Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by KDPPatsfan85, Nov 16, 2011.
Fed debt hits $15 trillion; GOP blasts Obama
6 trillion of the 15 trillion is Obama's fault!!
What percent of that is the fault of the Republican tax cuts, deficit spending, and refusal to raise taxes?
The other 7 trillion is Bush and Regan!
The last 2 trillion is people in-between!
Also last time I checked Congress passes the bills and spends the money, not just the Prez.....
My car broke down, its Obama's fault
My roof leaks, its Obama's fault
My dog died, its Obama's fault
My wife left me, its Obama's fault
My toilet won't flush, its Obama's fault
My hair is falling out, its Obama's fault
My sister hates me, its Obama's fault
Is that about right?:bricks:
I know the bailouts helped it. Im sure obamacare is doing the samething. This is all on Bush and Obama. Ohh a side not, When bush was in office his second term, the democrats had control of the house and senate so inorder for bush to push our country to the brink of bankruptcy, the democrats had a hand in it. Obama is now finishing what bush started!!
Yes, it took Bush 8 years to put us in a 7 trillion dollar deficit. It took Obama only 3 years to put us into another 6 trillion dollar deficit.
Ohhh and also,
Obamacare is ruining the economy, ITS BUSH'S FAULT
Its been 3 years and more jobs have been lost, ITS BUSH'S FAULT
Obama promised to create jobs, but doesnt know how, ITS BUSH'S FAULT
The Obama Administration gave billions to failing businesses and are still bailing them out, ITS BUSH'S FAULT.
THE BP OIL SPILL, BUSH'S FAULT.
SOLYNDRA, BUSH'S FAULT
LIBYA, BUSH'S FAULT
Herman Cain sexually harrasing women, BUSH'S FAULT
Its Raining outside, BUSH'S FAULT
My car needs new brakes, BUSH'S FAULT
I have a bad cold, BUSH'S FAULT
THE TELEPROMPTER BROKE, BUSH'S FAULT
No, the debt is much more on the Republicans. They are the ones who have an issue with spending, but what they've done since Reagan is increase spending and increase tax cuts. The Democrats also like to spend, but they at least want to increase taxes. If taxes had been increased or even if the tax cut for the wealthy had never taken place, our deficit would be well within a manageable range. There's a lot I don't like about the mainstream Democrats -- namely that they caved in on issues of tax hikes when put under Republican pressure, and they are threatening to do so again, but the generally approach of the Democrats has been tax hikes and increased spending, while the generally approach of the Republicans has been tax cuts and increased spending. Of those two choices, which is the more responsible one?
How much has it cost to date?
This started long before Obama and Bush.
See this is where democrats and republicans cant see eye to eye. You thinking cutting taxes is the problem, but to me and republicans think that its SPENDING thats the problem. Have you ever heard the saying, its easier to spend someone else's money than it is your own. The problem with democrats is that they will spend spend spend, but if it was their money, they would be frugal. The way we should approach this deficit is like how a family does. Budget your money so you can pay off your bills and not spend what you dont have. Thats the problem here. We are spending money we dont have. We are printing money at an alarming rate and there is nothing to back up that money. The more money we print the bigger the inflation and the more the US dollar is devalued. I agree in some ways with the spending, but not the federal government. THE PEOPLE OF THE USA has to spend the money not the federal government. Consumers is the ignition. The more the consumer spends, the more money businesses make. The more money the businesses make, the bigger the store and then they will need to hire more people. Thats how you create jobs and build the economy. Also, another way to fix the economy is get rid of the wasteful spending by our government. I know where to start first. WITH THE ILLEGALS. They arent paying taxes at all or contributing to society AT ALL while the tax payers are paying for them to go to school, to get free medical care, food stamps, etc and who is paying for it all-WE THE PEOPLE. Illegals are not people, THEY ARE CRIMINALS. They came in this country illegally. I have no problem with foreign people coming to the country to have a better way of life as long as they do it the right way!
Well right now, every American is in debt 47k. That includes you, your kids, your grandkids, your great grandkids, your great great grandkids. You get the picture.
You need to put something behind your claim.
Now you're talking out both sides of your mouth -- and ignoring facts.
That is false.
but this, really, says it all
A brief history of American Debt..
What is overlooked here is that Bush created an unfunded liability based on his lies over Iraq... and his contribution is significant.
I know who's fault it is. It's the moron public who's too ignorant, too dumb, and too partisan to understand how ****ed up our government is, and has been, for a couple of generations now. Anyone who thinks this problem started with this administration, or the previous administration, falls into my second sentence. Sure different pols, policies, and administrations add different levels of unsustainability and debt to the bottom line, but our trajectory for decades has been U-N-S-U-S-T-A-I-N-A-B-L-E. We're broke, and the day of reckoning is coming. I hope you're all prepared.
Math, much like basic logic, isn't your strong suit I see.
Debt % change during presidency:
Carter- 42 (10.6/yr)
Reagan- 189 (23.6/yr)
Bush I- 55.6 (13.9/yr)
Clinton- 36 (4.4/yr)
Bush II- 89 (11.1/yr)
Obama- 34 (13.6/yr)
Not blaming anyone. Just saying that it looks like someone...not saying any names...was a bit of a big spender. Ohhhhh, how I wish for the good old days when the USA and the CCCP had a nice, tidy cold war going and everyone else was scared sh!tless of the both of us.
Is it still OK to blame past mistakes on past presidents or is everything still Obama's fault and responsibility?
Let's not forget that traditional wisdom tells us that you do not start a war and lower taxes at the same time.
Only once before Bush has that happened....and that was by JFK in the very early years of Viet Nam - long before the extent of our involvement there was fully known.
Traditionally taxes are raised in times of war - because most reasonably intelligent people understand that wars are costly business and you will need increased revenue to pay for them.
That's too simplistic a way to look at debt. You really need to look at the specific policies, there effects, what entitlements meant, as well as the conditions at the time. I think there is a graph somewhere that shows a correlation between our debt, and the eleimination of the gold standard. I might be wrong, but I thought it showed a spike thereafter. That or maybe it was some other policy that resulted in the spike.
Whenever someone starts talking about "percentage change" that immediately should sound warning alarms that the person is going to present some jury rigged statistics.
When have I ever done that? That's a false statement. Do you think there is no such thing as pct. change or a valid use for it? Why bother with such a throw-away post?
I was surprised to find the stats and forgot to provide a source link.
All I did was notice something in a table. The numbers for Bush were surprisingly good overall until the economy crashed in his last year. I was surprised how well Clinton did. And when I say those names, I understand the myriad of factors internally and externally which influence the debt. Only a complete and utter fool would not recognize that the national debt should NEVER be directly and exclusively the fault of one individual. Such fools need to see things in a bigger picture.
Lucky for me neither you nor anyone else had anything to offer in the way of an arguement...so I win!
yeah, that's pretty ridiculous, even for wolfie -- he don't like dem dere "percentages" -- how can you trust 'em?
If our current debt was somewhere around 30 trillion dollars we'd have the same debt to GDP ratio we had at the end of WW1. If it was 45 trillion dollars we'd have the same debt to GDP ratio as we had at the end of WW2. Even after WW2 ended we basically gave Europe 2% of our GDP for re-building every year through 1952. Yet somehow amidst all that massive spending we didn't all die of excessive debt.
I wouldn't go so far as to say we should continue spending as we have been; but there really is no logical reason for Republicans to be in such a tizzy over the debt. Its like y'all got tired of flipping out over every terrorist threat to come along and flipping out over every single illegal alien just wasn't quite satisfying enough, so you found something new to flip out over.
I'm just saying that percentage change is an extremely misleading statistic. I didn't mean to say the data was false when I said it was "jury rigged," so I apologize if I gave that impression. I'm just saying that real numbers are more informative than "percentage change"
Congratulations on being the first person in history to win an internet argument. :rocker:
I think your data are inaccurate, according to the following chart, but I will grant you that the highest debt to GDP ratio we've ever had was at the end of WW2. The problem is that that was an extremely short term statistical blip followed by drastic and immediate declines ones the war was over. Fact is there is no such decline anywhere on our horizon; if anything, thanks to Obama, we can expect continued increases.
Fact also is we have never had a prolonged period at the current debt to GDP ratio we are currently experiencing. We are entering some unchartered - and very frightening - waters.
There is plenty of blame to go around, trying to assign blame is an exercise of rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
A group of Tea Party folks have proposed a solution I posted a thread on it, of course it will require some reading so no one will be interested.
OT: Actually, having both absolute #s and percentages tends to be best -- % change reflects the context of whatever absolute data you're looking at.
Bingo. There's a distinct difference between short term debt and structural debt. Our current problem is structural.
Separate names with a comma.