good ideas and which were the looney ones, right? Right.

[The One and Only...]

Deficits are supported by various economists as a way to stimulate recovery.

[Emu]

Yes, because breaking things always makes them better, right?

[mburbank]

"Deficits are supported by various economists as a way to stimulate recovery."

And not supported by other economists.

But since your generation is going to paying off W.s debt, more power to you.

I don't think I'd mind the defficits so much if the money weren't being spent on war in Iraq and tax cuts for the people who need them the least. If we were running massive deficits because our money was being spent on ways to free ourselves from oil dependence, strengethening police and fire departments, education and job training, veterans benefits, afterschool programs which research shows reduce drug use as opposed to student drug testing which research shows does not reduce drug testing etc. Maybe I'd be more sanguine about the debt. But only a little. Fiscal responsability is one of the few thing Republicans ever changed my mind about.

John Mccain recently accused his own party of spending money like drunken sailors.

So far 'growth' stimulation is great if you build yachts or own Neiman Marcus, or are one of the 1,000 lucky people who got one of those jobs recently created. When Mommy and Daddy stop paying for your bow ties and pocket protectors I'll be more impressed by your economic savy.

[Brandon]

Originally Posted by mburbank

When Mommy and Daddy stop paying for your bow ties and pocket protectors I'll be more impressed by your economic savy.

[Buffalo Tom]

Originally Posted by kellychaos

President Bush promises tax cuts to get elected. So far, that's normal. Every candidate has made a variety of promises that he learns, while in office, he can't realistically keep. We know that, the president USUALLY knows that, we get screwed by the "promise breaking" and yet everyone still lives happily ever after because we're pretty much used to this standard ploy. Yet this idiot, against the advise of his own hand-picked treasurer, chooses to go through with his tax cut program with the full knowledge that it's going to further befuck the social security program down the road. This is all for the sake of keeping a campaign promise. In a way, I respect his desire to keep his promises but in another way ... how totally freaking daft can you be?! Of course, the task now seems to be to further discredit this same treasurer on other issues so that when the issue comes up in the future (After his presidency, for posterity's sake!), it will seem that the issue of the tax cut, while apparently a flaw in judgement by the president, cannot be held accountable to the president since many of the financial counseling received from this treasurer were just looney. How was the president to differentiate which were the good ideas and which were the looney ones, right? Right.

Robbing Peter to pay Paul.

[kellychaos]

So what do you guys think the motives are behind the recent mudbath that former secretary of the treasury, Paul H. O'Neill, has taken from the current administration ... aside from his book, I mean? He was good enough for the appointment but the minute he says anything even minutely scathing about the administration, he's put on a spit. That's like a five year old's mentality ... and that's giving them some credit.

[The One and Only...]

I didn't say I support the deficit spending. What I can say is that I can see why he does.

If all things go as planned, paying back the deficit won't take too long because of a continual, moderate inflation rate that will subside after the optimal interest rate within the equilibrium is attained.