Liberal Forum

...

Oh, the fringe libertarian moonbats. Figures. Cite Cato next time. They're credible. Not Mises, the hopeless purists. You laugh at any sources that are not right wing opinion pieces. We all know that. I laugh at idiocy, which generally comes from your side....

Is that from the first edition of the book that grossly under-predicted federal revenues from the Supply Side tax cuts and had to be revised in later editions? I'll bet. Revenues rose by 28% in the five years after Reagan's cuts....

I'm still wondering why we should believe anything coming from an "economics" site that can do simple math....

Janet Reno gave it teeth....

Four Deformations of the Apocalypse-By DAVID STOCKMAN-Published: July 31, 2010 The second unhappy change in the American economy has been the extraordinary growth of our public debt. In 1970 it was just 40 percent of gross domestic product, or about $425 billion. When it reaches $18 trillion, it wi...

Aren't you the one I said "I hate this gotcha ****" to? ****. Your fave source wiki: The original Act was passed by the 95th United States Congress and signed into law by President Jimmy Carter on October 12, 1977 (Pub.L. 95-128, 12 U.S.C. ch. 30).[ 38] The CRA was passed as a result of national pr...

It's from the same link that I posted in post #508. You laugh at any sources that are not right wing opinion pieces. We all know that....

The federal spent 28.7% under Reagan? More moonbat nonsense that anyone with even a little knowledge would reject off the top of their head. And of course, no link so we can laugh at the source. Not only that, but Carter's last budge was 1981, and Reagan's 1989....

I've got a question for you, are you aware that an increase in spending of "national income" from 27.9% to 28.7% is 0.8%, not 3%?...