Skip to main content

29 replies

Bush's Deficits--YES, Bush's!

B beternUOld Faithful
The alink has the straight facts about where the fiscal deficits of this and succeeding years are coming from. Sample:

"Just two policies dating from the Bush Administration — tax cuts and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan — accounted for over $500 billion of the deficit in 2009 and will account for almost $7 trillion in deficits in 2009 through 2019, including the associated debt-service costs. [6] (The prescription drug benefit enacted in 2003 accounts for further substantial increases in deficits and debt, which we are unable to quantify due to data limitations.) These impacts easily dwarf the stimulus and financial rescues. Furthermore, unlike those temporary costs, these inherited policies (especially the tax cuts and the drug benefit) do not fade away as the economy recovers."


http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3036
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

b50mb50mOld Faithful
Well beter, I'll read it later but I noticed one problem in just your highlight.

The tax cuts do fade away, as of this year.

Before you keep blasting Bush, your boy Obama is planning to give 26 billion off the budget to teachers. Why? because they are losing jobs. Why? because the idiot made his new 'reach for the top' education plan fire teachers as a ground plan for failing schools. DUUUUUUH!

Obama is pres, it's now his playground.

Also, your boy said he would save money by pulling troops out of Iraq, can't count that past 2011.
elinterventor01elinterventor01Post Master
betern nuttin,

"Just two policies dating from the Bush Administration — tax cuts and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan — accounted for over $500 billion of the deficit in 2009"

Now, as to the tax cuts contributing to the deficit, that is not true. I've posted on this about a dozen times, showing the statement is not true. Still, you and others of the left repeat the same false statement. The tax rate was above that level at which revenues start to decline -- a point of diminishing returns. The tax cut resulted in the largest level of tax receipts in US history. Overspending caused the deficit. Europe forgot this lesson, know since the time of the Domesday Book and is suffering. I assume you continue to post this falsehood either because you suffer from attention deficit disorder, or are using the Big Lie technique.

When the present tax cuts phase out, the deficit will increase at a higher rate.

Attachments

Hide
Images (1)
  • revenue_growth_2000_2005
seeweedseeweedOld Faithful
Apparently there are a lot of people who pay no attention to recent history.
Clinton inherited huge defecates from the Reagan/Bush administration. In fact the largest since WWll. He managed to turn them in the largest budget surpluses EVER !. W Bush then took what was working and completely destroyed it all for the sake of corporate interest.
If you refuse to look at what has worked and what has failed (history) , we will be doomed to repeat the failure.
Last months jobs report showed that for the first time in 4 years, our economy ADDED jobs, not many but job growth was positive.
When Obama took over from W, job growth had been negative, meaning we were loosing jobs and more were getting lost every month. Obama took over, Jobs Bill, and the graph started going positive.
Just look at facts instead of looking for reasons to throw doo-do around.
Flatus the AncientFlatus the AncientHall of Famer
quote:
Clinton inherited huge defecates from the Reagan/Bush administration. In fact the largest since WWll. He managed to turn them in the largest budget surpluses EVER !


Uh, no actually he didn't have a surplus because of the budgetary trickery that started with LBJ when trust funds were counted in the budget.

quote:
In early 1968 President Lyndon Johnson made a change in the budget presentation by including Social Security and all other trust funds in a"unified budget." This is likewise sometimes described by saying that Social Security was placed "on-budget."

This 1968 change grew out of the recommendations of a presidential commission appointed by President Johnson in 1967, and known as the President's Commission on Budget Concepts. The concern of this Commission was not specifically with the Social Security Trust Funds, but rather it was an effort to rationalize what the Commission viewed as a confusing budget presentation. At that time, the federal budget consisted of three separate and inconsistent sets of measures, and often budget debates became bogged-down in arguments over which of the three to use. As an illustration of the problem, the projected fiscal 1968 budget was either in deficit by $2.1 billion, $4.3 billion, or $8.1 billion, depending upon which measure one chose to use. Consequently, the Commission's central recommendation was for a single, unified, measure of the federal budget--a measure in which every function and activity of government was added together to assess the government's fiscal position.
http://www.ssa.gov/history/BudgetTreatment.html

To know if a president actually produced a balanced budget or not, look at the national debt:

Date Dollar Amount
09/30/2001 5,807,463,412,200.06
09/30/2000 5,674,178,209,886.86
09/30/1999 5,656,270,901,615.43
09/30/1998 5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 4,411,488,883,139.38
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/.../histdebt_histo4.htm

One can say that in Clinton's time that the process slowed down, but the national debt was still increasing. The reason probably was due to the 1994 midterm election that stymied both parties from spending on their parties own priorities.
pineywoodscatpineywoodscatHall of Famer
quote:
Originally posted by PKROUSE:
Wow i thought racism was gone from the south. Calling Obama BOY sure sound's racist to me, and bush was the one who fixed thing's, now the boy has to get us out of the hole the retard left us in.


Your Village is missing you bad. You need to return and do some more enlightning study on life. What a nut!
JankinonyaJankinonyaOld Faithful
So are the folks on here that are blaming the Obama administration with our bad economy serious? Can any of you recall where we were financially when he took office? Bush started the bailouts with a lot of push from McCain and Obama alike. We were so bad off. Businesses closing left and right. Housing marketing completely bottomed out. (and before you start saying that was Clinton's fault remember that you are now saying all our problems are Obama's) Bush had 8 years to right any wrongs he felt Clinton had done. Obama has had less than 2 years and he stepped into a huge mess. I really just don't understand what any of you thought would happen with this economy. Did you think it would just miraculously be better after the election? I know I didn't. People ask am I happy with the change...you bet I am. Its not 100% better but compared to what the Bush administration was doing and did to our country I am very happy with what Obama is trying to accomplish. One of the reasons I voted for him was for health care reform. I can't say its exactly what I wanted but its a step in the right direction. My oldest son who has a chronic illness was only one year from being dropped from my husbands insurance and we were afraid. Now he can stay on ours till he is 26 or if he wants to go onto his own policy he can not be turned down due to pre-existing conditions.

Whether you like Obama or not, surely you can be reasonable enough to admit that where we are today economically can not be laid at his feet. Even this recent disaster in the Gulf is getting blamed on Obama and the regulations that the Oil Companies are under is still Bush's mess. I remember when Obama was talking about new environmental laws for corporations most of the same people blaming him for this were arguing against that too. What do you want?

I know that all of you will still rant against the current administration regardless of the obvious facts, however we as a country will never pull out of this if we don't start pulling together. I for one am willing to do that. I have considered and will vote for some Republicans in this next election. I am not blinded by party lines.

Whoever it was in this thread that threw out the race card needs to stop that crap too. I am so sick of hearing that if you are against the president you are raciest! Please be reasonable.
midknightridermidknightriderHall of Famer
quote:
Originally posted by Jankinonya:
Whether you like Obama or not, surely you can be reasonable enough to admit that where we are today economically can not be laid at his feet.



Whether you're Democrat or Republican, surely you can be reasonable enough to admit that where we are today economically is the result of poor fiscal policy for the last fifty years. No matter who's in power, you can't spend more money than you take in. You can argue all day about how much to take, who to take it from, and how to spend it, but the bottom line is...if you spend more than you take you have to borrow. We've been doing that for over fifty years and apparently the American people have been convinced there's no problem with it because we keep doing it. Sooner or later someone is going to have to pay the piper or, as I suspect, admit we aren't going to keep our promises.
JankinonyaJankinonyaOld Faithful
quote:
Originally posted by midknightrider:
quote:
Originally posted by Jankinonya:
Whether you like Obama or not, surely you can be reasonable enough to admit that where we are today economically can not be laid at his feet.



Whether you're Democrat or Republican, surely you can be reasonable enough to admit that where we are today economically is the result of poor fiscal policy for the last fifty years. No matter who's in power, you can't spend more money than you take in. You can argue all day about how much to take, who to take it from, and how to spend it, but the bottom line is...if you spend more than you take you have to borrow. We've been doing that for over fifty years and apparently the American people have been convinced there's no problem with it because we keep doing it. Sooner or later someone is going to have to pay the piper or, as I suspect, admit we aren't going to keep our promises.


I actually totally agree. Greed and mismanagement has gotten us in a mess. If we would take care of business at home and tighten our belts we MIGHT balance our budget in our life time....but I seriously doubt that is going to happen. Frowner I too fear we will eventually have to face those countries we are in debt to and admit we have no real way of paying off said debt. That to me is a much bigger issue than gay rights, abortion, prayer in schools or any other moral issue people let derail them come election time.
seeweedseeweedOld Faithful
quote:
Originally posted by Jankinonya:
So are the folks on here that are blaming the Obama administration with our bad economy serious? Can any of you recall where we were financially when he took office? Bush started the bailouts with a lot of push from McCain and Obama alike. We were so bad off. Businesses closing left and right. Housing marketing completely bottomed out. (and before you start saying that was Clinton's fault remember that you are now saying all our problems are Obama's) Bush had 8 years to right any wrongs he felt Clinton had done. Obama has had less than 2 years and he stepped into a huge mess. I really just don't understand what any of you thought would happen with this economy. Did you think it would just miraculously be better after the election? I know I didn't. People ask am I happy with the change...you bet I am. Its not 100% better but compared to what the Bush administration was doing and did to our country I am very happy with what Obama is trying to accomplish. One of the reasons I voted for him was for health care reform. I can't say its exactly what I wanted but its a step in the right direction. My oldest son who has a chronic illness was only one year from being dropped from my husbands insurance and we were afraid. Now he can stay on ours till he is 26 or if he wants to go onto his own policy he can not be turned down due to pre-existing conditions.

Whether you like Obama or not, surely you can be reasonable enough to admit that where we are today economically can not be laid at his feet. Even this recent disaster in the Gulf is getting blamed on Obama and the regulations that the Oil Companies are under is still Bush's mess. I remember when Obama was talking about new environmental laws for corporations most of the same people blaming him for this were arguing against that too. What do you want?

I know that all of you will still rant against the current administration regardless of the obvious facts, however we as a country will never pull out of this if we don't start pulling together. I for one am willing to do that. I have considered and will vote for some Republicans in this next election. I am not blinded by party lines.

Whoever it was in this thread that threw out the race card needs to stop that crap too. I am so sick of hearing that if you are against the president you are raciest! Please be reasonable.


Well said. Very well said.
W WHHall of Famer
quote:
Originally posted by Jankinonya:
So are the folks on here that are blaming the Obama administration with our bad economy serious? Can any of you recall where we were financially when he took office? Bush started the bailouts with a lot of push from McCain and Obama alike. We were so bad off. Businesses closing left and right. Housing marketing completely bottomed out. (and before you start saying that was Clinton's fault remember that you are now saying all our problems are Obama's) Bush had 8 years to right any wrongs he felt Clinton had done. Obama has had less than 2 years and he stepped into a huge mess. I really just don't understand what any of you thought would happen with this economy. Did you think it would just miraculously be better after the election? I know I didn't. People ask am I happy with the change...you bet I am. Its not 100% better but compared to what the Bush administration was doing and did to our country I am very happy with what Obama is trying to accomplish. One of the reasons I voted for him was for health care reform. I can't say its exactly what I wanted but its a step in the right direction. My oldest son who has a chronic illness was only one year from being dropped from my husbands insurance and we were afraid. Now he can stay on ours till he is 26 or if he wants to go onto his own policy he can not be turned down due to pre-existing conditions.

Whether you like Obama or not, surely you can be reasonable enough to admit that where we are today economically can not be laid at his feet. Even this recent disaster in the Gulf is getting blamed on Obama and the regulations that the Oil Companies are under is still Bush's mess. I remember when Obama was talking about new environmental laws for corporations most of the same people blaming him for this were arguing against that too. What do you want?

I know that all of you will still rant against the current administration regardless of the obvious facts, however we as a country will never pull out of this if we don't start pulling together. I for one am willing to do that. I have considered and will vote for some Republicans in this next election. I am not blinded by party lines.

Whoever it was in this thread that threw out the race card needs to stop that crap too. I am so sick of hearing that if you are against the president you are raciest! Please be reasonable.



You mention "facts" in your post. The facts are...Bush was in office 8 years and left with a deficit of 4.82 billion,+/- a little.

Obama has been in office less than two years, our deficit now stands at 1.1 trillion...well over twice what bush did in his 8 years, Obama has accomplished in 2 years.


Another facts is...your sons health problems are not MY responsibility, I have my own children to care for.
JankinonyaJankinonyaOld Faithful
quote:
Originally posted by WH:
quote:
Originally posted by Jankinonya:
So are the folks on here that are blaming the Obama administration with our bad economy serious? Can any of you recall where we were financially when he took office? Bush started the bailouts with a lot of push from McCain and Obama alike. We were so bad off. Businesses closing left and right. Housing marketing completely bottomed out. (and before you start saying that was Clinton's fault remember that you are now saying all our problems are Obama's) Bush had 8 years to right any wrongs he felt Clinton had done. Obama has had less than 2 years and he stepped into a huge mess. I really just don't understand what any of you thought would happen with this economy. Did you think it would just miraculously be better after the election? I know I didn't. People ask am I happy with the change...you bet I am. Its not 100% better but compared to what the Bush administration was doing and did to our country I am very happy with what Obama is trying to accomplish. One of the reasons I voted for him was for health care reform. I can't say its exactly what I wanted but its a step in the right direction. My oldest son who has a chronic illness was only one year from being dropped from my husbands insurance and we were afraid. Now he can stay on ours till he is 26 or if he wants to go onto his own policy he can not be turned down due to pre-existing conditions.

Whether you like Obama or not, surely you can be reasonable enough to admit that where we are today economically can not be laid at his feet. Even this recent disaster in the Gulf is getting blamed on Obama and the regulations that the Oil Companies are under is still Bush's mess. I remember when Obama was talking about new environmental laws for corporations most of the same people blaming him for this were arguing against that too. What do you want?

I know that all of you will still rant against the current administration regardless of the obvious facts, however we as a country will never pull out of this if we don't start pulling together. I for one am willing to do that. I have considered and will vote for some Republicans in this next election. I am not blinded by party lines.

Whoever it was in this thread that threw out the race card needs to stop that crap too. I am so sick of hearing that if you are against the president you are raciest! Please be reasonable.




Another facts is...your sons health problems are not MY responsibility, I have my own children to care for.


WTH? Show me where I ask you to be responsible for my son's health problems. We pay for his insurance out of our own paycheck and I made sure that I voted for the candidate that would help make sure I could continue to do that. Also now he has a real chance of having his own independent policy when he gets out of college and goes to work full time.

Do you honestly believe that all of the debt we have right now is Obama's fault? I would also like to see where you got your numbers from and how much of our current deficit is a direct result of tax breaks, war and bailouts. None of which are new or exclusively owned by the present administration. You got some "facts" to prove that?

I ask again do you seriously believe it is all Obama's fault that we are in this economic mess ?
B beternUOld Faithful
quote:
Originally posted by elinterventor01:
betern nuttin,

"Just two policies dating from the Bush Administration — tax cuts and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan — accounted for over $500 billion of the deficit in 2009"

Now, as to the tax cuts contributing to the deficit, that is not true. I've posted on this about a dozen times, showing the statement is not true. Still, you and others of the left repeat the same false statement. The tax rate was above that level at which revenues start to decline -- a point of diminishing returns. The tax cut resulted in the largest level of tax receipts in US history. Overspending caused the deficit. Europe forgot this lesson, know since the time of the Domesday Book and is suffering. I assume you continue to post this falsehood either because you suffer from attention deficit disorder, or are using the Big Lie technique.

When the present tax cuts phase out, the deficit will increase at a higher rate.


You looked at only one corner of the picture--the 2003 Jobs and Growth Act. There is much more to it than that. You did not read, from the link I provided, the description of how the "Bush-era tax cuts" were factored into the alalysis. Here is the rest of the story:

"Bush-era tax cuts — Through 2011, the estimated impacts come from adding up past estimates of various changes in tax laws — chiefly the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA), the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (JGTRRA), the 2008 stimulus package, and a series of annual AMT patches — enacted since 2001. Those estimates were based on the economic and technical assumptions used when CBO and the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) originally “scored” the legislation, but the numbers would not change materially using up-to-date assumptions. Most of the Bush tax cuts are scheduled to expire after December 2010 (partway through fiscal 2011). We added the cost of extending them, along with continuing AMT relief, from estimates prepared by CBO and JCT.[16] (We did not assume extension of the temporary tax provisions enacted in ARRA.) Together, the tax cuts account for $1.7 trillion in extra deficits in 2001 through 2008, and $3.4 trillion over the 2009-2019 period. Finally, we added the extra debt-service costs caused by the Bush-era tax cuts, amounting to more than $200 billion through 2008 and another $1.7 trillion over the 2009-2019 period — and $330 billion in 2019 alone."

When you selectively extract only part of the story, you can reach a different conclusion from the correct one calculated by these folks who really know what they are doing.
B beternUOld Faithful
quote:
Originally posted by WH:
quote:
Originally posted by Jankinonya:
So are the folks on here that are blaming the Obama administration with our bad economy serious? Can any of you recall where we were financially when he took office? Bush started the bailouts with a lot of push from McCain and Obama alike. We were so bad off. Businesses closing left and right. Housing marketing completely bottomed out. (and before you start saying that was Clinton's fault remember that you are now saying all our problems are Obama's) Bush had 8 years to right any wrongs he felt Clinton had done. Obama has had less than 2 years and he stepped into a huge mess. I really just don't understand what any of you thought would happen with this economy. Did you think it would just miraculously be better after the election? I know I didn't. People ask am I happy with the change...you bet I am. Its not 100% better but compared to what the Bush administration was doing and did to our country I am very happy with what Obama is trying to accomplish. One of the reasons I voted for him was for health care reform. I can't say its exactly what I wanted but its a step in the right direction. My oldest son who has a chronic illness was only one year from being dropped from my husbands insurance and we were afraid. Now he can stay on ours till he is 26 or if he wants to go onto his own policy he can not be turned down due to pre-existing conditions.

Whether you like Obama or not, surely you can be reasonable enough to admit that where we are today economically can not be laid at his feet. Even this recent disaster in the Gulf is getting blamed on Obama and the regulations that the Oil Companies are under is still Bush's mess. I remember when Obama was talking about new environmental laws for corporations most of the same people blaming him for this were arguing against that too. What do you want?

I know that all of you will still rant against the current administration regardless of the obvious facts, however we as a country will never pull out of this if we don't start pulling together. I for one am willing to do that. I have considered and will vote for some Republicans in this next election. I am not blinded by party lines.

Whoever it was in this thread that threw out the race card needs to stop that crap too. I am so sick of hearing that if you are against the president you are raciest! Please be reasonable.



You mention "facts" in your post. The facts are...Bush was in office 8 years and left with a deficit of 4.82 billion,+/- a little.

Obama has been in office less than two years, our deficit now stands at 1.1 trillion...well over twice what bush did in his 8 years, Obama has accomplished in 2 years.


Another facts is...your sons health problems are not MY responsibility, I have my own children to care for.


***uld that your figure (4.82 billion +/- a little) were true. It just isn't. Here is Politifact's analysis of the matterH

http://www.politifact.com/trut...bush-administration/

Additional explanation of the truth in this mattter from the Cato Institute:

http://www.seeingtheforest.com...ato_dont_blame_1.htm

Excerpt: "Obama was essentially correct when he said he inherited a budget deficit of $1.3 trillion. Though the budget deficit for 2008 was a then-record $458.6 billion, the CBO issued a projection in January 2009, just days before Obama took office that the budget deficit would reach $1.2 trillion that year, before the cost of any new stimulus plan or other legislation was taken into account"

Hey, WH, your $4.82 billion is so far off from reality as to be laughable. Where DID you get that fictional figure?
B beternUOld Faithful
quote:
Originally posted by WH:

quote:
You mention "facts" in your post. The facts are...Bush was in office 8 years and left with a deficit of 4.82 billion,+/- a little.

Obama has been in office less than two years, our deficit now stands at 1.1 trillion...well over twice what bush did in his 8 years, Obama has accomplished in 2 years.

Another facts is...your sons health problems are not MY responsibility, I have my own children to care for.


quote:
Originally posted by WH:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jankinonya:
So are the folks on here that are blaming the Obama administration with our bad economy serious? Can any of you recall where we were financially when he took office? Bush started the bailouts with a lot of push from McCain and Obama alike. We were so bad off. Businesses closing left and right. Housing marketing completely bottomed out. (and before you start saying that was Clinton's fault remember that you are now saying all our problems are Obama's) Bush had 8 years to right any wrongs he felt Clinton had done. Obama has had less than 2 years and he stepped into a huge mess. I really just don't understand what any of you thought would happen with this economy. Did you think it would just miraculously be better after the election? I know I didn't. People ask am I happy with the change...you bet I am. Its not 100% better but compared to what the Bush administration was doing and did to our country I am very happy with what Obama is trying to accomplish. One of the reasons I voted for him was for health care reform. I can't say its exactly what I wanted but its a step in the right direction. My oldest son who has a chronic illness was only one year from being dropped from my husbands insurance and we were afraid. Now he can stay on ours till he is 26 or if he wants to go onto his own policy he can not be turned down due to pre-existing conditions.

Whether you like Obama or not, surely you can be reasonable enough to admit that where we are today economically can not be laid at his feet. Even this recent disaster in the Gulf is getting blamed on Obama and the regulations that the Oil Companies are under is still Bush's mess. I remember when Obama was talking about new environmental laws for corporations most of the same people blaming him for this were arguing against that too. What do you want?

I know that all of you will still rant against the current administration regardless of the obvious facts, however we as a country will never pull out of this if we don't start pulling together. I for one am willing to do that. I have considered and will vote for some Republicans in this next election. I am not blinded by party lines.

Whoever it was in this thread that threw out the race card needs to stop that crap too. I am so sick of hearing that if you are against the president you are raciest! Please be reasonable.



You mention "facts" in your post. The facts are...Bush was in office 8 years and left with a deficit of 4.82 billion,+/- a little.

Obama has been in office less than two years, our deficit now stands at 1.1 trillion...well over twice what bush did in his 8 years, Obama has accomplished in 2 years.


Another facts is...your sons health problems are not MY responsibility, I have my own children to care for.


Would that your figure (4.82 billion +/- a little) were true. It just isn't. Here is Politifact's analysis of the matter:

http://www.politifact.com/trut...bush-administration/

Additional explanation of the truth in this mattter from the Cato Institute, a CONSERVATIVE think tank!!

http://www.seeingtheforest.com...ato_dont_blame_1.htm

Excerpt: "Obama was essentially correct when he said he inherited a budget deficit of $1.3 trillion. Though the budget deficit for 2008 was a then-record $458.6 billion, the CBO issued a projection in January 2009, just days before Obama took office that the budget deficit would reach $1.2 trillion that year, before the cost of any new stimulus plan or other legislation was taken into account"

Hey, WH, your $4.82 billion is so far off from reality as to be laughable. Where DID you get that fictional figure?
elinterventor01elinterventor01Post Master
quote:
Originally posted by Jankinonya:
So are the folks on here that are blaming the Obama administration with our bad economy serious? Can any of you recall where we were financially when he took office? Bush started the bailouts with a lot of push from McCain and Obama alike. We were so bad off. Businesses closing left and right. Housing marketing completely bottomed out. (and before you start saying that was Clinton's fault remember that you are now saying all our problems are Obama's) Bush had 8 years to right any wrongs he felt Clinton had done. Obama has had less than 2 years and he stepped into a huge mess. I really just don't understand what any of you thought would happen with this economy. Did you think it would just miraculously be better after the election? I know I didn't. People ask am I happy with the change...you bet I am. Its not 100% better but compared to what the Bush administration was doing and did to our country I am very happy with what Obama is trying to accomplish. One of the reasons I voted for him was for health care reform. I can't say its exactly what I wanted but its a step in the right direction. My oldest son who has a chronic illness was only one year from being dropped from my husbands insurance and we were afraid. Now he can stay on ours till he is 26 or if he wants to go onto his own policy he can not be turned down due to pre-existing conditions.

Whether you like Obama or not, surely you can be reasonable enough to admit that where we are today economically can not be laid at his feet. Even this recent disaster in the Gulf is getting blamed on Obama and the regulations that the Oil Companies are under is still Bush's mess. I remember when Obama was talking about new environmental laws for corporations most of the same people blaming him for this were arguing against that too. What do you want?

I know that all of you will still rant against the current administration regardless of the obvious facts, however we as a country will never pull out of this if we don't start pulling together. I for one am willing to do that. I have considered and will vote for some Republicans in this next election. I am not blinded by party lines.

Whoever it was in this thread that threw out the race card needs to stop that crap too. I am so sick of hearing that if you are against the president you are raciest! Please be reasonable.


As the Democrats assured the nation Bush was totally responsible for 9/11 after less than 8 months as president; logic suggests that after after 16 month, Obama must bear the burden of enforcement of drilling safety regulations in the gulf. No!
elinterventor01elinterventor01Post Master
quote:
Originally posted by beternU:
quote:
Originally posted by elinterventor01:
betern nuttin,

"Just two policies dating from the Bush Administration — tax cuts and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan — accounted for over $500 billion of the deficit in 2009"

Now, as to the tax cuts contributing to the deficit, that is not true. I've posted on this about a dozen times, showing the statement is not true. Still, you and others of the left repeat the same false statement. The tax rate was above that level at which revenues start to decline -- a point of diminishing returns. The tax cut resulted in the largest level of tax receipts in US history. Overspending caused the deficit. Europe forgot this lesson, know since the time of the Domesday Book and is suffering. I assume you continue to post this falsehood either because you suffer from attention deficit disorder, or are using the Big Lie technique.

When the present tax cuts phase out, the deficit will increase at a higher rate.


You looked at only one corner of the picture--the 2003 Jobs and Growth Act. There is much more to it than that. You did not read, from the link I provided, the description of how the "Bush-era tax cuts" were factored into the alalysis. Here is the rest of the story:

"Bush-era tax cuts — Through 2011, the estimated impacts come from adding up past estimates of various changes in tax laws — chiefly the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA), the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (JGTRRA), the 2008 stimulus package, and a series of annual AMT patches — enacted since 2001. Those estimates were based on the economic and technical assumptions used when CBO and the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) originally “scored” the legislation, but the numbers would not change materially using up-to-date assumptions. Most of the Bush tax cuts are scheduled to expire after December 2010 (partway through fiscal 2011). We added the cost of extending them, along with continuing AMT relief, from estimates prepared by CBO and JCT.[16] (We did not assume extension of the temporary tax provisions enacted in ARRA.) Together, the tax cuts account for $1.7 trillion in extra deficits in 2001 through 2008, and $3.4 trillion over the 2009-2019 period. Finally, we added the extra debt-service costs caused by the Bush-era tax cuts, amounting to more than $200 billion through 2008 and another $1.7 trillion over the 2009-2019 period — and $330 billion in 2019 alone."

When you selectively extract only part of the story, you can reach a different conclusion from the correct one calculated by these folks who really know what they are doing.


I read the thing. I posted what the actual results were. Further:

2001**$1991.1
2002**$1853.1
2003**$1782.3
2004**$1880.1
2005**$2151.6
2006**$2406.0
2007**$2568.0
2008**$2524.0

dollars in current billions

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org...yafact.cfm?Docid=200

Again, cutting the tax rates resulted in more revenue, period! Increased revenue, got that! Without the tax cuts, the deficit would be larger.
W wigreveSmall Talker
Most folks speak about the woes acted upon by the Presidents they are old enough to recall. The problem is actually more simple than blaming one or a short succession of presidents. The problem is that politicians are spending our money not theirs. They all suck and blow the noble purpose of the day to get their way what ever it is thus more and more money is spent. The problem has been worsened in that the taxpayers do not havee a majority voice because the equal protection guaranteed by the constitution has been violated and not applied to each citizen so that each pays in the same number of dollars in tax. A progressive tax structure has killed our country. Our nation is in it's death throws now. There is no equality when citizens face different financial responsibilities In our current system decisions are made by the simple unaffected ignorant, send me a bigger check fools and leftist antisoverigns.
W WHHall of Famer
quote:
Originally posted by Jankinonya:
quote:
Originally posted by WH:
quote:
Originally posted by Jankinonya:
So are the folks on here that are blaming the Obama administration with our bad economy serious? Can any of you recall where we were financially when he took office? Bush started the bailouts with a lot of push from McCain and Obama alike. We were so bad off. Businesses closing left and right. Housing marketing completely bottomed out. (and before you start saying that was Clinton's fault remember that you are now saying all our problems are Obama's) Bush had 8 years to right any wrongs he felt Clinton had done. Obama has had less than 2 years and he stepped into a huge mess. I really just don't understand what any of you thought would happen with this economy. Did you think it would just miraculously be better after the election? I know I didn't. People ask am I happy with the change...you bet I am. Its not 100% better but compared to what the Bush administration was doing and did to our country I am very happy with what Obama is trying to accomplish. One of the reasons I voted for him was for health care reform. I can't say its exactly what I wanted but its a step in the right direction. My oldest son who has a chronic illness was only one year from being dropped from my husbands insurance and we were afraid. Now he can stay on ours till he is 26 or if he wants to go onto his own policy he can not be turned down due to pre-existing conditions.

Whether you like Obama or not, surely you can be reasonable enough to admit that where we are today economically can not be laid at his feet. Even this recent disaster in the Gulf is getting blamed on Obama and the regulations that the Oil Companies are under is still Bush's mess. I remember when Obama was talking about new environmental laws for corporations most of the same people blaming him for this were arguing against that too. What do you want?

I know that all of you will still rant against the current administration regardless of the obvious facts, however we as a country will never pull out of this if we don't start pulling together. I for one am willing to do that. I have considered and will vote for some Republicans in this next election. I am not blinded by party lines.

Whoever it was in this thread that threw out the race card needs to stop that crap too. I am so sick of hearing that if you are against the president you are raciest! Please be reasonable.




Another facts is...your sons health problems are not MY responsibility, I have my own children to care for.


WTH? Show me where I ask you to be responsible for my son's health problems. We pay for his insurance out of our own paycheck and I made sure that I voted for the candidate that would help make sure I could continue to do that. Also now he has a real chance of having his own independent policy when he gets out of college and goes to work full time.

Do you honestly believe that all of the debt we have right now is Obama's fault? I would also like to see where you got your numbers from and how much of our current deficit is a direct result of tax breaks, war and bailouts. None of which are new or exclusively owned by the present administration. You got some "facts" to prove that?

I ask again do you seriously believe it is all Obama's fault that we are in this economic mess ?


Just WHO do you think is going to pay for this 'new found' health care benefits you refer to?


And no I don't think Obama is solely responsible for our deficit...I never said as much and I would like to know why you would ask the question.
B beternUOld Faithful
quote:
Originally posted by elinterventor01:
quote:
Originally posted by beternU:
quote:
Originally posted by elinterventor01:
betern nuttin,

"Just two policies dating from the Bush Administration — tax cuts and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan — accounted for over $500 billion of the deficit in 2009"

Now, as to the tax cuts contributing to the deficit, that is not true. I've posted on this about a dozen times, showing the statement is not true. Still, you and others of the left repeat the same false statement. The tax rate was above that level at which revenues start to decline -- a point of diminishing returns. The tax cut resulted in the largest level of tax receipts in US history. Overspending caused the deficit. Europe forgot this lesson, know since the time of the Domesday Book and is suffering. I assume you continue to post this falsehood either because you suffer from attention deficit disorder, or are using the Big Lie technique.

When the present tax cuts phase out, the deficit will increase at a higher rate.


You looked at only one corner of the picture--the 2003 Jobs and Growth Act. There is much more to it than that. You did not read, from the link I provided, the description of how the "Bush-era tax cuts" were factored into the alalysis. Here is the rest of the story:

"Bush-era tax cuts — Through 2011, the estimated impacts come from adding up past estimates of various changes in tax laws — chiefly the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA), the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (JGTRRA), the 2008 stimulus package, and a series of annual AMT patches — enacted since 2001. Those estimates were based on the economic and technical assumptions used when CBO and the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) originally “scored” the legislation, but the numbers would not change materially using up-to-date assumptions. Most of the Bush tax cuts are scheduled to expire after December 2010 (partway through fiscal 2011). We added the cost of extending them, along with continuing AMT relief, from estimates prepared by CBO and JCT.[16] (We did not assume extension of the temporary tax provisions enacted in ARRA.) Together, the tax cuts account for $1.7 trillion in extra deficits in 2001 through 2008, and $3.4 trillion over the 2009-2019 period. Finally, we added the extra debt-service costs caused by the Bush-era tax cuts, amounting to more than $200 billion through 2008 and another $1.7 trillion over the 2009-2019 period — and $330 billion in 2019 alone."

When you selectively extract only part of the story, you can reach a different conclusion from the correct one calculated by these folks who really know what they are doing.


I read the thing. I posted what the actual results were. Further:

2001**$1991.1
2002**$1853.1
2003**$1782.3
2004**$1880.1
2005**$2151.6
2006**$2406.0
2007**$2568.0
2008**$2524.0

dollars in current billions

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org...yafact.cfm?Docid=200

Again, cutting the tax rates resulted in more revenue, period! Increased revenue, got that! Without the tax cuts, the deficit would be larger.


Deficits are calculated on the basis of the difference between revenues and expenditure. Those figures you posted might be correct insofar as revenues are concerned, but the fact remains that the expenditures in excess of revenues piled up during the Bush maladministration were big 'uns and they are having huge forward effects in terms of debt interest and the ongoing Iraq War costs--wjhich are not easy to get out of, irrespective of who is in the Oval Office. We are STUCK! Had the costs of the Iraq War (incurred through lying and neocon manipulation), been avoided, we wouldbe in hugely better shape!
elinterventor01elinterventor01Post Master
quote:
Deficits are calculated on the basis of the difference between revenues and expenditure. Those figures you posted might be correct insofar as revenues are concerned, but the fact remains that the expenditures in excess of revenues piled up during the Bush maladministration were big 'uns and they are having huge forward effects in terms of debt interest and the ongoing Iraq War costs--wjhich are not easy to get out of, irrespective of who is in the Oval Office. We are STUCK! Had the costs of the Iraq War (incurred through lying and neocon manipulation), been avoided, we wouldbe in hugely better shape!


betern nuttin,

The figures I posted are correct and prove that the statement that Bush's tax cuts contributed to the deficit. As to the expenditure half of formula, the war added about $80 billion per year to the deficit. While significant, other expenses increased the deficit even worse. Republicans ruled like Democrats-light for six years and paid the price.

Just because Republicans ran up the deficit gives the Democrats no good argument to do the same, only double. The projected deficit increase doesn't take into account the effect of raising taxes, which will reduce revenue, as shown in my earlier posts.

http://directorblue.blogspot.c...out-now-wouldnt.html

Attachments

Hide
Images (1)
  • imf_obama_deficit
ferrelljferrelljOld Faithful
quote:
Originally posted by PKROUSE:
Wow i thought racism was gone from the south. Calling Obama BOY sure sound's racist to me, and bush was the one who fixed thing's, now the boy has to get us out of the hole the retard left us in.


So you have a problem calling one president a boy but no problem with calling another one a retard? Oh by the way, racism is not gone in the south, north, east, or west.
marksw59marksw59Post Master
quote:
Originally posted by PKROUSE:
Wow i thought racism was gone from the south. Calling Obama BOY sure sound's racist to me, and bush was the one who fixed thing's, now the boy has to get us out of the hole the retard left us in.


I have referred to Obama as boy. I also referred to Clinton as boy. All this time I thought I was exercising racial equality in my derisive remarks.
Tomme73Tomme73Hall of Famer
quote:
Originally posted by PKROUSE:
Wow i thought racism was gone from the south. Calling Obama BOY sure sound's racist to me, and bush was the one who fixed thing's, now the boy has to get us out of the hole the retard left us in.


You sound too much like another former forum contributor who was all to quick to throw out the race card. Those of us who have been here at least 6 months refer to him as BnW. Saying "your boy" is very common, as is "my boy." Have you ever been to a baseball game when the ump makes a good call and someone says, "You're my boy, blue"? There's nothing racist in the least. Of course, the most racist people in our society are the ones who are screaming racism all the time.
Tomme73Tomme73Hall of Famer
quote:
Originally posted by elinterventor01:
quote:
Deficits are calculated on the basis of the difference between revenues and expenditure. Those figures you posted might be correct insofar as revenues are concerned, but the fact remains that the expenditures in excess of revenues piled up during the Bush maladministration were big 'uns and they are having huge forward effects in terms of debt interest and the ongoing Iraq War costs--wjhich are not easy to get out of, irrespective of who is in the Oval Office. We are STUCK! Had the costs of the Iraq War (incurred through lying and neocon manipulation), been avoided, we wouldbe in hugely better shape!


betern nuttin,

The figures I posted are correct and prove that the statement that Bush's tax cuts contributed to the deficit. As to the expenditure half of formula, the war added about $80 billion per year to the deficit. While significant, other expenses increased the deficit even worse. Republicans ruled like Democrats-light for six years and paid the price.

Just because Republicans ran up the deficit gives the Democrats no good argument to do the same, only double. The projected deficit increase doesn't take into account the effect of raising taxes, which will reduce revenue, as shown in my earlier posts.

http://directorblue.blogspot.c...out-now-wouldnt.html


Have you not learned by now that too much "book learnin'" can often lead to a diminished level of common sense and an absolute failure for sound political reasoning?
Renegade NationRenegade NationHall of Famer
quote:
Originally posted by midknightrider:
quote:
Originally posted by Jankinonya:
Whether you like Obama or not, surely you can be reasonable enough to admit that where we are today economically can not be laid at his feet.



Whether you're Democrat or Republican, surely you can be reasonable enough to admit that where we are today economically is the result of poor fiscal policy for the last fifty years. No matter who's in power, you can't spend more money than you take in. You can argue all day about how much to take, who to take it from, and how to spend it, but the bottom line is...if you spend more than you take you have to borrow. We've been doing that for over fifty years and apparently the American people have been convinced there's no problem with it because we keep doing it. Sooner or later someone is going to have to pay the piper or, as I suspect, admit we aren't going to keep our promises.


You can argue all day about how much to take, who to take it from, and how to spend it, but the bottom line is...if you spend more than you take you have to borrow.

Or PRINT...which is devastating to just about anyone who is not a bank or the receiver of the "new" money...

The dollar has lost 95% of it's value through Democrat and Republican administrations since the Fed came into existence.
Renegade NationRenegade NationHall of Famer
quote:
Originally posted by beternU:
Deficits are calculated on the basis of the difference between revenues and expenditure. Those figures you posted might be correct insofar as revenues are concerned, but the fact remains that the expenditures in excess of revenues piled up during the Bush maladministration were big 'uns and they are having huge forward effects in terms of debt interest and the ongoing Iraq War costs--wjhich are not easy to get out of, irrespective of who is in the Oval Office. We are STUCK! Had the costs of the Iraq War (incurred through lying and neocon manipulation), been avoided, we wouldbe in hugely better shape!


The thing you and everyone seems to forget, ultimately it is the congress that holds the purse strings.

So we can argue all day about Bush this, Clinton that, and Obama sucks, etc...meanwhile WE send the same people to Washington year after year...the only people that have the Constitutional authority to spend money.

Yes presidents propose ideas and sign budgets into law...but once again it is the ultimate Constitutional responsibility of Congress.

And when ever Congress relinquishes it's authority to declare war to a president...it's authority over the purse strings to a bureauracy, etc...it does so in violation of their Constitutional duty.

Add Reply

Post
affilated websites:
Times Daily | Decatur Daily | Courier Journal | The Hartselle Enquirer | Moulton Advertiser | The Redstone Rocket | The Madison Record | The Franklin County Times | Reach256 | TNValleyStuff.com TNValleyHomefinder.com | TNValleyWheels.com

Terms of Service | Private Policy | California Privacy Policy/Private Policy

Untitled Document

Membership Required

We're sorry. You must be signed in to continue. Sign In or Register
×
Are you sure you want to remove from your Block List?
×
Loading...
×
When you block a person, they can no longer invite you to a private message or post to your profile wall. Replies and comments they make will be collapsed/hidden by default. Finally, you'll never receive email notifications about content they create or likes they designate for your content.
Note: if you proceed, you will no longer be following .
×
Advanced Search
Advanced Search
Link copied to your clipboard.
×