(October 15, 2013 at 12:13 pm)sarcasticgeographer Wrote:(October 11, 2013 at 4:51 pm)Raeven Wrote: Here is a website for your immense erudition: http://www.investopedia.com/articles/eco...l-debt.asp
Ok, I thought you had the quote thing worked out, but obviously not. The above is not something I said. It's something you are trying to point me to, I think.
I did have a look at your link, and there's some great information in there! Nothing of which I wasn't already aware, however. (Sorry!) So let me say again, the mechanism to reduce the national debt is through the Federal budget to reduce spending. Taxes must be increased as well. A growing GDP will help, but it's not the answer. I get that.
Your mistake is in assuming those of us in opposition to the present tactics of the House Republican minority are similarly opposed to addressing the large national debt. That's a false equivalency. Speaking strictly for myself, I simply don't view the methods now being employed by the Tea Party faction of the House as being ethical, effective or even particularly lawful. Current estimates of the hit to the economy over the past 15 days since the Federal government shut-down are around 20 billion dollars. Gosh, I'll bet that would pay for a lot of First Lady staff!
(October 15, 2013 at 12:13 pm)sarcasticgeographer Wrote: You have the audacity to call me ignorant? Please cite from the constitution the exact article that stipulates the duties of the first lady? Please use the appropriate article that created her office? Then, you also have the audacity to say I need to do my homework? Show me your constitutional acumen! Then, you can say I need to do homework!
That platform you stand on must be so elevated you don't even notice your hypocrisy.
Oh, I'll take your word for it that there is nothing in the Constitution that provides for duties and/or staff for First Ladies. In fact, in my first response to you, I think I was careful to say their duties are by custom and tradition. Historically, they've all championed pet causes and made appearances for their husbands, and they have all had staff. So... I guess my question to you is, why is it a problem for THIS First Lady? Have you objected continually and strenuously throughout your life to all the customary duties and staffing of all other First Ladies? Or... would this be the first time it's a big problem -- so big, in fact, that it's the lynchpin to solving the entire national debt crisis?
Wasn't your underlying concern when first posting in this thread to do with budgetary concerns and overspending by the government? Yes? So I have to ask: Is this the best you can come up with to ameliorate overspending? Come on, I know you can do better than that! Maybe focus more on content and less on having a fish-slapping contest.
