Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 29
  1.    #1  
    I don't get this, Republicans keep getting mad at Obama for increasing the national debt. IS obama increasing it? Yes, Is it a bad thing? Yes. But he's doing for a couple reasons: create jobs, Help the Economy, increase health covreage , and couple more..

    That's how you deal with a recission, the government has to spend more to create jobs, then when the economy gets better, you spend less, and start making up the debt.

    If you want to blame the debt on people, blame on those who brought it up, when there wasn't a recession.

    http://zfacts.com/metaPage/lib/National-Debt-GDP.gif


    Look at Reagan, and Bush senior, look at Jr. And stop praising Reagan in the same sentence you bash Obama for increasing debt.


    Chart speaks for itself...
  2. #2  
    Why a nation as rich and prosperous as the USA feels the need to run continually in the red is baffling. Don't spend more money then you take in....simple concept (I will give a 2 year pass for the crap we find ourselves in this last while). Other countries can do it so the USA can do it.

    Americans love their low taxes....unfortunately that means the government can't afford anything it's doing.
    Last edited by ryleyinstl; 04/07/2010 at 04:15 PM.
    Sprint|Samsung Epic
  3. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #3  
    Quote Originally Posted by nimer55 View Post
    I don't get this, Republicans keep getting mad at Obama for increasing the national debt. IS obama increasing it? Yes, Is it a bad thing? Yes. But he's doing for a couple reasons: create jobs, Help the Economy, increase health covreage , and couple more..

    That's how you deal with a recission, the government has to spend more to create jobs, then when the economy gets better, you spend less, and start making up the debt.
    Show me where that's worked? Who told you that? The way out of recession is to tighten your budget, spend only the money that you have and stop borrowing, and get money back into the hands of the consumers so they can drive the economy back up buying products and services.
    If you want to blame the debt on people, blame on those who brought it up, when there wasn't a recession.
    I don't know that anyone is blaming debt on Obama, except for the debt that he's directly responsible for. That's fair isn't it? Or should he not be liable for his spending?
    Look at Reagan, and Bush senior, look at Jr. And stop praising Reagan in the same sentence you bash Obama for increasing debt.

    Chart speaks for itself...
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  4. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #4  
    Quote Originally Posted by ryleyinstl View Post
    Why a nation as rich and prosperous as the USA feels the need to run continually in the red is baffling. Don't spend more money then you take in....simple concept (I will give a 2 year pass for the crap we find ourselves in this last while). Other countries can do it so the USA can do it.

    American's love their low taxes....unfortunately that means the government can't afford anything it's doing.
    if it can't afford it, it needs to stop
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  5. #5  
    For public consumption:

    http://michaelscomments.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/unemployment-projection-march-2010.gif
  6. bmatlosz's Avatar
    Posts
    0 Posts
    Global Posts
    53 Global Posts
    #6  
    Nimer55, please look at your numbers correctly:

    US National Debt As Percent Of GDP in United States 1792-2012 - Federal State Local

    As you can see the highest percentage was under FDR and Truman ( Spendocrats ) and if you look at the trend based on Nobama's spending you will see it at over 100% again with a Spendocrat in office at 2012!!

    That makes Regan's paltry 50% seem like a bargain. I just love how the left tries to spin the facts but as always they come back to bite you on the ***.
    Last edited by bmatlosz; 04/07/2010 at 04:03 PM. Reason: not finished
  7.    #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Show me where that's worked? Who told you that? The way out of recession is to tighten your budget, spend only the money that you have and stop borrowing, and get money back into the hands of the consumers so they can drive the economy back up buying products and services.

    I don't know that anyone is blaming debt on Obama, except for the debt that he's directly responsible for. That's fair isn't it? Or should he not be liable for his spending?
    Tax cuts do not solve the economic problem. All tax cuts do is make it so those with jobs, have a little bit more cash, but even with a little more cash, not alot of companies are willing to take huge risks. But when you create jobs, and the un-employment rate goes down, then you have a solution... Then when the economy gets better, you undo the Reagan tax cuts for the rich, and start gaining your debt back.
  8. #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by nimer55 View Post
    I don't get this, Republicans keep getting mad at Obama for increasing the national debt. IS obama increasing it? Yes, Is it a bad thing? Yes. But he's doing for a couple reasons: create jobs, Help the Economy, increase health covreage , and couple more..
    Lemme 'splain it to ya. Fiscal conservatives aren't upset that Obama is trying to make the economy better. They're upset because they believe that:
    1) the fixes are short-term and will harm the US greater in the long-term
    2) it's not the government's responsibility to fix the economy in a free-market system. This is called laissez-faire economics. You should have learned about it in high-school.

    So take a step back. The differences are rarely rooted in action...they're about philosophy/paradigm. You'll be a better person to try to understand other people's philosophies (I'm not saying you need to agree with them).

    Quote Originally Posted by nimer55 View Post
    That's how you deal with a recission, the government has to spend more to create jobs, then when the economy gets better, you spend less, and start making up the debt.
    Again, this is where your philosophy says that it's the government's responsibility is to fix the economy.

    Quote Originally Posted by nimer55 View Post
    If you want to blame the debt on people, blame on those who brought it up, when there wasn't a recession.

    http://zfacts.com/metaPage/lib/National-Debt-GDP.gif


    Look at Reagan, and Bush senior, look at Jr. And stop praising Reagan in the same sentence you bash Obama for increasing debt.


    Chart speaks for itself...
    Yes, but the chart stops awfully short on Obama. Consider that spike at the end with of W's administration...Obama's should be something like triple that at this point.

    No venom intended. I'm just trying to round-out the picture. Things are rarely as one-sided as they seem.
  9. bmatlosz's Avatar
    Posts
    0 Posts
    Global Posts
    53 Global Posts
    #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by foosball View Post
    Thanks for the addition Foos.... Everyone with a brain needs to vote out every Spendocrat up for election. Save the USA.....
  10. sweaner's Avatar
    Posts
    161 Posts
    Global Posts
    249 Global Posts
    #10  
    How exactly is the government to create jobs, other than making more bureaucracy.
  11. solarus's Avatar
    Posts
    554 Posts
    Global Posts
    575 Global Posts
    #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by nimer55 View Post
    That's how you deal with a recission, the government has to spend more to create jobs, then when the economy gets better, you spend less, and start making up the debt.
    I'm certainly not excusing any other President that has over spent but operating further in the red is not how you get out of a recession. When the consumers represent 70% of all domestic economic activity I would think that putting money in their hands would be the number one thing to do. A government would also have to cut spending.

    I'm not going to argue the merits of the stimulus package but for arguments sake lets just its a perfect bill with no flaws. Even then the government should have found the $750 billion from an existing program instead of increasing our debt load further. The ends do not justify the means. Even if 100% of the country thought universal healthcare was amazing and the thing to do - I would still disagree with increasing our debt to pay for it. Its simply a question of priorities.

    The everyday person or family has to budget appropriately so why shouldn't we expect our government to also. Debt isn't inherently bad but when you have too much of it you end up in a spiral you can't get out of, and the beginning of that spiral isn't something you notice until you are right on top of it.

    Quote Originally Posted by nimer55 View Post
    Tax cuts do not solve the economic problem. All tax cuts do is make it so those with jobs, have a little bit more cash, but even with a little more cash, not alot of companies are willing to take huge risks. But when you create jobs, and the un-employment rate goes down, then you have a solution... Then when the economy gets better, you undo the Reagan tax cuts for the rich, and start gaining your debt back.
    Huh you may want to learn a thing or to about business growth and investing. Tax cuts (reasonable one's I may add) allow small-mid sized businesses (60%-70% of the jobs come from small business) to keep more of their own money, in turn providing for cash to invest in growing the business and hiring new employees. Yeah not all the extra money may go into the business, some will probably go to the shareholders, who as consumers tend to spend the money, helping the consumer segment of the economy.

    I'm not saying government can't have programs in place to stimulate the economy but saying tax cuts don't work and only government spending will is just wrong. I'm all for government spending on projects when they are meaningful and needed but when stimulus money goes to providing 30-50 jobs for repaving a road in Atlanta that didn't need repaving that's not a smart use of funds.
    Last edited by solarus; 04/07/2010 at 04:31 PM.
  12. #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by nimer55 View Post
    I don't get this, Republicans keep getting mad at Obama for increasing the national debt. IS obama increasing it? Yes, Is it a bad thing? Yes. But he's doing for a couple reasons: create jobs, Help the Economy, increase health covreage , and couple more..

    That's how you deal with a recission, the government has to spend more to create jobs, then when the economy gets better, you spend less, and start making up the debt.

    If you want to blame the debt on people, blame on those who brought it up, when there wasn't a recession.

    http://zfacts.com/metaPage/lib/National-Debt-GDP.gif


    Look at Reagan, and Bush senior, look at Jr. And stop praising Reagan in the same sentence you bash Obama for increasing debt.


    Chart speaks for itself...
    That would be interesting if the borrowing was actually creating jobs, but it isn't. Most of the stimulus money hasn't even been spent yet. And how is it helpful if the jobs that are created are low-pay construction jobs and wasteful government jobs? Do you realize that the government had to hire 11,000 people to administer cash for clunkers? That's 11,000 people to handle rebates for less than 800,000 cars. That means one person for every 70 cars! Are you kidding me?

    And speaking of waste, every car purchased lost more in depreciation value on the first day than the rebate was worth. It didn't create jobs, it just cleared out inventory. The average mpg increase for all those cars together was about 1 mpg. So it cost 3 Billion to do that, _ whatever we paid each of the 11,000 people that have been hired.

    How does that work for you, does borrowing money make you more prosperous, or does it restrict you because all your money goes to pay interest? How much more could you do on your salary if you paid cash for everything, bought only what you could afford, and didn't pay interest on any purchase?

    And remember, Obama has increased the deficit in one year by almost as much as Bush did over 8 years and including starting two wars. Obama makes Bush's overspending look like amateur hour.

    It would have been cheaper for them to buy Walmart and a bunch of other big companies and give us all jobs as greeters so we could all get our insurance through Walmart...
    Last edited by Cantaffordit; 04/07/2010 at 04:31 PM.
  13. #13  
    Only ones to come on top after the bailout fiasco were the financial institutions....considering they were the ones who dragged us down into this mess to begin with....win win.
  14.    #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by bmatlosz View Post
    Nimer55, please look at your numbers correctly:

    US National Debt As Percent Of GDP in United States 1792-2012 - Federal State Local

    As you can see the highest percentage was under FDR and Truman ( Spendocrats ) and if you look at the trend based on Nobama's spending you will see it at over 100% again with a Spendocrat in office at 2012!!

    That makes Regan's paltry 50% seem like a bargain. I just love how the left tries to spin the facts but as always they come back to bite you on the ***.
    But that's not the reason the Us has so much debt... that's the precent of GDP.. Which was horrible for back them, but that's not the main problem.

    Reagan, and the 2 bushes where responsible for about 8 trillion of the current debt... When reagan came to office there was about a trillon dollar debt, so don't blame this on some president in the 40's...

    Obama's done moe than his share, but it's a recession, most countries are going into debt, and the Us has been the most impacted since the rescission. . In the bush years, most countries where doing fine...
  15.    #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by Cantaffordit View Post
    That would be interesting if the borrowing was actually creating jobs, but it isn't. Most of the stimulus money hasn't even been spent yet. And how is it helpful if the jobs that are created are low-pay construction jobs and wasteful government jobs? Do you realize that the government had to hire 11,000 people to administer cash for clunkers? That's 11,000 people to handle rebates for less than 800,000 cars. That means one person for every 70 cars! Are you kidding me?

    And speaking of waste, every car purchased lost more in depreciation value on the first day than the rebate was worth. It didn't create jobs, it just cleared out inventory. The average mpg increase for all those cars together was about 1 mpg. So it cost 3 Billion to do that, _ whatever we paid each of the 11,000 people that have been hired.

    How does that work for you, does borrowing money make you more prosperous, or does it restrict you because all your money goes to pay interest? How much more could you do on your salary if you paid cash for everything, bought only what you could afford, and didn't pay interest on any purchase?

    And remember, Obama has increased the deficit in one year by almost as much as Bush did over 8 years and including starting two wars. Obama makes Bush's overspending look like amateur hour.

    It would have been cheaper for them to buy Walmart and a bunch of other big companies and give us all jobs as greeters so we could all get our insurance through Walmart...
    It's not like the wars are over.. And the wars where USELESS!!! THEY DID NOTHING!!!! THATS A WASTE OF CASH!

    Actually, nvm, it made terrorism in those countries worst, so it did achieve something...

    DO you realize how much debt Canada is going under to? During the bush years Canada was doing fine. It;s cause of the recession. And the rescission has hit the US MUCH,MUCH,MUCH worse than it has Canada...I'm not for nearly everything Obama has done, but i to blame him for trying to deal with an economy that bush was largely responsible for is demented..
  16. #16  
    Just lower my taxes so I can hire more and manufacture more product. With lower taxes I would have more sales, then more profit. With more profit I can offer higher pay and insurance to my employees. In fact if taxes were lower for all then the insurance would cost less too. One of the many reason health insurance is high is that Dr's, nurses, lawyers, hospitals health insurance companies and everyone in between have to pay high taxes. With lower taxes everyones cost comes down. Let the people drive the economy not the government.

    So yes I am mad at Obama and the current congress. I am upset with the Governor, and legislature of New York State too.
    Last edited by Finally Pre; 04/07/2010 at 04:52 PM.
    Sprint: 2-TouchPad 32g, Frank.-Pre-2, Pre-, MiFi & 1-LG Lotus with Xlink tied to home handsets. Backups: 650 & 700wx

    HP Please release the CDMA Pre3 phones!
    We want them!!!
  17. #17  
    The government can not create jobs. It can only shuffle money around. It can only tax some jobs to fund other jobs. If you accept the fact that government is inherently inefficient and must waste some of that money in administration, then you have to agree that government job creation is a net negative on the welfare of society.
  18. #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by MP715 View Post
    original post removed
    I admit nimer55 was a little off with grammar. What we need to do is to read it and attempt to grasp the main thought that nimer55 was trying to convey. In doing that nimer55 is out there a bit and seems to be uninformed in seeing both sides and then making a more educated opinion. With that said we also need not directly insult or attach a person for their opinion. We need to state our own and hope that in time the best opinions will come out.
    Last edited by groovy; 04/07/2010 at 09:01 PM.
    Sprint: 2-TouchPad 32g, Frank.-Pre-2, Pre-, MiFi & 1-LG Lotus with Xlink tied to home handsets. Backups: 650 & 700wx

    HP Please release the CDMA Pre3 phones!
    We want them!!!
  19. bmatlosz's Avatar
    Posts
    0 Posts
    Global Posts
    53 Global Posts
    #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by nimer55 View Post
    But that's not the reason the Us has so much debt... that's the precent of GDP.. Which was horrible for back them, but that's not the main problem.

    Reagan, and the 2 bushes where responsible for about 8 trillion of the current debt... When reagan came to office there was about a trillon dollar debt, so don't blame this on some president in the 40's...

    Obama's done moe than his share, but it's a recession, most countries are going into debt, and the Us has been the most impacted since the rescission. . In the bush years, most countries where doing fine...
    Again, the folks on the left spin, spin, spin, the lies. Let's actually look at the debt:

    Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 1950 - 1999

    If you look at the numbers for Regans eight years, then go to the Obama time frame you will see that he has managed to increase the debt 2.1 TRILLION since he took office as compared to almost the same amount for Regan during his whole Presidency. Also, there has not been a reduction in the debt since 1958 so they are all to blame for the debt problem, but NoBama has taken it to a whole new level...
  20. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #20  
    Let's keep it on topic here. No insults and certainly no threats (even in jest).
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions