I am not against paying taxes and never have been, but if you actually knew how much money is wasted by the federal government, which you apparently are OK with, you wouldn’t call it “whinning”, but rather “outrage”. Maybe you pay so little if any federal income tax that it doesn’t bother you how much money OTHER people fork over.

omg! tRACY, I agree with you. I agree that our government is wasting money on Wall Street parasites who are sucking our coffers dry because they want to privatize the gains and socialize the losses. I agree that we’re wasting money in Iraq and contractors like KBR so they can serve feces-tainted ice to our troops. I applaud you for your stance, and await the day you rant against the Bush administration’s waste of our taxpayer dollars.

Everyone, even Clinton, is in agreement the “welfare reform” of the 1990s worked. Give us a break!

Define “worked.” If by “worked” you mean “got everyone off welfare,” then yes. And that’s how they defined it. But it did that merely by eliminating welfare; it’s not like anybody accomplished anything. If you mean that poor people are better off and have easier routes to opportunity, then no, it did the opposite of “work.”

Make sure to kiss your gun good night for me.
____________

As you, no doubt, sit in the dark, fondling your, ah, “weapon”…

Sweaty palms, itchy trigger finger…

G’night good people.
You too trolls.

Nest pots I will try dooble ddigits

I remain the concept is lost even thought the car, door, and windows remain open…

(various confused and insulting things)

Tracy__5 Says:

Accounting practices are pretty much universal when it comes to budgets whether it be a government or business budget.

I’ll agree with you, to a qualified extent. For example, military war spending should not be “off budget,” for example. Most of these silly tricks appear to be to try to hide the actual spending number, even though all of the information is public anyways. I won’t say it should be done “like a business,” but it should be streamlined/simplified so that taxpayers can more clearly understand what they’re paying for.

.

Tracy__5 Says:

We are talking fiscally conservative….i.e. economics. Haven’t heard anything in the debate here about social policy.

It wasn’t until the 90’s that poor people started being demonized for their “life choices.” Newt Gingrich coined the term “welfare queen” and started making a political victim of unwed teenage mothers. Public assistance programs were “reformed” – er, I mean destroyed – wholesale across the nation. The mentally ill were dumped onto the streets en masse, and remain a majority of the homeless population today.

The glorification of the wealthy, as well as the assumption that the rest of us only have our share of the economy as a favor by them, has increased from a fairly sketchy proposition in the late 80’s (Gordon Gecko was a villian, remember) to be practically chiseled in political stone by 2004. Rounds of tax cuts after tax cuts vastly favored the wealthiest handful of the population, with a pittance scattered about for everybody else.

Oh, did I forget corporate deregulation? Yeah. If corporations are like individuals, then the trend since 1988 has been to institute nothing but pure anarchy. One after another, regulations designed to ensure fair trade and industry have been “reformed” – er, I mean destroyed. It’s gotten so bad that in the 2000’s, the executive branch has literally been appointing people to oversee regulations who don’t believe in overseeing the regulations that it’s their job to enforce. That is to say, the legislative slashing wasn’t good enough for them, they actually had to hire people who would blatantly refuse to do their jobs. Think they could get away with that in the 80’s? Me neither.

This is all economic policy I’m talking about here.

Face it You don’t get what I am saying. Stuff so doesn’t matter. Sharing does…

xxoo
Hippie_crusher crusher…