yay! I love when hmj comments. Here are the actual facts to counter your latest nonsensical rant and regurgitation of talking points.

www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/obamas-and-bushs-effect-on-the-deficit-in-one-graph/2011/07/25/gIQAELOrYI_blog.html

Klein was just pulling the chart from the Times. I didn't link directly to the Times because I figured there was too much reading involved. Check out the Post link again and it'll connect you to the Times if you're interested in more than just the quick visual.

The point is they're facts. Klein didn't make the facts up (and didn't even create the chart). This isn't an "Obama bot" (wtf does that even mean??) issue. You're degrading your viewpoint by being oblivious to history and facts. Does more need to be done? Yes. Are we light years better off than we were 4 years ago? Yes. Are we past the "point of no return." Of course not. Are Dave Wallace and Mitt Romney a better choice than Van Hollen and Obama. Maybe, we'll see where they come down on issues. If they just regurgitate Fox News/hmj crap about how the "left loons" like Obama and Clinton have screwed up the govt budget more than Bush and Reagan, of course they'll lose because of course that's blatantly dumb to say. One honestly has to live under a rock or be dumb as a rock to think that. A decent segment of Americans fit that description, but certainly not a majority.

Here's hoping Dave Wallace isn't a D.O.A. wacko. I'd love to see a real debate break out between him and Van Hollen.

He prefers to stay in business, Fred. When the cost of business goes down (taxes), you can hire more people. Econ 101.

Yeah, Mike, that makes a lot of sense. Never mind the fact U.S. firms have more cash on hand than ever in the history of the universe, yet we still have historically high unemployment. Executives raking in big bucks, whether by dodging taxes or based on actual merit, doesn't mean they're going to turn around and hire people - it never has and it never will. I didn't think anyone still bought into that trickle down crap these days.

jag, just because you call a circle "a square" does not make it so. Companies are holding cash because they aren't sure if they're going to need it or not with Dodd/Frank, ObamaCare, or any of the other confiscatory laws, like Sarbanes/Oxley, which I know first hand costs companies money to implement and comply to. The more companies get to keep, the they are. The less they get to keep, the worse off they are. It's just like your home expenses. If I tax you more, you spend less, or does your world not work like everyone else's?

"The more companies get to keep, the [better] (sic) they are. The less they get to keep, the worse off they are. If I tax you more, you spend less, or does your world not work like everyone else's?"

That is only if you accept that taxes don't provide essential services that benefit businesses. If the taxes pay into public transportation for employees that get them to work, that's a benefit for the business. If the taxes pay into a regulatory agency that monitors and penalizes abuse to prevent fraud so customers trust an industry, that's a benefit to the business.

If that is your world then it is oversimplified.

Corbin, it is my view that government does have a purpose, to govern and legislate for everyone, not pick and choose who wins and who loses through overly complicated and sometimes conflicting rules that causes business to grind to a screeching halt. I worked as a consultant for a federal agency. The waste, abuse and fraud I saw my tax dollars going toward was astounding. This opened my eyes to the fact that the larger government gets the more gravity it generates to suck in money and power. Eventually, the event horizon pulls you in. They spent money at the end of the fiscal year even thought they didn't need to, because it was a "use it or lose it" policy. If they didn't use it, next year's funds would be directed elsewhere. That's your money too.

Government does have a purpose as a necessary evil, but it's too big, bloated, and inefficient. Once they have the money, it's out of everyone's hands never to be seen again. Do those "shovel ready" jobs ring a bell? $5 Trillion dollars later, we are back where we started and your kids and grand kids are screwed.

"The waste, abuse and fraud I saw my tax dollars going toward was astounding."

But the amount of good being done with your tax dollars was probably lost to your view.

I don't really want to argue the $5 trillion figure other than to say $8 trillion previous and about $3 trillion is debt incurred from lost tax revenue since income decreased.

"But the amount of good being done with your tax dollars was probably lost to your view."

I argue MORE good can be done by people outside of a bloated government when left to their own devices since the private individual is much more efficient in using his capital and just as wise in its application.

The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases.
– Thomas Jefferson

He may not be hiring, Dianne, but if he were paying MD taxes, his added cost in taxes and regulation would not be good for his business, correct? Thus, we can assume he wouldn't be hiring and possible be cutting or fold up shop altogether.