The $10 Trillion Hangover: Paying the Price for 8 Years of Bush

[THE KOD]

control thru fear? :shrug: You all hope against facts!

I forgot how things need to be stated much more directly in this forum, maybe bold it :0008

The "savings" from Health Care bill, in the very best case scenario (which ain't gonna happen) is so tiny, it almost ain't worth talking about. There are a hundred other things Congress always massages that would make bigger change. Anybody who does make special mention of the help it might add to deficit reduction ain't facing facts!

.........................................................


You and no one else has a clue what will happen when it goes into effect in 2014


They have to continue to stop the corruption of medicare, the stealing doctors, the stealing drug companies, and the crooked insurance companys.

Drug companies pay .05 per pill and charge people without insurance 4 dollars each.

Stop the wars in Iraq and Afghan and we will be in much better shape to get out of this debt.

We will never be able to kill enough Al Queda and Taliban anyways.

you are as cynical as DTBlackgumby

 

[Trampled Underfoot]

Stop the wars in Iraq and Afghan and we will be in much better shape to get out of this debt.

Thats what I just don't understand. We have all these right wingers upset with the spending but they don't want to cut $1 of spending of our defense budget. Just amazing.

 

[Terryray]

You and no one else has a clue what will happen when it goes into effect in 2014

why would you support something this big if you had no clue what would happen when it goes into effect? :shrug: I trust you are more prudent spending your own money than my tax dollars.

As for the leanings of Bilmes and Stiglitz, I would agree with you. Definitely to the left. So, if that's what's important to point out, you did it

from your posts above, it's obvious that it's important to you. But of course, that ain't the main point. I'll restate it more directly. Bold it. The point is---you and Skulnik and whomever can cut and paste long articles and challenge each other all day long, while us folks looking for answers will stay out of the bickering over content of skewed partisan articles. I'm sure Skulnik is wondering why you haven't responded with "any commentary on the CONTENT of" his "in-depth article" commenting on yours.

Still waiting on any commentary on the CONTENT of their in-depth article. Dismissing the message because of the messenger is fine, but doesn't deal with the issue.

It deals with the larger issue, which precisely includes the smaller. We all filter out comments and opinions every day by looking at the messenger. I don't bother with the content of a Joseph E. Stiglitz article, outside of comments about Pareto optimality, any more than I bother wasting time with the content from a Heritage article. Content is partisan and generally skewed. Why waste my time on that when so much available isn't this way?

if ya want comments on specifics, I posted again other day what I think is cause of recession--and why big spending by goverment Stiglitz claims is so necessary isn't going to help.

also had there comments why Obama's large deficits in the out years are worrisomely different from previous ones--contrary to Stiglitz claims.

I've posted in past study by Treasury dept shows that one can only argue the middle class has "shrunk" because so many have grown and gotten rich and moved in the upper classes

I've also posted before links to fine paper by Ron Haskins on why the simple income "distribution" data is full of noise we can control for, and not doing so gives a very skewed view. He discusses Richard Burkhauser's famous work showing the severe data problems all specialists in this area (of which Stiglitz is decidedly not one) know that gives you very exaggerated picture of how well the top income folks have been doing, relative to others.

and Robert J. Gordon's paper for the prestigious NBER discusses here (sorry, just abstract available free) why controlling for some variables significantly reduced the alleged huge growing gap seen in recent income "distribution" tables.

but these few minutes is already too much time by me spent dealing with the contents of a Stiglitz or a Heritage piece....

 

[Chadman]

Wow. I just posted that article, because I found some of the content interesting, and it does shed some light on the issue. I don't in any way consider it gospel, or to be completely accurate. But I do consider some of it to be, and some of it definitely shows how the previous administration has a role in current and future debt. If you don't agree with that, so be it.

You lump me in with Skulnik? We really don't have much more to talk about, then. I give you credit, and you pretty much want to label me as a simpleton. Whatever makes you feel better, I guess. I can alter my look towards you, I suppose. I try to give credit, even when I don't agree with the position another person takes. But, I certainly don't have to.

I guess that you "smart guys" are the only ones who can search for answers. Seems to me, with your last post, you want us all to believe you HAVE all the answers, compared to me, at least. I don't spend all day here looking for strictly scholarly economic links. I try to have some fun, discuss issues, engage with others, learn about my opinions and those of others. There's info all over the place, some good, some bad. Yes, I get some of mine from left-wing sources. Just like you get some of yours from right-wing sources. I'm always searching for answers. I get some from conservatives, and learn more from people with different opinions than I have, that much I know. I don't presume to know where those answers are going to come from all the time.

I stand by my interactions here, and will show the same respect I receive. I think I've always given you quite a bit of respect. Maybe I shouldn't waste my time doing that, either.

 

[THE KOD]

You lump me in with Skulnik? We really don't have much more to talk about, then. I give you credit, and you pretty much want to label me as a simpleton. Whatever makes you feel better, I guess. I can alter my look towards you, I suppose. I try to give credit, even when I don't agree with the position another person takes. But, I certainly don't have to.

I guess that you "smart guys" are the only ones who can search for answers. Seems to me, with your last post, you want us all to believe you HAVE all the answers, compared to me, at least. I don't spend all day here looking for strictly scholarly economic links. I try to have some fun, discuss issues, engage with others, learn about my opinions and those of others. There's info all over the place, some good, some bad. Yes, I get some of mine from left-wing sources. Just like you get some of yours from right-wing sources. I'm always searching for answers. I get some from conservatives, and learn more from people with different opinions than I have, that much I know. I don't presume to know where those answers are going to come from all the time.

I stand by my interactions here, and will show the same respect I receive. I think I've always given you quite a bit of respect. Maybe I shouldn't waste my time doing that, either.

....................................................................

Yeh same here TerryRoothead

you dont know chit from shinola.

you should just stick to talking about Sarah Palins
bigger boobs or something stupid like that.

She didnt get a boob job but one of her boobs is now as big as you're head.

 

[Terryray]

....................................................................

Yeh same here TerryRoothead

you dont know chit from shinola.

you should just stick to talking about Sarah Palins
bigger boobs or something stupid like that.

She didnt get a boob job but one of her boobs is now as big as you're head.

Sorry man. Lesson learned! Lord knows (sorry gmroz22) I wouldn't want anyone to tick off anybody who might have recently eaten State Fair-style walleye on a stick, or some dude from GA gunning after illegals. Sorry if I came across as too arrogant. Youze guys are some of the more fair-minded on this board, and do show some care when reading others posts (that a very rare commodity here or anywhere!)...I'll go back to baseball fourm to get more humility, or maybe read some of my old threads for that, and sportsbar thread to try and lighten up some....

 

[THE KOD]

Sorry man. Lesson learned! Lord knows (sorry gmroz22) I wouldn't want anyone to tick off anybody who might have recently eaten State Fair-style walleye on a stick, or some dude from GA gunning after illegals. Sorry if I came across as too arrogant. Youze guys are some of the more fair-minded on this board, and do show some care when reading others posts (that a very rare commodity here or anywhere!)...I'll go back to baseball fourm to get more humility, or maybe read some of my old threads for that, and sportsbar thread to try and lighten up some....

..............................................................

Thats more like it ass eyes .


:00hour :SIB

 

[Chadman]

For the record, I've never been to the state fair, here, or anywhere, just not my thing. Not much of a fan of fish, either, on or off the stick. I guess that was a sideways chiding, while sort of apologizing, by taking us back to an old discussion that I think you probably like.

I'll say two things here. I have many posts that take me down a few notches, been wrong many times, especially in the handicapping forums. In the political forum, too, depending on who you "follow" there. I respect your take on economics, Terry, and hopefully nobody thought I can hold a candle to your take on that subject. I've learned plenty from your economic posts, and those of others.

I don't look at life through purely economic eyes, and hope to maintain a balance in life. So, my opinions on economics will often fall far short of pure economic "intelligence." I think my time on earth is better spent thinking about a few other things than just money, and how everything will effect me personally, in all situations.

Peace, out. Come on in the Bar tonight, I'll buy you a beer, just to shoot holes in my liberal-leaning hat... :0074

 

[THE KOD]

For the record, I've never been to the state fair, here, or anywhere, just not my thing. Not much of a fan of fish, either, on or off the stick. I guess that was a sideways chiding, while sort of apologizing, by taking us back to an old discussion that I think you probably like.

...............................................................

I think he called you a walleye from Minn.

fish on a stick sounds yummy.

I think he got me wrong also as I am no gunning for illigals.

Lets see you're papers son.

 

[Trench]

You lump me in with Skulnik? We really don't have much more to talk about, then. I give you credit, and you pretty much want to label me as a simpleton.

:142smilie

Damn, that was a cheap shot by Terryray, lumping you (of all people) with Skulnik. That's bad mojo (no offense Skulnik). :142smilie

Trench

 

[THE KOD]

:142smilie

Damn, that was a cheap shot by Terryray, lumping you (of all people) with Skulnik. That's bad mojo (no offense Skulnik). :142smilie

Trench

........................................................

Got to agree here.

no offense lumping skul in as a dumb ass.

but then to group it up and put chadman in there just dont seem right somehow.

chad is the only one here that really trys to be even minded about alot of the crap posted by these right wing neocons morans.

 

[Trench]

........................................................

Got to agree here.

no offense lumping skul in as a dumb ass.

Right Scotty. There's no offense intended by saying that because someone lumps you with Skulnik, they're implying you're a simpleton.

The "point" is that Chadman is the last guy that anyone should cast that aspersion upon by lumping him with Skulnik.

Trench