Says me and many others. Then we can get rid of a lot of heavy tank divisions and bases we no longer need in Europe and North America, can't we. We can greatly reduce the National Guard, which has huge waste in terms of facilities. We can, but we can't control territory with air strikes. It takes an army to take and hold ground, its just that we need a smaller and more deadly army. The world has not gotten smaller either, we have let the navy get too small. But we don't need a National Guard armory in every county in the nation. We don't need to maintain an army in Europe. Collectively Europe can match us in conventional military power and they can defend themselves against Russia and rogues like Iran. We don't need to build an expensive missile system to protect Europe, let them do it themselves. We have dozens of unneeded bases since we have fewer combat wings, combat brigades, and naval task forces to house. Like you say, government is less efficient than optimum. So defense has to cut its waste as well as the other government agencies. And individuals are going to have to pay more for Social Security and Medicare.
More evasion. He asked simple questions nd you have not answered any of them. Well, cutting taxes did not bring them back either. In fact it helped trigger the recession. Employment was low in the prosperous 1990's under the former tax structure. Doesn't it make sense to go back to it?
you are citing a facebook page as evidence of your position. facebook is not a credible source. any idiot can create a facebook page and say whatever they want.
I have repeatedly asked you simple and direct questions and you refuse to answer them. I am left with no other alternative than to believe you are unable to answer my questions. Funny enough, every time that you are unable to answer you like to say that my question is loaded or misguided or full of holes. Why give tax breaks to the people who are systematically shipping jobs overseas? How does it make sense? Isn't it the same as subsidizing other countries.
You have still not shown evidence of when this is possible. You tried, rather unsuccessfully, to say that meager tax cuts in 1997 led to the Clinton economic boom. As we discussed, the problem with that was we had already implemented tax increases in 1993 and the budget deficit had already been erased by the tax increase. In fact, we had already posted a budget surplus for one year before those small tax cuts were ever implemented. So.....you still have yet to show me an example of how a Republican President has worked with congress to balance the budget without increasing taxes.
Name one instant where Barry sent jobs overseas.....not Barry's next door neighbor or a guy that works for Barry, but when did Barry send jobs overseas? Would you like me to start listing the times when your boy Romney oversaw jobs being shipped overseas......which of course he says never happened, or that he wasn't in charge even though his name was all over the documents submitted to the SEC?
So Barry appoints a JOB CZAR who sends them over seas. Same thing dipshit. I never said Romney didn't send jobs overseas. It is part of business with our policy structure, which is why OBAMA's Job CZAR does the same thing. Obama never had a PRIVATE sector job nor was he in control of one, so how could he? Though Obama is in control of who we appoints as a JOB CZAR who sends them overseas.
Dick is not a curse word, pride. It is a slang reference for a penis, which is that portion of your body that guys like you make love to their hand with. LOL.......
When? If you are trying to imply that portions of the bailout were given to overseas companies then I've already disproved it with an article from factcheck.org. so when?
