Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever[W:187]

Re: Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

Winston said:

So, no one ever blamed the debt on the president from 2008-2016?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

But we were supposed to be tired of all the winning......

Re: Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

Rogue Valley said:

Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

Another milestone for The Donald and the GOP.

Related: US National Debt Clock

Click to expand...

How much you want to bet we hear nothing but crickets from the Tea Baggers and the Michelle Malkin crowd of pundits? And, of course, the usual suspects will claim this is Obama's debt.

Fact is though. When it comes to debt, the Republicans are the borrow and spend clan.

Re: Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

Kushinator said:

Debt doesn't matter. Economic growth does. Your attempt to remain consistent at the behest of economic logic isn't particularly compelling.

Click to expand...

Increasing debt during a time of relative prosperity is a recipe for disaster. If you weren't being partisan, you would agree.

Re: Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

iguanaman said:

As long as you keep your head vapid and devoid of any history, you can claim trade wars will create jobs and increase revenue. Those of us that can read know better. Trump will go down in history as the worst President ever (even surpassing GW Bush!) and also be credited for destroying the GOP. Your party is lost and have no way out.

Click to expand...

Trump will surpass Nixon in corruption, Bush in incompetence, and Clinton in whore-dogging.

MAGA!

Re: Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

calamity said:

Increasing debt during a time of relative prosperity is a recipe for disaster. If you weren't being partisan, you would agree.

Click to expand...

How the **** am i being partisan? The U.S. economy cannot maintain 3% rGDP growth even in an extremely low interest rate environment. This is simply a matter of fact. Debt doesn't matter... economic growth does.

Re: Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

MrShangles said:

Trump has a long way to go to catch Obables doubling the debt from ALL previous presidents ALL OF THEM TOGETHER.

Click to expand...

Not that you care about facts but President Obama didn't double the debt. Bush did. Which is quite impressive considering Bush was handed a surplus and President Obama was handed the massive trillion dollar Bush Deficits (yea, they have a name). And as you've been informed, Reagan tripled the debt.

Re: Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

calamity said:

Trump will surpass Nixon in corruption, Bush in incompetence, and Clinton in whore-dogging.

MAGA!

Click to expand...

There is all the winning!

Re: Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

MrShangles said:

Trump has a long way to go to catch Obables doubling the debt from ALL previous presidents ALL OF THEM TOGETHER.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

With the new tax cuts being payed for on speculation the GOP have given up the fiscally conservative mantle.

Re: Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

Fletch said:

Deficits dont matter. Remember?

Click to expand...

Yes I remember Cheney saying that, why do you ask? oh wait, are you yet another conservative (or conservative like poster) who doesn't know it was Cheney who said it? Surely someone has mentioned this to you at some point. Anyhoo, I cant help but think your post is just another attempt to obediently deflect from the flaming lying hypocrisy of conservatives. Why is your obedience to republicans more important than your integrity?

Re: Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

Perotista said:

Neither party knows the meaning of fiscal responsibility. Republicans talk a good game, but end spending as much if not more at times than the Democrats. In this regard, the Democratic Party is more honest. They don't pretend at all about curbing spending to bring fiscal sanity to Washington. They'll let you know right up front, they want to spend more.

Click to expand...

er uh pero, its good you gingerly admit repubicans may be hypocrites about deficits but democrats have curbed spending. Clinton and President Obama did. Democrats just aren't "debtaphobes" and understand how to use debt wisely. If you think any deficit is irresponsible then you are a debtaphobe. But pero, this is thread isn't about your irrational fear of debt. Its about trump who promised to eliminate the debt is actually increasing it and the flaming lying hypocrisy of republicans.

Re: Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

Vern said:

er uh pero, its good you gingerly admit repubicans may be hypocrites about deficits but democrats have curbed spending. Clinton and President Obama did. Democrats just aren't "debtaphobes" and understand how to use debt wisely. If you think any deficit is irresponsible then you are a debtaphobe. But pero, this is thread isn't about your irrational fear of debt. Its about trump who promised to eliminate the debt is actually increasing it and the flaming lying hypocrisy of republicans.

Click to expand...

Ever hear the expression it takes two to tango? Reagan added 1.9 trillion to the debt in round numbers and Tip O'Neal and the Democratically controlled House went along with it. Reagan couldn't spend a nickel if the Democratic House didn't write and pass the legislation. Same for the first Bush, once again a Democratically controlled House and Senate. The first Bush years added approximately 1.5 trillion with both parties happy to do it. Sure Bill Clinton came right close to balancing the budget, only 19 billion was added to the debt his last year. Bill accomplished that with Republican control of the House and Senate his last six years. He still added a bit over 1.4 trillion.

Bush the second, he added 4.7 trillion in round numbers. His first six years under a Republican congress and his last two under a Democratic one. Bush II's last two years with a Democratically controlled House and Senate, 1.8 trillion was added compared to 2.9 trillion his first six years. Obama, he added 10 trillion in 8 years. The first two under a Democratic congress, the last six under the Republicans. Fact is none of those presidents couldn't have spent a red cent without congress going along with it.

Presidents don't control the budget process or write the bills or pass them. All a president can do is either sign them or veto them.

Trump's an obnoxious, egotistical oaf of a president in my book. If the Democrats had nominated a decent candidates, there would be no Trump. But they had to nominate someone as disliked as America as a whole as Trump was. I suppose that's politics. Two major party politics which neither party give a darn about the good of the nation, only of their party. Because of their hyper partisanship it is interesting to note in the last 20 years those who affiliate or identify with the two major parties have shrunk from roughly 70% down to 55% of the electorate. It won't be long before a majority of Americans don't want anything to do with either party. The sad part of folks dropping out of both major parties is that it leaves just the hard core hyper partisans left to choose the candidates. Hence I think we'll have more and more Clinton vs. Trump candidates in the future. They nominate these unwanted candidates because they can and have a monopoly on our election system.

Re: Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

Perotista said:

Ever hear the expression it takes two to tango? Reagan added 1.9 trillion to the debt in round numbers and Tip O'Neal and the Democratically controlled House went along with it. Reagan couldn't spend a nickel if the Democratic House didn't write and pass the legislation. Same for the first Bush, once again a Democratically controlled House and Senate. The first Bush years added approximately 1.5 trillion with both parties happy to do it. Sure Bill Clinton came right close to balancing the budget, only 19 billion was added to the debt his last year. Bill accomplished that with Republican control of the House and Senate his last six years. He still added a bit over 1.4 trillion.

Bush the second, he added 4.7 trillion in round numbers. His first six years under a Republican congress and his last two under a Democratic one. Bush II's last two years with a Democratically controlled House and Senate, 1.8 trillion was added compared to 2.9 trillion his first six years. Obama, he added 10 trillion in 8 years. The first two under a Democratic congress, the last six under the Republicans. Fact is none of those presidents couldn't have spent a red cent without congress going along with it.

Presidents don't control the budget process or write the bills or pass them. All a president can do is either sign them or veto them.

Trump's an obnoxious, egotistical oaf of a president in my book. If the Democrats had nominated a decent candidates, there would be no Trump. But they had to nominate someone as disliked as America as a whole as Trump was. I suppose that's politics. Two major party politics which neither party give a darn about the good of the nation, only of their party. Because of their hyper partisanship it is interesting to note in the last 20 years those who affiliate or identify with the two major parties have shrunk from roughly 70% down to 55% of the electorate. It won't be long before a majority of Americans don't want anything to do with either party. The sad part of folks dropping out of both major parties is that it leaves just the hard core hyper partisans left to choose the candidates. Hence I think we'll have more and more Clinton vs. Trump candidates in the future. They nominate these unwanted candidates because they can and have a monopoly on our election system.

Click to expand...

pero, you're doing that thing again where you post a lot of words but don't respond to anything I said. And oddly you post some falsehoods about how debt President Obama and bush added. At some point I have to assume your constant deflections and falsehoods are on purpose. Here's my post again if you want to respond to it

Vern said:

er uh pero, its good you gingerly admit repubicans may be hypocrites about deficits but democrats have curbed spending. Clinton and President Obama did. Democrats just aren't "debtaphobes" and understand how to use debt wisely. If you think any deficit is irresponsible then you are a debtaphobe. But pero, this is thread isn't about your irrational fear of debt. Its about trump who promised to eliminate the debt is actually increasing it and the flaming lying hypocrisy of republicans.

Click to expand...

Re: Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

Vern said:

pero, you're doing that thing again where you post a lot of words but don't respond to anything I said. And oddly you post some falsehoods about how debt President Obama and bush added. At some point I have to assume your constant deflections and falsehoods are on purpose. Here's my post again if you want to respond to it

Click to expand...

The numbers are facts. One can look them up or not. Now the numbers will change depending on whether one goes by fiscal year or calendar year. Carter left office with approximately, rounded number with a national debt standing at 908 billion dollars. Reagan left office with national debt standing at 2.6 trillion. Bush the first left office with national debt at 4.1 trillion. Bill Clinton left office with a national debt of 5.7 trillion dollars. Bush the second left office with a national debt standing at 10 trillion and Obama left office leaving a national debt of 19.6 trillion. Close enough to 10.

rounded off Treasury department numbers. they're numbers you don't want to hear pure and simple. I assume you want to add the 10 trillion of debt accumulated under Obama to Bush. Pretty partisan and wrong, but I wouldn't put it past you.

Re: Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

Perotista said:

The numbers are facts. One can look them up or not. Now the numbers will change depending on whether one goes by fiscal year or calendar year. Carter left office with approximately, rounded number with a national debt standing at 908 billion dollars. Reagan left office with national debt standing at 2.6 trillion. Bush the first left office with national debt at 4.1 trillion. Bill Clinton left office with a national debt of 5.7 trillion dollars. Bush the second left office with a national debt standing at 10 trillion and Obama left office leaving a national debt of 19.6 trillion. Close enough to 10.

rounded off Treasury department numbers. they're numbers you don't want to hear pure and simple. I assume you want to add the 10 trillion of debt accumulated under Obama to Bush. Pretty partisan and wrong, but I wouldn't put it past you.

Click to expand...

well pero thank you for posting fewer words but you've yet to respond to my post. When you finally respond to my post, we can then discuss your subsequent falsehoods. Here's my post again.

Vern said:

er uh pero, its good you gingerly admit repubicans may be hypocrites about deficits but democrats have curbed spending. Clinton and President Obama did. Democrats just aren't "debtaphobes" and understand how to use debt wisely. If you think any deficit is irresponsible then you are a debtaphobe. But pero, this is thread isn't about your irrational fear of debt. Its about trump who promised to eliminate the debt is actually increasing it and the flaming lying hypocrisy of republicans.

Click to expand...

Re: Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

Hawkeye10 said:

We have been stealing from the kids/grandkids/unborn for a generation, we boomers were never interested in paying our own way, nor do we have any morale problems with conducting generational warfare.

Dont blame that on Trump.

Click to expand...

I agree with that sediment. It is the reason why deficits can not be fixed.

Spending, however, is not the issue..... its deficits that matter. However, we had deficits going in the right direction over the past eight years UNTIL 2017, when the Trump administration presided over the first deficit increase since 2009...and that is before a tax cut that will remove an additional $1T from the Treasury.

https://www.thebalance.com/us-deficit-by-year-3306306

Re: Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

Winston said:

So, no one ever blamed the debt on the president from 2008-2016?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Have you by chance heard my "The leaders are deeply immoral and incompetent and the people are largely ignorant" argument?

I care about truth and the right thing to do, not recent events of the herd.

Re: Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

Vern said:

well pero thank you for posting fewer words but you've yet to respond to my post. When you finally respond to my post, we can then discuss your subsequent falsehoods. Here's my post again.

Click to expand...

Okay, Clinton did with help from a Republican congress over his last six years. It takes two to tango. Give Bill credit, he was a good president in my book and probably ranks number 3 on my list of presidents that I have personally experienced. Eisenhower and JFK are one and two. Obama didn't. When one adds close to 10 trillion to the national debt, there was no curbing spending. One can't add close to 10 trillion to the national debt and say he cut spending. Federal spending went from approximately 3.0 trillion a year when Obama took office to 3.9 trillion his last year in office. That's not cutting spending. That is increasing spending big time. Clinton went from approximately 1.9 trillion in federal spending to 2.1 trillion in his 8 years.

That's not bad for Bill and the GOP congress. Of course they had Ross Perot raising a ruckus about the national debt. An outside threat to both major parties, so during the 1990's both major parties adopted a lot of Perot's political philosophy to make him go away. It worked. Now I already told you what I thought about Trump. I didn't vote for him and I never will.

I don't give a dang about Trump. I started out backing Jim Webb and when it came apparent he wasn't going to campaign, I switched to John Kasich and then in November went with Gary Johnson. Both Hillary and Trump disgusted me. If those are the best our two major parties can come up with, then our two major parties don't need to be around much longer. I have a feeling this nation is in its last days anyway.

Re: Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

Captain Adverse said:

What amazes me is how some people lack understanding of the roots of this national debt problem.

Instead of blaming the correct source, i.e. Congressional actions over DECADES of tax and spend legislation, combined (IMO) with trade deals like NAFTA and WTO which allowed production to flee to foreign lands giving greater profits to "multi-national" corporations while eliminating many middle class production jobs here....instead you prefer to blame tax cuts recently obtained via Congress by the current Administration as the source of all evil.

(Not to mention rampant inflation and our monetary policies over the same period). :coffeepap:

Click to expand...

The budget infrastructure is indeed a generational issue and the main reason we have a large debt. Near the end of the 20th Century, we had the deficits under control, running with essentially a balanced budget. However, in the early 21st century, we decided to create large deficits by starting two wars, expanding Medicare and starting two wars. The deficits went up immediately. When the economy deeply recessed in 2008, the deficits became huge and the debt doubled over the ensuring eight years.

What the Trump administration did, however, was increase spending and cut taxes... so he has added to the problem. Very little was actually done during the Obama administration to change budget infrastructure. In fact, deficits dropped each year of the Obama administration (except for the first year when they went up due to the recession). The year over year deficit reduction was reversed in the first year of the Trump administration when the deficit rose by 20%. Sorry, but the tax cuts are, in fact, the source of some evil as they will expand the deficit.

https://www.thebalance.com/us-deficit-by-year-3306306



There is little basis to argue that "production fled the country" because of trade deals. Manufacturing and productivity in the US is actually up. Manufacturing jobs disappeared largely due do automation.

Why are There Fewer US Manufacturing Jobs Today?
U.S. manufacturing producing more with fewer workers | Pew Research Center

NAFTA's affect on US jobs has been essentially a push.

https://www.marketplace.org/2017/03/21/economy/did-nafta-cost-or-create-jobs-both

Re: Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

Praxas said:

Doesn't matter what you are against. You blamed Obama for the debt occurred under him but won't do so with Trump. That's hypocritical on YOUR part. Case closed.

Click to expand...

You are projecting more than a Rave Cinema.

Re: Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

jmotivator said:

You are projecting more than a Rave Cinema.

Click to expand...

Projecting would mean that I am blaming Trump for the economy. I don't think you understand what projecting means, but I don't expect any more from a Trump supporter. Go back to your rally to get your orders from Trump because your comments are not worth **** here. Hey, maybe Trump can give you some of his 4th grade English lessons to help you along. :lamo

Re: Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

Rogue Valley said:

Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

Another milestone for The Donald and the GOP.

Related: US National Debt Clock

Click to expand...

One of the problems with this report is neither the Democrats or many of the Republicans will allow Trump to make cuts and/or reduce the government workforce. The swamp does not want government to shrink. All that Trump has been able to do, with respect to the bloated government is freeze hiring and allow the workforce to shrink via retirement. This was done via executive actions since Congress will not act on it.

This wall maintains high overhead, even though you don't need the same number of people. For example, the EPA, with the number of regulations cut can do with fewer people. Both welfare and social security also need to be fixed, but Democrats will cry the sky is falling, and Evil Heartless Trump is starving the elderly, so nothing can happen. They then blame Trump for their sabotage and the bloat that remains.

We need look at the biggest picture to see what Trump has suggested, and who is clogging up these goals, so there is more debt. The tax and regulation cuts have increased the number of jobs, which has increased tax revenue and has lowered welfare costs. For example, the number of people collecting food stamps fell by 2 million, which saves money; new tax revenue and less welfare is a two for one. This is not due to cuts in the budgets, but due to a growing economy. If Trump was been allowed to also cut overhead, the deficit would be lower.

What I would like to see is an experiment where we let Trump cut the government to see what happens. The Democrats fear it will work and Trump will get credit. Foot dragging is a better way to place blame. If we do that, we need to make sure everyone knows who is responsible for not allowing any cuts so the debt remains higher.

The analogy is I tell Sally I will be there at 9AM. A bunch of acquaintances see me heading there and physically stop me until 9:30, so I am late. They then blame me for being late. Nobody mentions the mob that created the delay and the high overhead that can be trimmed. I am surprised how many people have no investigative skills and can't even figure out the delay tactics used to create the these optics.

Re: Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

MrShangles said:

Trump has a long way to go to catch Obables doubling the debt from ALL previous presidents ALL OF THEM TOGETHER.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Not that Trump isn’t trying hard with his tax cuts for the rich.
If Trump doesn’t double the debt it will because he inherited Obama’s healthy economy not Bush’s failed one.

Re: Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

wellwisher said:

One of the problems with this report is neither the Democrats or many of the Republicans will allow Trump to make cuts and/or reduce the government workforce. The swamp does not want government to shrink. All that Trump has been able to do, with respect to the bloated government is freeze hiring and allow the workforce to shrink via retirement. This was done via executive actions since Congress will not act on it.

This wall maintains high overhead, even though you don't need the same number of people. For example, the EPA, with the number of regulations cut can do with fewer people. Both welfare and social security also need to be fixed, but Democrats will cry the sky is falling, and Evil Heartless Trump is starving the elderly, so nothing can happen. They then blame Trump for their sabotage and the bloat that remains.

We need look at the biggest picture to see what Trump has suggested, and who is clogging up these goals, so there is more debt. The tax and regulation cuts have increased the number of jobs, which has increased tax revenue and has lowered welfare costs. For example, the number of people collecting food stamps fell by 2 million, which saves money; new tax revenue and less welfare is a two for one. This is not due to cuts in the budgets, but due to a growing economy. If Trump was been allowed to also cut overhead, the deficit would be lower.

What I would like to see is an experiment where we let Trump cut the government to see what happens. The Democrats fear it will work and Trump will get credit. Foot dragging is a better way to place blame. If we do that, we need to make sure everyone knows who is responsible for not allowing any cuts so the debt remains higher.

The analogy is I tell Sally I will be there at 9AM. A bunch of acquaintances see me heading there and physically stop me until 9:30, so I am late. They then blame me for being late. Nobody mentions the mob that created the delay and the high overhead that can be trimmed. I am surprised how many people have no investigative skills and can't even figure out the delay tactics used to create the these optics.

Click to expand...

I warn people that before they make statements about numbers, they look at the numbers. Federal employment is 3 percent of spending. The vast amount of federal spending is in five areas: Social security, Medicare, Medicaid, defense and interest on the debt. So if you want to cut spending, your are talking about cutting the big five or you have no idea what you are talking about.

Re: Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

wellwisher said:

...
This wall maintains high overhead, even though you don't need the same number of people. For example, the EPA, with the number of regulations cut can do with fewer people. Both welfare and social security also need to be fixed, but Democrats will cry the sky is falling, and Evil Heartless Trump is starving the elderly, so nothing can happen. They then blame Trump for their sabotage and the bloat that remains.

We need look at the biggest picture to see what Trump has suggested, and who is clogging up these goals, so there is more debt. The tax and regulation cuts have increased the number of jobs, which has increased tax revenue and has lowered welfare costs. For example, the number of people collecting food stamps fell by 2 million, which saves money; new tax revenue and less welfare is a two for one. This is not due to cuts in the budgets, but due to a growing economy. If Trump was been allowed to also cut overhead, the deficit would be lower.

What I would like to see is an experiment where we let Trump cut the government to see what happens. The Democrats fear it will work and Trump will get credit. Foot dragging is a better way to place blame. If we do that, we need to make sure everyone knows who is responsible for not allowing any cuts so the debt remains higher.
...

Click to expand...

First, cutting the workforce is only a goal if the jobs that the workforce performs isn't needed. It's ludicrous to presume that those EPA jobs aren't needed. The EPA keeps the air and water clean by enforcing regulations designed to keep Americans safe from harmful pollutants. So, your solution is penny wise and pound foolish -- saving money on jobs while increasing illnesses and death from the effects of pollution -- which lowers productivity and raises medical costs (not to mention pain and suffering for victims.)

Second, while you assert that Trump's "tax and regulation cuts have increased the number of jobs, which has increased tax revenue and has lowered welfare costs. For example, the number of people collecting food stamps fell by 2 million." none of those things are true. Job gains in 2016 before Trump, were greater than 2017 job gains, after Trump. The tax-cuts were just passed, so their effect on revenue is too soon for you to make the assertion that you did, that revenue is up because of them. Historically, when taxes are cut revenue falls. There is no reason to believe that this will not maintain the same pattern.

You also asserted that because of Trump the number of people collecting food stamps fell by 2 million. Food Stamp (SNAP) participation has been falling since 2013 (see chart) and has nothing to do with Trump but everything to do with the improved economy under Obama.



Your post is nothing more than regurgitation of right-wing dogma, namely, that government regulations are always bad and that cutting taxes is always good. Never mind that before the EPA Lake Erie used to catch fire due the chemicals dumped in it and the air in NYC and LA were unbreathable.

There is also no historical validity to assume that cutting taxes improves economic output.

Re: Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

Getting back to the thread -- let us all be reminded that Trump promised during the campaign to Eliminate National Debt in Eight Years. Not only will that not happen but because of his tax-cuts, that are already projecting the 2018 deficit to be over a trillion dollars, the debt is expanding DUE TO Trump policies. That's something that didn't happen under Obama. Obama's debt was caused by lower revenue and automatic safety net programs, due to the Great Recession, not Obama taking any specific action.