Liberals DOUBLE DOWN on DEFICITS
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
But not Carter's, Reagan's, Bush I's, or Bush II's.
You're laughably transparent.
You do know that the "Obama phone" program was instituted under Reagan, right?
No, my plea is that the proponents of said program are fully at fault for their inferior communications program.
He probably wasn't of age to get one during the Reagan years.... That and he's from kenya after all
Of course... those who cry about benefits are the worst at sucking at the government tit
And guys like flossy et al would be the first ones to cry if they were denied to their parents or even(perish the thought) to refugees..
Trolling for fun isn't too bad but trolling with bullshit is what they do!
If I'm not mistaken the Provincial Gov. can borrow against the CPP fund and have 10 years to pay it back, wasn't that the big hallaballoo a few years ago when baby boomers were starting to retire and not enough money in the fund to support them, until the news dug up this little crumb about Provinces not paying back their loans from CPP fund.
Nice to see you finally agree with me.
No, a typical response from a blowhard would be something like "KEEP YOUR F*****G TRAP SHUT!"
How does the provinces taking money out of CPP help pay for retired baby boomers?
No that was the problem the Province's borrowed the money to such an extent that there wasn't enough in the coffers to pay the upcoming Boomer retirements. The Gov. wanted to cut pension payments to make the available money stretch until the borrowing practise surfaced forcing the Provinces to return outstanding loans to make the money available to the pensioners.
Question: Is there anybody here who thinks that running deficits except in times of national emergency or economic recession is a good idea?
I don't.
I would even support a revision of the Constitution that would require a 2/3 + 1 vote in Parliament to reduce revenue or increase expenditure and a 1/2 + 1 vote to reduce expenditure or increase revenue.
Assuming debt is not so much the problem as much as it has to do with the particular situation at that time and what it is used for. In the case of tater tot, the optics are that he's taking on this debt, spending the cash and the public at large has nothing to point to that accounts for the cash.
Any jurisdiction, nation, etc has to generate a basic budget that can be funded through the basic contributions of the population. Understanding that an economy is dynamic and ever changing, it's not unreasonable to use debt to mitigate the cyclical nature of the economy with borrowing against the future... What does become important is that the managers of gvt place great importance on the time value of that money and make the spending decisions accordingly.
That said, the determination of whether or not running a deficit is bad is predicated on the manner in which that money is used.
Sounds like the RCC so you know it is slanted towards favoritism. How about 50% plus 1 vote?? (like in the real world just for a change)
Referendums are the only way to curb influence peddling in the Gov.