UK: The Conclusive Results that Prove Austerity Doesn't Work

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Obama charged a Denny's Grand Slam breakfast to the national debt, August 15th at 8:00am in Alberquerqe, New Mexico.

Did Boehner authorize that breakfast as part of the WH operating appropriation?

Different chart, same content and hence same comment as above. I'm starting to think that you really can't prove your point.

[Teddy B 17,252]

Did Boehner authorize that breakfast as part of the WH operating appropriation?

I'm not sure, but the cheap ####### left only a .37cent tip, kept muttering something about being broke from having to buy beer for a racist cop and a loudmouth college professor from Mass.

Edited December 10, 2012 by Teddy B

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I'm not sure, but the cheap ####### left only a .37cent tip, kept muttering something about having to buy beer for a racist cop and a loudmouth college professor from Mass.

Beer summits don't come cheap.

[Karee 4,190]

He has? Can you prove that? Of course not. The President doesn't get t spend a single penny unless the Congress has first authorized that penny to be spent. In other words, the President doesn't get to spend anything. Nothing. Nada. Mad about high federal spending? Call John Boehner.

So then GWB has nothing to do with the fiscal problems we have now?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Okay, Kip. I know that it's cold up there in Alaska. And cold temperatures do slow shite down. I get it. These charts have been presented before. Nothing new to see here. The question is this: What of that spending was done w/o Congress' authority?

Hope the larger font will help you out.

[JohnR! 5,495]

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Edited December 10, 2012 by Bad_Daddy

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

So then GWB has nothing to do with the fiscal problems we have now?

Very little. Congress does the spending. The Constitution makes that so.

Bush couldn't have deprived the government of revenue, couldn't have spent over a trillion dollars on a war of choice, another trillion on a new drug benefit for Medicare without the Congress making it so. And since he had spending happy Republicans running the show in Congress, he's got all that done. No, Bush hasn't set this up. Those who you are to see as deficit hawks have done that. The Republicans that are today faking their hate on the deficits and debt are the ones that have been busy building both of them up.

Okay, the large font didn't do the trick. This one's done.

[Karee 4,190]

Very little. Congress does the spending. The Constitution makes that so.

Bush couldn't have deprived the government of revenue, couldn't have spent over a trillion dollars on a war of choice, another trillion on a new drug benefit for Medicare without the Congress making it so. And since he had spending happy Republicans running the show in Congress, he's got all that done. No, Bush hasn't set this up. Those who you are to see as deficit hawks have done that. The Republicans that are today faking their hate on the deficits and debt are the ones that have been busy building both of them up.

Okay, the large font didn't do the trick. This one's done.

Well I'm happy to finally hear someone from the left not blaming it on Bush. You might want to let some of your other Democrat friends in on this. I don't think they understand this thing about Congress spending the money and not the president.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Well I'm happy to finally hear someone from the left not blaming it on Bush. You might want to let some of your other Democrat friends in on this. I don't think they understand this thing about Congress spending the money and not the president.

I thought that was common knowledge.

[Karee 4,190]

I thought that was common knowledge.

Apparently not. Everyone is running around talking about letting the "Bush" tax cuts expire. I guess the media and the government are unaware how it all works.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Apparently not. Everyone is running around talking about letting the "Bush" tax cuts expire. I guess the media and the government are unaware how it all works.

Maybe some people just assign too much significance to these labels.

[Karee 4,190]

Maybe some people just assign too much significance to these labels.

Someone should clue in President Obama as to how government works. I don't think he understands either.

"What I'm not going to do is to extend Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 2 percent that we can't afford and according to economists will have the least positive impact on the economy," the president said at his first news conference since his re-election last week.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/14/obama-bush-tax-cuts_n_2130943.html

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Someone should clue in President Obama as to how government works. I don't think he understands either.

"What I'm not going to do is to extend Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 2 percent that we can't afford and according to economists will have the least positive impact on the economy," the president said at his first news conference since his re-election last week.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/14/obama-bush-tax-cuts_n_2130943.html

Certain policies will get a catchy and easy label that is used to identify them in the public debate. If the policies are based on a specific President's proposal, then that President's name is often attached to these policies in public communication and debate. In theory, these tax cuts should be referred to as the EGTRRA and JGTRRA tax cuts. You've got to admit that's not very catchy.