Defining Fiscal Conservativism

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Or should we just toss this label to the dustbin of catchphrase politics.

[Bozo_Casanova 26277]

Toss it, it doesn't mean shit anymore. 
"fiscal Republicanism", on the other hand, means debt-financing stimulus during expansions through tax cuts without offsetting spending, thus reducing revenues over the long haul and structurally expanding both the deficit and the debt.

Edited July 19, 2018 by Bozo_Casanova

[TwiceHorn 31264]

As identified with either democrats or republicans, or US politics, sure.

 

But the terms "fiscal" and "conservative," used together, have an independent and literal meaning that's still useful.  Kind of like tooth fairy, sasquatch, abominable snowman, or unicorn.

[BurntOrange&White 39621]

Fiscal responsibility in politics is dead. Who gives a shit. They’re going to cut and spend where each party wants.

[dark54555 72]

Fiscal Conservatism is crap.

We should be striving for fiscal utilitarianism.  

[David Dennison 18652]

28 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Or should we just toss this label to the dustbin of catchphrase politics.

It's always been a label to signal that we shouldn't spend money on the poor.

[Bat Guano 359]

25 minutes ago, Bevo VIII said:

Fiscal responsibility in politics is dead. Who gives a shit. They’re going to cut and spend where each party wants.

Fixed.

[TornACL 7675]

Why don't we just make one meta-thread entitled "Topics that Hugo is tired of reading about in other threads"

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

I never understood why people are so shy about starting new threads on shaggy.  Like who gives a shit about more topics of discussion?

1 minute ago, TornACL said:

Why don't we just make one meta-thread entitled "Topics that Hugo is tired of reading about in other threads"

It would get derailed.

[Clob94 121]

Fiscal Conservative-- 

 

A person that opposes any form of pork barrel spending. 

A person that understand you can have either entitlement programs or social aid immigration programs, but you can't have BOTH. One must go. 

A person that sees an importance for funding our military but not spending money on the next stealth designed liquid cooled jock strap for JSOC operators to wear so they can keep their juevos at 65 degrees. 

A person that shwacks government jobs that have overlap. You can work twice as hard and make 25% more or fuck off and go work really hard in the private sector. 

 

A person that legalizes medical and recreational mota, forces farmers to grow said weed by taking away their subsidies that pay them NOT to grow crops, taxes el shitto out of el weedo and uses the billions to pay for Medicare for all TAX PAYING AMERICAN CITIZENS-- all others must pay out of pocket or we bill your respective government....

Just a few starters...

[F250 28680]

20 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I never understood why people are so shy about starting new threads on shaggy.  Like who gives a shit about more topics of discussion?

 

1. Shaggy is all about the art of meta threads. My theory is the traffic congestion in Austin during our formative years has messed with our psyche. Everyone needs to squeeze into one road to get anywhere.

2. Starting numerous threads is culturally a texags thing. Since you do it, maybe it's just an SEC thing or perhaps an east Texas/Louisiana thing.

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

3 hours ago, F250 said:

2. Starting numerous threads is culturally a texags thing. Since you do it, maybe it's just an SEC thing or perhaps an east Texas/Louisiana thing.

I am technically a message board refugee fleeing persecution.

Like Cave Man Lawyer I am confused by your mysterious ways.

Edited July 19, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Bozo_Casanova 26277]

Fiscal Conservative-- 
 
A person that opposes any form of pork barrel spending. 
A person that understand you can have either entitlement programs or social aid immigration programs, but you can't have BOTH. One must go. 
A person that sees an importance for funding our military but not spending money on the next stealth designed liquid cooled jock strap for JSOC operators to wear so they can keep their juevos at 65 degrees. 
A person that shwacks government jobs that have overlap. You can work twice as hard and make 25% more or fuck off and go work really hard in the private sector. 
 
A person that legalizes medical and recreational mota, forces farmers to grow said weed by taking away their subsidies that pay them NOT to grow crops, taxes el shitto out of el weedo and uses the billions to pay for Medicare for all TAX PAYING AMERICAN CITIZENS-- all others must pay out of pocket or we bill your respective government....
Just a few starters...

That’s not a “fiscal conservative”, that’s a Unicorn

[Clob94 121]

5 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

That’s not a “fiscal conservative”, that’s a Unicorn

You'd be surprised man. I know quite a few people that would be down with all of this. In fact, I bet you there's even a few on this board. 

[BurntOrange&White 39621]

I never understood why people are so shy about starting new threads on shaggy.  Like who gives a shit about more topics of discussion?

It would get derailed.

Mainly because they come from you and your fuck ton of posting every day. You’re FCHorn but of the other team. While I appreciate some

Of your content. Quality > quantity and you average 47.5 post per day

[Bozo_Casanova 26277]

18 hours ago, Clob94 said:

You'd be surprised man. I know quite a few people that would be down with all of this. In fact, I bet you there's even a few on this board. 

If they vote GOP at the moment, they don't believe any of it. 

[Pescado_Rojo 19331]

23 hours ago, dark54555 said:

Fiscal Conservatism is crap.

We should be striving for fiscal utilitarianism.  

As others have said, it's really a broad brush meaningless term in this day and age. The ROI of our tax dollars would be a better conversation to have. I want to get rid of, or drastically scale back things that have a shitty ROI, like the drug war. Of course, the definition of that ROI would vary depending on what side of the political isle you are on. 

[TwiceHorn 31264]

4 minutes ago, Pescado_Rojo said:

As others have said, it's really a broad brush meaningless term in this day and age. The ROI of our tax dollars would be a better conversation to have. I want to get rid of, or drastically scale back things that have a shitty ROI, like the drug war. Of course, the definition of that ROI would vary depending on what side of the political isle you are on. 

Right, I think a fiscal conservative would insist upon a cost-benefit analysis of just about every piece of legislation under serious consideration.  There's already some degree of cost analysis that occurs with major legislation, but it often gets ignored with the simple assumption that "it must be good."  And also a serious look at the costs and benefits of existing laws and policies.  Congress doesn't do nearly enough repealing and sunsetting for my taste.

 

The unfortunate fact is that the vast majority of the electorate, of all political stripes, won't vote for someone who is fiscally conservative because someone's ox is gonna get gored by everything.  The free shit army applies to both sides.  BOTH SIDES!!!111!

Edited July 20, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[Clob94 121]

36 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

If they vote GOP at the moment, they don't believe any of it. 

I won't disagree with you that the current crop of legislators on the right, for the most part, sucks donkey balls. The same can be said about the majority of the left. And that's the problem. We have two shit show parties to choose from. 

[DixonHur 11171]

6 minutes ago, Clob94 said:

I won't disagree with you that the current crop of legislators on the right, for the most part, sucks donkey balls. The same can be said about the majority of the left. And that's the problem. We have two shit show parties to choose from. 

Come on, you can't both sides this shit.  

One party has complete control of the government, and is bending over backwards to support an philandering, pathologically lying, dumb as a brick, grifting traitor.

The other side spent 6 years defending an intelligent, thoughtful, and effective leader from the first group in the previous example because he once wore a tan suit, liked spicy mustard and arugula, put his feet on the desk...ah, hell, let's be honest, it was because he's black.

Those are not remotely equal sins.  That's like comparing a guy who beats up his girlfriend's rapist to Ted Bundy because "they're both guilty of violence".

[formermav43 4599]

On 7/19/2018 at 3:13 PM, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I never understood why people are so shy about starting new threads on shaggy.  Like who gives a shit about more topics of discussion?

I imagine there would be near universal support for you starting as many threads on shaggy as your heart desires. 

[Clob94 121]

1 hour ago, DixonHur said:

Come on, you can't both sides this shit.  

One party has complete control of the government, and is bending over backwards to support an philandering, pathologically lying, dumb as a brick, grifting traitor.

The other side spent 6 years defending an intelligent, thoughtful, and effective leader from the first group in the previous example because he once wore a tan suit, liked spicy mustard and arugula, put his feet on the desk...ah, hell, let's be honest, it was because he's black.

Those are not remotely equal sins.  That's like comparing a guy who beats up his girlfriend's rapist to Ted Bundy because "they're both guilty of violence".

So like there are blind Trump defenders, there are also blind Obama defender, such as yourself. As far as I am concerned, I most certainly can "both sides" this shit because I'm not loyal to either party. I'm about result, not style. If you think the previous administration didn't have some serious warts, I've got some bad news for you. They did. Neg me all you want because I'm not confirming to your beliefs or this echo chamber here, but my life was permanently  altered by the one of the irresponsible acts of the previous administration. And no, it had nothing to do with the ACA.

[maninblack 7974]

You could define it but it doesn't mean it applies to someone, politician or not, that uses the label.

[dark54555 72]

4 hours ago, Pescado_Rojo said:

As others have said, it's really a broad brush meaningless term in this day and age. The ROI of our tax dollars would be a better conversation to have. I want to get rid of, or drastically scale back things that have a shitty ROI, like the drug war. Of course, the definition of that ROI would vary depending on what side of the political isle you are on. 

You have to take all emotion out of it, and there's plenty of inefficiency caused by emotion on both sides of the aisle.

[thrillhammer 683]

On ‎7‎/‎19‎/‎2018 at 6:55 PM, Clob94 said:

You'd be surprised man. I know quite a few people that would be down with all of this. In fact, I bet you there's even a few on this board. 

yeah, but you don't know any in congress.

[Clob94 121]

Just now, thrillhammer said:

yeah, but you don't know any in congress.

See my previous posts. I agree. Both sides are shit. Time for a 3rd party and term limits. Or perhaps open revolution. 

[Gengs1 2583]

Meantime living of the government 

 

https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/2018/07/20/report-rand-paul-spent-donor-cash-trips-abroad-clothing/806820002/

[David Dennison 18652]

6 hours ago, Clob94 said:

So like there are blind Trump defenders, there are also blind Obama defender, such as yourself. As far as I am concerned, I most certainly can "both sides" this shit because I'm not loyal to either party. I'm about result, not style. If you think the previous administration didn't have some serious warts, I've got some bad news for you. They did. Neg me all you want because I'm not confirming to your beliefs or this echo chamber here, but my life was permanently  altered by the one of the irresponsible acts of the previous administration. And no, it had nothing to do with the ACA.

Of course the previous administration had warts. All of them do. But Barack Obama is a fine man and was an outstanding president, warts and all.

[Clob94 121]

5 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Of course the previous administration had warts. All of them do. But Barack Obama is a fine man and was an outstanding president, warts and all.

There were things he did did that impressed me. Ya, he was a cool cat with an air about him...but I the end, was he Wesley snipes from "white men can't jump"? He'd rather look good and lose than look bad and win? 

His foreign policy was just shy of terrible.... Israel, Syria, Mexico, Iran, Russia "called and they want their 1980s policy back". Drone strikes....... no way that can be defended. Fast and furious, don't even try. Did I support the guy his first term? No doubt. But by his second term, his deficiencies were readily revealed. I will gladly debate with you those short comings or you can simply act like a Bob stoops bag of dicks and call me a name like nazi or klansmen and show everyone that you don't care about an honest discussion, you just care about shilling for "your guy" blindly. 

 

Volley to you. 

[David Dennison 18652]

1 minute ago, Clob94 said:

There were things he did did that impressed me. Ya, he was a cool cat with an air about him...but I the end, was he Wesley snipes from "white men can't jump"? He'd rather look good and lose than look bad and win? 

His foreign policy was just shy of terrible.... Israel, Syria, Mexico, Iran, Russia "called and they want their 1980s policy back". Drone strikes....... no way that can be defended. Fast and furious, don't even try. Did I support the guy his first term? No doubt. But by his second term, his deficiencies were readily revealed. I will gladly debate with you those short comings or you can simply act like a Bob stoops bag of dicks and call me a name like nazi or klansmen and show everyone that you don't care about an honest discussion, you just care about shilling for "your guy" blindly. 

Volley to you. 

I don't disagree, I just don't think any of these things reach the level of awful you do. Even with all of his faults, Barack Obama was the best president of my lifetime and I was born during the Nixon administratiom.

[Clob94 121]

2 hours ago, David Dennison said:

I don't disagree, I just don't think any of these things reach the level of awful you do. Even with all of his faults, Barack Obama was the best president of my lifetime and I was born during the Nixon administratiom.

They don't reach the levels that "I do" (you) because of one thing: 

You did not lose your best friend because of his foreign policy. I'm not a Trump guy..but I'm seeing some results. That's all I care about from elected officials- results. Unemployment is at an all time low for all races, the stock market is killing it- my sector of business is rocking... so far, I ca only complain about him being a pornstar fucking goober. 

Edited July 21, 2018 by Clob94

[bad_teammate 13132]

 

 

[Guest Lobo]

You know you don’t meet enough of?

social conservative, fiscally liberal. 

I mean yes, as this thread points out—-plenty of people who actually vote/support policy that way.  But I mean, you never meet that person at a cocktail party.  You meet the other three in droves, but never they fourth quadrant.  In terms of people self describing that way.  

[F250 28680]

43 minutes ago, Lobo said:

You know you don’t meet enough of?

social conservative, fiscally liberal. 

I mean yes, as this thread points out—-plenty of people who actually vote/support policy that way.  But I mean, you never meet that person at a cocktail party.  You meet the other three in droves, but never they fourth quadrant.  In terms of people self describing that way.  

I've meet a few from Europe. Its always a bit odd talking to an Evangelical whose fiscal views would be considered far left in the U.S.