"The greatest increase in poverty and hardship produced by any law in modern U.S. history."

|

Apocalypse now.

For the vigilant apocalypse watchers, Robert Greenstein, a budget analyst at the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, is warning that John Boehner's proposed debt plan "could well produce the greatest increase in poverty and hardship produced by any law in modern U.S. history," which he apparently believes is the terrifying likely consequence of cutting government so much that federal discretionary spending only rises from $1.034 trillion to $1.234 trillion over the next decade. 

NEXT: The Facts About Spending Cuts, the Debt, and the GDP

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Ah, another contestant for the Hyperbole Awards.

    1. We should know.

      1. Church Leaders: The Poor Have a Right To Sink The Country Even Deeper Into Debt

        Haven’t these pastor types heard of Romans 3:18?

        Owe no one anything, except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law.”

        Maybe Proverbs 22:7 would be easier for them to understand:

        The rich rules over the poor, And the borrower becomes the lender’s slave.

        Meanwhile, Krugabe insists that federal spending is actually going down.

        1. Poor imitation of the classic Another Isolated Incident.

          D-

          1. And you fucked up the links.

            F

    2. He fucking forgot the federal reserve act of 1913.

      1. Milton Friedman agrees.

    3. Wouldn’t that be Hyper-Hyperbole?

    4. When I shit my pants, there’s blood in it. Should I see a proctologist or get a less abrasive ass dildo?

      1. You got blood in your poopy too? Let’s swap!

      2. Dude, enough’s enough. Epi?

        1. Yes, my son?

          1. How long do these spoofers usually last?

            1. Ask again later.

  2. The rhetoric on the left has gotten to the point that the average American thinks they’ve all gone insane.

    1. Re: James Ard,

      What do you mean “gone”?

      1. In the mid 90s their mental health was upgraded for a period of time to simply necrotic.

        1. I’d argue that their mental health is comparable to that of a dead person.

          1. Firefox spell check rapes me again.

            1. I like it better than what was intended.

              1. Me too.

                1. I have a question. Is it really child molestation if she says yes?

                  OK, two questions. Is the age of consent in Kentucky 9 or 10?

                  1. Depends if its a relation or not.

                    1. Sister. Cool?

                  2. Dude, enough’s enough.

                    1. Dude, it’s anarchy in practice! No registration, no moderation; threaded comments, attacks, counter-attacks, spoofs, trolls, flame wars, mayhem…

                      Isn’t it lovely? Civilization is for suckers.

                    2. 1) I’m not an anarchist, not even close, and

                      2) is that a spoof of Epi?

        2. necrotic.

          I see what you did there.

          Joshua conring|7.29.11 @ 6:17PM|#
          Firefox spell check rapes me again.

          I see what you did there again.

          1. GOD DAMN IT!!!

    2. Yes. Thats true. This article is wrong though. The post they link to is not discretionary spending. It is total spending.

  3. John Boehner eats poor babies.

    1. …eats poor babies stuffed with cash!

      1. Waiter… can you recommend a good salad dressing to compliment this cash I’m about to eat?

        Also… this baby is way overcooked.

        1. I thought you were gonna request dressing for a tossed salad, but President Clinton was already here today.

          1. I always knew that Boehner was uncouth, but then I learned that he likes his baby meat grilled, when every true connoisseur know that baby is best if you poach it, preferably in orphan tears.

            1. I have a problem that I’d to share with you. My peepee is like 3″, 4 if I try real hard. Is there a machine or device I could buy or borrow from one of you that would put me out of my misery? Thanking you in advance, RPA.

              1. Hi Rectal. Another lame spoof? The people who spoof you do such a better job. Myself included.

                1. Spoofing is bad. I’d never do it.

                  1. Wait, it’s Rather spoofing me? Should have seen that a mile away.

                    1. There are no rules in anarchy.

    2. You may think you’re joking, but if Boehner gets his way people in the lower class will go so hungry that eating babies will become an option.

      1. Can’t tell if spoof or just stupid.

        1. Does it matter?

        2. Got to be the spoof. The real tony isn’t clever enough to make an ironic Jonathon Swift reference.

          -jcr

      2. eating babies is only an option if you’re hungry?

      3. Nah because if they eat their young the checks get smaller.

        1. ^ This

      4. Correct, Tony. The reduced demand for food won’t cause prices to drop or anything. It will simply sit unsold and will spoil.

        Dogs will be eaten.

        1. I call dibs on the dalmatian from the firehouse

          1. I sucked off a chihuahua once. True story!

            1. Shitty, wasteful spoof is shitty and wasteful.

              Z-.

              1. Dude, if it makes you feel any better, I once sucked off a wild boar and washed it down with a hoppy little microbrew.

                1. Now you’re spoofing Epi, too? Do you get paid to do this?

                  1. Dude, it’s me! Either you’re a mendacious, bipolar, passive-aggressive fuck or you’re retarded. Either way I don’t care. Fuck off.

                    1. Too far off the reservation — not even mildly believable anymore.

      5. Pretty sure it’s a ‘modest proposal’.

      6. Chairman Mao beat him to it. About fifty years ago.

        But I forgot, you’ll do it better. Somehow.

  4. I vote for ObamaCare for that prize.

    1. I’m going Austrian and saying Nixon closing the gold window.

      1. Smoot-Hawley.

        1. Hey Black Mongo, I’m Red Mongo.

        2. Judges, is that considered “modern U.S. history”?

          1. Hmm, last 100 years…

            Sure, why not?

          2. If we were talking about European or world history, we’d have to say anything after the late 18th century is modern (although we would have really pointless arguments about exactly when).

            On that analogy, everything after the Declaration of Independence, is modern US history.

            For US history alone, let’s say 1898 (and then argue or not about whether the events were good, bad or indifferent)

            (1) US fights the Spanish American War proving herself a global military power.
            (2) First sale of a US built automobile.
            (3) US fights Aguinaldo its first overseas insurgency.
            (4) Pepsi Cola first sold.
            (5) So-called Lochner Era begins.

              1. People are actually willing to pay for Gwen Awful’s tripe?

        3. Agreed, given that its implementation is in the timeline of the march to GD and WWII.

        4. Lex Iulia de Maritandis Ordinibus

      2. I just wet myself.

        1. Thank you for sharing.

        2. Thank you for sharing.

          And darn you, “third party spam filter.” Who’s the third party, anyway?

          1. A chimp in India.

            1. Shitty spoof is shitty.

              Z-.

        3. Shitty spoof is shitty.

          Z-.

          1. Anarchists complain about spoofers, reap what they sow

            Libertopia (AP) – A corner of the anarcho-libertarian universe was in an uproar Saturday morning as a horde of spoofers, flamers, trolls and perverts invaded Reason.com’s Hit & Run comment board. Infiltrators utilized Reason’s unmoderated forum to vividly demonstrate the pitfalls of anarchy in practice. Local anarchists were not amused and vowed revenge before they wet themselves in an impotent rage.

            Nothing else happened.

            https://reason.com/blog/2011/07…..e-in-pover

            1. I can’t tell whether you actually think I’m an anarchist and are being a dick, or if you’re just a typical troll.

              Either way, I’m not an anarchist. Tough luck.

              1. Dude, what makes you think it’s talking to you? And is it really you? This anarchy shit is confusing. Maybe we need some rules after all…

                Naaaaaaah!

                1. D-.

            2. Actually, by spoofing not only their handles, but also by “digitally signing” the posts by including the spoofees’ email addresses, the spoofer has probably committed some kind of federal offense under our ubiquitous and ever-expanding list of federal crimes. It seems that the irony of the spoofer may be a double-edged-sword indeed.

    2. The Controlled Substances Act is going to be hard to beat.

      Though one could argue that even in its absence the state-level drug laws would be just as destructive.

      1. To liberty. However, at least we wouldn’t have the wasted billions for the DEA / “aid” to corrupt scumbags. Also, there would be many, many, fewer dead Mexicans.

      2. Easy. As I wrote upthread, Federal Reserve Act, 1913.

    3. Taft-Hartley NLRA (1947)

      1. Gets my vote

        *If only counting the US, since it pulled tons more out of poverty in other countries due to our lack of competitiveness.

    4. What about Wickard?

      1. While Wickard came down in response to a law (the AAA, I believe), it is not a law itself. The quoted statement talks about poverty produced by “any law.”

  5. *cue commercial of Boehener kicking the change cup out of a bum’s hand*

    1. If I saw that commercial I’d vote for him.

      1. Really ?? That’s sad. Most “bum’s” are mentally disturbed in some way. Would you kick at someone with Down’s ? That’s a rhetorical question so don’t bother.

        Another reason why Libertarians will never take over.

        1. PWN’D

        2. C. You can do better than that.

          1. No she can’t.

            1. When you’re that bitter and jealous, it sort of interferes with, well, everything. Maybe she can copy paste a whole bunch of our own quotes back at us. That’s the height of PWNAGE.

              1. Embarrassing, isn’t it.

            2. Who’s C ??

            3. YES WE CAN!

        3. What’s great is how the aggrieved anonypussy tried to unsubtly accuse NoTalentAssClown of adding an incorrect apostrophe, which he didn’t.

          Bum’s hand. Possessive. You just love proving your own idiocy, don’t you anonypussy? Oh, and there was no need to put quotes around his statement if you weren’t accusing him of that, so that’s a preemptive fuck off.

          DOUBLE IRONIC PWNAGE.

          1. But…but…she makes the puppets dance! At least, that’s her little fantasy. Self-delusion is often hilarious, and sure is in this case.

          2. So a minor spelling error makes kicking a change cup out of a “bum’s” hand OK ?

            Which is sad also. This site is my home page and I also subscribe. I love 90% of this place.

            The other 10% is why libertarians will never amount to anything.

            It’s too severe for the average person.

            1. The other 10% is why libertarians will never amount to anything.

              It’s too severe for the average person.

              Sadly, you are correct.

              Coeus then goes off to accuse someone of raping their grandmother with a dead horse dick over a minor disagreement over terminology.

              1. With friends like Episiarch, libertarianism doesn’t need enemies.

                1. FUCK YOU WITH A RHINO HORN AND LEAVE MY FRIEND EPI ALONE YOU MONSTER!!

                  1. Shitty spoof is shitty.

                    Z-.

            2. So a minor spelling error makes kicking a change cup out of a “bum’s” hand OK ?

              Did the man actually kick the change cup out of someone’s hand? Wouldn’t it violate the non-aggression principle?

              What is really sad is that we have such an absolutely pussified society that dark humor is taken seriously. Didn’t your mother ever tell you that “sticks and stones will break my bones but words can never hurt me”? No? Instead she taught you how even words that you do not directly hear can effect your self esteem for the rest of your life? I suppose it was “hate” speech?

        4. “That’s sad. Most “bum’s” are mentally disturbed in some way.”

          False.

          1. ” Most “bum’s” are mentally disturbed in some way. ”

            In this case no ‘ is needed.

        5. Really ?? That’s sad. Most “bum’s” are mentally disturbed in some way. Would you kick at someone with Down’s ?

          You should really take things less seriously.

    2. *Gulfstream jet, carrying a load of republican congressmen, taxiing through an itinerant camp.
      [Paul Ryan lookalike]: “Fuck all these old people, and children, and minorities! Give it some gas, pilot, I want to get in the air and drink my $9000 wine and piss out the window on these rabble!”
      [Pilot: John Boner]: OK!
      *A group of bum”working family” scrambled to get out of the way as the front wheel of the jet runs over their tent.
      [Plane Passengers]: “BWAHAHAHA! Look at ’em run!” *jeering
      *Suddenly, a manhandicapped senior citizen great grandma, clutching a picture of her smiling grandkids, is sucked in to one of the jet engines at the tail of the plane
      [Rep. Ryan]: Not Again!? Hang on, let me call up GEORGE W BUSH and DICK CHENECY, they always help us out of these jams.
      *End commercial – a bloodied jet engine sits amongst the weeping destitute, while the newly repaired jet taxis into the distance, while the passengers laugh.
      [VOICEOVER]: Is this really what we want for OUR America?

      1. God, I would vote for whoever ran this commercial SO HARD.

      2. So glad you posted this late in the day; if I was still at work my uncontrollable laughter would be kind of embarrassing.

        1. Agreed. I would vote for this person, kill myself, talk the Creator into sending me back, and voting again.

          1. no need to go to all that resurrection trouble, every dead person gets at least two votes in Chicago.

            1. Or Mississippi.

      3. We’ll get right on that.

      4. You need to get some minorities in there; on the runway I mean, not in the plane.

        1. The minority should be an indian who has a single tear rolling down his cheek as he looks at the old jet engine leaking fuel in a swamp wetlands.

  6. For the vigilant apocalypse watchers, Robert Greenstein, a budget analyst at the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, is warning that John Boehner’s proposed debt plan “could well produce the greatest increase in poverty and hardship produced by any law in modern U.S. history,”

    Makes one think about the great act of bravery it has been to contain the relentless wave of poverty just by spending money we don’t have.

    http://www.cartoonstock.com/lowres/vsh1064l.jpg

    1. If debt is the answer to poverty, can’t the poor just take out lots of loans so they’ll be rich?

      These people have no idea that debt eventually has to either be paid back, defaulted, or monetised. In the latter two scenarios you lose your credit rating and never get to borrow again.

      1. …and never get to borrow again.

        They got to loan it to someone if they want to stay in the lending business. And what else can the do with their money?

      2. If debt is the answer to poverty, can’t the poor just take out lots of loans so they’ll be rich?

        Very good point.

        I often ask if families deep into debt and facing a financial crisis can solve things by borrowing even more money.

        The only retorts I hear is that government is somehow different.

  7. What about the Bush tax cuts?

    1. What about them? It’s one of the few good things that cocksucker EVER did.

  8. The infuriating thing is that there are people who actually buy into this bullshit. I expect a few of them to join us in the comments any minute now.

  9. John Boehner’s proposed debt plan “could well produce the greatest increase in poverty and hardship produced by any law in modern U.S. history,”

    That’s because the spending helps the middle class and the poor, and why would you balance the budget on the backs of the middle calss and the poor, and aggregate demand, and only the government can stimulate, and…

    1. EXTERNALITIES!!!!!!!!

  10. If you are stupid enough to think what this guys says is true, you should be laughed at mercilessly every second of the day by everyone around you until you smarten up, or go insane and kill yourself.

    1. But I’m guessing many people think it’s true. Is there any way to turn them back to the light? Do you have a plan?

    2. There’s no stopping it. This information will be seeded and repeated on blogs ad nauseum in a never ending left-wing circle jerk.

    3. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

      1. PWN’D!!!

        1. HAHAHAHAHAHA!

          1. When you’re that bitter and jealous, it sort of interferes with, well, everything. Also nothing. I don’t know. Maybe she can copy paste a whole bunch of our own quotes back at us. That’s the height of PWNAGE. Or not. I don’t know…

            I’m tired. So…tired…

    4. I wouldn’t shortchange Mr. Greenstein too much. By mocking the rich for years I’m sure he’s joined their ranks.

      That’s the rub. When you look in the proverbial Gulfstream of the rocking script farther up the thread, it’s guys like Greenstein actually in there laughing.

  11. If you love America, you’ll throw money in its hole. SAVE THE MONEY HOLE!

    1. We can’t not allow a money hole gap!

    2. What if I don’t have any money? Can I put something else in America’s hole?

      1. Haven’t you ever heard of Xerox? Money doesn’t grow on trees, you have to turn them into paper first. Then, money!

  12. “Boehner’s proposed debt plan “could well produce the greatest increase in poverty and hardship produced by any law in modern U.S. history,…”

    Word of the day: hyperbole.

    1. Not hyperbole, THIS WHAT LIBERALS ACTUALLY BELIEVE.

      1. I know.

        But what they believe is hyperbole.

  13. Astonishing, that merely slowing the growth of spending can cause such carnage.

    If spending even more next year than we have this year will result in such horrors, then why aren’t we experiencing these horrors (and more!) now?

    1. Amazing how when the government was absolutely tiny (federal level) we didn’t just simply fail to exist as a nation, instead of a dystopic wasteland populated by zombie plutocrats eating the brains of children and the elderly.

      1. But that was a long time in ago, in the age of wig-wearing slavedrivers.

        1. Gilded Age capitalism was so terrible that I hear millions of foreigners abandoned their homelands to come here and work. The horror!

          1. But that was a long time in ago, in the age of wig-wearing slavedrivers.
            But that was a long time in ago, in the age of wig-wearing slavedrivers.
            But that was a long time in ago, in the age of wig-wearing slavedrivers.
            But that was a long time in ago, in the age of wig-wearing slavedrivers.
            But that was a long time in ago, in the age of wig-wearing slavedrivers.

            You see what I did there? The act is called “Shitheaded Progressive”! How do you like it?

            1. Two thumbs up.

              1. Put them in my rectum, please.

                1. Aww, is cuntpickle butthurt? What did RPA do to you, refuse to bukkake you?

            2. Gilded Age: 1870-1900.

              Wait one minute now…

          2. I’d agree that the gilded age was a disgrace–especially if you were a minority or a woman.

            But the failures of the gilded age were a function of the government not doing its job in protecting people’s rights. If the government failed to protect the right of women to own property…if the government failed to protect the rights of minorities through both the criminal justice system and the civil justice system?

            That’s hardly the fault of capitalism. Capitalism isn’t a system where you can violate people’s rights with impunity–no matter what its opponents say. And there aren’t any libertarians I’m aware of arguing in favor of violating anybody’s individual rights.

            I mean, just ’cause I’m all about small government and individual rights–doesn’t mean I have to pretend it was a better world when women couldn’t vote and black people had to suffer under Jim Crow.

            But nobody can say that the proliferation of government spending by the federal government in the wake of FDR somehow made the protection of women and minorities possible. Those things are unrelated.

            1. Also, no one ever talks about how the government stood by and allowed corporations to beat the shit out of union workers with a massive private army (the Pinkertons). That was pretty clearly a violation of the right to assemble.

              1. My thoughts, but clearer and better expressed.

              2. Often they were trespassing. Sometimes committing sabotage or killing and assaulting new workers. The Pinkertons were enforcing property rights.America’s violent labor history wasn’t a one-way street.

              3. Unions happened, and became militant and effective, precisely in response to that kind of turmoil. Then they got the government to ‘do its job’ and before long OSHA is my local rep and if I am slighted I call my lawyer.

                Unions never figured out each ‘achievement’ in legislation and government expansion for the worker was making them outdated.

                It’d be like Apple petitioning the government to get in the computer business, and succeeding.

              4. Also, no one ever talks about how the government stood by and allowed corporations to beat the shit out of union workers with a massive private army (the Pinkertons). That was pretty clearly a violation of the right to assemble.

                Actually, in almost all circumstances, all that the Pinkertons did was protect company property from illegal occupation and seizure by striking workers.

                Strike all you want. Just not on my factory floor. Because trespassers will be shot.

            2. Yeah, I’m obviously not going to defend the subjugation of women, blacks, Indians, and labor union, but the fact remains that in spite of all that shit, all peoples wages, life expectency, and overall standard of living increased dramatically during this period because of capitalism.

              1. We agree.

                But any time we talk about the good things of the gilded age, we do open ourselves up to that criticism.

                The reason a lot of people mistrust us libertarians is because they suspect we really are nostalgic for a time when minorities were disenfranchised and women couldn’t vote.

                It’s really important to emphasize libertarians’ commitment to individual rights. You’re right, the problem with the gilded age wasn’t the capitalism–it was the government’s refusal to protect people’s individual rights.

                1. “You’re right, the problem with the gilded age wasn’t the capitalism–it was the government’s refusal to protect people’s individual rights.”

                  Incidentally, many of our problems today likewise stem from the government’s failure to protect our individual rights.

              2. Unspoken fact of Gilded Age was it was last hurrah of empires in the classical sense. America’s vast economic expansion in that period was accompanied by equally vast territorial expansion, all the way to the fucking Philippines.

                1. The Philippines is a U.S. state?
                  I did not know that.

                  1. These spoofs suck. F-.

            3. Ironically, Jim Crow laws were supported by those seeking to maintain the status quo specifically because capitalism meant that some people were willing to exchange goods and services with freed blacks. Why go to the trouble of imposing de jure discrimination if the free market was supposedly fully supportive of de facto discrimination.

            4. It is also ironic that regulations like the minimum wage, that have become key components of the liberal/progressive dogma, were actually imposed as a means of preventing freed blacks from taking business away from whites by under-bidding them. In that way any many others, the bottom rungs have been cut off of the career ladder by those who are supposedly in favor of ending poverty.

            5. Capitalism isn’t a system where you can violate people’s rights with impunity–no matter what its opponents say.

              So, under capitalism, whom does one turn to in the event of a breach of contract?

        2. I’m as sharp as a marble!

      2. Amazing how when the government was absolutely tiny (federal level) we didn’t just simply fail to exist as a nation, instead of a dystopic wasteland populated by zombie plutocrats eating the brains of children and the elderly.

        True, but back then people didn’t have the tangled web of dependency on govt that we do now. Going back to even late-90s levels of spending would result in some massive and painful economic dislocation as the markets readjusted to life without as much govt largesse.

        Frankly, I think that even if the prez and Congress have a conversion experience and cut spending to the levels it needs to be cut to, the people would boot them out of office in the next election cycle because the pain would be so great. There’s a significant chance the correction would take more than two years.

        IOW, we’re fucked, even if the govt starts to do the right thing.

        1. This. We’re fucked until we’re forced into austerity, and then we’re really fucked.

        2. True, but back then people didn’t have the tangled web of dependency on govt that we do now. Going back to even late-90s levels of spending would result in some massive and painful economic dislocation as the markets readjusted to life without as much govt largesse.

          If late ’90’s spending levels were so painful, why was not this pain felt in the late ’90’s?

    2. If spending even more next year than we have this year will result in such horrors, then why aren’t we experiencing these horrors (and more!) now?

      Were you guys completely asleep during Clinton?

      That slowed growth amounts to a massive cut!

  14. Mr. Greenstein, I don’t use the word “hero” lightly, but you are the greatest hero in American history.

    1. Well, modern American history.

      Let’s not go hyperbolic here.

  15. To be fair, he could be right. Of course, the Obama plan is 1% worse.

    1. Well, if the Obama plan actually existed. It’s still in a quantum state of possibly existing.

      1. Schr?dinger’s Budget!

        1. …liberal-progressive intellectual defending the Warfare/Welfare state for “OBAMA 2012”.

          1. greenstein, that is…

        2. Alright, that was pretty good.

      2. You mean a linear combination of an existing state and a nonexisting state.

        1. One thing’s for sure, this superposition of states will collapse.

  16. It’s true, so stop griping and get out of the way and let Democrats fix things so it doesn’t happen.

    1. Like Christ-fags would ever let Obama do what he does best.

      1. ….elected him to do. Where’s my handout?

        1. I don’t have it. How about a reach-around, sweetcakes?

          1. Not even a fucking F-. That was just… old and uninspired, dude.

            1. Just. Ignore. The. Troll.
              Do. As. I. Say.
              Not. As. I. Do.

      2. That would be Christ-fag pigfucks I assume?

        These Christ-fags I know not of.

    2. Worst Tony ever.

      1. The Shreik wasn’t bad, though.

        1. He didn’t end it with a comment about Dick Cheney.

          C+

      2. Worst Tony or worst Spoof?

        1. There’s a difference?

          1. Stop spoofing me!!

            1. Give up, fuckhead. You’re getting worse with each post.

              1. Stop spoofing me!

                X-

  17. I could give a soft shit about the “poorest and most vulnerable.” There’s nothing rare or precious about humanity, and I’ve never heard a convincing, logical, and unsentimental argument for forcibly taking my money to save other humans — most of whom we’re paying to rescue from their own stupidity, laziness, and lack of impulse control.

    That said, until Boehner’s budget comes out with some defense budget cuts and caps, it’s kaka, AFAIC. And right now, hate to say it though I do, Reid’s budget proposal is kicking Boehner’s budget’s ass, for that reason.

    How many useless wars are we in now? Three? Two? Cut the trillions we continue to spend to play “Ineffectual World Cop,” or go home.

    1. Settle down Alberich.

    2. Why is it always SOFT shits with “you people”?

      1. Let’s just say we like our fiber.

        1. We like to feel peachies?

    3. I agree that you shouldn’t have your money confiscated to help other people, but can’t we admit that our policy preferences have downsides? Can’t we say that ending taxation is the right thing to do without also saying that those who will suffer as a result deserve it? And, by the way, stupidity, laziness and lack of impulse control aren’t necessarily things you can just overcome by force of will – genetics is a lottery, so can we show a little compassion for those who lost?

      1. > Can’t we say that ending taxation is the right thing to do without also saying that those who will suffer as a result deserve it?

        No. Fuck Joe Biden, Charlie Rangel, and the rest of those tax-sucking assholes.

        If you meant poor people, they’re the ones who would benefit the most from a massive reduction in taxes. They’d be able to find work.

        -jcr

      2. I could buy into that. Altruism itself is not a defect. But using the sad-sacks as props so Uncle Sugar can ride around in luxury-airliners handing out checks for votes etc. is beyond the pale.

        Its one thing to be indifferent with the less fortunate, but its twisted to see in their suffering an opportunity to steal from others for your own self-aggrandizement. Its disgusting.

        1. its twisted to see in their suffering an opportunity to steal from others for your own self-aggrandizement.

          But they have more than I think they need.

  18. Robt Green-with-envy or Greenstein, that is….

  19. ‘I’ve seen budget horrors… that you’ve never seen. But you have no right to call me a squanderer. You have a right to impeach me. You have a right to do that… but you have no right to judge me. It’s impossible for words to describe what is necessary to those who do not know what horror means.

    Horror has a face… and you must make a friend of horror. Horror and moral terror are your friends. I remember when I was with the Budget Office… seems a thousand centuries ago. We went to do a CBO on inoculating some poor children. We left the area after they had inoculated the children for polio, and this old man came running after us and he was crying. He couldn’t see. We went back there, and the Republicans had come and hacked off every inoculated arm. There they were in a pile. And I remember… I… cried, I wept like some grandmother. And I want to remember it. I never want to forget it…’

    1. Didn’t you forget something about pulling your teeth out and crawling along the edge of a straight razor?

  20. Worse than NAFTA?!

  21. Bobby Greenstein is the guy that gave us Food Stamps under Carter

  22. I’m going to go out on a limb and say that Public Law No. 107-243, the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 caused a greater increase in poverty and hardship than any of the other laws suggested in the comments above, and even more than Boehner’s proposed budget increase.

    Or don’t the poverty and hardship count when they are experienced by foreigners?

    1. the Republicans had come and hacked off every inoculated arm. There they were in a pile

      I’m going to go out on a limb

  23. Sure, it’s ridiculous. But at least he’s not some kind of Bushie christfag (judging by his name).

    1. B-

      Still no followup about Cheney. But you got the email link in the name right.

  24. If the debt ceiling is not increased, dogs will starve due to the public being unable to buy dog food because all savings accounts will instantly vanish and personal credit lines go to $0 if the government can’t sell more bonds.

  25. It’s a doozy in Cleveland today.

    State of Ohio corrections officer sues Cleveland over 2009 showdown with police

    In summary, a state corrections officer was on the property of a state prison with another state corrections officer, all wearing ID and in uniform, inspecting some holes in the fence.

    Plainclothes police show up, threaten to shoot the state officers, disarm them, and injure them.

    Lt. Brian Betley, vice president of the Fraternal Order of Police supervisors union, praised Barrow as a proactive leader with a good record. “I’m sure after the lawsuit runs its course,” Betley said, “it will turn out positive for both the city and Lt. Barrow and his men.”

    The police’s excuse is that they suspected a drug deal or a “lover’s lane” situation. (I sure know hanging outside of prisons gets me in the mood.)

    1. Wait, who am I supposed to feel bad for in this story?

      1. Not sure; my brain gets stuck in some kind of infinite loop.

        The cops (coming from an unmarked car) said they had to attack and disarm the uniformed officers because they had guns and felt threatened. (Keep in mind open carry is legal in Ohio.)

        On the bright side, no dogs were shot.

  26. I could post these links all day, and I’m just covering July in one city.

    Family sues Cleveland police officers, claims teen son with Down syndrome was attacked

    Juan Ortiz was 16 when Cleveland police officers mistook him for a neighborhood robber. In a federal civil rights lawsuit filed Monday, Juan and his parents accuse Patrolman Brian Kazimer of using excessive force on the teen and Patrolman Dan Crisan of allowing it to happen.

    Juan’s parents also say that after they continued to explain their son’s mental disability, Kazimer responded with: “You’re lucky we didn’t shoot him,” then ordered Ortiz to “shut the f— up.”

    1. Cleveland pigs don’t like Puerto Ricans, generally speaking.

      1. They really don’t like mongoloid Puerto Ricans.

          1. I blew a guy in Cleveland once.

            Say, what do you look like, Warty?

            1. Guys, do you think this spoofer’s somebody obscure/new, or a regular?

              1. I think it’s me.

                I mean Epi!

            2. Is somebody spoofing RPA?

              1. NVM, obvious troll/spoof is obvious.

                1. Just. Ignore. The. Troll.
                  Do. As. I. Say.
                  Not. As. I. Do.

    2. Somebody just needs to explain to the nice officers that they are not allowed to beat up citizens.

    3. Kazimer responded with: “You’re lucky we didn’t shoot him,” then ordered Ortiz to “shut the f— up.”

      Or maybe they’re lucky they didn’t shoot him. Amazing how pigs seem to think they’re untouchable.

  27. Well, we’ll see how apocalyptic Boehner’s bill will be. It passed the House. http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITI…..index.html

    1. THE SUN JUST BURNED OUT!

      Oh wait, its nighttime.

  28. Not to worry, Obama has a secret plan to end the debt crisis. Yes, really.

    1. If that’s the case, I feel better already. Whew.

    2. Obama has a secret plan to end the debt crisis.

      Why did reading that just now give me a sense of deja vu?

      1. What do you have against D?j? vu?

        1. Nothing. Neither the song nor the sensation. Always liked Dionne Warwick’s music: Do You Know the Way to San Jose? ; Walk On By.

  29. The earth must be getting pretty flat, because The New Republic likes Ron Paul’s debt ceiling solution.

    Nothing else happened.

    1. STOP SPOOFING ME!!!

      1. D-, since you used capital letters.

        1. YOU’RE NOT THE BOSS OF ME!!

    2. have the Federal Reserve Board destroy the $1.6 trillion in government bonds it now holds.

      Can’t we just invalidate them now, and burn them in the winter for heat? That would be more practical.

  30. Threadjack: For anyone who can’t make the movie, I present: Cap’n ‘Merica: The Last Avenger.

    1. That was horrifying, good thing it was just a comic!

      1. The End…?

    2. The Dildo of Power should have been glowing. That is all.

    1. Fuck. That was supposed to be a reply to cap l

  31. “The greatest increase in poverty and hardship produced by any law in modern U.S. history.”

    Obviously Boners limp proposal is not the greatest in history.

    But what law with the greatest source of poverty?

    And yes tony we already know that you think the Constitution is the greatest source of poverty…but i am wondering what others think.

    1. There is some truth in ‘the greatest source of poverty’ line. Passing Boehner’s bill will defang the Tea Party, permit an Obama ‘victory’, and accomplish nothing of benefit. The public will go back to sleep and the govt will grow even faster.

  32. I’m so glad I didn’t interview with these shit-stains. The money was good, but fuck CBPP with clown shoes.

    I also had a friend who doesn’t know my politics to try to get me to interview with a Democratic polling company. “The CEO is good friends with Rahm Emmanuel!”

    I fucking hate this city.

    1. Would you like to talk about it?

      1. Griefer troll is boring.

        Are you this much of a failure in the rest of your life too?

        1. Wow… you turned down a meeting with Rahm, and you DIDN’T get your ass kicked in a dark alley?

    2. Your friend is fucking retarded.

    3. I would have gone on that interview, and I’d have taken a hidden camera with me.

      -jcr

  33. And when my penis oozes that greenish-yellow sticky fluid, should I see a doctor or blame it on the dog?

    1. Visit a doctor, and leave us alone.

      1. There are no rules in anarchy.

      2. This spoofer’s getting more retarded every time he/she posts. Any bets on how long it’ll last?

        1. Ask again later.

  34. If I confessed to being, say, a Democrat tranny, would you hold it against me? Can I hold it anyway? So soft…soooooo soft…

    1. Z-.

  35. The funny thing is, he could be right, just not for the reason he believes.

    The Boehner bill keeps us on the road to the dollar collapse.

    -jcr

  36. Those that fail to remember history
    are condemned to repeat it…

    We are witnessing the culmination of a
    30-year “failed” conservative economic policy, a.k.a. “Reaganomics”:

    The consequence of “supply-side” economics has been a large increase in the national debt, and the loss of vital social programs have occured
    as a result of tax cuts for the wealthy…

    Cheese…

    1. the loss of vital social programs have occured

      Lol! If anything, there’s been an increase in social programs. Jeez, what cheezy liars we have around here.

      1. Any increase in social program
        support pales, comparatively, to
        the huge increase in benefit to
        the wealty and the rich in this
        country…

        You are an uninformed moron…

        This nation contains a shitload of
        wealth, but idiots (like yourself) claim that it is contained within
        social programs…

        Let’s just get rid of government (and
        all associated programs),and all problems will be solved…

        1. All those words and not one responded to .’s comment…

        2. So there’s been a relative decrease in social programs compared with the wealth of the rich, so even if social programs kept the poor fed, housed, and with medical care you would say they are inefficient because they just don’t spend enough money?

          1. This guy apparently wants half the population living in government housing, the epitome of a “social program”, while the rich pay 95% income tax because the money belongs to the Democrat du jour. It must be really rewarding advocating the seizure and spending of other people’s money.

            1. The money belongs to the government, without regard to which Team is in charge.

              Didn’t you get the memo? Rs like to spend, too!

    2. Those that fail to remember history
      are condemned to repeat it…

      We are witnessing the culmination of a
      100-year faulty economic policy, a.k.a. “Keynesianism”:

      The consequence of “monetary-policy” economics has been a large increase in the national debt, and the increase in unsustainable programs that have occured
      as a result of uncontrolled spending…

      Cheese…

      FIFY

    3. “We are witnessing the culmination of a
      30-year “failed” conservative economic policy, a.k.a. “Reaganomics”:
      The consequence of “supply-side” economics has been a large increase in the national debt”

      Well, it is remarkable how the debt seems to shoot up with the coming not of the Great Soceity, but of the “Reagan Revolution…”

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USDebt.png

      1. I know you guys aren’t Republican establishment types, and any of the trolls here that say you are are being supremely ridiculous, but let’s be honest — you dislike and oppose Democrats and Keynesian economics just because they’re Demcrats and Keynesian economics. You have never once offered a good argument in favor of your positions, but you always claim you have and then throw out something entirely irrelevant to the debate at hand.

        The fact is, the legacy of Detroit is on the Republican establishment, and so is this mess. Wake up and realize what’s going on in this country.

        1. Spoofs already? I guess it is a Saturday and summer school is out…

          1. This is unusual, even for Reason — a spoofer claiming I’m spoofing. At least come up with something new.

            1. I’m sure Reason could just identify the spoofer’s usual handle, we’d all enjoy that.

              1. You’re not going to like this, but it’s … STEVE SMITH.

                1. And he’s IN THE HOUSE? On the extension?

            2. It was pretty obvious, since it didn’t conform to MNG’s usual writing style. Although it was a decent spoof, I guess.

              1. MNG, you fuckin traitor, you betrayed the cause! Long live the communist party of the united states! proletarians of the world, unite and face the scourge!

                1. If you needed any more proof of the adolscent idiocy of the spoofer here he spoofs Tony in responding to the wrong thread.

                  Stay in school lil’ buster!

                  Now maybe the big people can discuss the point I brought up, that debt seemed to mushroom coincident with the Reagan Revolution?

                  1. It could be the same fuckhead that’s been spoofing me. The kid seems high.

                    1. Some say spoofing is the sincerest form of flatter, but I tend to think it demonstrates the inability of the spoofer to actually address the argument of another. I’m not sure why H&R appeals to so many teen-agers, maybe it’s the movie reviews or something.

  37. The end of the world???

  38. your site contains many information. it is helpful to us. thank you.

  39. Maybe it is the spiraling cost of food in a tough economy or the logical next step in the movement to eat locally. Whatever the reason, New Yorkers are increasingly fanning out across the city’s parks to hunt and gather edible wild plants, like mushrooms, American ginger and elderberries.

    Now parks officials want them to stop. New York’s public lands are not a communal pantry, they say. In recent months, the city has stepped up training of park rangers and enforcement-patrol officers, directing them to keep an eye out for foragers and chase them off.

    “If people decide that they want to make their salads out of our plants, then we’re not going to have any chipmunks,” said Maria Hernandez, director of horticulture for the Central Park Conservancy, the nonprofit group that manages Central Park.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07…..s.html?hpw

    1. Fucking public land, how does it work?

      1. Do you know how many transfats are in chipmunks?

        1. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          This calls for a prohibition!

    2. “If people decide that they want to make their salads out of our plants, then we’re not going to have any chipmunks,” said Maria Hernandez, director of horticulture for the Central Park Conservancy

      Fair enough.

      Anyway, I’m also trapping the animals.

  40. The federal law known as Title IX ? requiring schools at all levels across the country to offer girls and women equal access to athletics ? has produced a wealth of progress since it was enacted almost four decades ago. Almost no one disputes that.

    But scores of schools, year in and year out, still fail to abide by the law. For those schools, almost no one disputes this: There is little chance their shortcomings will ever be investigated, and even if they are, few will be meaningfully punished.

    According to a review by The New York Times, the Office for Civil Rights allows cases of suspected discrimination to drag on for years, long after the affected athletes have graduated.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07…..d.html?hpw

    1. The federal law known as Title IX ? requiring schools at all levels across the country to offer girls and women equal access to athletics ? has produced a wealth of progress since it was enacted almost four decades ago. Almost no one disputes that.

      Pravda used similar bullshit tactics — fucking citation please

      1. I’m pretty sure they mean there are many more opportunities for women than before. Do you dispute that?

        1. what you’re assuming is that it was the law that changed our culture in that direction

          1. So the law has had no effect, it was all culture. Great, then no bitching about the law.

            1. as long as the law wasnt framed so schools could MAKE girls do athletics, then yeah it was a pretty benign and useless law

              1. I’m pretty sure it has had effects, there have been numerous lawsuits over it and that alone would provide incentives. People I know who work in the field acknowledge its effects (some lament it).

                I think it is a great law. It is enforced by the stick of a threat to withold funds so there is really no actual coercion there by libertarian standards. It’s basically just saying that if you are going to take money from the citizenry you have to use it equally between the two biggest groups in that citizenry.

                1. “I think it is a great law. It is enforced by the stick of a threat to withold funds so there is really no actual coercion there by libertarian standards.”

                  Except for the whole stealing from people to give to schools that have girls basketball thing. Yup, no coercion at all.

                  1. Well, you’re not against title IX, you’re against taxpayer money going to schools period. At the very least Title IX should add nothing to that.

            2. The law is an ass.

              Culture is a bitch.

        2. Opportunities to play sports no one cares about. Hooray!

          1. Speak for yourself, you LOVING BIGOT!

    2. a wealth of progress

      What does that even mean?

      1. I believe they meant “stealth progress.”

    3. What if there aren’t enough girls in a given school who want to participate in sports?

      1. You build a new swimming pool/training facility, throw in a few scholarships, and start a women’s rowing program. I can’t claim to be a Title IX expert, but I know that there’s a long-running joke about women’s rowing and Title IX. IIRC, it involves both funding reasons (it’s a low-cost sport) and satisfies numbers requirements (lots of women both can and want to row, something that can’t necessarily be said — for whatever reason, I have no desire to get in a Title IX/gender war on a Sat. — for sports that involve more contact).

        Just Google “women’s crew” and “Title IX.” Perhaps it will have changed, and I’ll be wrong. It’s not an issue I feel great passion about. I’m just pretty sure…

        1. I just think the whole thing is stupid.

          1. Google women s crew. Haha. I see what you did there.

    4. I dispute that.

      Progress…to what?

  41. http://www.cpusa.org/save-the-…..-the-rich/

    “We’re going broke? We can’t afford it.” That’s the line from deficit hawks determined to destroy Social Security and Medicare and slash every federal, state, and local program that benefits working people.

    Republicans held hostage an extension of jobless benefits for two million workers in order to extort an extension of $750 billion in Bush-era tax cuts for millionaires.

    Now, in the name of “deficit reduction,” they are ramrodding a federal budget that slashes education, privatizes Medicare and cuts Social Security. Tax cuts for wealthy individuals, banks and corporations are preserved adding trillions to the deficits. Also virtually untouched is the trillion dollars per year for Pentagon spending and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    Meanwhile, governors like Republican Scott Walker of Wisconsin, unleashed a vicious, nationwide union-busting offensive falsely blaming public employees for the budget shortfall even though these workers gave up wage and benefit increases. Standing in the shadows are the billionaire Koch brothers, bankrollers of Walker and other “Tea Party” Republicans.

    1. Wait, you an ACTUAL communist? Man, I knew you were a leftist, but a full-blown communist? Wow, MNG

      1. Have you priced tax cuts lately? The government isn’t made of money, you know.

        1. No, but you and your family are. Give it the fuck up, serf.

      2. It’s a spoofer, youth run amok.

        1. Oh. sounded reasonable enough, lol, sorry

    2. “…even though these workers gave up wage and benefit increases.”
      Pretty sure that wasn’t really intended to have any specific meaning, just random bullshit for emotional effect.

    3. Republicans held hostage an extension of jobless benefits for two million workers in order to extort an extension of $750 billion in Bush-era tax cuts for millionaires.

      The avarice just DRIPS here.

      1. Wish them success!

  42. Platypus|7.29.11 @ 5:51PM|#

    Well, if the Obama plan actually existed. It’s still in a quantum state of possibly existing.

    Joe M|7.29.11 @ 5:53PM|#

    Schr?dinger’s Budget!

    Beautiful. I am so using that. That’s exactly what all these budget plans are: The committees, the cuts in future years, all in the black box. And when you open it, who knows what you’ll wind up with?

    1. A shit sandwich, I’m guessing.

    2. The committees, the cuts in future years, all in the black box.

      A black lock box.

    3. And when you open it, who knows what you’ll wind up with?

      Hey, Rocky, wanna see me pull a budget out of this box?

    4. Schr?dinger’s Budget!

      Wait, there’s more! Some of us may have missed this the other day.

    5. all in the black box

      RACIST and SEXIST!!!!!11

  43. Has anyone seen that ad for that upcoming TV series about Detroit and the wonderful come back it’s making and sponsored by GM. How many progressives are going to look at this as a wonderful validation for the bailout of the to big to fail car companies.

    1. All but the 10 to 12 honest progressives in the world, I’m betting.

    2. I’m making a comeback, too!

      1. Not before I rip out your blond dreads.

  44. Stop believing in the Republican lies: there is no debt crisis. This is a fabricated crisis. We have the lowest tax rates in the last 50 years. All we need is to increase the tax rates, and there won’t be any deficit.
    If all those cuts as proposed by the GOP would happen, the GDP would be reduced by more than 15%. That would decrease demand, and business would have no choice but to make massive lay-offs, further decreasing the GDP. The economy would spiral down, with 30% unemployment as in the 1930’s. It would be a tragedy that this would have to happen just to show how dangerous the Tea-party ideas are.

    1. ^^THIS^^

      … is remarkably stupid!

      1. The sad thing is that I know many ostensibly intelligent people whom zaybu’s post may as well have been a direct quote from.

        There’s a whole lot of people out there who just will not acknowledge fiscal reality.

  45. Wow OK man that really does make a lot of sense dude.

    http://www.privacy-tools.no.tc

  46. Good article more useful to me, I will continue to pay attention, and I love discount evening wedding dress,I hope you lot just my site! http://www.tofuchina.com

  47. It’s an interesting approach. I commonly see unexceptional views on the subject but yours it’s written in a pretty unusual fashion. Surely, I will revisit your website for additional info.

  48. which he apparently believes is the terrifying likely consequence of cutting government so much that federal discretionary spending only rises from $1.034 trillion to $1.234 trillion over the next decade.

    So an increase in spending is a cut?

    Has that idea ever been used before in human history, let alone American history?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.