Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Store
Latest reviews
Search products
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New listings
New products
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Cart
Cart
Loading…
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Change style
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
SVTPerformance's Chain of Restaurants
Road Side Pub
this is getting out of hand
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="1 BA SVT" data-source="post: 288186" data-attributes="member: 4477"><p>GOOD NEWS, BAD NEWS, UNBELIEVABLE NEWS</p><p></p><p>by James W. Harris</p><p></p><p> President Bush: Biggest Spender in Decades</p><p></p><p>President Bush is spending so much tax money so fast that he makes former President Clinton -- and other big-spending big-government presidents of decades past -- look downright frugal. And its not just because of increases in war spending. Bush is shoveling out far more tax dollars for non-defense purposes than Clinton, too.</p><p></p><p>So reports Chris Edwards, director of fiscal policy for the Cato Institute:</p><p></p><p><strong>ased on his first three budgets, President Bush is the biggest spending president in decades. For Fiscal Year 2004, discretionary outlays will rise 3.5 percent, which follows increases of 7.8 percent in FY2003 and 13.1 percent in FY2002. Non-defense discretionary outlays will rise 3.2 percent in FY2004 following increases of 7.9 percent in FY2003 and 12.3 percent in FY2002 </strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>With Bush's budget plan for FY2004, real non-defense discretionary outlays will rise 18.0 percent in his first three years in office (FY2002-FY2004). That growth far exceeds the first three years of any recent presidential term, including Ronald Reagan's first term (-13.5 percent), Reagan's second term (-3.2 percent), George H. Bush's term (11.6 percent), Bill Clinton's first term (-0.7 percent), and Clinton's second term (8.2 percent) .</strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>The administration has backed large increases in the defense budget -- from $306 billion in FY2001 to $390 billion in FY2004. Yet it has not offset those increases with an aggressive plan to reform non-defense spending by major program terminations, privatization, and moving functions such as education back to the states .</strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>And dont count on the Bush proposed tax cuts to help. Edwards notes that Bushs proposed spending dwarfs his proposed tax cuts:</strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>The administration proposes to increase total federal outlays by $89 billion in FY2004, $114 billion in FY2005, and more than $100 billion each year thereafter. As spending increases accumulate, annual outlays are expected to be $571 billion greater in FY2008 than in FY2003. By contrast, the tax cuts in the administration's growth package have a tiny effect on future budgets. By FY2008, the Bush growth package tax cuts would reduce federal revenues by just $50 billion annually in FY2008.</strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>When President Bush submitted his budget last week, his budget director Mitch Daniels proudly declared: This is a president of big projects and big ideas.</strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>Indeed. High taxes, gigantic government, huge handouts to corporations, massive deficits, assaults on the Bill of Rights, and war. Its business as usual in Washington.</strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>(Source: Cato Institute <a href="http://www.cato.org/dailys/02-04-03-2.html" target="_blank">http://www.cato.org/dailys/02-04-03-2.html</a> ;</strong></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="1 BA SVT, post: 288186, member: 4477"] GOOD NEWS, BAD NEWS, UNBELIEVABLE NEWS by James W. Harris President Bush: Biggest Spender in Decades President Bush is spending so much tax money so fast that he makes former President Clinton -- and other big-spending big-government presidents of decades past -- look downright frugal. And its not just because of increases in war spending. Bush is shoveling out far more tax dollars for non-defense purposes than Clinton, too. So reports Chris Edwards, director of fiscal policy for the Cato Institute: [B]ased on his first three budgets, President Bush is the biggest spending president in decades. For Fiscal Year 2004, discretionary outlays will rise 3.5 percent, which follows increases of 7.8 percent in FY2003 and 13.1 percent in FY2002. Non-defense discretionary outlays will rise 3.2 percent in FY2004 following increases of 7.9 percent in FY2003 and 12.3 percent in FY2002 With Bush's budget plan for FY2004, real non-defense discretionary outlays will rise 18.0 percent in his first three years in office (FY2002-FY2004). That growth far exceeds the first three years of any recent presidential term, including Ronald Reagan's first term (-13.5 percent), Reagan's second term (-3.2 percent), George H. Bush's term (11.6 percent), Bill Clinton's first term (-0.7 percent), and Clinton's second term (8.2 percent) . The administration has backed large increases in the defense budget -- from $306 billion in FY2001 to $390 billion in FY2004. Yet it has not offset those increases with an aggressive plan to reform non-defense spending by major program terminations, privatization, and moving functions such as education back to the states . And dont count on the Bush proposed tax cuts to help. Edwards notes that Bushs proposed spending dwarfs his proposed tax cuts: The administration proposes to increase total federal outlays by $89 billion in FY2004, $114 billion in FY2005, and more than $100 billion each year thereafter. As spending increases accumulate, annual outlays are expected to be $571 billion greater in FY2008 than in FY2003. By contrast, the tax cuts in the administration's growth package have a tiny effect on future budgets. By FY2008, the Bush growth package tax cuts would reduce federal revenues by just $50 billion annually in FY2008. When President Bush submitted his budget last week, his budget director Mitch Daniels proudly declared: This is a president of big projects and big ideas. Indeed. High taxes, gigantic government, huge handouts to corporations, massive deficits, assaults on the Bill of Rights, and war. Its business as usual in Washington. (Source: Cato Institute [url]http://www.cato.org/dailys/02-04-03-2.html[/url] ;[/B] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
SVTPerformance's Chain of Restaurants
Road Side Pub
this is getting out of hand
Top