4 ms·

Presumably the OP believes the BBB is stupid too?

by mousethatroared 1y ago

clipsy 1y ago
Why are you speaking for him? Surely he's capable of denouncing the BBB himself if he chooses to.
- mousethatroared 1y ago
  Because "mindslight" didn't have an argument? He just threw a little non-sequitar tantrum assuming that OP was a Trumpist.
readthenotes1 1y ago
Warren Buffett had this line that we would have no budget deficits if it we're required that every Congress person who voted for such would be ineligible for re-election. Pushing the cost burden on subsequent generations is a cowardly way to deal with our financial problems. When Reagan entered office, the debt was less than $1T (about $3.5T in today's dollars). The #4 cost currently is paying off interest (not principle) on old debt.
- fn-mote 1y ago
  It’s funny but economically wrong to ban deficits. I agree we are spending too much now, but the solution should not be to stop all spending. The problem is deeper than just a deficit.
  - blitzar 1y ago
    We should bring back surpluses in the good times. If you are the head of a country and you are proclaiming that the economy is "the greatest ever" then you should be running a balanced / surplus budget. If the economy is in the shitter you are perfectly entitled to run a deficit.
    - sethammons 1y ago
      Can the down voters help me understand the downvotes? The argument seems cogent. Doing good? Pay down debts. Need a boost? Invest and incur debt. Where is the flaw?
      - mindslight 1y ago
        It makes nobody happy - people who think deficits are bad, people who think continual deficits are good, people with no trust in politicians to do the right thing.
  - msgodel 1y ago
    It might be more optimal to run a small deficit but I don't think you can trust the legislature with it.
- aredox 1y ago
  >Warren Buffett had this line that we would have no budget deficits if it we're required that every Congress person who voted for such would be ineligible for re-election. Yeah, and the USSR would have won. >When Reagan entered office, the debt was less than $1T (about $3.5T in today's dollars). Well, guess who won the Cold War? Who pushed the USSR to bankrupt itself? It would be like saying "no private company should ever raise capital".
mindslight 1y ago
If that were the case, they wouldn't have contributed a narrative being used to support the fascist movement that gave us the big ugly spending bill. Sorry to anyone who was legitimately interested in actual fiscal conservatism (which includes myself), this is now just another lofty ideal Trump has burnt the credibility of in service of enriching himself. Maybe we can try again in 20 years, if we still have a country.
- mousethatroared 1y ago
  The conversation was about NASA, an agency that poured billions to Boeing and the United Alliance and was forced to accept SpaceX (way back during the Obama admin, I believe) whilst kicking and screaming.
  - mindslight 1y ago
    And? The argument being made was the simplistic "cannot afford" meme, which is trotted out every time the fascists are crushing an agency, yet is conveniently ignored when the fascists spend trillions of dollars for new purposes. If one wants to make a nuanced argument about NASA or fiscal responsibility despite the current political environment, it is perfectly possible to do so! But you need to work much harder to tease out the nuance and distance yourself from the fascists, lest your effort of espousing your lofty ideals just end up as fuel supporting them. Fascists don't respect ideals beyond power - the open hypocrisy is the point.
    - mousethatroared 1y ago
      THE OP IS AGAINST BBB TOO The one who lacks nuance is not the one who thinks NASA could stand to shave a couple billions but the one who's making everything a partisan fight.
      - mindslight 1y ago
        That's just the standard postmodern cognitive dissonance of supporting terrible politicians. "I don't like what they did, but not enough to stop supporting them". It's a defense mechanism against the obvious hypocrisy. Find me where they're completely condemning Trump, like say calling for impeachment, and then you'll have a point. And no, the comment I responded to had absolutely no specific criticism about what from NASA should be "shaved". Notice how I didn't respond to the one about SLS?
Iwan-Zotow 1y ago
I don't like it
- mousethatroared 1y ago
  I didn't think so.

Presumably the OP believes the BBB is stupid too?

clipsy 1y ago

Why are you speaking for him? Surely he's capable of denouncing the BBB himself if he chooses to.

mousethatroared 1y ago
Because "mindslight" didn't have an argument? He just threw a little non-sequitar tantrum assuming that OP was a Trumpist.

readthenotes1 1y ago

Warren Buffett had this line that we would have no budget deficits if it we're required that every Congress person who voted for such would be ineligible for re-election. Pushing the cost burden on subsequent generations is a cowardly way to deal with our financial problems. When Reagan entered office, the debt was less than $1T (about $3.5T in today's dollars). The #4 cost currently is paying off interest (not principle) on old debt.

fn-mote 1y ago
It’s funny but economically wrong to ban deficits. I agree we are spending too much now, but the solution should not be to stop all spending. The problem is deeper than just a deficit.
- blitzar 1y ago
  We should bring back surpluses in the good times. If you are the head of a country and you are proclaiming that the economy is "the greatest ever" then you should be running a balanced / surplus budget. If the economy is in the shitter you are perfectly entitled to run a deficit.
  - sethammons 1y ago
    Can the down voters help me understand the downvotes? The argument seems cogent. Doing good? Pay down debts. Need a boost? Invest and incur debt. Where is the flaw?
    - mindslight 1y ago
      It makes nobody happy - people who think deficits are bad, people who think continual deficits are good, people with no trust in politicians to do the right thing.
- msgodel 1y ago
  It might be more optimal to run a small deficit but I don't think you can trust the legislature with it.
aredox 1y ago
>Warren Buffett had this line that we would have no budget deficits if it we're required that every Congress person who voted for such would be ineligible for re-election. Yeah, and the USSR would have won. >When Reagan entered office, the debt was less than $1T (about $3.5T in today's dollars). Well, guess who won the Cold War? Who pushed the USSR to bankrupt itself? It would be like saying "no private company should ever raise capital".

mindslight 1y ago

If that were the case, they wouldn't have contributed a narrative being used to support the fascist movement that gave us the big ugly spending bill. Sorry to anyone who was legitimately interested in actual fiscal conservatism (which includes myself), this is now just another lofty ideal Trump has burnt the credibility of in service of enriching himself. Maybe we can try again in 20 years, if we still have a country.

mousethatroared 1y ago
The conversation was about NASA, an agency that poured billions to Boeing and the United Alliance and was forced to accept SpaceX (way back during the Obama admin, I believe) whilst kicking and screaming.
- mindslight 1y ago
  And? The argument being made was the simplistic "cannot afford" meme, which is trotted out every time the fascists are crushing an agency, yet is conveniently ignored when the fascists spend trillions of dollars for new purposes. If one wants to make a nuanced argument about NASA or fiscal responsibility despite the current political environment, it is perfectly possible to do so! But you need to work much harder to tease out the nuance and distance yourself from the fascists, lest your effort of espousing your lofty ideals just end up as fuel supporting them. Fascists don't respect ideals beyond power - the open hypocrisy is the point.
  - mousethatroared 1y ago
    THE OP IS AGAINST BBB TOO The one who lacks nuance is not the one who thinks NASA could stand to shave a couple billions but the one who's making everything a partisan fight.
    - mindslight 1y ago
      That's just the standard postmodern cognitive dissonance of supporting terrible politicians. "I don't like what they did, but not enough to stop supporting them". It's a defense mechanism against the obvious hypocrisy. Find me where they're completely condemning Trump, like say calling for impeachment, and then you'll have a point. And no, the comment I responded to had absolutely no specific criticism about what from NASA should be "shaved". Notice how I didn't respond to the one about SLS?

Iwan-Zotow 1y ago

I don't like it

mousethatroared 1y ago
I didn't think so.