🚀 go-pugleaf

On Tue, 13 Mar 2001 20:19:17 -0800, Bill Shatzer
<bshatzer@OregonVOS.net> wrote:

>
>
>
>
>On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr. wrote:
>
>-snips-
>
>> Bush in the campaign constantly said he would use the surplus equally
>> for new spending as for tax cuts - about a "quarter" of the surplus
>> for each. I am sure you remember that - taking out four dollar bills,
>> one for tax cuts, one for important new programs etc.
>
>> Folks said Bush was lying - that in fact he planned to spend more than
>> three times as much for the tax cut.
>
>> Bush has come out with his budget. It has 1.6 trillion for a tax cut
>> and about half a trillion for new spending.
>
>Nope, he has -not- come out with an actual budget although he has
>indicated what it will look like in general terms and that includes a
>4% increase in new spending - which equals a bit over $200 billion per
>year.
>
>Over the next ten years (which is the period the $1.6 or $1.8 trillion tax
>reduction is calculated), that amounts to $2 trillion - actually quite a
>bit more, given the "miracle of compounding".

No. When you talk about "new spending" you refer to amounts above the
already budgeted amount.

For instance, under your distortion of what these words commonly mean,
Bush lies when he says he will cut taxes - since tax receipts will go
up, not down.

So either way - the commonly accepeted way of using these words, or
your way - Bush was telling a trillion dollar lie.



>
>Or, more or less equal to but a bit more than "spending" on the tax cut.
>Seems pretty much keeping his campaign promises in this regard.

Under your definitions, there is no tax cut.

What a shocking thing you point out - Bush ran on a promise to cut
taxes - yet he all the time planned to INCREASE THEM!


You can not bail Bush out by using definition one for his tax cut and
definition two for his proposed new spending.

You must be consistent.

And while you are at it, you might as well use words in their common
usage sense.




>
>Try again and try and pay attention next time - you lose on this 'un.
>
>Peace and justice,
>
>
>
>