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.
reagan/bush1 tripled debt from just under 1 trillion to 3 trillion
clinton nearly double debt from 3 trilllion to 5.87 trillion
bush nearly doubled debt from 5.87 trillion to 10.6 trillion
obama is well in his way to doubling the debt..has already had a 50% increase from 10.6 trillion to 15.7 trillion
so who has spent more
reagan/bush1 3 trillion
clinton 2.7 trillion
bush2 4.8 trillion
or obama 5.1 trillion
???
hmmm
obama is the clear winner of spending the most and creating the most debt
Do you agree the deficit and debt will be a lot lower if federal tax revenue in 2009+ would be about 20% of the GDP?
I'm not as much into that specific number as you are.
Then why did you tell us we couldnt do math because we questioned the number? Why did you QUOTE THE FIGURE, if you didnt believe it? Why are you back peddling now?
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost
To me, it simply points at the core issue: the right wing rhetoric that spending has increased under Obama like never seen before.
Thats not the topic of the thread, so again, why do you keep hijacking this thread to discuss something that doesnt exist? This thread is to proclaim Obama only increased spending by 1.4%, a complete fabrication. The fact that other presidents have increased spending similar to Obama, also isnt the topic of the thread, because it was you liberal lefties who set the increase rate of 1.4%, a complete and total bs lie.. No one here said Obama has increased spending more than any other president, so do you always have to lie about what others have said in order to argue against them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost
But, for someone who has probably quoted the number more than the person who calculated it, you sure haven't shown what you calculate the growth rate over time to be. But then, you want to avoid comparisons to begin with. So...
Actually I did compute what the debt would be if it would have grown at the 1.4% rate projected. Its how I computed the figure was off by about $2.5T over a 4 year period. If you are going to say someone elses figures are wrong, then maybe you need to back them up and actually address the issue. NOT ONE PERSON has said that other presidents hasnt increased spending, and again, THATS NOT THE TOPIC OF THE THREAD..
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost
From the OP: Government spending under Obama, including his signature stimulus bill, is rising at a 1.4% annualized pace — slower than at any time in nearly 60 years
Why do you keep quoting that and then saying you're not "into that specific number" Thats really an asinine way to have a dicussion, say something and the say its not valid.. but everyone else who says its not valid is wrong..
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost
You will be waiting for as long as you avoid showing us your numbers and math.
I did, you keep avoiding them. For someone who claims to be Einstein, you arent very bright. The only thing you keep managing to do is saying other people are wrong when they show their math, but you wont ever validate it. Again, how the FK do you get 1.4%? If you are going to say its slower then x, you NEED TO GET THE ****EN RATE FIRST!!
Thats like saying person A's IQ is higher than person B's, but not knowing what the hell person A's IQ is.. only a fool would do something that stupid, but here ya are.. doing it..
Then why did you tell us we couldnt do math because we questioned the number? Why did you QUOTE THE FIGURE, if you didnt believe it? Why are you back peddling now?
Because you haven't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
Not the topic.. Again, the topic is the new left wing lie that Obama only increased spending at 1.4% a year.. Revenues are a distraction.
Well, I know you can't do math. Occasionally, you can't read either. This was put in the previous page, FOR YOU:
Quote:
Originally Posted by walidm
Government spending under Obama, including his signature stimulus bill, is rising at a 1.4% annualized pace — slower than at any time in nearly 60 years
You do understand the sentence is a statement based on comparative analysis, correct?
I must remind you again... the numbers on the right (your "actual") are simply rounding off of the numbers to the left and it can be seen here.
you are not fully reading or comprehending what you are reading
it was put out by anouther poster about 6.25%
I took the numbers and USED 6.25%
ie 1.9 trillion plus 6.25% is 2.01 ...the actual passed budget was 2.0...about 6.25% on the head
its not rounding
it ACTUAL math using the fy 2001 as a base and adding 6.25% to each sum. then also showing the ACTUAL budget
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.
