Today the Democratic Party’s leader in the House said this:
“Tax cuts are spending.”
This wasn’t a slip of the tongue or a moment when Pelosi’s brain lost traction. She has said similar things before. She has also said that government doling out unemployment checks is powerful economic stimulus.
Pelosi went on to say:
“Our whole budget is what $3.5 trillion,” Pelosi said at a Capitol Hill press conference. “So, when we talk about reducing spending, we certainly must, and we certainly have–$1.6 trillion in the previous Congress, $1.2 of it in the Budget Control Act.
“But spending is also related to tax cuts,” said Pelosi. “Tax cuts are spending. Tax expenditures, they are called. Subsidies for big oil, subsidies to send jobs overseas, breaks to send jobs overseas, breaks for corporate jets. They are called tax expenditures. Spending money on tax breaks.”
“Spending money on tax breaks…”
The only way that tax cuts = government spending is if all money really belongs to the government. If all money belongs to the government, then every penny is the government’s property. If government cuts taxes and therefore takes less of its money from citizens, then those tax cuts can be considered “spending.”
That’s what Nancy Pelosi really believes. After she said that tax cuts are spending, she went on to say this.
“And that’s the spending that we must curtail as well,” she said.
In other words, Americans and the corporations we form should be allow to keep less money. Because it all belongs to the government anyway.
In reality, money is private property earned by citizens and the corporations we form. Government takes money in taxes at the threat of deadly force or deprivation of liberties. Tax cuts are not “spending.” They are government taking less of people’s money, than the government otherwise would taken. At the threat of deadly force or deprivation of liberties.
It’s shocking that a leader of one of our two major political parties is as stupid, and really evil when you examine the morality of her position, as Nancy Pelosi is.
...and she proves ithis contention, each and every time she opens that maw we generously call a 'pie-hole'.
I don't know about anyone else but I consider her an insult to this country and needs a stage-hooking for once and always......
...and she proves ithis contention, each and every time she opens that maw we generously call a 'pie-hole'.
I don't know about anyone else but I consider her an insult to this country and needs a stage-hooking for once and always......
They're not called that by anyone with half a brain, Ex (thank you)-speaker Pelosi, which only proves you have no brain at all. We might as well realize that Congress & this President will NEVER reign in spending on their own. It is a drug to which they are addicted, and we know what happens to drug addicts when their habit continues to be supplied.
The only way(s) the apocalyptic spending will stop: <a href="http://1.The/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">1.The</a> people force Congress to balance the budget with a Constitutional amendment, or 2. (and I hope it's not this one) A complete meltdown of the economy, whereby survival (and not extravagance,... (show more)
They're not called that by anyone with half a brain, Ex (thank you)-speaker Pelosi, which only proves you have no brain at all. We might as well realize that Congress & this President will NEVER reign in spending on their own. It is a drug to which they are addicted, and we know what happens to drug addicts when their habit continues to be supplied.
The only way(s) the apocalyptic spending will stop: <a href="http://1.The/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">1.The</a> people force Congress to balance the budget with a Constitutional amendment, or 2. (and I hope it's not this one) A complete meltdown of the economy, whereby survival (and not extravagance, waste, fraud & abuse) is the goal. (show less)
You didn't build that.
You aren't paying your fair share.
We need to redistribute wealth.
You'll find out what's in our legislation when we pass it.
Which of these things is not in the forefront of the Democratic Party platform? And, in what specific way are they materially different from radical Marxism?
You didn't build that.
You aren't paying your fair share.
We need to redistribute wealth.
You'll find out what's in our legislation when we pass it.
Which of these things is not in the forefront of the Democratic Party platform? And, in what specific way are they materially different from radical Marxism?
The dollar a person possess used to be a physical manifestation of ones labor (even though that is less the case these days considering the welfare state we live in).
It is not the dollar that gives value to things but the work of people. That's why rampant currency printing devalues the dollar and causes inflation. The government or the Federal reserve could have $1000 trillion dollars and if the people choose to trade in Monopoly money then those dollars aren't worth the paper they are printed on!
So what are we really talking about the? The government doesn't want worthless dollars, right? Neither does the Federal Reserve. The want the value behind the... (show more)
The dollar a person possess used to be a physical manifestation of ones labor (even though that is less the case these days considering the welfare state we live in).
It is not the dollar that gives value to things but the work of people. That's why rampant currency printing devalues the dollar and causes inflation. The government or the Federal reserve could have $1000 trillion dollars and if the people choose to trade in Monopoly money then those dollars aren't worth the paper they are printed on!
So what are we really talking about the? The government doesn't want worthless dollars, right? Neither does the Federal Reserve. The want the value behind the dollar. That value is provided by people who are productive and are not takers.
Bryan has it exactly right. This is evil. What Nancy Pelosi is really saying is that the government owns your labor and productivity. Even if Peolosi doesn't realize that she's <a href="http://advoc.ating/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">advoc.ating</a> this, I take no comfort in her stupidity (show less)