• 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!

Govt. borrows 46 cents of every dollar it spends

Somerville said:
Don't know if this was deliberate obtuseness or you just refuse to see reality

My words "If the economy is not doing as well " does, at least to me, indicate that the GDP is not as high as it was previously (inflation adjusted) therefore - even when the feds don't spend as much as previously, the amount spent may still be a larger percentage of GDP, despite a reduction in spending
Click to expand...

:lol: Nice try, but look at the real (inflation adjusted) federal spending figures for 2003 to present. Note the 2008/2009 spike.

Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary
 
longview said:
I think most can agree, that our government is spending too much.
The real question, is what and how to cut to fix it.
Raising taxes is like increasing a junkie's heroine supply.
We have to trim government.
Click to expand...

Do like the "junkies heroin supply" simile. Kudos.
 
Cole said:
Do like the "junkies heroin supply" simile. Kudos.
Click to expand...
Is there really a difference between opium and OPM (other peoples money)?
They both seem to be horribly addictive narcotics.
 
Muddy Creek said:
NOT funding programs you start is the problem. We began this HUGE debt that Bush created up to $13 trillion before he left office by NOT funding two wars, tax cuts for the rich (removing money from the budget) and a HUGE pharmaceutical socialist program in Medicare. When you have a party like the republicans who STILL outspend on pork barrels any democrat, then you have fiscal irresponsibility.
Click to expand...

Muddy:
JUST SAY NO.
Sayno.gif
 
Hairytic said:
Throwing money at the millitary won't give us a strong defense.
Click to expand...
Then let's close the military down.

It's not throwing "money at". That's what Obama's 6 trillion of waste was. Throwing at donors. Crony Capitalism.

Parasite Nation is farking retarded.

Sum peepl u jus kaint reech.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
What picture is that? Obama is running up the defict at over twice the rate that Bush did. Facts are not your friend using that lame argument. Under Bush, federal taxation was 17% of GDP and federal spending was 20% of GDP, under Obama, taxation is still 17% of GDP but spending is now 24% of GDP, that is a 20% increase in federal spending. Yes he did!
Click to expand...
Obama didn't cause an aging population and he didn't start the wars and he didn't cause the recession. Most of Obama's spending is mandatory and was in place long before he took office. The public recognized this and voted accordingly.
 
Moot said:
Obama didn't cause an aging population and he didn't start the wars and he didn't cause the recession. Most of Obama's spending is mandatory and was in place long before he took office. The public recognized this and voted accordingly.
Click to expand...

:lol: But Obama did campaign on cutting the federal deficit in half (knowing full well about the wars, the aging population and the recession), going "line by line" through the budget making "necessary cuts" and all of that hope and change BS. Next he claimed to need another term to finish "those tasks". Just what spending is mandatory, i.e. not subject to change by congress, except perhaps interest on the national debt? If spending is mandatory that would make taxation seem to be mandatory as well, yet we seem to have allowed huge deficits. Yes they can!
 
ttwtt78640 said:
:lol: But Obama did campaign on cutting the federal deficit in half (knowing full well about the wars, the aging population and the recession), going "line by line" through the budget making "necessary cuts" and all of that hope and change BS. Next he claimed to need another term to finish "those tasks". Just what spending is mandatory, i.e. not subject to change by congress, except perhaps interest on the national debt? If spending is mandatory that would make taxation seem to be mandatory as well, yet we seem to have allowed huge deficits. Yes they can!
Click to expand...
Obama didn't know just how bad the economy was until he took office in January 2008. He didn't campaign on pulling us out of a recession, that was a surprise left behind by his predecessor for him to clean up. Mandatory spending are the entitlements and the cost of war and the recession and yes, the interest on the debt that was in place before he took office. Yes, they did.
 
Moot said:
Obama didn't know just how bad the economy was until he took office in January 2008. He didn't campaign on pulling us out of a recession, that was a surprise left behind by his predecessor for him to clean up. Mandatory spending are the entitlements and the cost of war and the recession and yes, the interest on the debt that was in place before he took office. Yes, they did.
Click to expand...

If Barrack Obama didn't know how bad the economy was when he took over he was probably the only American adult who didn't know. Giving him the "He was too stupid to know" defense isn't a winning strategy at all.

He should also have known about the entitlements and the aging population. If he didn't understand any of these issues why did so many people vote for him? Are they even dumber than him?
 
Grant said:
If Barrack Obama didn't know how bad the economy was when he took over he was probably the only American adult who didn't know. Giving him the "He was too stupid to know" defense isn't a winning strategy at all.

He should also have known about the entitlements and the aging population. If he didn't understand any of these issues why did so many people vote for him? Are they even dumber than him?
Click to expand...
The recession didn't officially begin until Dec. 2007. The only person who really knew how bad it was ex-Goldman Sach's CEO and Bush's Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson and his cronies on Wall Street because they caused it. Some say they planned it and I'm inclined to agree.
 
Moot said:
The recession didn't officially begin until Dec. 2007. The only person who really knew how bad it was ex-Goldman Sach's CEO and Bush's Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson and his cronies on Wall Street because they caused it. Some say they planned it and I'm inclined to agree.
Click to expand...

That's just nonsense. Everyone who bothered reading the paper or who tried to keep up at all knew how bad it was. Don't you recall how BHO said how bad the debt was and that Bush was "unpatriotic" for allowing it to get so high?

Of course Obama has done to that debt in 4 years what took Bush 8 years to do.

How unpatriotic does that make Barrack Obama?.
 
Grant said:
That's just nonsense. Everyone who bothered reading the paper or who tried to keep up at all knew how bad it was. Don't you recall how BHO said how bad the debt was and that Bush was "unpatriotic" for allowing it to get so high?

Of course Obama has done to that debt in 4 years what took Bush 8 years to do.

How unpatriotic does that make Barrack Obama?.
Click to expand...
Right, it only took Bush 8 years to run up the debt to 10 trillion and destroy the global economy and you expected Obama to clean up the mess in 4 years? Yes, there were a lot of people who saw the train wreck coming, but they were either ignored, ridiculed or fired for being unpatriotic.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Fill what void? The void left by the government being pared back to what it was a decade ago?

Who filled the void then?
Click to expand...
cold turkey is often the only proper path for addicts
 
Moot said:
Right, it only took Bush 8 years to run up the debt to 10 trillion and destroy the global economy and you expected Obama to clean up the mess in 4 years? Yes, there were a lot of people who saw the train wreck coming, but they were either ignored, ridiculed or fired for being unpatriotic.
Click to expand...

Obama's goal seems to destroy the country much faster than you claim Bush did.

his solution to Bush's spending is to spend tons more

why do obama supporters whine about Bush's spending when they support Obama spending?

is it that Bush's spending did not create as many dependent sloths beholden to the government as Obama's does?
 
TurtleDude said:
Obama's goal seems to destroy the country much faster than you claim Bush did.

his solution to Bush's spending is to spend tons more

why do obama supporters whine about Bush's spending when they support Obama spending?

is it that Bush's spending did not create as many dependent sloths beholden to the government as Obama's does?
Click to expand...
You know darn well TD, that government spending during a recession is the Keynesian way. Starving the economy during an economic downturn has been proven pure folly. Just ask Hoover.
 
Moot said:
Right, it only took Bush 8 years to run up the debt to 10 trillion and destroy the global economy and you expected Obama to clean up the mess in 4 years? Yes, there were a lot of people who saw the train wreck coming, but they were either ignored, ridiculed or fired for being unpatriotic.
Click to expand...

You don't know that Bill Clinton left George Bush a debt of almost $6 trillion?

The MSM has let you down.
 
Moot said:
You know darn well TD, that government spending during a recession is the Keynesian way. Starving the economy during an economic downturn has been proven pure folly. Just ask Hoover.
Click to expand...

Keynes works well in theory but in practice politicians borrow money during the bad times but don't pay it back during the good times. It is not to their benefit to pay down the debt and, in Obama's case anyway, the electorate doesn't seem to care.
 
Grant said:
Keynes works well in theory but in practice politicians borrow money during the bad times but don't pay it back during the good times. It is not to their benefit to pay down the debt and, in Obama's case anyway, the electorate doesn't seem to care.
Click to expand...
It's not to anyone's benefit to pay down the debt during a recession. If you don't like debt then you should have been more vociferous about it back in 2003 - 2004 when Greenspan warned the Republican congress that the tax cuts wouldn't work if they didn't get their spending under control.
 
Grant said:
You don't know that Bill Clinton left George Bush a debt of almost $6 trillion?

The MSM has let you down.
Click to expand...
Clinton inherited 12 years of Bush/Reagan policies and a recession and you're whining because he deregulated the financial industry, gave us the free trade agreement NAFTA, reduced the size of government, overhauled welfare and left BushJr. with a budget surplus? Get over it.
 
Moot said:
Clinton inherited 12 years of Bush/Reagan policies and a recession and you're whining because he deregulated the financial industry, gave us the free trade agreement NAFTA, reduced the size of government, overhauled welfare and left BushJr. with a budget surplus? Get over it.
Click to expand...

I never mentioned NAFTA or anything else. What I said was that he left Bush with an almost $6 trillion dollar debt. Do you understand that part before you move on elsewhere?
 
Moot said:
It's not to anyone's benefit to pay down the debt during a recession. If you don't like debt then you should have been more vociferous about it back in 2003 - 2004 when Greenspan warned the Republican congress that the tax cuts wouldn't work if they didn't get their spending under control.
Click to expand...

The idea behind Keynes theory is that the government borrow money during the bad times to stimulate the economy and pay it back during the good times.

How do you know what I was doing during 2003-2004?
 
Moot said:
Right, it only took Bush 8 years to run up the debt to 10 trillion and destroy the global economy and you expected Obama to clean up the mess in 4 years? Yes, there were a lot of people who saw the train wreck coming, but they were either ignored, ridiculed or fired for being unpatriotic.
Click to expand...

Lets look at facts, Bush added 4.357 trillion to the national debt in 8 yrs, Obama has added 6.668 trillion in just 4 yrs, Obama is borrowing 1.2 trillion a yr and by the end of his 8 yrs will have added over 10+ trillion in just 8 yrs. Trumping all the presidents before him combined. For a total of 20+ trillion national debt. Last I remember he was going to cut the deficit in half in his first term. But you knew he was lying as Liberal = tax, borrow, spend and give free stuff.
 
Born Free said:
Lets look at facts, Bush added 4.357 trillion to the national debt in 8 yrs, Obama has added 6.668 trillion in just 4 yrs, Obama is borrowing 1.2 trillion a yr and by the end of his 8 yrs will have added over 10+ trillion in just 8 yrs. Trumping all the presidents before him combined. For a total of 20+ trillion national debt. Last I remember he was going to cut the deficit in half in his first term. But you knew he was lying as Liberal = tax, borrow, spend and give free stuff.
Click to expand...

To be fair please answer the following simple question: What was the Bush increase in the defict/national debt about, if not simply to "tax, borrow and spend and give free stuff"? The outrage is not so easy to believe when the basic policy was not changed, only the "magnitude" of the gap (deficit). Hmm...
 
Born Free said:
Lets look at facts, Bush added 4.357 trillion to the national debt in 8 yrs, Obama has added 6.668 trillion in just 4 yrs, Obama is borrowing 1.2 trillion a yr and by the end of his 8 yrs will have added over 10+ trillion in just 8 yrs. Trumping all the presidents before him combined. For a total of 20+ trillion national debt. Last I remember he was going to cut the deficit in half in his first term. But you knew he was lying as Liberal = tax, borrow, spend and give free stuff.
Click to expand...

But this practice of Tax, Borrow, Spend and Give Away Free Stuff actually works. Food Stamps, Subsidized ent and Obamaphones. What more does a person need?

This guy should have been taught in public schools but its too late for that now.

Alexis de Tocqueville Quotes (Author of Democracy in America)
 
Born Free said:
Lets look at facts, Bush added 4.357 trillion to the national debt in 8 yrs, Obama has added 6.668 trillion in just 4 yrs, Obama is borrowing 1.2 trillion a yr and by the end of his 8 yrs will have added over 10+ trillion in just 8 yrs. Trumping all the presidents before him combined. For a total of 20+ trillion national debt. Last I remember he was going to cut the deficit in half in his first term. But you knew he was lying as Liberal = tax, borrow, spend and give free stuff.
Click to expand...


And where were the "debt concerned" GOP members during the Bush era of tac cuts, borrow, spend and give free stuff?

The simple fact is Obama is continuing a method that got Bush elected twice. No, I'm not just blaming Bush. Let's get real though, how can anyone who voted for Bush twice be complaining about Obama's spending without being a hypocrite?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom