Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, history does not show such thing. Bush, in the other hand, spent as much as ALL presidents before him combined, and Reagan spend three times as much as all presidents before him combined.
By time Obama leaves the oval office, there is no doubt that he had doubled the national debt. His own estimates show this to be true, which makes me wonder why you would argue such partisan bs..
Actually it seems that you forgotten some very important facts. That 1993 Clinton Omnibus Act, was practically reversed by 1997, which resulted in massive tax cuts. 90% of businesses received one, including $500 tax credits for children, and cutting of the capital gains tax rate from 26% to 20%
Not you again.
1. I never brought up the 1977 Omnibus and Appropriation Act.
2. I didn't forget about it.
3. It did not practically reverse the 1993 Omnibus Act. It made some changes, but to call it a complete reversion is not accurate.
From the CBO:
Quote:
the estimated impact of the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 (TRA-97) is not particularly large by recent historical standards. But neither is it insignificant. As a share of the nation's gross domestic product (GDP), the tax cuts in TRA-97 are about half the size of the tax increases enacted in the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (see Table A-1). The last major legislation before TRA-97 to provide a net reduction in taxes was the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981. As a percentage of GDP, the cuts in that act were more than 10 times larger than the ones in TRA-97. However, the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 repealed or modified a number of the provisions of the 1981 legislation before they took effect.
By time Obama leaves the oval office, there is no doubt that he had doubled the national debt. His own estimates show this to be true, which makes me wonder why you would argue such partisan bs..
That is quite true. DOUBLED THE NATIONAL DEBT. Leftists seem to avoid this uncomfortable and disasterous fact which will necessitate austerity for the next 15 years to overcome the financial mistake that was Obama and the democratic congress. All the misery the nation collectively endures during that time was for the "pleasure" of "hope and change" for a few years. This will go down as the greatest financial misadventure in US history by a long shot.
Percentages mean nothing. What is real is the fact that Obama will have added $8 trillion in debt. If someone had "doubled the debt" from $1 to $2, that in the mind of democrats, would be as aggregious as increasing the debt from $8trillion to $ 16 trillion. That is liberal logic for you- the failure to understand that absolute numbers (and the interest that we pay on those numbers) makes all the difference in the world.
Obama is a fiscal disaster and his brief four years in the White House will cost the nation more than any other disaster in US history, with the exception, perhaps, of the Civil War.
1. I never brought up the 1977 Omnibus and Appropriation Act.
I didnt either. I responded to YOU bringing up the Omnibus act in 1993
Quote:
Originally Posted by I Drink Water
On top of this, every Republican voted against Clinton's Omnibus act in 1993
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
Actually it seems that you forgotten some very important facts. That 1993 Clinton Omnibus Act
Quote:
Originally Posted by I Drink Water
2. I didn't forget about it.
You clearly did forget about it, you couldnt even follow your own posting, and my response
Quote:
Originally Posted by I Drink Water
3. It did not practically reverse the 1993 Omnibus Act. It made some changes, but to call it a complete reversion is not accurate.
It cut taxes on 90% of businesses and lowered the capital gains tax rate from 26%, to 20%.. If thats not a complete reversal from the 1993 tax increases, than what is it? Lets see, tax increases to tax decreases.. Yep, reversal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by I Drink Water
4. Lastly, thanks for proving my point that not all Democrats are opposed to tax cuts when proper times call for it.
All you need to do is read these boards enough to realize that many Democrats dont know that Clinton cut taxes, and they believe that tax increases balanced the budgets..
Republicans wish they could be as fiscally responsible as Clinton.
Actually it was the GOP which pushed Clinton into "balanced budgets".. Are you another poster who needs to return to civics class to better comprehend the US Constitution and the responsibility of the branches of government? I do however thank you into validating that tax cuts grow the economy and help generate revenues and that cutting spending is whats needed, just like Clinton did.
Actually it was the GOP which pushed Clinton into "balanced budgets".. Are you another poster who needs to return to civics class to better comprehend the US Constitution and the responsibility of the branches of government? I do however thank you into validating that tax cuts grow the economy and help generate revenues and that cutting spending is whats needed, just like Clinton did.
Yes they did, which is why I don't understand why they let Dubya spend, spend, and spend some more.
Republicans, you have to realize that your group has obstructed anything Obama has wanted to do. Lots of wing nuts in the Republican party now...They don't believe in science, don't believe in climate change, want to blame Obama for anything Bush did. They probably think the Flintstones cartoon was a documentary about the stone age. Worse yet they LISTEN TO FOX!!!
Republicans, you have to realize that your group has obstructed anything Obama has wanted to do. Lots of wing nuts in the Republican party now...They don't believe in science, don't believe in climate change, want to blame Obama for anything Bush did. They probably think the Flintstones cartoon was a documentary about the stone age. Worse yet they LISTEN TO FOX!!!
No they havent. When you stop listening and repeating the same old left wing talking bs, I'll take you seriously.
It cut taxes on 90% of businesses and lowered the capital gains tax rate from 26%, to 20%.. If thats not a complete reversal from the 1993 tax increases, than what is it? Lets see, tax increases to tax decreases.. Yep, reversal.
Again, from the CBO: the tax cuts in TRA-97 are about half the size of the tax increases enacted in the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993.
Sorry pal, but 50% is not a complete reversal. 100% would be complete reversal. 50% would be half. Only someone like you would believe otherwise.
Quote:
Actually it was the GOP which pushed Clinton into "balanced budgets".. Are you another poster who needs to return to civics class to better comprehend the US Constitution and the responsibility of the branches of government? I do however thank you into validating that tax cuts grow the economy and help generate revenues and that cutting spending is whats needed, just like Clinton did.
Take your supercilious attitude on a long walk off a short pier. You are wrong again. The economy grew from 1993 to 1997 after Clinton passed his 1993 Omnibus act which every Republican said would cause another Great Depression. Imagine that. The economy grew after Clinton raised taxes slightly in order to correct for the out of control spending by Republicans (re: Bush and Reagan)
You Republicans are funny. Not only are wrong, but are downright haughty about it. Additionally, you think tax cuts are the panacea to all the world's problem.
Additionally, most of our debt from the past 30 years are from Replicans administrations. Republicans are some of the biggest spenders and lovers of big government, despite their talking points. They are often hostile to limited governments and free markets, but that is expected from corporate statists.
Its been fun, but I can see that all you want to do is initiate a flame war and spew misconceptions. Sorry, but I got better things to do than listen to your nonsense again.
Actually it was the GOP which pushed Clinton into "balanced budgets".. Are you another poster who needs to return to civics class to better comprehend the US Constitution and the responsibility of the branches of government? I do however thank you into validating that tax cuts grow the economy and help generate revenues and that cutting spending is whats needed, just like Clinton did.
Yes they did, which is why I don't understand why they let Dubya spend, spend, and spend some more.
Because he is a republican.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
