Bob Gorrell by Bob Gorrell

Bob Gorrell

Comments (10) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Ajax 4Hire

    Ajax 4Hire said, over 1 year ago

    What is President Obama doing with $3800 billion dollars he gets to spend this year?

    That is $19000 per tax payer.
    That is $12000 per man, woman and child.
    That is right, President Obama spends enough money to give a 4-person household, $48,000 a year.

    What IS he do with all that money?
    Penny wise? I don’t know but definitely Dollar foolish.
    Certainly not running the government efficiently.

  2. dannysixpack

    dannysixpack said, over 1 year ago

    i’d like to see the first of it used to prosecute the bankers and their congressional supports for their crimes in the bush administration. then it would be cool to see bush/cheney put on trial for their war crimes.

  3. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    @dannysixpack

    Since Obama continue these “illegal” wars – following the Bush plan to rhe letter – should you be calling for his and his administrations inclusion in that “war crimes” trial?

    And “banking” regulations. Hmmmmm.

    the affiliation restrictions in the Glass–Steagall Act were repealed through the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act of 1999 (GLBA)

    President Bill Clinton publicly declared “the Glass–Steagall law is no longer appropriate.”

    Many commentators have stated that the GLBA’s repeal of the affiliation restrictions of the Glass–Steagall Act was an important cause of the late-2000s financial crisis. Some critics of that repeal argue it permitted Wall Street investment banking firms to gamble with their depositors’ money that was held in affiliated commercial banks.[ Others have argued that the activities linked to the financial crisis were not prohibited (or, in most cases, even regulated) by the Glass–Steagall Act Commentators, including former President Clinton in 2008 and the American Bankers Association in January 2010, have also argued that the ability of commercial banking firms to acquire securities firms (and of securities firms to convert into bank holding companies) helped mitigate the financial crisis.

    I’m with you Danny. Let’s round up every last politician that anything at all to do with this and prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law.

    Oh, that’s right. They changed the law.

  4. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    @Bruce4671

    Oh yeah, a reference for the above:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass%E2%80%93Steagall_Act

  5. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    When your basic budgeting plan calls for an annual increase for every category, when you ignore the benchmark of revenue received, when your plan includes the amount you must borrow in order to pay for all the stuff you want, then the only direction that line can go is up.

    Keynesian economics is the view that in the short run, especially during recessions, economic output is strongly influenced by aggregate demand (total spending in the economy).

    According to Obama, the recession ended June 2009. Since we are in the Obama recovery now, there is no need to flood the market with borrowed funds. And yet….

    I liked this one:

    http://ajherrma.hubpages.com/hub/federaldeficit

    and this one:

    http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/01/why-government-spending-does-not-stimulate-economic-growth-answering-the-critics

    So tell me, when does common sense dictate that you actually work with a balanced budget?

  6. echoraven

    echoraven said, over 1 year ago

    Sooooo… Bruce, what did you have for breakfast? Obviously not Kool Aid…

  7. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    @echoraven

    I had a 100 calorie breakfast bar. Why? Because I am striving to keep my blood sugar under 120 at all times. Why? Because preventative medicine is cheaper than the alternative. It fits into my budget plan.

    Regardless of a politicians political party, spending is what they do. All the programs devised to “bring home the bacon” to a politicians district are suspect. None of them are designed to lower the amount needed to balance a budget. None of them care to cut funds to programs their constituents deem important so spending cuts are just an illusion that they use to do the only important thing to a politician. The need to keep their job and get re-elected.

    But you go ahead a believe what you want.

    This nation collected 2.7 trillion dollars in revenue in 2012, according to the Obama budget.

    So what does that mean?

    Let’s look at the 2011 record in a simple way. Here is a chart made by the CBO.

    http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/BS_Mandatory_print.pdf

    2011 saw revenue collected at 2.3 trillion.

    Mandatory spending was 2 trillion even.

    We spent 3.6 trillion or 1.6 trillion in discretionary spending and interest on the debt.

    That is over a trillion dollars that did not have to be spent.

    There is waste to be found in the mandatory area. Obama says so.

    So why isn’t the waste that is in the mandatory area reallocated to the discretionary area and the borrowed amount eliminated?

    Because politicians can not be re-elected if they take money away from their districts with common sense budgeting.

  8. MortyForTyrant

    MortyForTyrant said, over 1 year ago

    @Ajax 4Hire

    The purse strings of the country rest with the House of Representatives alone, any appropriation has to be initiated there, as well as any laws regarding taxation.

    -

    I’m a German. Feel free to be ashamed that you don’t know your country as well as I do…

  9. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    @MortyForTyrant

    Yes, Morty, Article I, Section 7 states that all revenue bills shall originate in the House of Representatives but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on any other bills.

    I want to call your attention to this headline from 3/21/2013.

    Shutdown averted: Congress passes 2013 spending bill.

    Congress – as you may know – denotes both houses. So while the House must originate spending bills, the Senate can – and does – amend those bills which must then go back to the House for approval. If the House doesn’t care for the amendments then they change it to what is acceptable and it goes back to the senate – it’s called negotiations. BOTH houses of Congress must approve the bill and the President must sign it into law.

    That is why the same article (from the headline) ends up saying:

    Even as they finished work on 2013 spending, both chambers have already turned their attention to their 2014 budgets. Just minutes before it approved the spending bill, the House passed the GOP budget, written by Rep. Paul D. Ryan, that calls for holding taxes steady and imposing deep cuts to projected spending in order to balance the budget in a decade.

    The Senate, meanwhile, is debating a Democratic-written budget that calls for tax increases, but that still predicts deficits for the foreseeable future.

    Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/21/shutdown-averted-congress-pass-2013-spending-bill/#ixzz2S0KyiykL

    Just want you to know the rest of the story.

  10. TJDestry

    TJDestry GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    The whole “austerity” game in which debt is a crisis is based on a fraudulent analysis, just as “No Child Left Behind” was based on bogus achievement scores by a lying Secretary of Education. Do Republicans ever deal from the top of the deck?

    .
    When your political strength is based on fooling the foolish, you need to be like any other grifters — make your money and get out of town before they wise up.

  11. Refresh Comments.