Yes, we can.

[JWBear]

Originally Posted by Moonliner

Dear Hillary supporters:

When If Obama officially receives the Democratic nomination for President, will you then toss your support over to him? Vote McCain? Stay Home?

I'm an Obama supporter, so the question does not apply to me. However... If Clinton should manage to win the nomination, I will vote for her without hesitation in November – albeit with a firm grasp on my nose. She would be the lesser of two evils.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by 3894

Is borrowing money from China the better way to pay for our spending?

The premise of your question is flawed on two counts.

First is that raising taxes will result in raised revenue, far from a certainty, and I would argue the opposite takes place.

Secondly, the government should spend less money if money is tight.

Borrowing money from China is only for the Clinton's campaign coffers.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

First is that raising taxes will result in raised revenue, far from a certainty, and I would argue the opposite takes place.

And you'd be wrong. (or rather, you'd be just as likely to be wrong as right since all the evidence has shown that far too many economic factors are at play for incremental changes, up or down, in taxation to produce any sort of predictable, measurable effect on overall revenue due to economic growth or shrinkage).

By the same token, ignoring the last clause of the sentence, I agree that raising taxes is not a certain path towards revenue increase (see above). But the reality is that our spending is growing and that's not going to change no matter who is in office. The only thing that is going to have an effect at this point is military spending and McCain will certainly continue the trend of blowing the budget out of the water on that. From the standpoint of economic stability, while my druthers would be to make large cuts in all areas where there is waste, that's simply not going to happen in the short term so the next best thing is to stop the bleeding via un-budgeted military spending and continue to ensure there is enough revenue to cover the current levels of approved waste. When we had a budget surplus, moves were being made to begin cutting intelligently because Congress could look at the budget rationally instead of in panic mode. It'd be nice to be there again.

[wendybeth]

Originally Posted by 3894

Is borrowing money from China the better way to pay for our spending?

I owe you mojo.

[wendybeth]

Scaeagles, does the government military spending fuss you at all? Just wondering. Also, if not- where the hell do you think they get the money to do so?

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

Scaeagles, does the government military spending fuss you at all? Just wondering. Also, if not- where the hell do you think they get the money to do so?

I have no problem with taxation for Constitutionally mandated functions of the federal government. Well over half, and I'm sure it's over 75% though I do not know exact numbers, of federal spending is not for Constitutionally mandated functions. So, no, military spending doesn't anger me at all. Wasteful spending in all areas does, so to the point that military funding is wasted - and we would disagree on what constitutes wasted military spending - that is a problem.

[JWBear]

Sorry, but to me, McCain is the most scary of all three!

[scaeagles]

Understandable. The man scares me, too. Probably the only one I wouldn't be afraid to meet in a dark alley, though, would be Obama.

[wendybeth]

Well, McGovern seems to think she's hurting the Party. He is not a superdelegate, but he is very influential and switching his endorsement to Obama is just another sign that the Dem leadership is getting nervous about the potential for splitting the Party should this nastiness continue.

[innerSpaceman]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Probably the only one I wouldn't be afraid to meet in a dark alley, though, would be Obama.

Whoa, that better have been a joke.


Where's the smiley?