Welcome to PatsFans.com

Obama will ask congress for another 1.2 trillion to spend.

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by KDPPatsfan85, Dec 27, 2011.

  1. KDPPatsfan85

    KDPPatsfan85 In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Messages:
    2,666
    Likes Received:
    93
    Ratings:
    +196 / 7 / -30

    #24 Jersey

  2. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,459
    Likes Received:
    327
    Ratings:
    +919 / 7 / -3

    That's so funny to listen to. I must say. The first thing I thought of near the end, where he says "the deficit I inherited", was how many times the next joker in line will say that exact thing, as he/she spends us into further oblivion. :bricks:
     
  3. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    43,289
    Likes Received:
    331
    Ratings:
    +841 / 27 / -33

    There is no defense of Obama here, as these endless wars continue to drive this economy into forever tailspin...

    But your claim that Obama doubled the debt is erroneous.. the facts jack..

    No included in any of this is the secret 7.77 trillion dollar(could be 13 trillion) bailout of banks...

    Secret Fed Loans Gave Banks $13 Billion Undisclosed to Congress - Bloomberg
     
  4. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    41,754
    Likes Received:
    279
    Ratings:
    +1,153 / 5 / -10

    Good, go get em Jug Ears, the more you screw them the more they will slobber and fawn over you YOU ARE THEIR LITTLE POSTER BOY.

    YES WE CAN
     
  5. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    21,489
    Likes Received:
    505
    Ratings:
    +1,112 / 16 / -9

    Here's the conservative Cato Institute on the subject of who spent what, in 2009. It clarifies a very pertinent point: The 2009 deficit is a Bush deficit. Four months of FY09 were over by the inauguration, and the fiscal policy for FY 2009 was set:

    Don’t Blame Obama for Bush’s 2009 Deficit | Cato @ Liberty

    Here's the numbers from US.governmentspending.com...

    US Federal Deficit by Year - Charts Analysis

    Bush, 09 - $1.413 trillion deficit
    Obama, 10 - $1.293 trillion deficit
    Obama, 11 - $1.299 trillion deficit
    Obama, 12 (proposed) - $1.1 trillion deficit

    The '13 budget will be the last Obama sends up and Congress considers during his first term. For him to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term, he would need to get the deficit down to $700 billion.

    It will probably be very bad for the country if he does, unless growth explodes in the next couple of quarters.

    Final historical tidbit: The last time the U.S. debt was paid in full was under Andrew Jackson.

    Debt's bad, but government spending is what governments do in recessions. That's not some wild-eyed marxist theory, that's fact, across many nations and many eras. And this recession was a doozy.

    While we're well out of the official "recession" (measured by contraction of the economy,) we are also still feeling (in a big way) the huge job losses from that recession.

    Any economist will tell you that unemployment is a trailing indicator in an economic downturn.

    The righties need to pray for Europe to tank, however. If they get it together and don't drag the world down again like we did in '8, I am of the opinion that the outlook's considerable brighter than the near-term assumption we're all making.

    But if Europe does tank significantly, demand dives once again -- you can't give away goods, etc. etc.

    But once again, capital flees -- you guessed it -- to U.S. dollars. Interest rates remain low, because you don't need to entice investment in dollars when people want them. In other words, the rollover of debt remains cheap, and the impact of the debt increases only as money is newly spent.

    The huge threat is what happens when nobody wants dollars, we have to increase the interest paid on bonds to maintain debt, yet we also have to incur new debt to pay old debt.

    And for those who want to reduce debt and deficits, the question remains -- as it always has been -- why don't you put your money where your mouth is, and insist we start paying it back? The debt was incurred on behalf of each of us, and the way a government gets revenue is by raising taxes.

    To be sure you can start with the people who've expanded their incomes exponentially over the last decade, and use that money to help pay for and repair the infrastructure that made them rich. I don't think raising the top marginal rate by 4% (to revoke their "temporary" tax gifts under Bush) is a radical step.

    I'd be fine w/Kennedy era rates, myself, or Reagan era rates.

    As to the recession, unemployment, the housing market, etc -- you have to grow out of it. You can't scrimp and save your way out of it.

    You want to hold the line on government spending? Preach that sh1t when we're under 8% unemployment (At this rate, should be some time next year.)

    OH NO!!! What happens if people feel the economy's improving?

    That's right, four more years.

    Admit it righties. The Obama presidency is threatening to turn the corner in public opinion, and you're running scared.

    So, time to drag up the "OMG we just noticed the national debt exists!!!" meme again.

    So 2010. Sigh.

    PFnV
     
  6. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    27,332
    Likes Received:
    201
    Ratings:
    +576 / 6 / -24

    #18 Jersey

    That's all well and good....but I stand by my theory that we're actually in a world depression and will be for some time. All the above is smoke & mirrors.

    Can you list the factors outside the United States that give us hope things are getting better?

    I think we're going to start seeing trade wars in 2012 because things are not good and nations are going to become protectionists.

    How about the factors within our own borders that tell us things are getting better?

    I can tell you that in the private sector (consumer products) corp world, things are so (bad) competitive that there are few options for revenue growth. So corp. are engaging in price/discount wars to gain share. But even if they gain share, they're sacrificing margin. So the end result is that they're laying people off.

    CVS laid off almost 10% of their corp. office employees in 2011 just to meet Wall Street expectations. Now we're seeing Sears Holdings closing 100+ stores in 2012 along with the accompanying layoffs.

    Next will be Lowes building supplies. China is going levy heavy tariffs upon imported US autos in 2012. China has been a huge source of growth for US auto manufacturers...but maybe not anymore.

    Hey, I'd love to whistle in the dark with you, but I just ate some crackers.
     
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2011
  7. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    21,489
    Likes Received:
    505
    Ratings:
    +1,112 / 16 / -9

    I've listed in a number of places the sources of hope for 2012, and get a "TL; DR" type response from you.

    As you say, "your theory" says x, y, and z, you have no substantiation, and you discount facts to the contrary.

    Since you've decided you're a perma-bear at the moment, why don't you list the reasons for our internal growth in '11? Why don't you compare and contrast our growth in '11 with what "should have happened" by your "theory that we're in a worldwide depression?"

    I've previously explained to you that China's got a completely different set of problems, and the outcome of what they will have to do is easing of the artificially weak yuan. In fact China and Japan just signed an instrument to cut the dollar out of the yuan/yen interaction.

    On the surface that just cuts out a middleman and a source of excess uncertainty. It also weakens the U.S. position as the "referee" of global markets - yes, you can do currency exchange without pegging to the dollar.

    But it also disentangles markets for China and gives them the option of letting some of their newly strong Yuan flow to Japanese businesses without regard to U.S. interests. So if the difference between the U.S. and Japanese positions redounds to China's benefit, they can salvage one market and make do in the other.

    What does that tell us? You say China's going to slap tariffs on auto imports, but again cite no substantiation. Now, it might (of course) happen. If they do so there will be retaliatory tariffs vs. China, and to the extent that a short-term competitiveness gain from protectionism helps us, we'll offset the losses in the auto sector balance of trade elsewhere.

    But while China is always capable of taking such an action, it's an action with consequences. Beyond that, China will have problems baked into the system, because they're on the flip side of our problem: they've saved too much, as a country and individually among the U.S.-sized chunk of the population that's part of the economy as we measure it. Goods are too expensive for the labor rates (which are low.) They've got to "share the wealth" by letting the yuan float closer to free. Relaxing the regulation of the artificially weak Yuan is their version of stimulus.

    That means more buying power for the average Chinese, and I can quite easily see them hoping that the buying power redounds to the benefit of Chinese manufacturers -- just like we always hope it will redound to U.S. manufacturers.

    To that extent, some kind of protectionism could rear its head, sort of as the "control rod" they slip in if their population is on a foreign goods buying spree.

    But I'm not so sure they want to roll those dice. Every label that says "made in China" disappears from Walmart and is only found (upon closer inspection) in your Jos. A Banks jacket, if the U.S. imposes retaliatory tariffs.

    So where's your proof that China will impose auto import tariffs? What will be the extent of those tariffs? What do we know about the planned U.S. response to a first salvo in a trade war?

    Or are these just things you say because we know Chinese markets are about to open more through the strengthening Yuan, so you need there to be bad news that takes away that "get" for the world economy?

    Other than really liking your own theory, what do you have to substantiate it?

    PFnV
     
  8. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    41,754
    Likes Received:
    279
    Ratings:
    +1,153 / 5 / -10

    Four More Years
    Yes We Can
     
  9. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    25,628
    Likes Received:
    176
    Ratings:
    +473 / 13 / -14

    CATO is a Libertarian think tank Heritage is the Conservative think tank.
     
  10. PatsFan24

    PatsFan24 In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2005
    Messages:
    4,461
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

  11. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    39,710
    Likes Received:
    763
    Ratings:
    +2,025 / 44 / -31

    #24 Jersey

    What happened to that blueprint they talked about on the HBO show ... :rofl:
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>