https://www.facebook.com/RepJeffMiller/posts/10151501866461672?comment_id=27774399
Pensacola Discussion Forum
Go to page : 1, 2, 3
ZVUGKTUBM wrote:I agree with Gunz--that was a very good letter, Bob. I also respect Congressman Miller's reply.
Government spending must be slashed. It has to come from all points of the compass, to include defense, entitlements, and everywhere else.
ZVUGKTUBM wrote:
Government spending must be slashed. It has to come from all points of the compass, to include defense, entitlements, and everywhere else.[/color]
PACEDOG#1 wrote:ZVUGKTUBM wrote:
Government spending must be slashed. It has to come from all points of the compass, to include defense, entitlements, and everywhere else.[/color]
In bold is the areas that Obama and the Dems refuse to cut and that is the problem.
Bob wrote:ZVUGKTUBM wrote:
Government spending must be slashed. It has to come from all points of the compass, to include defense, entitlements, and everywhere else.[/color]
But we must also face the other fact. That to "slash" the federal spending will also come with a lot of sacrifice. A lot of people losing jobs. Which would put us back into an economic recession. Which could easily lead to even more and more job loss and more and more sacrifice.
We've created a situation which is analogous to the predicament of a cancer patient. The "cure" (chemotherapy) he needs to keep him alive, will itself cause him a lot of suffering.
PACEDOG#1 wrote:
We've never even began to take any medicine of any amount and that is the issue.
Bob wrote: https://www.facebook.com/RepJeffMiller/posts/10151501866461672?comment_id=27774399
2seaoat wrote:Sequestration in this area will be brutal. The problem is that we have folks who are making political decisions on the economy who do not understand basis economics 101. We must make long term economic decisions. We must make long term cuts in government spending, but this is the part that simply goes without saying in understanding economics..........for every dollar cut in government spending, we should be stimulating private sector job creation and support for private industry with tax credits for job creation in the private sector. This idiotic concept of just cutting government spending like this is isolated from our overall economy is where the small bus crowd cannot have their simplistic economic answers throw the nation into a recessionary spiral which will cost the government more money and send us to the threshold of economic despair..........first, our nation is strong and our economy is improving. Second, we can survive sequestration, but where is the jobs bill and incentives for creation of american jobs, and third Social Security is fine, and only needs minor adjustments over the next 30 years, and medicare is one simple national sales tax away from being solvent and all encompassing.
Mr. Miller does not appear to understand Economics 101. Half the equation never can solve the problem. We need government spending cuts, but the most important component which is missing is recovery of our 50k factories and American jobs in the private sector.......and that is what is missing in American politics.............
Bob wrote:I ran Sal's post through the babelfish translator and it came out...
"The federal government should keep borrowing and spending because that borrowing and spending will stimulate the economy and cause it to recover. And once the economy recovers, that will provide the revenues the government needs".
It's all so fundamentally and totally different from how I've always conducted my own finances that I'll never be the one to understand it.Sal wrote:
What do you think quantitative easing is?
It's a highly inefficient way of going about it, but it's magical money making.
We just shouldn't give it to the banks.
Our entire financial system has been proven to be FUBAR, so the better way would be to give people free money and federally finance massive infrastructure improvements.[/font]
Last edited by Bob on 2/25/2013, 6:26 pm; edited 1 time in total
Bob wrote:
It's all to fundamentally and totally different from how I've always conducted my own finances
Sal wrote:
Yes, it is.
Bob wrote:It's all so fundamentally and totally different from how I've always conducted my own finances that I'll never be the one to understand it.Sal wrote:
What do you think quantitative easing is?
It's a highly inefficient way of going about it, but it's magical money making.
We just shouldn't give it to the banks.
Our entire financial system has been proven to be FUBAR, so the better way would be to give people free money and federally finance massive infrastructure improvements.[/font]
Floridatexan wrote:Bob wrote:It's all so fundamentally and totally different from how I've always conducted my own finances that I'll never be the one to understand it.Sal wrote:
What do you think quantitative easing is?
It's a highly inefficient way of going about it, but it's magical money making.
We just shouldn't give it to the banks.
Our entire financial system has been proven to be FUBAR, so the better way would be to give people free money and federally finance massive infrastructure improvements.[/font]
That's because you don't have the capability to print your own money.
Bob wrote:Sal wrote:
Yes, it is.
But the question to ask is, which finances are in better condition? Mine? Or it's?
And the answer to that is simple. lol
That's a very sturdy limb to go out on. You could line up a hundred private citizens and a hundred governments, and I'll put my finances up against any of them. The only person I've ever heard of who gets more bang for buck out of his finances is my picker partner. But he's the world champeen at it so I don't mind being the world runner-up.Sage wrote:
its noticed they completly disregarded this comment. This comment here says it all.
im going to go out on a limb and say your finances are in better shape than the govs, knowing how bad the govs is.
Bob wrote:That's a very sturdy limb to go out on. You could line up a hundred private citizens and a hundred governments, and I'll put my finances up against any of them. The only person I've ever heard of who gets more bang for buck out of his finances is my picker partner. But he's the world champeen at it so I don't mind being the world runner-up.Sage wrote:
its noticed they completly disregarded this comment. This comment here says it all.
im going to go out on a limb and say your finances are in better shape than the govs, knowing how bad the govs is.
If you put him in charge of the government finances he could both reduce taxes and have a budget surplus inside of a month. lol
Go to page : 1, 2, 3
Pensacola Discussion Forum » General Discussion » I invite you to join my conversation with Jeff Miller on Facebook.
Similar topics
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
|
|