Możesz dodawać lokalizację do Twoich Tweetów, jak miasto czy konkretne miejsce, z sieci lub innych aplikacji. W każdej chwili możesz usunąć historię lokalizacji swoich Tweetów. Dowiedz się więcej
#PayGo in simple terms:
Means the government must demonstrate that it will *subtract* a 
from the economy for every it intends to *add*.
Why on 
would we want a rule to prohibit *net* contributions to the economy?
Without #PAYGO, Congress is free to put more into the economy than it subtracts away. That money could rebuild infrastructure, fund cancer research, etc. We call it “deficit spending,” which is unfortunate. B/c it all becomes part of the financial surplus *outside* government.
The relevant questions are: (1) Why is that being spent—i.e. does the spending improve the human condition? & (2) Who ends up with the surplus—i.e. are you exacerbating or reversing inequality? All deficits improve *someone’s* balance sheet. Ask why and for whom.
The federal PayGo law was passed by the Dems and signed by Obama in 2010. The stupidity is bipartisan.
...and as @cenkuygur said, Why is there no #TaxGo?
Cenk is part of the problem. He does not get it, and *refuses* to learn.
To protect us from helpful policies that might hurt the wallets of Dems' donors?
This is very bad economics. The US has done this before and must NOT continue to do it in the future.
Based on your ideas we should have unrestrained spending. Serious question, Is there a limit to the spending you are proposing?
I understand the argument that deficits don’t matter. That holds true when you are the issuer of the worlds reserve currency. But monetary system is evolving and ROW would prefer a neutral reserve asset to USD. Deficits will matter again in our lifetime.
Twitter jest przeciążony lub wystąpił chwilowy problem. Spróbuj ponownie lub sprawdź status Twittera, aby uzyskać więcej informacji.
