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.
"According to the White House's Office of Management and Budget, during his eight fiscal years, Bush ran up a total of $3.283 trillion in deficit spending (p. 22). In his first two fiscal years, Obama will run up a total of $2.826 trillion in deficit spending ($1.294 trillion in 2010, an estimated $1.267 trillion in 2011 (p. 23), and the $265 billion in "stimulus" money that was spent in 2009). Thus, Bush ran up an average of $410 billion in deficit spending per year, while Obama is running up an average of $1.413 trillion in deficit spending per year — or $1.003 trillion a year more than Bush.
Obama, of course, has said the economy made him do it. But the average inflation-adjusted deficits through Obama's first two fiscal years will be more than ten times higher than the average inflation-adjusted deficit during the Great Depression. Even as a percentage of the gross domestic product, the average deficits in Obama's first two fiscal years will more than three times higher the average deficit during the Great Depression. The fact that Obama's deficits have, by any standard, more than tripled those of the Great Depression, cannot convincingly be blamed on the current recession.
And none of this even takes into account Obamacare, which the Congressional Budget Office says would increase spending by more than $2 trillion in its real first decade (2014 to 2023) — and which, even under very rosy projections, the CBO says would increase the national debt by $341 billion by the end of 2019.
Let me give you a clue.
Spending <> Deficit.
Deficit has two components. Spending is one, and THAT is what this thread is about. Try again.
Clearly, you didn't bother to read before going with your mindless ranting again.
Yes, I did read your "mindless" response.
Therefore, if you actually understood what you were saying, YOU WOULD AGREE THAT OBAMA IS A WILD SPENDER AND THAT ANY CLAIMS OF PERCENTAGE CHANGES IN SPENDING IS ABSURD.
What matters is US dollars spent. That is it. Obama has WASTED TRILLIONS of US dollars. That is what is relevant, not some silly liberal inference that Obama is fiscally responsible. HE IS NOT FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE.
If this is going to be his approach in the presidential debates, it will be high comedy.
Was it? Its simple proof no spending binge happed, anywhere. What we have is a tax reciept shortfall responsible for the deficit, not a spending induced deficit. A "deficit binge" either enacted by a spending binge or tax holidays did not happen. That is what should have happened. But you really think Obama's handlers, being creditors, are going to allow a spending binge? No, they want dollar dilution via ZIRP only since it enriches them.
That you don't see how it relates to the rest of of our lot is the mother of all problems of the electorate. Its the debt-liquidity paradox few understand the financial class has put us in.
Was it? Its simple proof no spending binge happed, anywhere. What we have is a tax reciept shortfall responsible for the deficit, not a spending induced deficit. A "deficit binge" either enacted by a spending binge or tax holidays did not happen. That is what should have happened. But you really think Obama's handers being creditors are going to allow a spending binge? No, they want dollar dilution via ZIRP only since it enriches them.
That you don't see how it relates to the rest of of our lot is the mother of all problems of the electorate. Its the debt-liquidity paradox few understand the financial class has put us in.
My God.
I can now see how Obama was put into office in the first place.
When a liberal finds absolute facts and statistics uncomfortable, they just change them. This, of course, is a favorite tactic of Stalinists, therefore it is not surprising.
A liberal, of course, will refuse to even look at the data, as it shows the lunacy of their contention that Obama is a fiscal conservative.
I can now see how Obama was put into office in the first place.
My God what? Which part this little box we are in are you talking about? The deficit is the result of a "revenue" shortfall, not a spending "binge". I happend to be against a spending binge, but certainly not a deficit binge under the right circumstances.
My God what? Which part this little box we are in are you talking about? The deficit is the result of a "revenue" shortfall, not a spending "binge". I happend to be against a spending binge, but certainly not a deficit binge under the right circumstances.
Wrong.. The spending has jumped from $3T to $3.8T, resulting in $800B of the $1.3T deficit being JUST NEW SPENDING..
We could debate the other $500B, but there is no doubt that the new increases are a huge contributor to the deficit.
Wrong.. The spending has jumped from $3T to $3.8T, resulting in $800B of the $1.3T deficit being JUST NEW SPENDING..
We could debate the other $500B, but there is no doubt that the new increases are a huge contributor to the deficit.
Which as the first post explains needs not only to make up for the 1T in missing mortgage money but also the lack of circulation in the hand of those with less propensity to consume. The bond market has spoken...
So you are right in nominal terms, and when ever I speak of nominal terms, its not a compliment.
Money to buy things is just not showing up from the reasons I explained.
And the deficit is the last thing we need to worry about. It actually needs to go up in the context of reducing consumer debt.
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.
