Yes, but I'm better looking.
Which isn't saying much, believe me.
s "cost" language is propaganda in itself from the liberals (of either side) which implies that the money belongs to the BLEEPING government.
Where did the money come from, who created the wealth and who confiscated it?
Well, $4 trillion of it didn't come from us, it came from borrowing. And we all benefitted from it, directly or indirectly. Arguably, we proved it was possible to borrow your way out of a recession. It's now time to pay the piper. But no one wants to. They want taxes reduced. I'm sorry but the "cost" is a continued deficit, hundreds of billions in interest payments and no end in sight. Just that somehow (if we close our eyes and wish real hard) it will all go away. This isn't about blame, but reality. The reality is that the reduction in taxes are based on the assumption that the economy will continue to expand. If that isn't true, the borrowing starts again.
Cost was, in retrospect, a poor choice of words (not that I was wrong, of course, just not as careful as I should have been in choosing words.)
They never were concerned how much their wasteful spending practices would "cost" the taxpayers.
Neither were, or are, the taxpayers apparently.
The deficit came as a result of explosive spending (a double cross by the democrat congress) not a lessing of revenue (revenue at least doubled after the Reagan tax cut)
Of sorts: Under Reagan, this is what happened: (From 1980 to 1986 when the deficit skyrocketed - as a % of Gross Domestic product))
Domestic appropriations declined 1.4% (these would be the democrats favorite programs, btw). All other non defense spending: Declined .2% - more decreases Non-income tax revenues (the payroll taxes you and I pay) rose by .5% - this increased revenues. Most payroll taxes are paid by the working and middle class. These are the same taxes that Bush overlooked in his tax cut proposals.
Defense Spending increased by 1.3% Personal and corporate income taxes (the bulk of personal income tax is paid by the rich) declined by 2% (which means less money coming in) Interest on the National Debt increased grew by 1.2% (as we borrowed more money) Lets see, defense spending and income tax relief were Reagan's programs. (BTW, even Stockman admitted the corporate cuts got out of hand to the point of being characterized by him as a "greed fest")
Sorry. Reagan demanded and got increased defense spending and lower corporate and income taxes (off set in part by higher payroll taxes). Plus the democrats reduced domestic spending. I don't see where they did anything to increase the deficit other than give Reagan what he wanted.
I will not get into the greenhouse effect. It is something only time will tell and I've got land in the NC mountains. Unless the CO2 levels outpace the ability of plants to process it, of course.
I resolve to practice holding my breath for long periods of time, just in case.
On a positive note for republicans, if Global Warming is real and continues, Florida well end up under-water so no one will have to worry about under-votes and chads.