• 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!

Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jesus Christ thought so?

Another reason why Leftists are seldom sought out for their opinions on Christian teachings.

Why is it that those who most often profess to be "Christian" are the ones who know the least about the man?
 
Fiscal years go from October 1 of one year onto September 30 of the following year. Therefore, FY2009 began on October 1, 2008. And when was TARP enacted?



Wanna try that one again?

Using the historical record like that is ... well .... is that allowed here? ;)
 
chart.jpg



There someone found it for you... Puts your chart in perspective, no?

Yes, it shows the massive deficits in FY2010 caused by repubican legislation passed the previous year and signed by bush*
 
That's good because that's not what you asked me and not what I answered.

Funny, I think it is what I asked you. To expalin your comment, which you made in response to a claim that greenspan said he was wrong. Go back and look.
 
Using the historical record like that is ... well .... is that allowed here? ;)



It is. see this is not team politics for at leat me, Bush's tarrp was a trainwreck, that spawned the tea party movement, that is no excuse however for Obama to double down then ask for more. We simply cannot afford it.
 
Yes, it shows the massive deficits in FY2010 caused by repubican legislation passed the previous year and signed by bush*



/facepalm


Democrats control the purse strings, Obama was one of those democrats. and it's still going up up up....
 
Jesus Christ thought so?

Another reason why Leftists are seldom sought out for their opinions on Christian teachings.

Yes. Maybe you should read the Bible. Jesus clearly said the rich should sell all their possessions and give the proceeds to the poor.
 
Delusional appears to be a constant state with your side.

We can find delusional folks on both sides, hell, all sides. And I think you for proving that repeatedly. ;)
 
bush* was president. He signed it.

So it was Obamas' fault :roll:




Bush was at fault for Taarp 1, obama was at fault for all that came after. This isn't really hard. :doh




Hey, when does it become Obama's fault for not fixing this mess?
 
Last edited:
We will also discuss the economic policies of the right, which got us into this mess.

the mess

61.6 trillion dollars of unfunded promises, growing by 5.3 per year

if something isn't done now to restructure our budgets the programs will expire

not enough revenue extant in the universe to make it good

sorry

reform medicare or watch it die, danton
 
Objective Voice;1059665341]Fiscal years go from October 1 of one year onto September 30 of the following year. Therefore, FY2009 began on October 1, 2008. And when was TARP enacted?

Isn't that what I said, fiscal year 2009 which began on October. 1, 2008? Bush spent 350 billion of it by December and left 350 billion for Obama to spend. Most of what was released was paid back in 2009 so where did that go?


Wanna try that one again?

Not sure what you want me to try over again, that is what I said, fiscal year 2009 is when TARP was spent.
 
bush* was president. He signed it.

So it was Obamas' fault :roll:

You have to love these guys.....Obama is responsible for all of Bush's failures.
Clinton is responsible for the worst attack on our country that occurred on Bush's watch....oh...and Bush deserves credit for capturing and killing Osama Bin Laden despite the fact that he didn't really spend any time thinking about him or going after him.

Its all gamemanship to the wingers.
 
/facepalm


Democrats control the purse strings, Obama was one of those democrats. and it's still going up up up....

Have you gone to Recovery.org to see exactly where those Stimulus dollars are going towards in your state or around the country? Maybe you should....you might either be pleasantly surprised or royally offended. But before you complain, remember this...

"STATES RIGHTS!"

PRIVATE SECTOR JOB GROWTH

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DOESN'T CREATE JOBS

These have been the mantras of the Conservative movement, and yet many complain when things don't seem to be going quite their way when you try to place job growth where it can be most effective - at the state-level to be funnelled down to the private sector. That's the entire primus behind my poll thread here only too many of you are so damned partisan you can't think straight long enough to get out of your own way and do what's right for the country. Patriots indeed. :roll:
 
So because President's Reagan and Both Bushs spent plenty that gives Obama the right to put that spending on steroids? Obama's 2010 budget was 700 billion more than the Bush 2008 budget. You don't seem to get it, we have a spending problem not a tax problem. It has been posted many times FIT revenue went up AFTER the Reagan and Bush tax cuts but in your world you have no problem raising taxes with 24 plus million unemployed or unemployed Americans and supposedly giving more money to the politicians that have given us a 14.4 trillion dollar debt. That doesn't make any sense and is purely the liberal ideology. Have you ever looked at the budget of the United States? Try it some times and tell me why the Federal Govt. spends as much as it does and what can be cut and do that before buying the political rhetoric that we need more taxes.

When you have a budget problem do you first find a way to raise more revenue or do you check what expenses can be cut? Stop with the ideological rants and think.
Obama hasn't put spending steroids, that's a fallacious argument, however Bush 43 did put spending on steroids - big time. Bush's last budget was 2009, not 2008 as you keep saying. The reason tax revenues went up after Reagan's tax adjustments was inflation that started in earnest during Ford's administration got worse during Carter's and partially through Reagan's administration. Wages were so low by comparison they had to be raised by the nation's employers. Higher wages mean more tax revenue for the government. Reagan gave the biggest tax breaks to the wealthy - the top marginal rate was lowered from 70% to 50%.

The only spending problem we have is around the military industrial complex.
 
I've told you this before, I'm not reading every article you throw at me. But it's common sense that if your business is suffering losses, you don't just cut your expenses, you look at ways to increase your revenue as well. This is seriously Business 101. Are you arguing that I'm not correct?

I'm not sure he always read those either. So I wouldn't worry about it. :coffeepap
 
You have to love these guys.....Obama is responsible for all of Bush's failures.
Clinton is responsible for the worst attack on our country that occurred on Bush's watch....oh...and Bush deserves credit for capturing and killing Osama Bin Laden despite the fact that he didn't really spend any time thinking about him or going after him.

Its all gamemanship to the wingers.

What does that have to do with the Tread topic although did Obama support TARP? Did Obama spend the 350 billion left him by Bush? You really do hate Republicans, don't you? Interesting coming from someone in a city with 11.9% unemployment and a state run by Democrats that have a similar unemployment rate
 
I'm not sure he always read those either

LOL!

says the link challenged 60 second clicker who cites the SYDNEY MORNING HERALD on behalf of school teachers in new york
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom