Is John Edwards a complete retard?

[Blizzardbaum]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There have been a number of recent studies (albeit produced by CATO and Heritage economists)

[/ QUOTE ]

I have a dream....that one day, no one will listen to two words of the propaganda that comes from conservative think tanks

[ QUOTE ]
showing an historically inverse relationship between tax rates and tax revenues in the United States with the data adjusted for inflation.

[/ QUOTE ]

this absurd nonsense that tax cuts will pay for themselves (and it should be logically obvious, i.e., common sense, that it is nonsense) has been discussed and debunked before on this forum. I am currently too lazy to search for the threads myself, but you can find them if you like.

[/ QUOTE ]

You make a well reasoned case with numerous factual examples backing up your positions. No doubt, you have a strong background in debating.

[NeBlis]

So lemme get this straight. West and the rest of you guys.

you.
A. think that taxes are to low.
B. Also think that taxes should be raised rather than spending reduced.
C. Were dropped hard on your head once or twice as a child.

NeBlis

[West]

[ QUOTE ]
So lemme get this straight. West and the rest of you guys.

you.
A. think that taxes are to low.
B. Also think that taxes should be raised rather than spending reduced.
C. Were dropped hard on your head once or twice as a child.

[/ QUOTE ]

A. never said that - but with regards to repealing Bush's tax cuts favoring the rich to help balance the budget, yes, I'm all for that, what a shocking position to take
B. never said this, see A
C. see Blizzardbaum's reply above, which is far more applicable to your post

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So lemme get this straight. West and the rest of you guys.

you.
A. think that taxes are to low.
B. Also think that taxes should be raised rather than spending reduced.
C. Were dropped hard on your head once or twice as a child.

[/ QUOTE ]

A. never said that - but with regards to repealing Bush's tax cuts favoring the rich to help balance the budget, yes, I'm all for that, what a shocking position to take
B. never said this, see A

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you think taxes should be raised rather than spending reduced?

[4 High]

Even as one of the most liberal Democrats on this board, i would be for looking to reduce spending in alot of areas before considering rolling back tax cuts, even on the rich.

[cardcounter0]

That is already occuring. My local paper listed a bunch of stuff that was promised last year that the new congress is going to cut back on. Also mentioned was the Alaska Bride to Nowhere, I guess a lot of the funding was not complete on that pork, and the new congress is not going forward with that. In my neighborhood, a bunch of federal funds were going to be used to beautify a local bridge. Guess those funds are not coming, I will still have to drive over the same old ugly bridge.

[TomCollins]

[ QUOTE ]
That is already occuring. My local paper listed a bunch of stuff that was promised last year that the new congress is going to cut back on. Also mentioned was the Alaska Bride to Nowhere, I guess a lot of the funding was not complete on that pork, and the new congress is not going forward with that. In my neighborhood, a bunch of federal funds were going to be used to beautify a local bridge. Guess those funds are not coming, I will still have to drive over the same old ugly bridge.

[/ QUOTE ]

So if I tell my girlfriend I'm going to spend $100,000 on a new car next year, but then decide not to after some consideration, I've cut my budget! Brilliant!

[West]

btw, Blizzardbaum, I was not meaning to be insulting towards you - I mean to be insulting towards the integrity of conservative "think tanks" such as the Heritage Foundation and the CATO Institute. IMO, these types of organizations have shown time and again that using lies and half truths to advance the agenda of their backers is standard procedure. There is nothing the least bit objective about them.

[natedogg]

[ QUOTE ]
btw, Blizzardbaum, I was not meaning to be insulting towards you - I mean to be insulting towards the integrity of conservative "think tanks" such as the Heritage Foundation and the CATO Institute. IMO, these types of organizations have shown time and again that using lies and half truths to advance the agenda of their backers is standard procedure. There is nothing the least bit objective about them.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you are at all skeptical about the drug war then there's at least one school of thought you probably agree with coming out of Cato.

I suspect you just don't like what Cato has to say and choose to call them liars which is a fairly typical reaction when it comes to political differences.

Just because you don't agree with someone's viewpoint doesn't mean they scoundrels and liars. Before you go off about what liars they are and how I'm a dupe, let me ask you this: Is there ANY source that supports things like low taxes, low govt intervention, opposes socialized medicine and the like, that you DO respect? Or do you honestly believe that anyone with those views is a lying scum just trying to advance an agenda of their backers?

natedogg

[4 High]

Brookings Institute what what!

I dislike Cato generally, but i agree 100% with eliminating the "War on Drugs."