The Goat Pen

...losing yer job for telling the truth....firing coaches (w/national championships) in their prime...

bluetick wrote:Sardis - a chart of U.S. public debt% vs gdp - notice how it began a dramatic climb during the first term of Reagan, and peaked at the end of Clintons first term, and the steep decline throughout that 2nd Clinton term (down to near 30%), and then the march upwards beginning in '01

i have no idea where you got your chart from, but it clearly isn't right. it's saying that in 2010 the debt is only about 45% of gdp?

Here is a chart from the CBO.

sardis wrote:No, you just wussed out on that argument....

I assume you are referring to my post about gay marriage, which became a big topic while I was gone.

I basically said that I am opposed to gay marriage, but marriage laws have always been written by the states. I am resigned to the reality that liberal states will legalize gay marriage while conservative states will not. That is not me giving a tacit endorsement of gay marriage, which I think is a travesty. It is just my acceptance of what is.

Gay marriage is a symptom of a broader and major shift going on. Judaeo-Christianity has been a dominant force for 1,500 years in the West, but that age is coming to a close. America is no longer a "Christian nation," and I no longer it to behave like one. Instead of demanding the state to enforce our world view, I suggest that my fellow Christians get ready for a return to the catecombs.

I don't know where Owlman gets his 30%).

I don't know where you got it. I never said it.

Plus Clinton and the R's back then did not have the immediate future issue of medicare, like we do now.

yes they did. They just didn't do anything about it. It's the nature of politics. They knew it was a problem coming down the pike. If they started making changes then, then less drastic measures could have been implemented (sort of what was done with Social Security in the 1980's). Even now, the real problem is one over the next 20 years. Make changes over time (as I proposed above).

We are staring at a much larger abyss. There needs to be a net reduction of governnment because it doesn't matter how much you raise taxes you're still going to be in a hole. I challenge anyone to offer a tax increase that will raise a $1trillion a year because that's what it will take to plug the hole if there are no serious spending cuts. The arguments for some tax increases would carry more weight if the Dems would also have serious spending reductions, but they mention none.

Typical argument. One side says taxes alone can't do. The other side says spending cuts alone are too harsh. Both sides and virtually everyone says cut things, but nothing that effects me.

The obvious answer is a combination of taxes that effect all and cuts that effect all. But that means everyone will be hurt.

Heh at prof's catacombs. Mega-churches are springing up all over with facilities that put some universities to shame. Huge cathedrals with dual 40' HD tv screens and state-of-the-art-everything electronic; sprawling campuses with classrooms, dorms, and top-notch athletic facilities.

(There's a Baptist church in my neighborhood that fits that bill and for a measly $25/yr access card I hit their fitness center 3-4 times a week...imo better than The Rush, LA Fitness etc etc. Although they don't have an indoor pool.... yet.)

Sorry, Owlman, it was tick who posted the 30%. you two start sounding alike after awhile...

Sardis, the first graph was from the OMB. This one is identical and comes from the CBO.

bluetick wrote:Heh at prof's catacombs. Mega-churches are springing up all over with facilities that put some universities to shame. Huge cathedrals with dual 40' HD tv screens and state-of-the-art-everything electronic; sprawling campuses with classrooms, dorms, and top-notch athletic facilities.

(There's a Baptist church in my neighborhood that fits that bill and for a measly $25/yr access card I hit their fitness center 3-4 times a week...imo better than The Rush, LA Fitness etc etc. Although they don't have an indoor pool.... yet.)

Tick, you need to get out of eastern Tennessee once in awhile and see what's going on in the rest of the country.

Tick, you need to get out of eastern Tennessee once in awhile and see what's going on in the rest of the country.

What?

He said

TICK, YOU NEED TO GET OUT OF EASTERN TENNESSEE ONCE IN AWHILE AND SEE WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE REST OF THE COUNTRY

What?

OUR TOP STORY TONIGHT

GENERALISIMO FRANCISCO FRANCO

IS STILL DEAD!

heh heh

bluetick wrote:Sardis, the first graph was from the OMB. This one is identical and comes from the CBO.

tick, first, your graph is a couple years outdated. Second, it's only referring to our debt that is held by the public and not including debt held by other gov't agencies, i.e. SS trust fund. Here is a spreadsheet by the OMB with the deb info. My graph refers to column G on the spreadsheet which is total debt. Your graph seems to use column I.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default ... st07z1.xls

your graph is a couple of years outdated

Sardis, you asked me where the 30% number (debt in relation to gdp %) given for the end of the Clinton 2nd term came from and I told you. Wrt to figures compiled during that 1996-2000 term, I don't see where a 2009 graph is "outdated".


And yes it is public debt, not the gross federal debt. But try this.... put your graph and mine side by side and squint your eyes, and you'll be amazed at how identical they are. The only difference is the baseline - see how the debt rockets upward with Reagan, peaks midterm with Clinton and then spirals downward in his last term, but then turns back upward immediately with Bush II? You get the point, right? That debt-wise we had it going on under Bill ...your own figures support that.

see how the debt rockets upward with Reagan, peaks midterm with Clinton and then spirals downward in his last term, but then turns back upward immediately with Bush II? You get the point, right? That debt-wise we had it going on under Bill

Sad but true. Yes, I still miss the heady days of fiscal responsibility we enjoyed under Democrat President Clinton.

So how goes it?

Are you up to $20/hour yet?

No not yet.