The debt was probably 9 trillion dollars when he came in. But other than that you are correct. The idea that Obama has made the national debt exponentially larger than any other President is ridiculous. Don't forget it tripled under Reagan
Working in construction in SD CA gives great insight into this issue, and making it cost prohibitive to use illegal labor seems a lot more productive than demonizing poor people trying to help their families.
Frankly, the economies so bad right now that many local illegals went home for x-mas and stayed there.
Anyone wondering what I'm talking about start here:
The Psychology of Persuasion
article ptif219 linked to (post #225):
I point this out because it kinda flies in the face of the Conservative mantra..."keep more of what you earn". Of course, instilling the child tax credit only helped to reduce the gross income of low wage earners that much more, but here's the rub...As Bruce Bartlett at The New York Times notes, those in the bottom quintile have incomes of less than $16,812.
Bruce Bartlett points out that between 2000 and 2008, during the presidency of George W. Bush, the percentage of filers who paid no federal income tax rose from 25.2 percent to 36.3 percent. During this time, Bartlett says, Republicans added a significant child credit to the tax code, resulting in a rise in nonpayers.
In fact, the number of filers paying no federal income tax has hovered between 40 and 50 percent for the past several years.
A tax subsidy is a tax subsidy. The question becomes does impossing such a subsidy help the overall economy? Does the child tax credit put more money in the pockets of low-income families and, thus, providing more disposable income and, thus, allowing them to spend and/or save more? You guys (Conservatives) have said so yourselves that all poor people will do with their money is spend it on "things". They can't invest; $16K/annual will buy you very little in today's economy. As such, should the government take away this tax credit for the working poor for the sake of non-investment or should it remain because it spurs 1-time consumer spending (around tax refund time)?
Last edited by Objective Voice; 07-05-11 at 04:36 PM.
Hypocrisy stinks! But it smells so good when it's uncovered against those who espouse the falsehoods.
C'mon, man! That's low-ball even for you!!
Last edited by Objective Voice; 07-05-11 at 04:49 PM.