Have Surplus, Will Spend
January 2, 2007 · By Aaron Unruh
Sometimes I honestly think that Liberal free-spenders have truly fallen off the turnip truck. Here one is complaining about cutting taxes in response to a fiscal surplus:
Instead of using deficits as a reason to slash taxes, as Harris did, Harper and the Conservatives act just as George W. Bush did, using hard-earned federal surpluses as an excuse to cut taxes, which are, in essence, service cuts. In Harper’s logic, having deficits or surpluses are a reason to cut taxes…
Surpluses are not service cuts because they are revenues that exceed the current costs of existing programs. Get it? Some Liberal cheerleaders don’t.
Of course, this doesn’t take into account new programs or the spiralling costs of the sorts of programs Liberals love (see “gun control”). And that’s where Liberal free-spenders are losing it. It’s not enough any longer for government to be big. The government has to be big and have the never-ending capacity to grow through the accumulation of surplus revenues. Liberals could never stand cutting taxes because the loss of revenue would have harmed some government program. Now, Liberals can’t stand cutting taxes even in a period of surpluses because doing so may harm some future program that they themselves haven’t even thought of yet.
God help us all if their social engineer leader becomes PM.
Yeah, Liberals really do have no sense of economics at all. I like to put it this way: If they knew anything about economics, they wouldn’t be Liberals.
You can see a good summary of this here: http://purpletory.blogspot.com.....-dion.html
I find the most nutty statement from that quote is where the author exhibits that final sign of senility – a failure of differentiation between human beings.
I have news for you: HARPER IS NOT BUSH! He doesn’t LOOK like Bush! He doesn’t TALK like Bush! He doesn’t have the same education! He isn’t from the same country! He doesn’t have the same policies! This is not a valid form of argument:
1. Bush is an idiot. (assumed by argumentor to be self evident)
2. Harper is Bush. (again, assumed)
3. Bush does this. (perhaps the only semi-fact in this entire chain of reasonins)
4. Therefore Harper does this. (without proof or basis other than statement 2.)
5. Therefore Harper is an idiot.
Therefore Harper is an idiot.
My conclusion: Dimitry is an idiot.
How can a soft dictatorship running a country of drooling dependants of the state they created in the first place keep going if it does’nt have the power of the purse?
Stephen Harper MUST win a majority in the next election or we can kiss the bit of freedom and strength of caracter that’s left in some harts and minds of this once proud country.
Mediocrity is well entrenched in our socialist gulag, the next election will tell us if it’s too late to get out of it.