How did you manage to find a specific, though baseless, prediction about a deficit while not being able to find "historical precedent" that GDP grows with tax cuts? I mean, it was just as easy to look up as "bad static prediction about deficit."
Baseless? Yeah, you’re right; the CBO tends to be staffed by former Green Party and ACLU members, who probably spew anti-right positions out of spite. I stand corrected.
Sounds like a great argument against having kids out of wedlock and borrowing a bunch of money
On this, we are in complete agreement, and I bet the nuclear families living below the median income line - you know, the ones that haven’t really had any pay increases since 2008 - really appreciate our moralistic stand on debt and marriage.
Considering that we've managed to escape the climate disasters that were supposedly unavoidable, I'm not worried. Plus, I'll be dead in 2100.
You must not live in Texas, California, or Florida. The “I’ll be dead argument” is a bit on the solipsistic side (there’s a surprise). There must be no future generations of your family.
The solution to not saving for retirement is to save for retirement.
At the risk of sounding redundant, saving for retirement gets a bit tricky when you have a household income of less than 55,000 and two children (how much farther have these families fallen behind since 2008?) Those that can save on a monthly basis are contributing less than 10 percent, which isn’t going to get the job done. Ultimately, this will adversely affect the haves.
Thankfully, you rarely present any.
I suppose, technically, one person’s opinion is as valid as another’s on a public message board.