Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: gmflex on March 21, 2015, 10:41:43 AM
-
This will settle the debate on who has added the most money to the national debt..
http://useconomy.about.com/od/usdebtanddeficit/p/US-Debt-by-President.htm?utm_source=zergnet&utm_medium=tcg&utm_campaign=zergnet-test-423616 (http://useconomy.about.com/od/usdebtanddeficit/p/US-Debt-by-President.htm?utm_source=zergnet&utm_medium=tcg&utm_campaign=zergnet-test-423616)
-
This will settle the debate on who has added the most money to the national debt..
http://useconomy.about.com/od/usdebtanddeficit/p/US-Debt-by-President.htm?utm_source=zergnet&utm_medium=tcg&utm_campaign=zergnet-test-423616 (http://useconomy.about.com/od/usdebtanddeficit/p/US-Debt-by-President.htm?utm_source=zergnet&utm_medium=tcg&utm_campaign=zergnet-test-423616)
Doesn't really break it down now does it, where is Bush? they are attributing Bush's wars to Obama, it was money accounted for before he took office. This is the sly reason Bush' figures aren't spelled out.
-
Booooooooooossssssssshhh hhhhhh!!!!!
Says every liberal confronted with facts.
-
"It's Bush's fault" lol
-
Booooooooooossssssssshhhhhhhhh!!!!!
Says every liberal confronted with facts.
What facts? the bush wars are being attributed to Obama here, would you agree that spent money Obama had no dealings in should be in fact counted towards his total allotment. If say obama wars with IRAN or say russia near the end of his term, should we count that as his spending or the next president as we are doing here?
I don't care either way, there is a reason this article is written the way it is, there is a reason Bush's totals are MIA.
-
"It's Bush's fault" lol
If you are going to look at the numbers you might as well try and stick with reality. Just posting numbers with no context or that are partially incorrect doesn't help anyone.
I also wouldn't blame anyone, each president had unique circumstances etc, it has to be a more complex breakdown. Bush inherited a surplus, and raped it. He put the US into the GREAT RECESSION, you think Obama would of done a stimulus had he inherited what Bush did? no, it was in response to the failing economy or the biggest recession in history. Same after the depression etc.
-
If you are going to look at the numbers you might as well try and stick with reality. Just posting numbers with no context or that are partially incorrect doesn't help anyone.
I also wouldn't blame anyone, each president had unique circumstances etc, it has to be a more complex breakdown. Bush inherited a surplus, and raped it. He put the US into the GREAT RECESSION, you think Obama would of done a stimulus had he inherited what Bush did? no, it was in response to the failing economy or the biggest recession in history. Same after the depression etc.
Yes, even to this day "it's bushs fault" Lmao
-
If you are going to look at the numbers you might as well try and stick with reality. Just posting numbers with no context or that are partially incorrect doesn't help anyone.
I also wouldn't blame anyone, each president had unique circumstances etc, it has to be a more complex breakdown. Bush inherited a surplus, and raped it. He put the US into the GREAT RECESSION, you think Obama would of done a stimulus had he inherited what Bush did? no, it was in response to the failing economy or the biggest recession in history. Same after the depression etc.
Tell everyone please who pushed and forced banks to allow people to buy homes that didnt have 20% down?
Do you understand that the number one factor to the destruction of the economy was giving people 100-104% financing to buy a home?
-
What not so enlightened people like Coach doesn't understand is that the same people that control the Democraps, control the Republicants. It doesn't matter who racked up more debt. What should be asked is how in the hell did we allow a Central Bank to print our money when it wasn't needed. And how in the hell did we allow our money to be taken off the gold standard to be printed with no regard. These are the questions that should be asked. Not which puppet spent the most. It doesn't matter, they're puppets.
-
http://www.forbes.com/sites/briandomitrovic/2013/10/01/obamas-economy-is-worse-than-bushs-by-obamas-own-numbers/
-
haha as if it would make any difference if the actor who plays the president had another name, party or skin colour.
It all goes to plan. :)
(http://underinformation.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/rothschild666.jpg)
-
http://www.forbes.com/sites/briandomitrovic/2013/10/01/obamas-economy-is-worse-than-bushs-by-obamas-own-numbers/
it's really like asking which of these 2 pieces of dog shit tastes worse. We can argue about it all day, but nether of them is chocolate pudding, it's just 2 dog turds we're discussing here.
-
What not so enlightened people like Coach doesn't understand is that the same people that control the Democraps, control the Republicants. It doesn't matter who racked up more dept. What should be asked is how in the hell did we allow a Central Bank to print our money when it wasn't needed. And how in the hell did we allow our money to be taken off the gold standard to be printed with no regard. These are the questions that should be asked. Not which puppet spent the most. It doesn't matter, they're puppets.
Exactly this
-
It always makes sense to add taxes, print money, extend benefits and borrow money. It always results in a long term solution. I think I'll try that with my own finances.
-
Tell everyone please who pushed and forced banks to allow people to buy homes that didnt have 20% down?
Do you understand that the number one factor to the destruction of the economy was giving people 100-104% financing to buy a home?
Hard to overlook, yeah.
-
Tell everyone please who pushed and forced banks to allow people to buy homes that didnt have 20% down?
Do you understand that the number one factor to the destruction of the economy was giving people 100-104% financing to buy a home?
This.
And I'll never understand why so many damned foreigners are so obsessed with US politics and with defending Obama since he took office.
-
Tell everyone please who pushed and forced banks to allow people to buy homes that didnt have 20% down?
Do you understand that the number one factor to the destruction of the economy was giving people 100-104% financing to buy a home?
Blame Clinton for that. That was him. As I stated, it doesn't matter who is in office. These bubbles are created on purpose and exploded at certain times, on purpose. Now you have student loan bubble, derivatives bubble, car loan bubbles.
The housing collapse/bubble was on purpose.
-
If you are going to look at the numbers you might as well try and stick with reality. Just posting numbers with no context or that are partially incorrect doesn't help anyone.
I also wouldn't blame anyone, each president had unique circumstances etc, it has to be a more complex breakdown. Bush inherited a surplus, and raped it. He put the US into the GREAT RECESSION, you think Obama would of done a stimulus had he inherited what Bush did? no, it was in response to the failing economy or the biggest recession in history. Same after the depression etc.
Bush did not inherit a budget surplus. That is Clinton bullshit and manipulation of how the debt was accounted.
The Clinton budget surplus myth has been disproven countless times.
-
"It's Bush's fault" lol
Lol sounds pretty familiar to your hyper political favorite team rooting/cheering...everything is "obamas fault!"
-
Love all the experts in here, so wise, so educated, always right...
Amazing intellect and skills
-
since when a president is directly linked to the status of the economy ? Megacorporations manage the world economy, not politicians, dumbfuck(s). And megacorporations also select your "options", "choices" and finance their campaigns and careers.
-
since when a president is directly linked to the status of the economy ? Megacorporations manage the world economy, not politicians, dumbfuck(s). And megacorporations also select your "options", "choices" and finance their campaigns and careers.
Thank you. Morons here and everywhere else live and die by their "team/president" winning. Pro sports/entertainment for the masses. Oh well, it gives bitter people without hobbies something to concern themselves with.
-
for those who don't want to read the article
(http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/248944-galleryV9-nnhb.jpg)
(http://zfacts.com/wp-content/uploads/US-national-debt-GDP-graph.png)
-
lol both bush and Obama have done poorly just in different ways.
Bush by war mongering after 911. Starting two pointless wars after 9/11 instead of just firing off a few miscles into an al queda training camp.
And Obama is the stereotypical liberal who spends spends spends. He has to buy support off the poor and illegal immigrants by giving out a bunch of entitlements. All the while he grows the national debt without any thought of cutting back or getting out of debt.
-
And Obama is the stereotypical liberal who spends spends spends. He has to buy support off the poor and illegal immigrants by giving out a bunch of entitlements.
please list these new entitlements being given to the poor and immigrants, and then compare to the amount being spent on defense and corporate welfare.
-
1. The banks started to collapse because under the Democratic run congress under Bush they had Barney Frank pushing affordable housing act that gave mortgages to those who wouldn't have qualified. With little down they got a mortgage then when the house appreciated they qualified for home equity loans. Then house after house started to default.
2. The economy started going bad with the Democratic run congress under Bush due to uncontrolled spending. Obama had both sides of the congress with the House and the Senate his first two years and he did nothing with it. Then he spend the rest of his Presidency blaming the Republican house and Bush.
3. His auto maker bail out makes for good propaganda. The part they left out is that the same deal was offered to Ford who refused. They did take a minor green car hand out but they refused the main bail out. They recovered just as well if not better than GM and Chrysler. Yep, Obama saved the car industry. ::)
I can go on forever with this. I would be up to number 100 but the progressive liberals sheep who believe in Obama with the complicit majority press backing them will never see the light. Worse President in my life time.
-
1. The banks started to collapse because under the Democratic run congress under Bush they had Barney Frank pushing affordable housing act that gave mortgages to those who wouldn't have qualified. With little down they got a mortgage then when the house appreciated they qualified for home equity loans. Then house after house started to default.
2. The economy started going bad with the Democratic run congress under Bush due to uncontrolled spending. Obama had both sides of the congress with the House and the Senate his first two years and he did nothing with it. Then he spend the rest of his Presidency blaming the Republican house and Bush.
3. His auto maker bail out makes for good propaganda. The part they left out is that the same deal was offered to Ford who refused. They did take a minor green car hand out but they refused the main bail out. They recovered just as well if not better than GM and Chrysler. Yep, Obama saved the car industry. ::)
I can go on forever with this. I would be up to number 100 but the progressive liberals sheep who believe in Obama with the complicit majority press backing them will never see the light. Worse President in my life time.
So smart and all knowing. Has all the answers. Great minds on this board. Who needs political scientists and neutral think tanks
-
They've both borrowed and spent trillions of dollars. What other "economic record" do presidents and federal governments have to compare?
Obama's debt is piling up faster even after he "ended" the Bush wars, and even in a zero-interest rate environment.
Clinton, Bush, and Obama did not cause nor create dot com booms, real estate booms, nor oil booms. Apple, Microsoft, Netflix, Amazon, Google etc were not built by governments or presidents.
They did not and have not created private sector jobs, nor have they increased or even decreased stock markets, created inflation / deflation to any significant degree, or affected fuel prices themselves.
Guy is clueless, doesn't believe this, and is only saying it because Valerie wrote it down:
-
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-debt-to-gdp (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-debt-to-gdp)
http://www.atr.org/full-list-ACA-tax-hikes-a6996 (http://www.atr.org/full-list-ACA-tax-hikes-a6996)
(http://blogs-images.forbes.com/jamesgruber/files/2014/04/fed-rates-vs-sp.png)
-
for those who don't want to read the article
(http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/248944-galleryV9-nnhb.jpg)
(http://zfacts.com/wp-content/uploads/US-national-debt-GDP-graph.png)
That's got to be old. Debt is now over 18 trillion.
-
please list these new entitlements being given to the poor and immigrants, and then compare to the amount being spent on defense and corporate welfare.
How about doubling the number of people on food stamps for one?
I'd much rather a federal government that does little more than provide a strong national defense, as opposed to one that takes over private industries, increases taxes and regs, redistributes wealth, is obsessed with "social justice", "fairness", "social engineering", etc.
Go to 1:35 to see his true colors:
I'm not particularly happy with Republicans these days either. But I'll always vote against the guy who wants to take more of my money, weaken us militarily, and grow the fed govt endlessly on the domestic front.
-
1. The banks started to collapse because under the Democratic run congress under Bush they had Barney Frank pushing affordable housing act that gave mortgages to those who wouldn't have qualified. With little down they got a mortgage then when the house appreciated they qualified for home equity loans. Then house after house started to default.
2. The economy started going bad with the Democratic run congress under Bush due to uncontrolled spending. Obama had both sides of the congress with the House and the Senate his first two years and he did nothing with it. Then he spend the rest of his Presidency blaming the Republican house and Bush.
3. His auto maker bail out makes for good propaganda. The part they left out is that the same deal was offered to Ford who refused. They did take a minor green car hand out but they refused the main bail out. They recovered just as well if not better than GM and Chrysler. Yep, Obama saved the car industry. ::)
I can go on forever with this. I would be up to number 100 but the progressive liberals sheep who believe in Obama with the complicit majority press backing them will never see the light. Worse President in my life time.
If only that was true. That was when he forced the ACA down our throats, remember?
-
It's not even debatable as to what's driving debt: Insolvent Social Programs. It doesn't even matter who's President, as long as these programs aren't reformed.
(http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l142/thinlizzy21/477f51142b27d8c0f2a9e4439acbb08a_zps2c707ee8.jpg)
-
How about doubling the number of people on food stamps for one?
$80 billion per year at it's peak for SNAP. Now that the economy is doing well, that's dropping. That is what food stamps are for, so that people don't go malnourished during tough times. Compare that to $400 billion for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter which is 7 years behind schedule and has no real strategic purpose with the threats we face today.
-
It's not even debatable as to what's driving debt: Insolvent Social Programs. It doesn't even matter who's President, as long as these programs aren't reformed.
I know. Let's go back to the tax rates as they were under Ronald Reagan. That would solve all of our budget problems. Or just remove the Social Security tax cap. That would make SS solvent for 75+ years.
If you don't know how the social security tax cap works, this year only the first $118,500 is taxed. That means someone making $100 million pays no more into the system than someone making $120 thousand.
Here is an inconvenient fact for you: Every year we need fewer and fewer workers. In the not too distant future there won't be any jobs for the vast majority of workers. Now that means either incredible poverty for most, or a guaranteed income for all. The problem with masses in poverty is they tend to start revolutions. So the .1% will start having to paying for the food and housing of the masses.
-
It's not even debatable as to what's driving debt: Insolvent Social Programs. It doesn't even matter who's President, as long as these programs aren't reformed.
(http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l142/thinlizzy21/477f51142b27d8c0f2a9e4439acbb08a_zps2c707ee8.jpg)
Look at the right column of your chart. That's where the money is being collected from. 10% from corporations. Is that fair? Let's look at this over time
(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1152351/thumbs/o-FEDERAL-REVENUE-570.jpg)
Get corporations to pay their fair share.
-
Look at the right column of your chart. That's where the money is being collected from. 10% from corporations. Is that fair? Let's look at this over time
(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1152351/thumbs/o-FEDERAL-REVENUE-570.jpg)
Get corporations to pay their fair share.
Yeah, more taxes, that's the answer.
-
Yeah, more taxes, that's the answer.
It worked after WWII into the 70s. Largest growth of middle class ever.
-
It worked after WWII into the 70s. Largest growth of middle class ever.
WWII was an aberration. The rest of the industrial world had been bombed out and China and India weren't online. That type of competitive advantage doesn't exist, today.
-
WWII was an aberration. The rest of the industrial world had been bombed out and China and India weren't online. That type of competitive advantage doesn't exist, today.
Corporations are making record profits. Executives of corporations are making record salaries. Stock prices are way up, making the owners of corporations even more wealthy. Only one not enjoying this prosperity are the workers. And then all the people not working. Thirty five years of trickle down economics and the middle class has been devastated.
-
Corporations are making record profits. Executives of corporations are making record salaries. Stock prices are way up, making the owners of corporations even more wealthy. Only one not enjoying this prosperity are the workers. And then all the people not working. Thirty five years of trickle down economics and the middle class has been devastated.
I'm giving you cold hard facts. You're responding with empty emotional rhetoric. These programs are 100s of billions in the hole and it's only gonna get worse. They will eventually need reform. Sticking your hand deeper and deeper into other people's pockets won't work.
Moreover, by world standards, the average American lives like a king and averages eating 3700 cals a day. Every average Joe has access to goods and services that weren't even available to the elites just a few years ago, but to make your points you have take this for granted, don't you.
-
There is NO debt. Quit worrying about something that's entirely manufactured.
We print money, to borrow to ourselves, so we owe ourselves and are in debt to ourselves.
Yes, it makes perfect sense ::)
-
Corporations argue that they indirectly pay income tax through their employer base and through their shareholders personal declarations and also pay payroll tax as well.
I dont support their argument, but i dislike any non profit based tax like payroll tax, but its an efficient tax for government, company tax is to easily off shored by multi nationals. I would support a higher tax on corporations, and the retirement of payroll tax if they could tighten up the loopholes that allow them to trade out of places like Ireland.
-
Corporations argue that they indirectly pay income tax through their employer base and through their shareholders personal declarations and also pay payroll tax as well.
I dont support their argument, but i dislike any non profit based tax like payroll tax, but its an efficient tax for government, company tax is to easily off shored by multi nationals. I would support a higher tax on corporations, and the retirement of payroll tax if they could tighten up the loopholes that allow them to trade out of places like Ireland.
Yeah, we need to take more money out of the productive part of the economy and give it to politicians and bureaucrats because the over 3 TRILLION DOLLARS a year the Federal Government takes in isn't enough.
-
Since its Congress that controls the money and authorizes new debt wouldn't this chart make better sense if it corresponded to the party that controlled that branch.
Looking at the following chart says to me that the Reds & Blues are in this together...at the expense of the common American man.