Nationl Debt Tops $22 Trillion

Dittohead not! said:

It is probably timely to post the Presidential powers to our civics challenged Republicans who always blame Democratic Presidents for deficits.

Powers of the President of the United States - Wikipedia

The President of the U.S. has ZERO spending authority without Congressional Approval.

So please explain to me where I got this information wrong and I will sincerely apologize?? NOT GOING TO HAPPEN

Click to expand...

Thank you, guess Obama signing the 2009 budget and supporting the stimulus for shovel ready jobs had no impact on the 2009 deficit, right? Come on, you are smarter than you appear to be in these posts.

Pretty easy to show where you are wrong just by the signature on the budget and the stimulus bill passed by the Congress. It was sold on the basis of shovel ready jobs being created and those shovel ready jobs would impact revenue which they absolutely did because the shovels never arrived and employment went from 142 million down to 138 million in 2009. Wonder if the loss of 4 million taxpayers impacted revenue?

Conservative said:

Thank you, guess Obama signing the 2009 budget and supporting the stimulus for shovel ready jobs had no impact on the 2009 deficit, right? Come on, you are smarter than you appear to be in these posts.

Pretty easy to show where you are wrong just by the signature on the budget and the stimulus bill passed by the Congress. It was sold on the basis of shovel ready jobs being created and those shovel ready jobs would impact revenue which they absolutely did because the shovels never arrived and employment went from 142 million down to 138 million in 2009. Wonder if the loss of 4 million taxpayers impacted revenue?

Click to expand...

Right and Trump signing what Congress was able to pass of the 2017 and 2018 budgets had no impact on the debt at all, and neither did the tax cuts he proposed and supported.

You made a good point: It's the Congress, not the president. What you seem to forget is that it's the Congress regardless of whether the president is a D or an R.

Kushinator said:

2.) Labor force participation is not at it's highest.

Click to expand...

Wow....just wow, I can't believe you used this graph....and then dinged me for using it for the same argument.

Gimmesometruth said:

Wow....just wow, I can't believe you used this graph....and then dinged me for using it for the same argument.

Click to expand...

The person i quoted claimed it was at it's highest, which is clearly not true. I didn't ding you my man.

Kushinator said:

The person i quoted claimed it was at it's highest, which is clearly not true. I didn't ding you my man.

Click to expand...

You are being dishonest in 2 ways, and I think you really ought to step back and reconsider.

Conservative said:

Gave you the source, you ignored it, Bush 350 billion and Obama the rest

Click to expand...

They approved $700 billion, of which only $439 billion was actually appropriated.

Obama inherited TARP which recapitalized the banks and that started turning the economy around.

Click to expand...

That makes absolutely zero sense. TARP was about improving market confidence, which is why all broker dealers were required to take funds, even though some banks had capital structures that had weathered losses. The important policy that came out of Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 was legislation that gave the Federal Reserve the power to pay banks interest on reserves held overnight @ the Fed. It was this law that made quantitative easing possible. And make no mistake about it. Monetary policy was what aided the recovery the most, as the Republican controlled HoR was determined to make Obama a one term President.

The recession ended in June 2009

Click to expand...

The technical definition of recession ended in Q2 2009. However, that had to do with automatic stabilizers (unemployment insurance, SNAP, etc....) keeping the economy from sliding too far.

What Ended the Great Recession?

Click to expand...

An opinion piece by James Picerno from WallStreetPit.com does not refute my argument.

Gimmesometruth said:

You are being dishonest in 2 ways, and I think you really ought to step back and reconsider.

Click to expand...

Are you ****ing serious?

You quoted:

Conaeolos said:

What makes you think a large portion is idle and under-employed?

Click to expand...

and responded with a big fat participation graph. I responded to you showing that prime age labor participation is actually well off it's recent low, which is further evidence of a tight labor market.

In another thread, a member claimed that participation was at it's highest level. I posted the graph, which clearly shows we are well off the highs.

Because i disagree with the notion of current labor market slack doesn't mean i "dinged" you.

Dittohead not! said:

Right and Trump signing what Congress was able to pass of the 2017 and 2018 budgets had no impact on the debt at all, and neither did the tax cuts he proposed and supported.

You made a good point: It's the Congress, not the president. What you seem to forget is that it's the Congress regardless of whether the president is a D or an R.

Click to expand...

The more you post the more your proving to be a San Francisco Bay liberal, clean up your homeless problem around the Golden Gate Bridge and then get back with me because right now you have no credibility regarding Trump, the Republicans because you're party is an absolute disaster

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

gulfman said:

Trump inherited this mess from Obama

Click to expand...

He's only making it worse, not better. What is he doing to fix it?

Kushinator said:

Are you ****ing serious?

You quoted:

and responded with a big fat participation graph. I responded to you showing that prime age labor participation is actually well off it's recent low, which is further evidence of a tight labor market.

In another thread, a member claimed that participation was at it's highest level. I posted the graph, which clearly shows we are well off the highs.

Click to expand...

got it, you allow yourself to use the EXACT SAME GRAPH to make the SAME ARGUMENT (LFPR has declined), but when I do that, you get to argue against me.

Because i disagree with the notion of current labor market slack doesn't mean i "dinged" you.

Click to expand...

Um, arguing against me, when I made the same point with that same data, is hypocritically dinging me....and it was not limited to just that, you also tried to claim I made an absolute argument further on....another false ding. I'm not sure if you picked up a case of Jeageritis or what....but what ever it is, cool it.

Kushinator said:

They approved $700 billion, of which only $439 billion was actually appropriated.



That makes absolutely zero sense. TARP was about improving market confidence, which is why all broker dealers were required to take funds, even though some banks had capital structures that had weathered losses. The important policy that came out of Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 was legislation that gave the Federal Reserve the power to pay banks interest on reserves held overnight @ the Fed. It was this law that made quantitative easing possible. And make no mistake about it. Monetary policy was what aided the recovery the most, as the Republican controlled HoR was determined to make Obama a one term President.



The technical definition of recession ended in Q2 2009. However, that had to do with automatic stabilizers (unemployment insurance, SNAP, etc....) keeping the economy from sliding too far.



An opinion piece by James Picerno from WallStreetPit.com does not refute my argument.

Click to expand...

TARP was a loan, TARP was repaid, TARP recapitalized the banks and ended the recession, Obama created the worst recovery in history

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

99percenter said:

Donde estan los teabaggers?

Click to expand...

They have all covered to Trumpism abandoning fiscal conservatism in the process.

Conservative said:

The more you post the more your proving to be a San Francisco Bay liberal, clean up your homeless problem around the Golden Gate Bridge and then get back with me because right now you have no credibility regarding Trump, the Republicans because you're party is an absolute disaster

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

The national debt has nothing to do with San Francisco or the homeless around the Golden Gate.
And yes, the Democratic Party is a disaster.
So is the Republican Party.

iguanaman said:

You love the growth huh. What will you say when it drops back down to 2%? The stimulus of the tax cut has waned already and CBO forecasts are 2% or so from here on out. We are in a "boom time" and deficits are nearing a trillion and rising. It's called burning a candle at both ends and a recipe for disaster.

Click to expand...

<*sigh*> That definitely sounds like a realistic read of the economic tea leaves, unfortunately, the economy being inherently cyclic in nature.

eohrnberger said:

<*sigh*> That definitely sounds like a realistic read of the economic tea leaves, unfortunately, the economy being inherently cyclic in nature.

Click to expand...

And that is the point. If we can double our deficit in "good" times what will happen when they are not so good? When will we stop denying that the economic "cycle" is part of the destruction of the middle class thru wage suppression. After every recession the wealth transfer to the top increases.

Tbird19482 said:

Why do all the Republicans keep repeating this lie?
Where are they getting this from?
Can somebody tell us?
When Obama took over the budget and the debt it was Oct. 1 2009( for your info the incoming President does NOT take over the budget and debt on the day he takes office but on the first day of HIS first fiscal year and that is Oct. 1 of the year he takes over ) and according to the US Treasury website on the debt ( Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application))
The debt was 11,920,519,164,319.42 and IF Obama had doubled it like you say it would have been 23,841,038,328,638.84 and it has not hit that yet.
When Trump took office it was 20,244,900,016,053.51 an increase of 8,324,380,851,734.09
and as of yesterday it was 22,012,840,891,685.32
So I have to ask you to please stop repeating this Republican lie and do some research into the subject before you post
thank you and have a nice day

Click to expand...

From your source.


$ 18,421,174,888,124.90 (a straight doubling of $ 9,210,587,444,062.47) is less than $ 19,976,826,951,047.80, which is what the debit was 12/13/16, at the end of the Obama administration.

:shrug:

Gimmesometruth said:

got it, you allow yourself to use the EXACT SAME GRAPH to make the SAME ARGUMENT (LFPR has declined), but when I do that, you get to argue against me.

Um, arguing against me, when I made the same point with that same data, is hypocritically dinging me....and it was not limited to just that, you also tried to claim I made an absolute argument further on....another false ding. I'm not sure if you picked up a case of Jeageritis or what....but what ever it is, cool it.

Click to expand...

It's not the same point with the same data.

Someone claiming participation is at its highest is not the same as claiming there is slack in the labor market.

How are you not aware of this? Yes, I used the participation data to prove it isn't at its highest.

I know I'm at my highest... But that doesn't mean you're not way off. &#55357;&#56834;

Dittohead not! said:

The national debt has nothing to do with San Francisco or the homeless around the Golden Gate.
And yes, the Democratic Party is a disaster.
So is the Republican Party.

Click to expand...

What is going on in your area calls into question your credibility and the states on any issue.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Conservative said:

TARP was a loan, TARP was repaid, TARP recapitalized the banks and ended the recession, Obama created the worst recovery in history

Click to expand...

It (Tarp) did nothing of the sort. You are just a very confused partisan hack with a fondness for hypocrisy.

Kushinator said:

It (Tarp) did nothing of the sort. You are just a very confused partisan hack with a fondness for hypocrisy.

Click to expand...

You are clueless

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

iguanaman said:

And that is the point. If we can double our deficit in "good" times what will happen when they are not so good? When will we stop denying that the economic "cycle" is part of the destruction of the middle class thru wage suppression. After every recession the wealth transfer to the top increases.

Click to expand...

If the concern is so much about middle class wage suppression, why is it a position of the left to allow nearly uncontrolled immigration, further suppressing those middle class wages, due to a larger labor supply?

If middle class wages were really such a concern of the left, shouldn't they be leading the effort to clamp down on uncontrolled immigration?
Reducing the labor supply would increase the market pressures to increase wage compensation through competition of the scarce labor resource available, wouldn't it?

I mean this is a econ 101 fundamental of how markets work. Supply and demand.

eohrnberger said:

If the concern is so much about middle class wage suppression, why is it a position of the left to allow nearly uncontrolled immigration, further suppressing those middle class wages, due to a larger labor supply?

If middle class wages were really such a concern of the left, shouldn't they be leading the effort to clamp down on uncontrolled immigration?
Reducing the labor supply would increase the market pressures to increase wage compensation through competition of the scarce labor resource available, wouldn't it?

I mean this is a econ 101 fundamental of how markets work. Supply and demand.

Click to expand...

It's not any economics, it's a debunked myth that White Nationalists like to us as another way to demonize immigrants. Besides Trump wants to let in more skilled "desirable" immigrants that might compete with American skilled labor. Why would he want more of those? The American middle class has been victimized by their employers not immigrants. The low tax rates for high incomes has caused a wave of greed to pervade out corporations who have chosen short term gains over their companies and their employees. CEO Salaries went from 20 times their average employee to 300 times since 1980 and profits have tripled with no appreciable wage increase since that time.

iguanaman said:

It's not any economics, it's a debunked myth that White Nationalists like to us as another way to demonize immigrants. Besides Trump wants to let in more skilled "desirable" immigrants that might compete with American skilled labor. Why would he want more of those? The American middle class has been victimized by their employers not immigrants. The low tax rates for high incomes has caused a wave of greed to pervade out corporations who have chosen short term gains over their companies and their employees. CEO Salaries went from 20 times their average employee to 300 times since 1980 and profits have tripled with no appreciable wage increase since that time.

Click to expand...

You've presented citations that 'CEO pay is bad'. This is probably in line with your leftist ideology and little more than showing your confirmation bias.

You've not shown anything at all about the job market realities.

The job market realities are that when there is more of something, an over supply, the competition to fill demand reduces its price, and, yes, flooding the US with immigrants, especially illegal immigrants who'll work under the table, does put a downward pressure on wages both legal immigrants as well as US citizens in the workforce.

COEs, and other C-Levels, are also in a job market, one that has a scarcity of supply of good ones, leading to corporations to compete for the good ones, resulting in the large compensation packages.

Your graph shows a huge spike in the years around 2002, coinciding with the dot-com boom / bubble, and a fall there after, yet still rising again.

So in the last 15-20 years, nearly, what have the Democrats done of substance that has thwarted this job market? Anything?

No, they have not. In spite of leftists belief they can empower the government (some would say over empower), there's no thwarting a free market short of destroying it completely, and making everything far worse as a result.

If leftists really cared about the 'American middle class' and their compensation, they wouldn't be promoting policies that import so much competing labor resources, nor regulate the economy and corporations to the point of strangulation, which depresses labor demand and therefore hurts that same middle class US citizens. Appears the US middle class citizens have caught on to this bull**** from the Democrats, as their voting for Democrats appears to have fallen off, the ginned up TDS hatred not withstanding (yes, I'm honest enough to admit that this does have an impact).

One could even say ‘Black people have voted for Democrats their whole life, they’re still poor’.

Given your repetition of the DNC talking points, doesn't seem like this is going to change anytime in the near future.

eohrnberger said:

From your source.

Date	Debt Held by the Public	Intragovernmental Holdings	Total Public Debt Outstanding
01/02/08	$ 5,130,778,241,224.70	$ 4,079,809,202,837.77	$ 9,210,587,444,062.47
12/30/16	$ 14,434,841,520,928.30	$ 5,541,985,430,119.43	$ 19,976,826,951,047.80
			$ 9,210,587,444,062.47
			2	X
			$ 18,421,174,888,124.90

$ 18,421,174,888,124.90 (a straight doubling of $ 9,210,587,444,062.47) is less than $ 19,976,826,951,047.80, which is what the debit was 12/13/16, at the end of the Obama administration.

:shrug:

Click to expand...

01/02/08 is your beginning date for the Obama administration? :lamo

Kushinator said:

01/02/08 is your beginning date for the Obama administration? :lamo

Click to expand...

I am still waiting for you and other Obama supporters to explain how Bush is responsible for the 2009 deficit without any spending authority given by the DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS? Who signed the 2009 budget? Seems like a lot of civics ignorance here that continues today blaming Trump for spending increases that caused the 2018 deficit to grow 17% when the reality remains there was NO budget for 2018, Trump had no spending authority, and all Trump could do was cut spending which he did with the Executive branch budget. Your bias and ignorance is on full display regarding Presidential powers.

My short clueless statement yesterday was done later in the day when I was worn out kicking your butt.

TARP didn't capitalized the banks?

TARP wasn't a Loan?

TARP wasn't mostly repaid in 2009?

350 billion of TARP wasn't released under Bush and wasn't part of that PROJECTED deficit CBO generated for 2009?

TARP wasn't responsible for digging us out of the recession?

Recovery.org wasn't created to show Stimulus spending?

Obama's stimulus spending for shovel ready jobs didn't see employment go down 4 million in 2009, and only increase 1 million in 2010?

Economic results from the Obama economic policies didn't lead to the worst recovery in U.S. History?

Claiming this was the worst recession in history because of the results generated doesn't indicate economic failure of Obama economic policies?

So many questions totally ignored by you and the left showing again that radicals like you are incapable of admitting when wrong making you part of the problem not part of the sollutions