View Single Post
      09-29-2008, 09:10 AM   #92
Call's Avatar

Drives: 08 135i, 08 & 07 X5, 05 MCSC
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Gainesville, GA

iTrader: (0)

Sethchan, in reply to your accusation that I get my information from Rush and Fox News only implies other sources are either not available or ignored by me. That is your opinion...I don't reply to opinions. And I'll tell you why...more times than not no gain is made one way or the other when people get all hot and bothers on someone else's opinions, especially when facts often times get in the way of one expressing their opinion. Nonetheless, I will add that my information provided here is from the application of facts as they are available within the framework of rational thought and the reality of the situation.

You apparently misunderstand the actual application of all funds recovered by the Federal Government from all sources including SSA as they can and are applied to deriving the budget. Please note from the sources you provided how complicated and truncated the accounting procedure for SSA itself has been made...on purpose I might add not for clarification but to continue misuse and misappropriation of same. For example:

"However, those involved in budget matters often produce two sets of numbers, one without Social Security included in the budget totals and one with Social Security included. Thus, Social Security is still frequently treated as though it were part of the unified federal budget even though, technically, it no longer is."

It's part of the fuzzy math of our government; a means in which to be correct technically but not right specifically. This game is played by both the Congress and the Executive Branches of Government; and, by both major Party's.

I apologize to those who have had to read this boring part of the discussion but it was made necessary to bring rational thought to the table in regard to what a balanced budget is. Opps, that little word, again. I guess it does depend on the definition of the word "is":wink:

Now to this thing about raising taxes to pay as we go. I love a real balanced budget but when someone tries to tell me their budget is balanced and it still leaves a bill for the future to have to be paid by someone else it's not a balanced budget.

And your argument on lowering spending under Clinton and trying to compare it to the budgets of other countries...we don't look at the budgets of other countries to determine ours so that's not germaine to the topic at hand. All that does is attempting to justify a position that has no substance.
And saying HW reduced the rate of increase in defense spending is a little weak. Reduced the rate of increase as compared to what? The bottom line is HW's defense budget was an increase when Clinton's was a decrease.

As for the reduction in the intelligence the time of the reduction we didn't know it but afterwards we did. It was evident after Bush came to office and received the intelligence report revealing a reduction in field operatives expenditures and the lack of actual information available. Our intelligence agencies were in complete disorder. They couldn't even talk to each other. Clinton's raising counter-terrorism to a cabinet position only served to bring accountability to him so he could control the budget you so clearly indicated no one really knew how much was being spent. Now he knew.

I respect you as a 1ADDICT brother...I just can't respect your arguments on the content of the subject at hand. They are inconsistent and lack a degree of rational thought. I'll attack your positions but I will not attack you personally.