I understand you don't understand the economy at all but debt as a percentage of GDP now exceeds 100%
Yes, and the SSE policies you support put it there.
>>I suggest you learn about our private sector economy, read a history book about what our Founders created, and stop carrying the water for socialism and conversion to the European economy
I can't offer my suggestion for what you should do, not in mixed company at least.
>>Not going over this with you again because you have a very selective memory
You keep on saying that, but never follow through by actually keeping yer mouth shut.
>>the Reagan and Bush debt were well under 100% of GDP
Reagan brought the debt as a percentage of GDP from 31% to 50%, and handed his unfortunate successor a mess that drove it up to 61%. Clinton brought it back down to 55%, and 43 then drove it 77%.
Obummer inherited an economy that was teetering on the verge of a worldwide depression. He was forced to cut taxes and wait for businesses and consumers to regain confidence. That drove the ratio up over 100%. It's now 100.5, and down from 100.8 at the end of 2012.
>>their spending was for the private sector not the supporters of the Democratic Party.
Reagan spent extravagantly on the defence industries, which appears to have had the welcome effect of frightening the Soviet leadership and driving the final nail in the coffin of that brutal regime. Reagan and 43 both shoveled hundreds of trillions of dollars at wealthy households, which had no productive impact on the economy, but rather helped lead to today's grotesque and highly dysfunctional income and wealth inequality.
taxpayers pay debt service on the debt not the percentage of GDP
GDP provides the resources needed to pay debt interest, which is now back to pre-Reagan levels
Citations please. Back it up.
A completely legitimate request, but Conservative has caused me burn on that. Refute it if you can.
Actually W's budget was only a $407 billion deficit it's was the financial collapse and bailout spending that caused the 1.4 trillion while he was out of office
That Feb 2008 budget became outdated very quickly. In Jan 2009, CBO projected a $1.2 trillion shortfall. The Negro added another $200 billion in the ARRA, to which CBO attributes five million jobs. Tbh, I suppose I'm just confirming yer thoughts.
When a liberal is backed into the corner they pull out the percentage number not realizing that only sells to the low information voters.
When someone who doesn't understand simple arithmetic ignores the fact that bills are paid with funds currently available, that person's views should be appropriately discounted.
>>Liberals love to point to the lower percentage deficit to GDP ignoring the amount of that deficit and how much more has been added to the debt thus increasing the debt service.
Liberals and others sadly point to the causes of the large national debt and hope the electorate has learned its lesson regarding presidential candidates who ardently propose another application of SSE policies.
>>Reagan added 1.7 trillion to the debt in 8 years which is 200 plus billion a year
Reagan increased he debt as a percentage of GDP by 61%, and left 41 with a mess that drove that figure up to 97%.
>>Liberal logic??
No, simple reality. Yer confusion is apparently the result of reactionary
illogic.
