• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The final truth about Clinton, Bush and Obama's debt PROVEN with source

ModerationNow!

ModerationNow!

I identify as "non-Bidenary".
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 22, 2013
Messages
2,693
Reaction score
1,350
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
☑This thread clears up false propaganda and helps prove media bias: The media don't like to mention the debt under Obama. Nor did they even mention the annual deficit, until about 1-2 years ago, and it was then that they deceived millions of Americans. How? Simple, by NOT previously reporting the truth that under Obama, both deficit and debts had skyrocketed to all time record levels, they were able to report that "the deficit has gone down this year under Obama". The truth was that, even though it had finally dropped a bit, the previous yearly record deficits had happened under Obama! Deficits during the first part of Obama's terms were higher than under Bush by FAR.

Here is the debt calculator that lets you type in ANY date and see exactly what the total US debt was at that time. That will help you also understand how high the annual DEFICITS were as well.

It also disproves the leftist notion that Clinton left a 'surplus'. Here are the numbers at the beginning and end of Clinton's terms: Start: 4.1 trillion $ --- End: 5.7 trillion $
Bush: Start: 5.7 trillion --- End: 10.6 trillion. ☑Obama: Start: 10.6 trillion --- Now: 19.7 trillion and counting!!

In other words, Clinton didn't wipe the debt(the huge new influx of tax revenue due to entirely new tech sector helped temporarily balance DEFICITS towards late 90s). But more importantly, Obama has run HIGHER debt and deficits than at any time in US history. I rest my case, and any disagreement with these FACTS is merely based on a faith based refusal to admit that democrats could possibly be causing damage to this country. Period...
Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)
 
Last edited:
You have no idea what you are talking about do you?
 
ModerationNow! said:
In other words, Clinton didn't wipe the debt
Click to expand...

congratulations, you've won an argument that nobody has ever made. But condolences are also in order. You've proven you don't understand the words "deficit" and "surplus".
 
Vern said:
congratulations, you've won an argument that nobody has ever made. But condolences are also in order. You've proven you don't understand the words "deficit" and "surplus".
Click to expand...

Or the difference between "debt" and "deficit."
 
OrphanSlug said:
And that would be?
Click to expand...

Bubbles are always difficult to call. But given the present constellation, debt instruments are extremely expensive, real estate is topish in many cities, European banks are under capitalized, China is wobbling, Brazil is in a mess, a number of European countries are way over indebted without a currency rte valve and the EZB is overextended to keep at least some economic activities from collapse, most major stock markets are at very frisky levels, the US has huge debt and the Fed has little ammunition in its quiver, as it is already out there.... In a situation like that? We could easily be in a third cresting.
 
This belongs here:
All fiat currencies have failed. That is historical fact. It is a matter of time before ours again fails, as it has several times already.
But being a man of fact you know this. What I don't understand is why you think our current dollar is not on it's last leg.

The Fed is trying frantically to prop it up, hence the huge debt growth under every president in the list. It is a very fine balancing act they are undertaking. Create enough money to keep things chugging along, but not so much that the world loses faith in it.
This dance will fall apart at some point. So yes, I guess one can say it hasn't failed yet, it's just on it's death bed.
Also in bed with it is Keynesian economics. But as governments want to retain control of the money, they will revive Keynesian economics Lazerus style so that they maintain control of wealth and it's redistribution.
Historically this is done by falling back to some semblance of a gold standard.
Progressives will tell you that Gold is for fools, but if you look at the Central Banks you can see they trust gold very much.
As history shows us, a new currency will usually be tied to gold in some way. This instills confidence in the new currency. Of course they will strip that tie away over time so that the money can be manipulated (devalued) as history again teaches us.
This manipulation is the mechanism that is used to steal wealth from the People.
 
ModerationNow! said:
☑This thread clears up false propaganda and helps prove media bias: The media don't like to mention the debt under Obama. Nor did they even mention the annual deficit, until about 1-2 years ago, and it was then that they deceived millions of Americans. How? Simple, by NOT previously reporting the truth that under Obama, both deficit and debts had skyrocketed to all time record levels, they were able to report that "the deficit has gone down this year under Obama". The truth was that, even though it had finally dropped a bit, the previous yearly record deficits had happened under Obama! Deficits during the first part of Obama's terms were higher than under Bush by FAR.

Here is the debt calculator that lets you type in ANY date and see exactly what the total US debt was at that time. That will help you also understand how high the annual DEFICITS were as well.

It also disproves the leftist notion that Clinton left a 'surplus'. Here are the numbers at the beginning and end of Clinton's terms: Start: 4.1 trillion $ --- End: 5.7 trillion $
Bush: Start: 5.7 trillion --- End: 10.6 trillion. ☑Obama: Start: 10.6 trillion --- Now: 19.7 trillion and counting!!

In other words, Clinton didn't wipe the debt(the huge new influx of tax revenue due to entirely new tech sector helped temporarily balance DEFICITS towards late 90s). But more importantly, Obama has run HIGHER debt and deficits than at any time in US history. I rest my case, and any disagreement with these FACTS is merely based on a faith based refusal to admit that democrats could possibly be causing damage to this country. Period...
Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)
Click to expand...

The debt at the end of the last Bush fiscal year (2009) was 12 Trillion. You are off by the amount of the 2009 Deficit which was 1.4 Trillion.

Given Bush started with a deficit of nearly zero --- and handed Obama a 1.4 Trillion dollar deficit, you can attribute a least a few years of debt under Obama to Bush as well in all fairness.

The idea that a new president would just walk in and cut 1.4 Trillion in spending in his first fiscal year is silly. That inferred claim that a Red President would have done this is simply foolish.... yet, that is akin to what we heard from the (business candidate) Romney Clown when he was campaigning and much of the Red leadership.

Clowns through and through.
 
ModerationNow! said:
Nor did they even mention the annual deficit, until about 1-2 years ago,
Click to expand...


that's just delusional. You and yours were whipped into a constant state of panic about debt and deficits. That delusional panic was then used to justify not working with President Obama to help the economy and reduce the deficits faster.


and it was then that they deceived millions of Americans. How? Simple, by NOT previously reporting the truth that under Obama, both deficit and debts had skyrocketed to all time record levels, they were able to report that "the deficit has gone down this year under Obama". The truth was that, even though it had finally dropped a bit, the previous yearly record deficits had happened under Obama! Deficits during the first part of Obama's terms were higher than under Bush by FAR.
Click to expand...

so, you clearly hold President Obama responsible for the deficits he inherited from Bush's destruction of the economy. Do you hold Bush accountable for the mortgage bubble that started 4 years into his presidency? do you hold Bush responsible for the Great Recession that started 7 years into his presidency?
 
Vern said:
that's just delusional. You and yours were whipped into a constant state of panic about debt and deficits. That delusional panic was then used to justify not working with President Obama to help the economy and reduce the deficits faster.
so, you clearly hold President Obama responsible for the deficits he inherited from Bush's destruction of the economy. Do you hold Bush accountable for the mortgage bubble that started 4 years into his presidency? do you hold Bush responsible for the Great Recession that started 7 years into his presidency?
Click to expand...

Funny stuff Vern. We'd be smokin in the economics department if it weren't for that danged Bush. I guess BO set up the next pres for a bountiful reaping of great economic fortune?
You are making me giggly. :lamo
 
It's always easy to spend someone else's money.
 
Cable said:
Funny stuff Vern. We'd be smokin in the economics department if it weren't for that danged Bush. I guess BO set up the next pres for a bountiful reaping of great economic fortune?
You are making me giggly. :lamo
Click to expand...

cable, you've simply proven you're just another conservative who feels its his job to obediently flail at the facts. We have plenty of conservatives who cant respond to facts in an honest and intelligent fashion. You bring nothing new to the discussion. And for you to "poo poo" Bush's destruction of the economy once again proves you are no expert at economics.
 
Vern said:
cable, you've simply proven you're just another conservative who feels its his job to obediently flail at the facts. We have plenty of conservatives who cant respond to facts in an honest and intelligent fashion. You bring nothing new to the discussion. And for you to "poo poo" Bush's destruction of the economy once again proves you are no expert at economics.
Click to expand...

When the market crashes in the next year or two, who will be at fault? I look to your wisdom and clear thinking Vern.
 
It was a bit fascinating at the end when both were asked about the debt and the fact that neither of their plans would address it.
They both mumbled around a bit. They know they won't address it, we know they won't address it. Our currency will collapse over it, as it has several times in the past.
Who are they pandering to? There must be a huge portion of the population that doesn't want to know this is about to happen.

Dang you Bush!
 
Cable said:
They know they won't address it, we know they won't address it. Our currency will collapse over it, as it has several times in the past.
Who are they pandering to? There must be a huge portion of the population that doesn't want to know this is about to happen.

Dang you Bush!
Click to expand...
er uh cable, the "debt will destroy us all" is almost 8 years old. I think you simply need to catch up with the rest of the planet and accept the conservative concern for debt was simply another way to manipulate the easily manipulated. You and yours were whipped into a ridiculous state of panic over the debt. It was this "panic" that allowed republicans to obstruct President Obama's recovery and attempts to lower the deficit faster. But enough about that, you just focus on catching up with the latest conservative narratives. this should help you "discover" your narrative is rather dated.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/us-pa...ervative-debt-concerns.html?highlight=concern


Cable said:
When the market crashes in the next year or two, who will be at fault? I look to your wisdom and clear thinking Vern.
Click to expand...

mmmmm, if the "market crashing" is something to be afraid of, shouldn't President Obama's Bull Market something to proud of? It saved my retirement and moved it up a couple years. And fyi, the "market is going to crash" is getting a little old too. Its been updated over the years but continue to be wrong. But I do give you credit, you didn't give a reason. It's definitely an improvement over the "predictions" that had a cause and timeframe. It makes it harder to mock you when it doesn't happen. Here's a thread chock full of "market is going to crash" predictions if you're interested

http://www.debatepolitics.com/us-pa...-you-again-president-obama-w-1017-2344-a.html
 
Vern said:
er uh cable, the "debt will destroy us all" is almost 8 years old. I think you simply need to catch up with the rest of the planet and accept the conservative concern for debt was simply another way to manipulate the easily manipulated. You and yours were whipped into a ridiculous state of panic over the debt. It was this "panic" that allowed republicans to obstruct President Obama's recovery and attempts to lower the deficit faster. But enough about that, you just focus on catching up with the latest conservative narratives. this should help you "discover" your narrative is rather dated.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/us-pa...ervative-debt-concerns.html?highlight=concern




mmmmm, if the "market crashing" is something to be afraid of, shouldn't President Obama's Bull Market something to proud of? It saved my retirement and moved it up a couple years. And fyi, the "market is going to crash" is getting a little old too. Its been updated over the years but continue to be wrong. But I do give you credit, you didn't give a reason. It's definitely an improvement over the "predictions" that had a cause and timeframe. It makes it harder to mock you when it doesn't happen. Here's a thread chock full of "market is going to crash" predictions if you're interested

http://www.debatepolitics.com/us-pa...-you-again-president-obama-w-1017-2344-a.html
Click to expand...

I don't need a link to any narrative Vern. And I'm not saying it will destroy us all. It will certainly rob many in the middle class of their wealth in the form of savings. Just as it has before. Good on you for growing your retirement egg. Hope you get out soon.
Fiat currency, that is value at the point of a gun, always fails. That is historical fact that anyone can verify quite easily. This country has gone through several fiat currencies. Most were trashed to fund wars.
This current one is pretty unique, but it will suffer a similar fate.

This is why the central banks are storing gold. They know they have to back the new currency with gold or folks won't buy the lie again. They can rip the rug out later, as they always do, and I'm not just talking about the U.S.
 
Cable said:
I don't need a link to any narrative Vern. And I'm not saying it will destroy us all. It will certainly rob many in the middle class of their wealth in the form of savings.
Click to expand...

No, it won't. The debt has no bearing on anything other than the government's ability to borrow. And even with high debt, borrowing rates for the Federal government are still very low. I'm not sure what you mean by "rob the middle class of their wealth in the form of savings"? Can you expand on that?
 
Cable said:
I don't need a link to any narrative Vern. And I'm not saying it will destroy us all. It will certainly rob many in the middle class of their wealth in the form of savings. Just as it has before. Good on you for growing your retirement egg. Hope you get out soon.
Fiat currency, that is value at the point of a gun, always fails. That is historical fact that anyone can verify quite easily. This country has gone through several fiat currencies. Most were trashed to fund wars.
This current one is pretty unique, but it will suffer a similar fate.

This is why the central banks are storing gold. They know they have to back the new currency with gold or folks won't buy the lie again. They can rip the rug out later, as they always do, and I'm not just talking about the U.S.
Click to expand...

mmmm, I sorry cable, I don't see a problem with me paraphrasing "our currency will collapse" as "debt will destroy us all". Just in case you don't understand, I'm mocking your statement. I'm not "misparaphrasing" because I cant respond. Speaking of responding, you seem to have deflected from my point :

the conservative concern for debt was simply another way to manipulate the easily manipulated. You and yours were whipped into a ridiculous state of panic over the debt. It was this "panic" that allowed republicans to obstruct President Obama's recovery and attempts to lower the deficit faster.

So just in case you try to pretend not to understand again, the lying conservative "currency will collapse" narrative is 8 years old. It didnt even collapse when Bush destroyed the economy. But if you're concerned about "collapse of the currency" then you need to tell republicans to stop voting for incompetent buffoons. Oh and when you post your little "gold standard" narratives you simply prove again you have no understanding of economics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom