CHART: Who Really Caused The Deficit?

[Gremlin-USA]

We have 119 Trillion dollars in unfunded entitlements.
The American people are paying 4.4 Trillion in taxes when you add Fed.,state,city and county.
The government spends 1.2 Trillion more than it takes in.

Dem's do not want to balance the budget. They want to tax more and keep the entitlements the way they are with very little cuts.That will be put on to future generations to pay off.
Republicans want to cut spending and reform entitlements.

We got both parties fighting over ideology and nothing much is getting done.
It's up to the voters this Nov. to decide with way were going to go.

Considering almost 50% of Americans are on some type of Entitlement Program, it will be a tough race for President ......

 

[peach174]

We have 119 Trillion dollars in unfunded entitlements.
The American people are paying 4.4 Trillion in taxes when you add Fed.,state,city and county.
The government spends 1.2 Trillion more than it takes in.

Dem's do not want to balance the budget. They want to tax more and keep the entitlements the way they are with very little cuts.That will be put on to future generations to pay off.
Republicans want to cut spending and reform entitlements.

We got both parties fighting over ideology and nothing much is getting done.
It's up to the voters this Nov. to decide with way were going to go.

Considering almost 50% of Americans are on some type of Entitlement Program, it will be a tough race for President ......

That is exactly why it's going to be a tight race. 49% of the people are hooked on government handouts. They are going to vote for the entitlements.
Ben Franklin;
“I am for doing good to the poor, but...I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed...that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”
This satement by Franklin, is totally foreign to Liberals be they Dem's or Repubs.

 

[MikeK]

I thought deficits stimulate the economy?

[...]

That is news to me. Who ever said that? Milton Friedman?

My understanding is the economy is stimulated by the circulation, rather than the hoarding, of money. And the way to circulate money is to put it in the hands of people who will spend it. This is why our periods of greatest productivity and prosperity occurred when the upper-income tax levels were highest and regulations were in place to prevent the kind of laissez-faire capitalist exploitation which has arisen since the Reagan Administration was positioned.

Paul Krugman, Barack Hussein Obama, Jon Corzine and Nancy Pelosi

Are any of those names familiar to you?

I won't say nice try because that would imply you are aware of the obvious flaw in what you've been led by the right-wing propaganda machine to believe. The deceptive element in what you believe is Krugman, Obama, Corzine and Pelosi did not say or imply that deficits, per se, stimulate the economy, which would be a plainly stupid declaration. But rather deficit spending stimulates the economy. Specifically, deficit spending via the creation of necessary work, such as repairing the infrastructure and other essential, government sponsored work, which is how FDR managed to pull us out of the Great Depression. He put America back to work.

It is important for right wing water-carriers to put forth the deception you've carried forward because the proposed deficit spending will necessarily include a substantial tax increase on the rich, which is the part they leave out.

The mechanism is rather simple: The rich hoard money because they don't need it. But those who need it spend it, which produces circulation, as with the blood in your arteries and veins, without which you would die -- as the U.S. economy is slowly dying, and for exactly the reason I've stated.

We must levy a heavy tax on the super rich to recover some of the money they have pilfered from us via one surreptitious scheme or another.

 

[starcraftzzz]

Put Democrats in charge of the Nation's checkbook, and look what happens:


Democrats took the GOP’s last deficit of $162 Billion and ran it up to $1.4 TRILLION

9 TIMES the amount of the last GOP deficit

Republicans control Congress
2000 290 Billion SURPLUS
2001 127 Billion SURPLUS
2002 157 Billion
2003 374 Billion
2004 413 Billion
2005 319 Billion
2006 248 Billion
2007 162 Billion
Democrats control Congress as of Jan 2007
2008 455 Billion
2009 1,400 TRILLION
2010 1.300 TRILLION
2011 1,300 TRILLION

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office offers a prognosis: "Under the president's budget, debt held by the public would grow from $7.5 trillion (53 percent of GDP) at the end of 2009 to $20.3 trillion (90 percent of GDP) at the end of 2020." Interest payments would quadruple.'

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/edito rials/ct-edit-buffett-20100329,0,7563220.story


Interest payments are 9% of our budget right now. Do you know what will happen when interest payments become 39% of our budget, per Obama's plan?

When did Bush become a democrat?

 

[Vidi]

We have 119 Trillion dollars in unfunded entitlements.
The American people are paying 4.4 Trillion in taxes when you add Fed.,state,city and county.
The government spends 1.2 Trillion more than it takes in.

Dem's do not want to balance the budget. They want to tax more and keep the entitlements the way they are with very little cuts.That will be put on to future generations to pay off.
Republicans want to cut spending and reform entitlements.

We got both parties fighting over ideology and nothing much is getting done.
It's up to the voters this Nov. to decide with way were going to go.

Considering almost 50% of Americans are on some type of Entitlement Program, it will be a tough race for President ......

That is exactly why it's going to be a tight race. 49% of the people are hooked on government handouts. They are going to vote for the entitlements.
Ben Franklin;
“I am for doing good to the poor, but...I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed...that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”
This satement by Franklin, is totally foreign to Liberals be they Dem's or Repubs.

if you think living on unemployment is easy with rising gas prices, rising food prices, rising energy costs, youre fooling yourself.

 

[starcraftzzz]

We have 119 Trillion dollars in unfunded entitlements.
The American people are paying 4.4 Trillion in taxes when you add Fed.,state,city and county.
The government spends 1.2 Trillion more than it takes in.

Dem's do not want to balance the budget. They want to tax more and keep the entitlements the way they are with very little cuts.That will be put on to future generations to pay off.
Republicans want to cut spending and reform entitlements.

We got both parties fighting over ideology and nothing much is getting done.
It's up to the voters this Nov. to decide with way were going to go.

Yep Plz source where we have 119 trillion in unfunded entitlements. You can’t? Well then stop spewing pure bullshit like a retard
I see so according to you raising taxes to eliminate the deficit means you do not want to balance the budget. Say stupider shit plz. Furthermore the democrats have already cut and agreed to trillions in spending cuts, however the GOP still refuses to raise a cent in taxes.

 

[Vidi]

We have 119 Trillion dollars in unfunded entitlements.
The American people are paying 4.4 Trillion in taxes when you add Fed.,state,city and county.
The government spends 1.2 Trillion more than it takes in.

Dem's do not want to balance the budget. They want to tax more and keep the entitlements the way they are with very little cuts.That will be put on to future generations to pay off.
Republicans want to cut spending and reform entitlements.

We got both parties fighting over ideology and nothing much is getting done.
It's up to the voters this Nov. to decide with way were going to go.

Yep Plz source where we have 119 trillion in unfunded entitlements. You can’t? Well then stop spewing pure bullshit like a retard
I see so according to you raising taxes to eliminate the deficit means you do not want to balance the budget. Say stupider shit plz. Furthermore the democrats have already cut and agreed to trillions in spending cuts, however the GOP still refuses to raise a cent in taxes.

It comes from the Cato Institute ( you know them right? super ultra conservatives )

The U.S. government is about to exceed its statutory
debt limit of $14.3 trillion. But that actually
underestimates the size of the fiscal time bomb
that this country is facing. If one considers the
unfunded liabilities of programs such as Medicare
and Social Security, the true national debt could
run as high as $119.5 trillion.

But at least they spread out the blame more evenly than some posters here

More important, all this ignores the other
side of the equation. During the final years of
the Bush administration and the first years of
the Obama administration, spending skyrocketed.

Heres a link to the full report:

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa673.pdf

 

[Vidi]

We have 119 Trillion dollars in unfunded entitlements.
The American people are paying 4.4 Trillion in taxes when you add Fed.,state,city and county.
The government spends 1.2 Trillion more than it takes in.

Dem's do not want to balance the budget. They want to tax more and keep the entitlements the way they are with very little cuts.That will be put on to future generations to pay off.
Republicans want to cut spending and reform entitlements.

We got both parties fighting over ideology and nothing much is getting done.
It's up to the voters this Nov. to decide with way were going to go.

Your post is only speaking in half truths. The dems DO want to balance the budget. They just want to raise taxes to do it.

The Repubs want to cut everything ( except defense of course ) and balance the budget that way.

Under either plan we have to trust that the sides wont raise spending at all on anything. Kinda doubt thats gonna happen. cant trust either party on that one.

So basically we are damned if we do damned if we dont.

 

[starcraftzzz]

We have 119 Trillion dollars in unfunded entitlements.
The American people are paying 4.4 Trillion in taxes when you add Fed.,state,city and county.
The government spends 1.2 Trillion more than it takes in.

Dem's do not want to balance the budget. They want to tax more and keep the entitlements the way they are with very little cuts.That will be put on to future generations to pay off.
Republicans want to cut spending and reform entitlements.

We got both parties fighting over ideology and nothing much is getting done.
It's up to the voters this Nov. to decide with way were going to go.

Yep Plz source where we have 119 trillion in unfunded entitlements. You can’t? Well then stop spewing pure bullshit like a retard
I see so according to you raising taxes to eliminate the deficit means you do not want to balance the budget. Say stupider shit plz. Furthermore the democrats have already cut and agreed to trillions in spending cuts, however the GOP still refuses to raise a cent in taxes.

It comes from the Cato Institute ( you know them right? super ultra conservatives )

The U.S. government is about to exceed its statutory
debt limit of $14.3 trillion. But that actually
underestimates the size of the fiscal time bomb
that this country is facing. If one considers the
unfunded liabilities of programs such as Medicare
and Social Security, the true national debt could
run as high as $119.5 trillion.

But at least they spread out the blame more evenly than some posters here

More important, all this ignores the other
side of the equation. During the final years of
the Bush administration and the first years of
the Obama administration, spending skyrocketed.

Heres a link to the full report:

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa673.pdf

Lets calculate US GDP during that time period
GDP Gross Domestic Product Projections 2000, 2010, 2020, 2030, 2040, geographic.org Courty Profiles - Economy, Geography, Climate, Natural Resources, Current Issues, International Agreements, Population, Social Statistics, Political System, Flags, Ma
So total GDP will be 1140trillion while added debt will be 119trillion
meaning according to CATO the US federal debt will decline from 100% of GDP in 2012 to around 12% in 2050.
Sounds like they are full of shit

 

[Vidi]

Yep Plz source where we have 119 trillion in unfunded entitlements. You can’t? Well then stop spewing pure bullshit like a retard
I see so according to you raising taxes to eliminate the deficit means you do not want to balance the budget. Say stupider shit plz. Furthermore the democrats have already cut and agreed to trillions in spending cuts, however the GOP still refuses to raise a cent in taxes.

It comes from the Cato Institute ( you know them right? super ultra conservatives )



But at least they spread out the blame more evenly than some posters here

More important, all this ignores the other
side of the equation. During the final years of
the Bush administration and the first years of
the Obama administration, spending skyrocketed.

Heres a link to the full report:

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa673.pdf

Lets calculate US GDP during that time period
GDP Gross Domestic Product Projections 2000, 2010, 2020, 2030, 2040, geographic.org Courty Profiles - Economy, Geography, Climate, Natural Resources, Current Issues, International Agreements, Population, Social Statistics, Political System, Flags, Ma
So total GDP will be 1140trillion while added debt will be 119trillion
meaning according to CATO the US federal debt will decline from 100% of GDP in 2012 to around 12% in 2050.
Sounds like they are full of shit

Im going through their sources for their paper. Doesnt look promising.

Basically, America is screwed.

Our only hope is to basically put all the elderly baby boomers out on the streets, stop educating our children and for everyone in between to learn how to cook the hell out of ramen noodles because thats the only food we'll be able to afford while we pay for the last 40 years of debt thats been racked up under both parties.

 

[starcraftzzz]

It comes from the Cato Institute ( you know them right? super ultra conservatives )



But at least they spread out the blame more evenly than some posters here



Heres a link to the full report:

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa673.pdf

Lets calculate US GDP during that time period
GDP Gross Domestic Product Projections 2000, 2010, 2020, 2030, 2040, geographic.org Courty Profiles - Economy, Geography, Climate, Natural Resources, Current Issues, International Agreements, Population, Social Statistics, Political System, Flags, Ma
So total GDP will be 1140trillion while added debt will be 119trillion
meaning according to CATO the US federal debt will decline from 100% of GDP in 2012 to around 12% in 2050.
Sounds like they are full of shit

Im going through their sources for their paper. Doesnt look promising.

Basically, America is screwed.

Our only hope is to basically put all the elderly baby boomers out on the streets, stop educating our children and for everyone in between to learn how to cook the hell out of ramen noodles because thats the only food we'll be able to afford while we pay for the last 40 years of debt thats been racked up under both parties.

We don’t have to pay for the last 100 years of debt that has been added to the federal government because by 2050 that debt will be equal to less then 11% of our whole economy

 

[Vidi]

Lets calculate US GDP during that time period
GDP Gross Domestic Product Projections 2000, 2010, 2020, 2030, 2040, geographic.org Courty Profiles - Economy, Geography, Climate, Natural Resources, Current Issues, International Agreements, Population, Social Statistics, Political System, Flags, Ma
So total GDP will be 1140trillion while added debt will be 119trillion
meaning according to CATO the US federal debt will decline from 100% of GDP in 2012 to around 12% in 2050.
Sounds like they are full of shit

Im going through their sources for their paper. Doesnt look promising.

Basically, America is screwed.

Our only hope is to basically put all the elderly baby boomers out on the streets, stop educating our children and for everyone in between to learn how to cook the hell out of ramen noodles because thats the only food we'll be able to afford while we pay for the last 40 years of debt thats been racked up under both parties.

We don’t have to pay for the last 100 years of debt that has been added to the federal government because by 2050 that debt will be equal to less then 11% of our whole economy

Yeah i saw your link. I just dont see our economy growing that much. I see more recession on the way...no matter who gets elected in November.

 

[starcraftzzz]

Im going through their sources for their paper. Doesnt look promising.

Basically, America is screwed.

Our only hope is to basically put all the elderly baby boomers out on the streets, stop educating our children and for everyone in between to learn how to cook the hell out of ramen noodles because thats the only food we'll be able to afford while we pay for the last 40 years of debt thats been racked up under both parties.

We don’t have to pay for the last 100 years of debt that has been added to the federal government because by 2050 that debt will be equal to less then 11% of our whole economy

Yeah i saw your link. I just dont see our economy growing that much. I see more recession on the way...no matter who gets elected in November.

Dude even after the Great depression the economy eventually got back to its long term trend and in fact passed it. So are you saying that the current economic situation is worse than it was in 1930?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

That is news to me. Who ever said that? Milton Friedman?

My understanding is the economy is stimulated by the circulation, rather than the hoarding, of money. And the way to circulate money is to put it in the hands of people who will spend it. This is why our periods of greatest productivity and prosperity occurred when the upper-income tax levels were highest and regulations were in place to prevent the kind of laissez-faire capitalist exploitation which has arisen since the Reagan Administration was positioned.

Paul Krugman, Barack Hussein Obama, Jon Corzine and Nancy Pelosi

Are any of those names familiar to you?

I won't say nice try because that would imply you are aware of the obvious flaw in what you've been led by the right-wing propaganda machine to believe. The deceptive element in what you believe is Krugman, Obama, Corzine and Pelosi did not say or imply that deficits, per se, stimulate the economy, which would be a plainly stupid declaration. But rather deficit spending stimulates the economy. Specifically, deficit spending via the creation of necessary work, such as repairing the infrastructure and other essential, government sponsored work, which is how FDR managed to pull us out of the Great Depression. He put America back to work.

It is important for right wing water-carriers to put forth the deception you've carried forward because the proposed deficit spending will necessarily include a substantial tax increase on the rich, which is the part they leave out.

The mechanism is rather simple: The rich hoard money because they don't need it. But those who need it spend it, which produces circulation, as with the blood in your arteries and veins, without which you would die -- as the U.S. economy is slowly dying, and for exactly the reason I've stated.

We must levy a heavy tax on the super rich to recover some of the money they have pilfered from us via one surreptitious scheme or another.

You're as wrong as Krugman

How can you have a Deficit without deficit spending? That has to be one of the stupidest statements ever posted on the Internet, did your worst enemy hack your account to make you look foolish?

Who do you think you're convincing, Jake Starkey? Rdean? TM?

CA has a substantial tax on the rich, guess what? They're leaving the state!

 

[starcraftzzz]

Paul Krugman, Barack Hussein Obama, Jon Corzine and Nancy Pelosi

Are any of those names familiar to you?

I won't say nice try because that would imply you are aware of the obvious flaw in what you've been led by the right-wing propaganda machine to believe. The deceptive element in what you believe is Krugman, Obama, Corzine and Pelosi did not say or imply that deficits, per se, stimulate the economy, which would be a plainly stupid declaration. But rather deficit spending stimulates the economy. Specifically, deficit spending via the creation of necessary work, such as repairing the infrastructure and other essential, government sponsored work, which is how FDR managed to pull us out of the Great Depression. He put America back to work.

It is important for right wing water-carriers to put forth the deception you've carried forward because the proposed deficit spending will necessarily include a substantial tax increase on the rich, which is the part they leave out.

The mechanism is rather simple: The rich hoard money because they don't need it. But those who need it spend it, which produces circulation, as with the blood in your arteries and veins, without which you would die -- as the U.S. economy is slowly dying, and for exactly the reason I've stated.

We must levy a heavy tax on the super rich to recover some of the money they have pilfered from us via one surreptitious scheme or another.

You're as wrong as Krugman

How can you have a Deficit without deficit spending? That has to be one of the stupidest statements ever posted on the Internet, did your worst enemy hack your account to make you look foolish?

Who do you think you're convincing, Jake Starkey? Rdean? TM?

CA has a substantial tax on the rich, guess what? They're leaving the state!

You illiterate dumbass no where does he stay you cant have a deficit without deficit spending.
Plz source the mass exodus of rich people leaving CA. Oh wait you were just spewing bullshit like usual my mistake

 

[Vidi]

Paul Krugman, Barack Hussein Obama, Jon Corzine and Nancy Pelosi

Are any of those names familiar to you?

I won't say nice try because that would imply you are aware of the obvious flaw in what you've been led by the right-wing propaganda machine to believe. The deceptive element in what you believe is Krugman, Obama, Corzine and Pelosi did not say or imply that deficits, per se, stimulate the economy, which would be a plainly stupid declaration. But rather deficit spending stimulates the economy. Specifically, deficit spending via the creation of necessary work, such as repairing the infrastructure and other essential, government sponsored work, which is how FDR managed to pull us out of the Great Depression. He put America back to work.

It is important for right wing water-carriers to put forth the deception you've carried forward because the proposed deficit spending will necessarily include a substantial tax increase on the rich, which is the part they leave out.

The mechanism is rather simple: The rich hoard money because they don't need it. But those who need it spend it, which produces circulation, as with the blood in your arteries and veins, without which you would die -- as the U.S. economy is slowly dying, and for exactly the reason I've stated.

We must levy a heavy tax on the super rich to recover some of the money they have pilfered from us via one surreptitious scheme or another.

You're as wrong as Krugman

How can you have a Deficit without deficit spending? That has to be one of the stupidest statements ever posted on the Internet, did your worst enemy hack your account to make you look foolish?

Who do you think you're convincing, Jake Starkey? Rdean? TM?

CA has a substantial tax on the rich, guess what? They're leaving the state!

Actually hes not.

without demand, it doesnt matter how much supply there is. The rich can only buy so many toasters before theres a surplus of toasters without demand.

The CONSUMER class is the middle class. Without a strong economically viable middle class, all other factors fall apart.

As to the California tax, you may be right about that. Rich people may bail to abnother state or even another country. But if WE are the consumers of the world, then they will have to do business with us and therefore pay into our economy in order to extract profit from it.