Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

The economy is improving, no thanks to Obama.  That increased tax revenue.  The only spending cut was the sequester, which, Obama did suggest. Then, the Democrats attempted to blame on the Republicans. 

 

While government employment is down, the cost of those working for the government has increased substantially thru contractors.  I suggest www.pogo.org for research into the increased costs. 

A good example of increased government cost for services is Eric Snowden.  Reportedly, he was paid over $200,000 while employed by the CIA and $150,000 while employed by the NSA as a contractor.  Add the markup for the contractor's costs and you have a considerable amount.  To claim that government is smaller under Obama is a sign of ignorance of facts, or worse. 

Originally Posted by seeweed:
Originally Posted by Chuck Farley:

It's funny you make it sound like they cut spending when in fact they raised taxes. 

They did both, but it is a fact that Obama is the smallest government president we have had in recent history.

 

__________________________________

Sorry, but you were misinformed.  As you may clearly see, government was NOT smaller.  Really shouldn't believe Progressive propaganda.  Its usually wrong -- embarrassing wrong.

 

<colgroup><col span="3" width="64" /></colgroup>
Year  
Outlays 
20082,982,544 
20093,517,677 
20103,457,079 
20113,603,059 
20123,537,127 
   
   
   
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals/
Table 1-1  
Originally Posted by direstraits:

A good example of increased government cost for services is Eric Snowden.  Reportedly, he was paid over $200,000 while employed by the CIA and $150,000 while employed by the NSA as a contractor.  Add the markup for the contractor's costs and you have a considerable amount.  To claim that government is smaller under Obama is a sign of ignorance of facts, or worse. 

Please,  these things are just too easy to find out.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ri...ve-its-barack-obama/

I would have to give credit first to the American voters who have voted for a very divided group of ideologues on both sides of the political spectrum. There aren't many middle ground politicians left, so even getting a continuing resolution through both houses of Congress much less an actual budget is nearly impossible. Second, to Obama for the idea of the sequestration. And finally, Harry Reid for keeping the Senate locked down.

Originally Posted by seeweed:
Originally Posted by direstraits:

A good example of increased government cost for services is Eric Snowden.  Reportedly, he was paid over $200,000 while employed by the CIA and $150,000 while employed by the NSA as a contractor.  Add the markup for the contractor's costs and you have a considerable amount.  To claim that government is smaller under Obama is a sign of ignorance of facts, or worse. 

Please,  these things are just too easy to find out.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ri...ve-its-barack-obama/

_______________________________

Bad choice, the graph on the left of your source clearly shows spending under Obama out stripping all other presidents since 1952. Really should learn how to read information when quoting from a source that made the same mistake.  The other presidents built the Interstate highway system and coped with the cold war with less.  Obama's just given more spending. 

 

One more time:

 Obviously, spending and deficits did not decrease.  Progressive accounting aka creative accounting will, if used with the IRS or real world scenarios, result in prison time and bankruptcy.

 

<colgroup><col width="85" /><col span="2" width="98" /><col width="102" /></colgroup>
Fiscal YearIn Current 2005 Dollars
ReceiptsOutlaysSurplus or Deficit (&ndash
2001 $          1,991.1 $          1,862.8 $            128.2
    
2002 $          1,853.1 $          2,010.9 $            (157.8)
2003 $          1,782.3 $          2,159.9 $            (377.6)
2004 $          1,880.1 $          2,292.8 $            (412.7)
2005 $          2,153.6 $          2,472.0 $            (318.3)
2006 $          2,406.9 $          2,655.0 $            (248.2)
2007 $          2,568.0 $          2,728.7 $            (160.7)
2008 $          2,524.0 $          2,982.5 $            (458.6)
TOTAL $          15,168.0 $          17,301.8 $          (2,133.9)
    
2009 $          2,105.0 $          3,517.7 $          (1,412.7)
2010 $          2,162.7 $          3,456.2 $          (1,293.5)
2011 $          2,303.5 $          3,603.1 $          (1,299.6)
2012 $          2,450.1 $          3,537.1 $          (1,086.9)
TOTAL $        9,021.3 $       14,114.1 $        (5,092.7)
    

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals

 

Probably the biggest way the statistics was cooked is because the 2009 budget was inflated with emergency spending and that spending rate became the new norm instead of falling back to pre- recession levels. The only reason that the rate of spending hasn't increased further is because the voters don't believe in either party and voted for divided government. As for the chart not attributed to its author by the purple one:

 

"As the chart indicates, Nutting arrives at that 1.4% number by assigning 2009—when spending surged nearly 20%—to George W. Bush: “The 2009 fiscal year, which Republicans count as part of Obama’s legacy, began four months before Obama moved into the White House. The major spending decisions in the 2009 fiscal year were made by George W. Bush and the previous Congress. Like a relief pitcher who comes into the game with the bases loaded, Obama came in with a budget in place that called for spending to increase by hundreds of billions of dollars in response to the worst economic and financial calamity in generations.”

Let me complete the metaphor for Nutting: “Then as those runners scored, Obama kept putting more on base.”

Obama chose not to reverse that elevated level of spending; thus he, along with congressional Democrats, are responsible for it. Only by establishing 2009 as the new baseline, something Republican budget hawks like Paul Ryan feared would happen, does Obama come off looking like a tightwad. Obama has turned a one-off surge in spending due to the Great Recession into his permanent New Normal through 2016 and beyond.

It’s as if one of my teenagers crashed our family minivan, and I had to buy a new one. And then, since I liked that new car smell so much, I decided to buy a new van every year for the rest of my life. I would indeed be a reckless spender.

Here is another way Nutting could have framed the spending issue:

The Obama spending record looks a little different now, yes?"

 

http://www.aei-ideas.org/2012/...e-really-did-happen/

Yes, but only by increasing revenue and decreasing fund required for recovery.

Man spends like a teenage girl with daddy's credit card.

 

<colgroup><col width="63" /><col span="2" width="79" /></colgroup>
YearIn millions 
ReceiptsOutlays
2008 $2,523,991 $2,982,544
2009 $2,104,989 $3,517,677
2010 $2,162,706 $3,457,079
2011 $2,303,466 $3,603,059
2012 $2,450,164 $3,537,127
2013   estimate $2,712,045 $3,684,947

 http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals

 

 Truth of the matter is ignored by whiney conservatives.

 

"While more work remains to be done, the U.S. economy has made significant progress in recovering from the worst downturn since the Great Depression. When the President took office in 2009, the private sector was losing over 800,000 jobs a month, credit markets that provide capital for investment had seized up, and businesses—small and large—were struggling. The housing market was in free fall and our auto industry was near collapse." http://www.whitehouse.gov/site...014/assets/14msr.pdf

 

         

Through the determination and resiliency of the American people and the decisive actions of the President working with Congress to bolster job growth and jumpstart economic activity, we successfully broke the back of the recession and pulled the Nation back from the brink.

 

      

The economy has been recovering ever since. We have seen positive economic growth for 15 consecutive quarters. Through June, the private sector has added jobs every month for 40 straight months, with a total of 7.2 million jobs added over that period. This year alone, more than 1.2 million private sector jobs have been added so far. The unemployment rate has fallen from a high of 10 percent in 2009 to 7.6 percent as of June. Manufacturers have added more than 500,000 jobs over the past three years. And the housing market and the auto industry continue to show signs of recovery.

MID-SESSION REVIEW Figures in RED are for dire since he has trouble reading charts

4

Table 1. CHANGES IN DEFICITS FROM THE 2014 BUDGET

(In billions of dollars)

 

2013

 

2014

 

2015

 

2016

 

2017

 

2018

 

2019

 

2020

 

2021

 

2022

 

2023

 

2014- 2018

 

2014- 2023

 

2014 Budget deficit

 

973

 

744

 

576

 

528

 

487

 

475

 

498

 

503

 

501

 

519

 

439

 

Percent of GDP

 

6.0%

 

4.4%

 

3.2%

 

2.8%

 

2.4%

 

2.3%

 

2.3%

 

2.2%

 

2.1%

 

2.1%

 

1.7%

 

Enacted legislation:

 

Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act of 2013

 

5

 

–8

 

*

 

*

 

–*

 

–*

 

*

 

*

 

*

 

*

 

*

 

–8

 

–7

 

Debt service

 

*

 

*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–1

 

Subtotal, enacted legislation

 

5

 

–8

 

*

 

*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

*

 

*

 

*

 

–*

 

–8

 

–8

 

Economic and technical reestimates:

 

Receipts

 

–65

 

11

 

47

 

46

 

27

 

15

 

30

 

58

 

40

 

42

 

69

 

146

 

384

 

Outlays:

 

Discretionary programs

 

–43

 

1

 

3

 

6

 

3

 

3

 

2

 

2

 

2

 

1

 

1

 

14

 

21

 

Mandatory:

 

Medicaid

 

8

 

8

 

11

 

11

 

11

 

12

 

13

 

13

 

14

 

14

 

15

 

54

 

123

 

Social Security

 

–3

 

–9

 

–12

 

–12

 

–11

 

–10

 

–8

 

–7

 

–6

 

–5

 

–4

 

–54

 

–85

 

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program

 

2

 

6

 

7

 

6

 

7

 

6

 

6

 

6

 

6

 

7

 

8

 

32

 

65

 

Premium assistance tax credits

 

.........

 

1

 

–5

 

–7

 

–3

 

–2

 

–3

 

–4

 

–5

 

–7

 

–8

 

–16

 

–43

 

Proceeds from GSE Preferred Stock

 

–71

 

3

 

5

 

6

 

4

 

3

 

3

 

3

 

3

 

3

 

3

 

20

 

34

 

Earned Income Tax Credit

 

2

 

3

 

3

 

2

 

2

 

2

 

4

 

4

 

4

 

4

 

4

 

12

 

32

 

Medicare

 

–2

 

*

 

1

 

1

 

–2

 

*

 

2

 

4

 

5

 

8

 

10

 

1

 

31

 

Unemployment compensation

 

–6

 

–5

 

–3

 

–3

 

–2

 

–2

 

–1

 

–1

 

–1

 

–1

 

–1

 

–15

 

–19

 

Supplemental Security Income program

 

–*

 

–1

 

–1

 

–1

 

–1

 

–1

 

–2

 

–2

 

–2

 

–2

 

–2

 

–6

 

–15

 

Federal retirement

 

*

 

–*

 

–1

 

–2

 

–2

 

–2

 

–2

 

–2

 

–2

 

–2

 

–1

 

–7

 

–14

 

Child Tax Credit

 

–1

 

–3

 

–3

 

–3

 

–3

 

–3

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

–16

 

–11

 

Troubled Asset Relief Program

 

–7

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

.........

 

.........

 

.........

 

5

 

7

 

Deposit Insurance Fund

 

–6

 

*

 

1

 

*

 

–*

 

–*

 

1

 

2

 

*

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

5

 

Other

 

–18

 

–1

 

–4

 

–4

 

–2

 

–2

 

–1

 

–*

 

–*

 

–1

 

–1

 

–13

 

–16

 

Total mandatory

 

–104

 

3

 

–*

 

–3

 

–2

 

2

 

14

 

17

 

17

 

21

 

25

 

*

 

93

 

Net interest

1

–7

 

–*

 

–*

 

2

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

4

 

7

 

11

 

15

 

3

 

41

 

Subtotal, outlays

2

–154

 

3

 

2

 

4

 

2

 

6

 

17

 

23

 

26

 

33

 

41

 

17

 

156

 

Subtotal, economic and technical reestimates

 

–219

 

14

 

49

 

50

 

29

 

21

 

47

 

81

 

65

 

74

 

109

 

163

 

540

 

Total, changes

 

–214

 

6

 

49

 

50

 

29

 

21

 

47

 

81

 

65

 

74

 

109

 

155

 

532

 

Mid-Session Review deficit

 

759

 

750

 

626

 

578

 

516

 

496

 

545

 

584

 

566

 

593

 

549

 

Percent of GDP

 

4.7%

 

4.5%

 

3.5%

 

3.1%

 

2.6%

 

2.4%

 

2.5%

 

2.6%

 

2.4%

 

2.4%

 

2.1%

 

Note:

 

MID-SESSION REVIEW

MID-SESSION REVIEW

4

Table 1. CHANGES IN DEFICITS FROM THE 2014 BUDGET

(In billions of dollars)

 

2013

 

2014

 

2015

 

2016

 

2017

 

2018

 

2019

 

2020

 

2021

 

2022

 

2023

 

2014- 2018

 

2014- 2023

 

2014 Budget deficit

 

973

 

744

 

576

 

528

 

487

 

475

 

498

 

503

 

501

 

519

 

439

 

Percent of GDP

 

6.0%

 

4.4%

 

3.2%

 

2.8%

 

2.4%

 

2.3%

 

2.3%

 

2.2%

 

2.1%

 

2.1%

 

1.7%

 

Enacted legislation:

 

Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act of 2013

 

5

 

–8

 

*

 

*

 

–*

 

–*

 

*

 

*

 

*

 

*

 

*

 

–8

 

–7

 

Debt service

 

*

 

*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–1

 

Subtotal, enacted legislation

 

5

 

–8

 

*

 

*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

*

 

*

 

*

 

–*

 

–8

 

–8

 

Economic and technical reestimates:

 

Receipts

 

–65

 

11

 

47

 

46

 

27

 

15

 

30

 

58

 

40

 

42

 

69

 

146

 

384

 

Outlays:

 

Discretionary programs

 

–43

 

1

 

3

 

6

 

3

 

3

 

2

 

2

 

2

 

1

 

1

 

14

 

21

 

Mandatory:

 

Medicaid

 

8

 

8

 

11

 

11

 

11

 

12

 

13

 

13

 

14

 

14

 

15

 

54

 

123

 

Social Security

 

–3

 

–9

 

–12

 

–12

 

–11

 

–10

 

–8

 

–7

 

–6

 

–5

 

–4

 

–54

 

–85

 

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program

 

2

 

6

 

7

 

6

 

7

 

6

 

6

 

6

 

6

 

7

 

8

 

32

 

65

 

Premium assistance tax credits

 

.........

 

1

 

–5

 

–7

 

–3

 

–2

 

–3

 

–4

 

–5

 

–7

 

–8

 

–16

 

–43

 

Proceeds from GSE Preferred Stock

 

–71

 

3

 

5

 

6

 

4

 

3

 

3

 

3

 

3

 

3

 

3

 

20

 

34

 

Earned Income Tax Credit

 

2

 

3

 

3

 

2

 

2

 

2

 

4

 

4

 

4

 

4

 

4

 

12

 

32

 

Medicare

 

–2

 

*

 

1

 

1

 

–2

 

*

 

2

 

4

 

5

 

8

 

10

 

1

 

31

 

Unemployment compensation

 

–6

 

–5

 

–3

 

–3

 

–2

 

–2

 

–1

 

–1

 

–1

 

–1

 

–1

 

–15

 

–19

 

Supplemental Security Income program

 

–*

 

–1

 

–1

 

–1

 

–1

 

–1

 

–2

 

–2

 

–2

 

–2

 

–2

 

–6

 

–15

 

Federal retirement

 

*

 

–*

 

–1

 

–2

 

–2

 

–2

 

–2

 

–2

 

–2

 

–2

 

–1

 

–7

 

–14

 

Child Tax Credit

 

–1

 

–3

 

–3

 

–3

 

–3

 

–3

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

–16

 

–11

 

Troubled Asset Relief Program

 

–7

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

.........

 

.........

 

.........

 

5

 

7

 

Deposit Insurance Fund

 

–6

 

*

 

1

 

*

 

–*

 

–*

 

1

 

2

 

*

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

5

 

Other

 

–18

 

–1

 

–4

 

–4

 

–2

 

–2

 

–1

 

–*

 

–*

 

–1

 

–1

 

–13

 

–16

 

Total mandatory

 

–104

 

3

 

–*

 

–3

 

–2

 

2

 

14

 

17

 

17

 

21

 

25

 

*

 

93

 

Net interest

1

–7

 

–*

 

–*

 

2

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

4

 

7

 

11

 

15

 

3

 

41

 

Subtotal, outlays

2

–154

 

3

 

2

 

4

 

2

 

6

 

17

 

23

 

26

 

33

 

41

 

17

 

156

 

Subtotal, economic and technical reestimates

 

–219

 

14

 

49

 

50

 

29

 

21

 

47

 

81

 

65

 

74

 

109

 

163

 

540

 

Total, changes

 

–214

 

6

 

49

 

50

 

29

 

21

 

47

 

81

 

65

 

74

 

109

 

155

 

532

 

Mid-Session Review deficit

 

759

 

750

 

626

 

578

 

516

 

496

 

545

 

584

 

566

 

593

 

549

 

Percent of GDP

 

4.7%

 

4.5%

 

3.5%

 

3.1%

 

2.6%

 

2.4%

 

2.5%

 

2.6%

 

2.4%

 

2.4%

 

2.1%

 

Note:

 

4

Table 1. CHANGES IN DEFICITS FROM THE 2014 BUDGET

(In billions of dollars)

 

2013

 

2014

 

2015

 

2016

 

2017

 

2018

 

2019

 

2020

 

2021

 

2022

 

2023

 

2014- 2018

 

2014- 2023

 

2014 Budget deficit

 

973

 

744

 

576

 

528

 

487

 

475

 

498

 

503

 

501

 

519

 

439

 

Percent of GDP

 

6.0%

 

4.4%

 

3.2%

 

2.8%

 

2.4%

 

2.3%

 

2.3%

 

2.2%

 

2.1%

 

2.1%

 

1.7%

 

Enacted legislation:

 

Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act of 2013

 

5

 

–8

 

*

 

*

 

–*

 

–*

 

*

 

*

 

*

 

*

 

*

 

–8

 

–7

 

Debt service

 

*

 

*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–1

 

Subtotal, enacted legislation

 

5

 

–8

 

*

 

*

 

–*

 

–*

 

–*

 

*

 

*

 

*

 

–*

 

–8

 

–8

 

Economic and technical reestimates:

 

Receipts

 

–65

 

11

 

47

 

46

 

27

 

15

 

30

 

58

 

40

 

42

 

69

 

146

 

384

 

Outlays:

 

Discretionary programs

 

–43

 

1

 

3

 

6

 

3

 

3

 

2

 

2

 

2

 

1

 

1

 

14

 

21

 

Mandatory:

 

Medicaid

 

8

 

8

 

11

 

11

 

11

 

12

 

13

 

13

 

14

 

14

 

15

 

54

 

123

 

Social Security

 

–3

 

–9

 

–12

 

–12

 

–11

 

–10

 

–8

 

–7

 

–6

 

–5

 

–4

 

–54

 

–85

 

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program

 

2

 

6

 

7

 

6

 

7

 

6

 

6

 

6

 

6

 

7

 

8

 

32

 

65

 

Premium assistance tax credits

 

.........

 

1

 

–5

 

–7

 

–3

 

–2

 

–3

 

–4

 

–5

 

–7

 

–8

 

–16

 

–43

 

Proceeds from GSE Preferred Stock

 

–71

 

3

 

5

 

6

 

4

 

3

 

3

 

3

 

3

 

3

 

3

 

20

 

34

 

Earned Income Tax Credit

 

2

 

3

 

3

 

2

 

2

 

2

 

4

 

4

 

4

 

4

 

4

 

12

 

32

 

Medicare

 

–2

 

*

 

1

 

1

 

–2

 

*

 

2

 

4

 

5

 

8

 

10

 

1

 

31

 

Unemployment compensation

 

–6

 

–5

 

–3

 

–3

 

–2

 

–2

 

–1

 

–1

 

–1

 

–1

 

–1

 

–15

 

–19

 

Supplemental Security Income program

 

–*

 

–1

 

–1

 

–1

 

–1

 

–1

 

–2

 

–2

 

–2

 

–2

 

–2

 

–6

 

–15

 

Federal retirement

 

*

 

–*

 

–1

 

–2

 

–2

 

–2

 

–2

 

–2

 

–2

 

–2

 

–1

 

–7

 

–14

 

Child Tax Credit

 

–1

 

–3

 

–3

 

–3

 

–3

 

–3

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

–16

 

–11

 

Troubled Asset Relief Program

 

–7

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

.........

 

.........

 

.........

 

5

 

7

 

Deposit Insurance Fund

 

–6

 

*

 

1

 

*

 

–*

 

–*

 

1

 

2

 

*

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

5

 

Other

 

–18

 

–1

 

–4

 

–4

 

–2

 

–2

 

–1

 

–*

 

–*

 

–1

 

–1

 

–13

 

–16

 

Total mandatory

 

–104

 

3

 

–*

 

–3

 

–2

 

2

 

14

 

17

 

17

 

21

 

25

 

*

 

93

 

Net interest

1

–7

 

–*

 

–*

 

2

 

1

 

1

 

1

 

4

 

7

 

11

 

15

 

3

 

41

 

Subtotal, outlays

2

–154

 

3

 

2

 

4

 

2

 

6

 

17

 

23

 

26

 

33

 

41

 

17

 

156

 

Subtotal, economic and technical reestimates

 

–219

 

14

 

49

 

50

 

29

 

21

 

47

 

81

 

65

 

74

 

109

 

163

 

540

 

Total, changes

 

–214

 

6

 

49

 

50

 

29

 

21

 

47

 

81

 

65

 

74

 

109

 

155

 

532

 

Mid-Session Review deficit

 

759

 

750

 

626

 

578

 

516

 

496

 

545

 

584

 

566

 

593

 

549

 

Percent of GDP

 

4.7%

 

4.5%

 

3.5%

 

3.1%

 

2.6%

 

2.4%

 

2.5%

 

2.6%

 

2.4%

 

2.4%

 

2.1%

 

Note:

 

 The figures in RED I highlighted for dire since he doesn't understand charts.

Last edited by Quaildog

"By JONATHAN WEISMAN

WASHINGTON — The federal budget deficit will fall to $759 billion for the fiscal year that ends this September, a $214 billion improvement from the projection made in March, as spending cuts, tax increases and an improving economy begin to tame the government’s red ink, the White House budget office said on Monday.

 

The annual midsession review from the White House Office of Management and Budget was largely in line with a recent forecast from the Congressional Budget Office. Both see a rapid decline in deficits expressed as a percentage of the economy, the fastest since the years following World War II, according to Sylvia Mathews Burwell, the White House budget director. The White House said this year’s deficit would reach 4.7 percent of the gross domestic product, down from more than 10 percent four years ago, and would continue to slide to 3 percent of the economy by 2017.

But absent structural changes to Medicare and Social Security, the forecast makes clear that such short-run improvements may not last. The White House projected the deficit to bottom out at $496 billion in 2018, then start ticking back up to $593 billion in 2022.

 

Over the course of the next decade, the White House said nearly $6.6 trillion will be added to the federal debt, with President Obama’s policies in place. That is slightly higher than the $6.3 trillion that the Congressional Budget Office said current policies without additional changes would add to the debt through 2023. The office’s forecast assumes the automatic spending cuts known as sequestration will remain in force, while the president’s figures assume they will not."

 

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes...deficit-will-shrink/

 

Not exactly zero, is it!

Originally Posted by Quaildog:

Dire I’m beginning to wonder if you were ever anything other than a ‘book keeper’ in an Ace Hardware store somewhere in the outskirts of Rome Ga.

 

BTW UMMMWAAA!! to the first lady. She's a sweetheart.

 

 

Wonder?

That would be YOU ...trying to put a sentence together.

CALL Beturnu...

Ya'll would make a Family???

[1]" Now we have a party in control of the House that would rather break things than move things along.  The budget process is relatively simple (though the in-fighting is brutal), so that means the only reason the US has not had a legal budget since before Obama took office is because the Republican Party is too fractured and scared of its own shadow to be anything except a roadblock to any kind of progress".

[2]Jeff Sessions is your only source for information regarding to economy? Why he is shutting the paper mill down in Courtland as thanks for voting him into office. NASA will be next. Just watch. Our state senators would be  well advised to monitor the heartbeat of business in Alabama before they suddenly close their doors. Not after.

============================================

[1] comment from ccwriter after nytimes post by dire http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes...it-will-shrink/?_r=0

[2] http://www.timesdaily.com/news...f4-0019bb30f31a.html

Originally Posted by direstraits:

The sad part is that the recovery is at about 1.5 to 2 percent.  If, we had a Reagan style recovery of 5 to 7 percent most of the troubles would be solved. 

_______________________

 

bahahahaha! reagan "spent" us out of a recession. the 'deficit hawk" teapublicans would NEVER allow that , now! time for you to join reality!

Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
Originally Posted by direstraits:

The sad part is that the recovery is at about 1.5 to 2 percent.  If, we had a Reagan style recovery of 5 to 7 percent most of the troubles would be solved. 

_______________________

 

bahahahaha! reagan "spent" us out of a recession. the 'deficit hawk" teapublicans would NEVER allow that , now! time for you to join reality!

____________________________________
No, the jobs generated were not government and, even most, not due to military build up.  Time for you to realize the failures of Progressivism.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×