What began as roof repairs on part of my house has progressed to a room with wide open sky, ripped out walls, and partial floor replacement. As a result, much of my time has been devoted to helping that project move along as quickly as possible. .. and doing what I can myself to keep costs down.
Thus, blogging will be quite low on my list of priorities for the next week or two. If content gets a bit stale, or your excellent tips go unreported, I apologize – but there are only so many hours in a day!
That’s the difference between right and left pillboy.
According to you, not getting all of my money means its a “cost to the treasury”.
According to me that means you should fire another uncivil servant or cut some useless program for black lesbian pygmies in New Guinea and eliminate the cost to the treasury.
Continuing to spend when you don’t take in my money is what requires the borrowing, not the decrease in revenue.
Had the CPC a shadow of integrity it would have been a balanced “stimulus”. They don’t, we are in deficit.
Not generating revenue != spending. You do understand the concept of double entry accounting, right, Tigger?
The difference, Opie, is that when someone you don’t like is at the trough, you call it socialism. When you are at the trough, well, you have a hundred dishonest excuses for why you deserve to be there, and why your Dear Leader can do no wrong.
Like I said, there’s no hypocrite like a right wing hypocrite. The program that should be eliminated is the one we’re talking about. Pay for your own damn hot tub.
“Pay for your own damn hot tub.”
I _am_ fool. That’s why it’s a tax credit and not a grant.
I’ve only spent three comments trying to explain that to you. Might as well bang my head against a brick wall than explain economics to a dipper.
Yeah, lance, you are a bit of a fool.
But we all knew that. You are a conservative,
after all.
Let me put it this way.
You spend 10 large on your hot tub, you pay
$1350.00 less in federal taxes then you normally would have.
Your neighbor spends 10 grand pimping his ride,
he pays not one thin dime less in tax because interventionist, borrow and spend, Dear Leader
has deemed one expenditure worthy of subsidization, and the other not.
Whether you pay $1350.00 less in taxes or
Steve cuts you a big fat check for same,
amounts to the same damn thing.
And you’re both going to be on the hook to
pay for it somewhere down the line.
You see lance, you practice the same kind of funny money, something for nothing economics that spawned credit default swaps and the like.
You think that just by labeling something a tax credit rather than a grant, the bucks just magically appear out of the ether, that there is no reciprocal cost to the treasury, and therefore other taxpayers. It’s no wonder Tory times are sorry times.
“Might as well bang my head against a brick wall than explain economics to a dipper.”
You’re correct lance. A complete and utter waste of time. Attempting to teach a fish how to ride a bicycle comes to mind.