Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-29-2011, 01:36 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,818,277 times
Reputation: 12341

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475 View Post
A yearly average shoves that idea right out of the debate.

For the wars, you're talking about a average of $114.7 billion a year.

For the tax cuts, and this is from the liberal Citizens for Tax Justice, the average yearly cost with interest has been $248.5 billion

When you add both of those together you get $363.2 billion a year.

Since Obama took office you have been running on average $1.384 trillion dollar deficits.

So as you can see, your talking points don't hold up to facts.
During the campaign and after taking the office, Bush and his followers, such "organizations" as Heritage Foundation spoke loudly of his tax cut plans and how it was the recipe to paying off the debt (and yet, nobody ever said a word about using the surplus at the time towards that effect), and a healthy economy. Three years later, the economy needed a second boost, and it did get it with credit/housing boom... for two years, that is.

Bush also promised to bring down the government spending to 16% of the GDP, from the high spending era (22%) under Reagan and even under Clinton (18%) to 16%. When he left, spending was at 25%. What he did see come down was... receipts at 14.9%. And people like you blame the next guy who stepped in a mess, an economy that lost 8.8 million jobs for goodness sake. Get a grasp of that number and its impact first.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-29-2011, 04:21 PM
 
3,457 posts, read 3,623,334 times
Reputation: 1544
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
The implication is that the nation was better off in 1910 when we had lower government spending.
i think that's the implication the OP is making, sure. that's not the implication that i made, though.

Quote:
Personally, I want Social Security and Medicare when I retire and most senior citizens agree.
i like the social security program, although i look at it as a glorified welfare program.

Medicare should be scrapped.

Quote:
Low spending isn't a panacea.
i agree.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 04:44 PM
 
30,065 posts, read 18,665,937 times
Reputation: 20882
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
The national debt is now over 15 trillion! In your opinion, exactly what in terms of specifics has caused this debt. Specifically, what events/spending led to the debt to increase under certain presidents?

I guess you neglected to show "the graph" where debt went from $8.6 trillion when Obama took office, to the $15 trillion level now. When Obama leaves office, the debt will be nearly $17 trillion.


I know that liberals are a little weak on cipherin', so let's do the math.

Debt from all presidents in US history prior to Obama- $8.6 trillion

Obama debt $17 trillion - $8.6 trillion = $8.4 trillion


Rate at which Obama has spent the identical debt 230/4 = 57 times faster debt accumulation than all other presidents (we are spotting Barry a few decimal places to make him look better). Now if that was a track meet, Obama would be a hero. As it is not a track meet, Obama appears to be the biggest fiscal idiot in US history.


Obama has ruined the treasury and has rung up more debt in four years than all the presidents of the US in the previous 230 years. The nation will not survive another four years of fiscal insanity. Liberals, given thier inability to comprehend simple math, cannot seem to understand the jeopardy that Obama has created for the US. Fortunately, independents understand this and will eject Obama in 2012. This action will benefit liberals as well, much to thier chagrin.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 05:55 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,013 posts, read 44,824,472 times
Reputation: 13710
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
I guess you neglected to show "the graph" where debt went from $8.6 trillion when Obama took office, to the $15 trillion level now. When Obama leaves office, the debt will be nearly $17 trillion.


I know that liberals are a little weak on cipherin', so let's do the math.

Debt from all presidents in US history prior to Obama- $8.6 trillion

Obama debt $17 trillion - $8.6 trillion = $8.4 trillion


Rate at which Obama has spent the identical debt 230/4 = 57 times faster debt accumulation than all other presidents (we are spotting Barry a few decimal places to make him look better). Now if that was a track meet, Obama would be a hero. As it is not a track meet, Obama appears to be the biggest fiscal idiot in US history.
Yep. Plain as day.

Quote:
Obama has ruined the treasury and has rung up more debt in four years than all the presidents of the US in the previous 230 years. The nation will not survive another four years of fiscal insanity. Liberals, given thier inability to comprehend simple math, cannot seem to understand the jeopardy that Obama has created for the US. Fortunately, independents understand this and will eject Obama in 2012. This action will benefit liberals as well, much to thier chagrin.
Ironic, no?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 06:00 PM
 
Location: Florida
76,971 posts, read 47,629,107 times
Reputation: 14806
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
I know that liberals are a little weak on cipherin', so let's do the math.

Debt from all presidents in US history prior to Obama- $8.6 trillion

Obama debt $17 trillion - $8.6 trillion = $8.4 trillion
Actually it was about 11T when he took office. It was around 5.5 when "W" took office, so he spent as much as all presidents before him together.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 06:09 PM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,464,356 times
Reputation: 4799
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
actually it was about 11t when he took office. It was around 5.5 when "w" took office, so he spent as much as all presidents before him together.
Quote:
01/22/2001 - 5,728,195,796,181.57
11/28/2003 - 6,925,065,499,881.34
01/20/2009 - 10,626,877,048,913.08
11/28/2011 - 15,051,673,595,197.90
Government - Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 06:10 PM
 
20,718 posts, read 19,363,240 times
Reputation: 8288
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
The national debt is now over 15 trillion! In your opinion, exactly what in terms of specifics has caused this debt. Specifically, what events/spending led to the debt to increase under certain presidents?
None. The national debt is increased by deficits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 06:13 PM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,464,356 times
Reputation: 4799
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwynedd1 View Post
None. The national debt is increased by deficits.
And intergovernmental holdings. Debt it owes to itself.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 06:38 PM
 
20,718 posts, read 19,363,240 times
Reputation: 8288
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475 View Post
And intergovernmental holdings. Debt it owes to itself.


Well yeah and the national debt, as I keep pointing out, happens to be the money supply along side bank credit which is 4X as big and at interest.

The reason why the national debt is growing is because bank credit has stalled, and thus to keep the money supply growing to allow the interest payments to be made on existing debt, large deficits must replace the lack of bank credit.

The ruin of the nation is due to non productive loans on fixed supplies of land, coast lines and the like which merely rise in price when banks print money to buy them. It converted the US from land owners to tenet farmers and workers. Private debt grew 27 trillion dollars from 2001 to 2008 and households actually have to pay interest on this debt with absolutely no benefit.

The national debt is a none issue for the most part. The only reason we have it is to have deficit spending without inflation. Its little different that just minting coins and buying stuff with no debt, other than the fact that it can retire a tax with as much fiat as when the money was created.

I just can't understand how people can discuss economics when they don't even know what is involved in actually creating a dollar federal reserve note. Using common sense without knowing this will result in an utter failure to understanding the system of a debt based fiat currency that is money and debt all in one. Its so counter intuitive that they don't realize they are babbling when they don't know what the national debt actually is.


http://moslereconomics.com/wp-conten...oints/7DIF.pdf
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-29-2011, 07:36 PM
 
30,065 posts, read 18,665,937 times
Reputation: 20882
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
Actually it was about 11T when he took office. It was around 5.5 when "W" took office, so he spent as much as all presidents before him together.

Keep thinking that and you will feel better when you vote again for Obama. But, then again, rationality may sweep over you and realize that you are wrong and that Obama bust the treasury. Given your political stance, denial is probably a better alternative, as evaluation of the facts would cause a tremendous sense of anxiety and guilt.

Barry destroyed the treasury and doubled the debt. Liberals love him for it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:26 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top