How much is a trillion and other '04 election year tales

A

andrasnm

It is election year and we shall try to keep all money talks bi-partisan and make a concious effort what is good for the US and your children and grandchildren.

I do have dual citizenship and I can do my business and trade from the moon or even further from Mars where Mr. Bush like to send some of his foes and political opponents.

Did you see Paul Krugman last week? “George Bush promised to bring honor and integrity back to the White House,” Krugman begins. “Instead, he got rid of accountability.”

Did you see Tom Friedman Sunday? “The Bush team’s real vulnerability,” he writes, “is its B.M.D. — Budgets of Mass Destruction, which have recklessly imperiled the nation's future, with crazy tax-cutting and out-of-control spending. The latest report from the Congressional Budget Office says the deficit is expected to total some $2.4 trillion over the next decade — almost $1 trillion more than the prediction of just five months ago.”

What is $1 trillion? Here’s how Democratic Mississippi Congressman Gene Taylor put it on the floor of the House this past summer: “If you went all the way from the Revolutionary War to 1979 . . . the Revolutionary War, the War of 1812, the Mexican-American War, the Civil War, the Spanish-American War, World War I, World War II, Korea and Vietnam, built the interstate highway system, built the Golden Gate Bridge, the intercostals waterway . . . we borrowed less than $1 trillion.”

And now we’ve added an extra trillion to the 10-year deficit projection in just five months.

But that’s just a projection. Taylor was reacting to what a Republican Congress and White House had actually borrowed. “In 25 months,” he told his Republican colleagues, “you guys have borrowed $1 trillion.”

(I apologize to overseas members if this subject is too US centric and talk about politics and US TV.)
 
Quote from pspr:

Uhhhh, the U.S. does not permit dual citizenship.
More...

Unfortunately, it does now. The wife of a friend of mine just got hers a couple of months ago. Citizenship used to mean an allegiance to a country. Now apparently, it is just a synonym for "address" or "work permit".
 
My wife was recently naturalized, also. While it is true that they don't make you give them your foreign passport, I don't think the naturalization oath (or meaning) has changed.

------------------------------------------
I HEREBY DECLARE, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely
renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign
prince, potentate, state or sovereignty, of whom or which I
have heretofore been a subject or citizen;

That I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of
the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and
domestic;
That I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;
That I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when
required by the law;
That I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces
of the United States when required by the law;
That I will perform work of national importance under civilian
direction when required by the law;
and that I take this obligation freely without any mental
reservation or purpose of evasion:
SO HELP ME GOD
 
Unfortunately both sides are in a race to see who can spend the most. the biggest complaint the democrats have right now is that the new drug bill doesn't cover enough people. they want to spend even more. the republicans used to be somewhat restrained in their spending but that has been forgotten because they have learned that you have to give the children what they want or they will throw a fit.
 
The president specifically promised that the tax bill would generate an additional 510,000 jobs by the end of 2003, growth above and beyond the jobs that an economy in recovery would naturally generate. In fact, the Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) projected that, with no change in policy, the resilient U.S. economy would generate a baseline of 4.1 million jobs by the end of 2004, even without the tax cut. (That baseline 3% gain in jobs was modest compared to earlier recovery periods without tax cuts: job growth was 4% over a comparable period of time following the early 1990s recession.) The CEA explained that, on top of that baseline job growth, the tax bill would add 510,000 jobs by the end of 2003 and a total of 1.4 million more jobs by the end of 2004. All told, the Bush Administration projected growth of 5.5 million jobs by the end of 2004 if its tax cuts were adopted, or an average growth rate of 306,000 jobs a month from July 2003 to December 2004. The state-by-state job numbers for December 2003 show that the failure has been widespread around the nation—job growth projected for the Bush economic plan fell short in 47 of the 50 states.

The December 2003 gain of only 1,000 jobs is a staggering 305,000 below the promised monthly increase. In fact, job growth has never reached even a third of the promised rate of 306,000 jobs a month since the tax cut was implemented in July 2003.

Overall, jobs increased by a total of 221,000 in the six months that the tax bill has been in effect. This total increase did not even reach the 510,000 jobs that President Bush promised over and above the baseline for those six months, much less the total of 1,836,000 jobs promised with the baseline included.

www.jobwatch.org/

to see the president's promise
www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/04/20030415-4.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top