Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Mainstream Politics and Economics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brian Sullivan who wrote (9535)	2/17/2012 8:06:51 AM
From: Steve Lokness	Respond to of 85487

<<<<<President Bush said the war in Iraq would cost $50 billion to $60 billion. It cost $800 billion. When Medicare Part A was created, the government said it would cost $9 billion in 1990. It cost $67 billion. They said the hiring of TSA airport security screeners would cost $100 million. Then they spent $700 million>>>>> Brian, it's what I have claimed all along. You fight two unfunded wars and it cost real money. You increase Medicare spending and it cost money. You increase the size of government - Homeland Security and it cost money. All done by Bush by the way. You want to end this you vote for Ron Paul.

To: Brian Sullivan who wrote (9535)	2/17/2012 5:34:45 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 85487

Good article Democrats use this deceit when they want more social spending. Republicans use it for military spending. Both parts of that statement are true. But social spending is noticeably larger, and growing faster. Military spending might face actual cuts, and if not will at least have larger "cuts" (reductions in the increase that politicians call cuts), and continues on a long term trend of decline as a portion of GDP, and of the federal budget, while social spending does the reverse.