Who Increased the debt?

[Roadking2003]

Here's another valid comparison. Federal spending under Bush's first four years was $8.3 trillion. Federal spending under Obama will be $14.5 trillion.

[hawkeye2009]

Originally Posted by Roadking2003

Here's another valid comparison. Federal spending under Bush's first four years was $8.3 trillion. Federal spending under Obama will be $14.5 trillion.

Don't bother wasting your breath on libs. They are too confused to understand.

Here is a simple example for them to ponder, which shows how ridiculous thier "bar graph" chart actually is.

Suppose a president started with a debt of 20 trillion and increased the debt to 30 trillion. That would be a 50% increase, yet a net increase of $10trillion.

Suppose another president started with a debt of 50 trillion and increased the debt $20trillion (double that of the "earlier" president), yet that would be a 40% increase in the debt.

So by "liberal math", the president who increased the debt $20 trillion, rather than the one who increased the debt $10 trillion, would be more fiscally responsible. To make this even more ridiculous, let's say that the national debt was one cent and one president increased it to two cents. He incresed the debt by 100% (very bad in liberal land), yet a president who added that $20trillion from a $50 trillion debt would be a hero. No wonder liberals believe leftist illogical banter.

Liberalism is a mental disorder.

[Thatsright19]

Give me control of a nation's money, and I care not who makes its laws.

All U.S. government debt is created through the Federal Reserve system.

When the government wants more money, the U.S. government swaps U.S. Treasury bonds for "Federal Reserve notes", thus creating more government debt. Usually the money isn't even printed up - most of the time it is just electronically credited to the government. The Federal Reserve creates these "Federal Reserve notes" out of thin air. These Federal Reserve notes are backed by nothing and have no intrinsic value of their own.

When the Federal Reserve creates money this way, it does not also create the money to pay the interest on the debt that has been created. Eventually this puts pressure on the U.S. government to borrow even more money to keep the game going. So what this creates is a spiral where the U.S. government must keep borrowing increasingly larger amounts of money, where the money supply is endlessly expanding and where the value of the U.S. dollar is destined to continue going down forever.

As long as the Federal Reserve system exists, the national debt will keep going up, the money supply will keep going up and the U.S. dollar will continue to decline in value.

This is not because of some big mistake. This is what the Federal Reserve system was designed to do. It was designed to trap the U.S. federal government (and by extension all of us) in perpetual debt.

If the U.S. government really wanted to get out of debt it would take back control of our currency from the bankers and would start issuing debt-free money. But don't expect that to happen any time soon.

Any of you ever seen the ending of the movie primal fear? "it don't matter who you hear it from Aaron or Roy. Roy or Aaron. It's the same story."

Republican. Democrat. It doesn't matter. The two party system is an illusion.

The bottom line is that Congress and the banking cartel have entered into a partnership in which the cartel has the privilege of collecting interest on money which it creates out of nothing, a perpetual override on every American dollar that exists in the world.

Congress, on the other hand, has access to unlimited funding without having to tell the voters their taxes are being raised through the process of inflation. If you understand this paragraph, you understand the Federal Reserve System.


That means all the American dollars in the entire world are earning daily and compounding interest for the banks which created them. A portion of every business venture, every investment, every profit, every transaction which involves money -- and that even includes losses and the payment of taxes -- a portion of all that is earmarked as payment to a bank.

And what did the banks do to earn this perpetually flowing river of wealth? Did they lend out their own capital obtained through investment of stockholders? Did they lend out the hard-earned savings of their depositors? No, neither of these were their major source of income. They simply waved the magic wand called fiat money.

The flow of such unearned wealth under the guise of interest can only be viewed as usury of the highest magnitude.

Money is debt and debt is money. If all debt was paid, there would be no money.

[Thatsright19]

Who increased the debt...

HA. HA. You people are too funny.

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." Thomas Jefferson.