LOL - yes let's take interest into account so this looks REALLY ridiculous.It's interest payments, so it is a recurring cost, and it is from one day. Of course you knew that since you read the source...
LOL - yes let's take interest into account so this looks REALLY ridiculous.It's interest payments, so it is a recurring cost, and it is from one day. Of course you knew that since you read the source...
Please show me the $5+ trillion in "stimulus related spending" that has caused the increase we've seen.
I'm not sure what you're getting at. I said earlier in this thread that policies from the last several decades have caused a multitude of our problems. However, from 2007-2011 we've seen the debt increase over $5 trillion dollars. That's $5 trillion of just under $15 trillion, or 1/3 of the total debt....in 4 years. And again, I'm not blaming Obama and Obama alone. His senate position and his presidency automatically load him up with some level of culpability. As do the legislative positions of everybody in the house and senate any time from 2007 to 2011, as well as the presidency of GWB. In less than 3 years, the debt has increased almost $4 trillion dollars, which is a little more than $1.5 trillion a year. If Obama serves two terms and we do not curb spending, that means he'll have resided over $12 trillion in new debt, which more than doubles the debt level that existed at the end of GWB's presidency.
Now, the chart I found shows that Reagan resided over a total increase of $3.2 trillion dollars. Considering the changing value of the dollar, that would be about $7.23 trillion today.
See, there is this thing called inflation. What it means is that 5t today is much less than 5t several years ago. This is what I am talking about with buying what you are told without examining it. Saying "OMG, 5 trillion dollars" is meaningless without a frame of reference.
LOL - yes let's take interest into account so this looks REALLY ridiculous.
To be fair, she took inflation into account in her last sentence.
See, there is this thing called inflation. What it means is that 5t today is much less than 5t several years ago. This is what I am talking about with buying what you are told without examining it. Saying "OMG, 5 trillion dollars" is meaningless without a frame of reference.
See, there is this thing called inflation. What it means is that 5t today is much less than 5t several years ago. This is what I am talking about with buying what you are told without examining it. Saying "OMG, 5 trillion dollars" is meaningless without a frame of reference.
I provided you with a comparison between 1982 and today. Today, the debt under Reagan would equate to about 7.23 trillion. So using today's numbers, we've almost matched in 4 years what took 8 years when he was president.
To be fair, most conservatives dont know what inflation is since they rarely (at least on these boards) adjust for it in any statistical material they present as "evidence" of how bad the left has screwed the American people.... which of course makes their argument at best laugable... much like Michele Bachmann's comment about she wanting the dollar today as having the same value as the dollar of 1911...
I provided you with a comparison between 1982 and today. Today, the debt under Reagan would equate to about 7.23 trillion. So using today's numbers, we've almost matched in 4 years what took 8 years when he was president.
What was Reagan's starting and ending deficit? Why don't you want to look at the whole picture?
To be fair, you obviously didn't read my post and just jumped at the chance to throw cons under the bus, as I very clearly referenced a comparison on the basis of inflation in my last sentence.
Also, to be fair, Redress initially referenced Reagan tripling the debt, and my retort was in response to that relatively ambiguous view of debt increase.
Why is it, Pete, that all you do is post insulting generalizations and ignorant assumptions about the right, while contributing nothing and failing to respond to sound points made by those you disagree with?
Yes, but you forgot to factor in a much higher tax income and the lack of 2 wars, plus a financial melt down not seen since the 1930s and so on. Just saying, it is not that easy to make comparisons without factoring in all the many differences that attributed to each President's "raise" in the debt and even deficit and it is especially difficult considering the partisan "fog of war" both sides like to throw in... like the conservatives holding Reagan up as some sort of God despite his many many flaws (he was a tax raiser!!!!).
It is insulting to call out people who forget inflation in their partisan bickering? That you as one of the few managed to sneak in inflation compensation at the end, does not mean that my comments are invalid by any means.
it's nonsensical to look at what is clearly stimulus-related spending and then project that it is intended to continue indefinitely
When the economy recovers spending will naturally abate and revenues will naturally rise
there is no reason to have a panic attack based on irrational projections
The spending is excessive regardless of the reasoning behind it.
He refuses to accept that this is a WAR and there is an ENEMY which must be vanquished.
It was 1.7 (ish) when he got there, 4.9 (ish) when he left. He DID reside over just about triple the debt increase in 8 years. In today's terms, they spent just over $2 trillion more in 8 years than we've spent in 4. At the current rate, we will more than double the debt that existed in 2009 by the time Obama serves two terms. In today's terms, Reagan spent $7.23 trillion in 8 years, and we'll spend over $12 trillion.
The trick is the whole "triple, double" thing. Tripling the debt sounds worse than doubling it, but if your starting debt when you triple is only $1.7 trillion, but it's $10 trillion when you double it, it's easy to see how the actual amount can be more significant than the total percentage increase.
I don't worship any politican. So there's that.
As for the rest of it...We were just talking the flat increase as it related to the original total. I'm not blaming any specific policy or program or any specific person for the increase. I'm saying it is wholly unacceptable and must be slowed, and then stopped for the sake of our credit rating, our economy, and our future obligations. The spending is excessive regardless of the reasoning behind it.
Indeed. Goddamn you conservatives. We of course are part of a dictatorship where you all had complete control and chose to delay this out of singularly your own choice.
...wait a second...
No, sorry, I got that wrong. We are a dictatorship, but we're a dictatorship under the Democratic Party, so the Republicans should've just did exactly what the Democrats wanted and dealt with it because we're not a representitive republic where people are elected by their constituents to push for their desires but rather are a dictatorship under teh Democratic Party. Silly me. Damn you conservatives! Damn you to hell for not doing exactly what the Democrats wanted.
...wait, no wait another second...
Oh that's right, we are a represnetitive republic. Both sides have one of the chambers of congress and one side also has the Presidency. Despite that, NEITHER side was able to actually fashion a bill that was able to get support from the other side until the past days. Both sides choices are the reason it took until the 11th hour for this to be done, not just one. But far be it for me to expect hyper partisans to pass up a chance to bash bash bash one sidedly for the sake of political points.
obama includes much of stimulus spending in his baseline
we were told unemployment would be 6.5% by now
no panic, but at 61.6T under and sinking 5.3 further each year, if something isn't done imminently to fundamentally restructure our budgets, then our big 3 federal programs (as well as state pensions) will simply not be there as we expect them for our next generation
It was a manufactured crisis by the right. Nobody can honestly say our debt isn't a big problem, but the right held a gun to all of our heads, exceeding the debt limit would not stop the spending, it would make borrowing more expensive for all of us. The right does this because they know the left cares more about our country will eventually say "uncle."Cooperate with what exactly? This was a manufactured crisis by the right in order to hold the nation and its economy hostage. Do you cooperate with that or squash that sort of treason like a bug?
Obama made the wrong decision. He refuses to accept that this is a WAR and there is an ENEMY which must be vanquished.