In response to:

Extortionist In Chief

Cappmann Wrote: Feb 21, 2013 1:33 PM
Let's make this so simple even out resident trolls can understand: You give your kid $10 allowance. They spend $14. They tell you that since you have more money than they do, you need to increase their allowance. You reluctantly agree, with the undersatanding that they will perform additional, unspecified chores sometime in the future. You raise their allowance to $12. Rather than cut their spending to $12, they INCREASE spending to $15. Now they tell you that not only will they not do the additional chores they agreed to, they are going to do less than they originally did (and didn't do well either).
Leonard152 Wrote: Feb 22, 2013 12:58 AM
They can also say 'if you don't stop threatening to increase my chores I'll spend even more money and you - Mr. Taxpayer and Mr. Consumer - will have to pay for my debts or see your credit rating go down the tubes.
Cappmann Wrote: Feb 21, 2013 1:35 PM
They demand an allowance of $16 and tell you they plan to raise their spending to $18. They'll borrow the difference from "friends", which is what, you discover, they've been doing all along. They tell you how high the trash is going to pile up, and how dirty the bathroom is going to get, and that the health risks of such are likely to cause half of your family to die, all unless you raise their allowance. And they will not even discuss additional chores to justify (again) increasing their allowance.
Cappmann Wrote: Feb 21, 2013 1:38 PM
And, BTW, the reason they owe their "friends" several hundred dollars is because their siblings wouldn't give them half of THEIR allowance, and you should just take the difference from the sibling's allowance and give it to your spendy kid. That, in their opinion, would be "fair"...
Cappmann Wrote: Feb 21, 2013 1:38 PM
Any of this sounding familiar?
LonePine Wrote: Feb 21, 2013 4:22 PM
I walked away from a marriage with a woman who had the same "fair spending" philosophy. It took me Years to get that boat bailed out. Its sad, but, I'm glad I did it.

At the end of 1995 and stretching into January 1996, the federal government "shut down" because of an impasse between President Bill Clinton and House Republicans led by then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich. The issue was increased taxes vs. less spending. Sound familiar? The government re-opened when a bipartisan agreement was reached to balance the budget by 2003. It wasn't for reasons that included, but were not limited to, two wars. Now the national debt is racing toward an unsustainable $17 trillion.

This time around it isn't about closing government. It's about "sequestration," which President Obama, the Democrats and their big media...

Related Tags: Spending Cuts Taxes economy