Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I'm always amazed the way these liberal idiots correlate directly dollar for dollar tax cuts adding to the deficit. Spending ads to the deficit not tax cuts. Tax cuts increases economic activity, and increase revenues to the government for the most part, or at the very least break even. We need tax reform not more taxes
Now in point of fact, Heller was right about the 1960s. In the wake of the JFK tax cuts phased in from 1962 to 1965, federal revenues surged at a real rate near 5% per annum. And in point of fact, after the Reagan tax cuts of the 1980s, receipts never went below the 20-year moving average adjusted for population and the price level. By the time Reagan left office in 1989, they were far above it. As Laffer pointed out at the time, if you throw in booming state and local revenues, the Reagan tax cuts did pay for themselves.
Supply-siders have made the argument retrospectively about the positive revenue effects of tax cuts, but they have been careful about projecting these claims into the future. It is only the cheap historiography of supply-side economics that has insisted that supply-siders fulsomely predicted revenue gains from tax cuts. That this argument has any traction, it must now be understood, is in defiance of a growing body of serious evidence.
It wasn't the Dems in 2007, it was the Red Sox, MORON. That 2009 1.4 trillion was BOOOOSH, shyttehead.
But thanks for the depression- has cost Obama about 4 trillion+, ASSHOLES, LOL
Really? Keep in mind that Bush inherited a budget in surplus from Clinton.Sometimes you people really do just crack me I just love how so many of you seem to think the deficit started with either Bush or Obama. Both men have contributed to it but it started long before either of them were President.
Mitt Romney Debt Speech Ignores Key Facts
By Tom Raum
WASHINGTON (AP) When Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney decried the "prairie fire" of U.S. debt Tuesday, he ignored some of the sparks that set it ablaze.
One was the Great Recession that took hold before Barack Obama became president. That landmark event went unmentioned in Romney's speech. Another was a series of Bush-era tax cuts that Romney wants to follow with even lower rates.
Instead he laid the blame on Obama, a president who has certainly increased the nation's eye-popping debt but not, as Romney claimed, by nearly as much as all other presidents combined.
A look at some of Romney's assertions and how they compare with the facts:
hmmm...as fiscal year 2009 was proposed by Bush, that doesnt look very good on his record does it?
he swings he misses
Put your big boy pants on and accept responsibility for once.:
President Obama Signs FY 2009 Omnibus Budget Bill
Written by Michael Wero
Friday, 13 March 2009 14:29
Navajo Nation Washington Office &view=article&id=66resident-obama-sign s-fy-2009-omnibus-budget-bill-&catid=35:fy20 09&Itemid=45
'It was supposed to have been completed last fall, but Democrats opted against election-year battles with Republicans and former President George W. Bush.'
Obama signs massive, 'imperfect' spending bill - politics - White House - msnbc.com
'Feb 26, 2009
OBAMA 2009 BUDGET PROJECTS DEFICIT OF $1.75 TRILLION
President calls for fiscal responsibility and hard choices, but not yet.
Washington, DC - President Obama’s $3.5 trillion 2009 budget will spend money today and burden taxpayers for generations. Under the Presidents proposal, spending will increase to nearly 35 percent of GDP, far from the historical norm of 20 percent, and the deficit will soar to 12.3 percent of GDP, levels not seen since the height of World War II.'
http://www.freedomworks.org/press-releases/obama -2009-budget-projects-deficit-of-175-trillion
I'm always amazed the way these liberal idiots correlate directly dollar for dollar tax cuts adding to the deficit. Spending ads to the deficit not tax cuts. Tax cuts increases economic activity, and increase revenues to the government for the most part, or at the very least break even. We need tax reform not more taxes
Sometimes you people really do just crack me I just love how so many of you seem to think the deficit started with either Bush or Obama. Both men have contributed to it but it started long before either of them were President.
CHART: Who Really Caused The Deficit?
Sometimes you people really do just crack me I just love how so many of you seem to think the deficit started with either Bush or Obama. Both men have contributed to it but it started long before either of them were President.
There was no deficit when W. took office. Debt, yes. Deficit, no.
hmmm...as fiscal year 2009 was proposed by Bush, that doesnt look very good on his record does it?
he swings he misses
Put your big boy pants on and accept responsibility for once.:
President Obama Signs FY 2009 Omnibus Budget Bill
Written by Michael Wero
Friday, 13 March 2009 14:29
Navajo Nation Washington Office &view=article&id=66
'It was supposed to have been completed last fall, but Democrats opted against election-year battles with Republicans and former President George W. Bush.'
Obama signs massive, 'imperfect' spending bill - politics - White House - msnbc.com
'Feb 26, 2009
OBAMA 2009 BUDGET PROJECTS DEFICIT OF $1.75 TRILLION
President calls for fiscal responsibility and hard choices, but not yet.
Washington, DC - President Obamas $3.5 trillion 2009 budget will spend money today and burden taxpayers for generations. Under the Presidents proposal, spending will increase to nearly 35 percent of GDP, far from the historical norm of 20 percent, and the deficit will soar to 12.3 percent of GDP, levels not seen since the height of World War II.'
http://www.freedomworks.org/press-releases/obama -2009-budget-projects-deficit-of-175-trillion
It's a matter of public record and common sense.
By Sahil Kapur
This week Republicans will attempt to move the national political conversation back to a familiar theme with a series of attacks on President Obama over the national debt. The GOP released a web video Monday bashing his broken promises on the deficit and previewed a major speech Tuesday by likely presidential nominee Mitt Romney on the issue.
Divorced from context, the numbers are uncomfortable for the President and are ready-made for pointed partisan attacks. Under Obamas watch the national debt has risen from roughly $10 trillion to $15 trillion, a record high. But to what extent are his decisions while in office to blame? The answer: very little. The vast bulk of the debt is the result of policies enacted during the Bush administration coupled with automatic increases in federal spending and decreases in tax revenue triggered by the economic downturn.
Those are economic facts of life known to experts but that often gets lost in the political debate (and which Obamas opponents are willing to obscure). So with the GOPs push to return the deficit to the center of the political conversation, heres quick reminder of the basic facts that you may have forgotten.
As the chart below reveals, the main drivers of projected deficits over the next decade are the wars of the oughts in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Bush tax cuts and the so-called automatic stabilizers unemployment insurance spending, lower tax burdens built into existing policy to combat economic downturns. Recovery measures by Bush and Obama caused a short-term spike in deficits but have mostly phased out and thus represent only modest fractions of the national debt.
The numbers, which come from the liberal-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, assume national policy as of a year ago would be renewed. Thus, they dont reflect expected peace dividends from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, or revised economic growth projections, and it assumes the Bush tax cuts will be renewed in their entirety something President Obama has vowed will not happen, after he accepted a two-year extension of all the rates late 2010. But they broadly demonstrate that existing debt and projected deficits arent largely a consequence of Obama initiatives.
Since just after Obamas victory, and with greater fervor since reclaiming the House, Republicans have used deficits and debt (the aggregate of accumulating deficits) as cudgels to attack spending on social programs. But their calls for fiscal responsibility mask an agenda, enshrined in a number of GOP budget measures, thats aimed at slashing spending on programs for the poor and elderly, increasing defense spending, and cutting taxes on the rich a platform that would dramatically alter the scope and size of government services, but reduce deficits and debt slowly. Obamas budget proposal is projected to yield lower deficits over the next decade than the GOP alternative.
After agreeing to significant cuts in domestic spending in several legislative deals last year, President Obama and Democrats have insisted that further efforts to improve the nations fiscal outlook include new revenues. The GOP has balked at this demand, and as a result, Congress has gridlocked and isnt expected to resolve any significant tax and spending issues until after the November election.
Chart by TPMs Clayton Ashley
How Bush-Fueled Deficits Continue To Haunt Obama (CHART) | TPMDC
