It's the DEFICIT STUPID!

[jreeves]

are you serious??

View attachment 8512

Why not compare the actual numbers? The portion of the chart for the Bush years is based on the Bush administration's cooked books. Cost of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq? Not counted in those numbers. Ditto the annual Medicare "doctor fix" and spending that comes up every year for natural disaster recovery (all of which, by the way, are accounted for in Obama's budget projections).

Excuse me I was using CBO numbers silly me....

 

[jreeves]

1. He ran on reducing the deficit. At no point did he say he was going to come in and slash programs left and right. The right likes to claim he did so they can shout "another broken promise". Of course, pretty hard to break a promise you never made.

2. I know this is going to come as a shock to you, but introducing a new program doesn't necessarily have to increase the deficit. I know your heroes Bush and Reagan spend like drunk sailors and just put everything on the credit card (creating the perception that all spending is deficit spending), but back in the real world, programs can be financed by either redirecting funds from other sources (like reducing payments to medical device manufacturers and getting rid of subsidies for insurance companies, in the case of the health care legislation) or increasing revenues (in the case of health care, capping the amount of employer-provided health insurance that isn't taxed in the Baucus bill, or increasing taxes, as the House bills do).

Uh--huh...sure

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OILe40aYhPg&feature=player_embedded]YouTube - Obama / McCain 3rd Debate, Part 13 - Cutting Programs[/ame]

That's proposing cuts to offset other spending, not cutting with reckless abandon.

Pay as you go is what was said.....

How about spend, spend, spend as you go?

 

[jreeves]

1. He ran on reducing the deficit. At no point did he say he was going to come in and slash programs left and right. The right likes to claim he did so they can shout "another broken promise". Of course, pretty hard to break a promise you never made.

2. I know this is going to come as a shock to you, but introducing a new program doesn't necessarily have to increase the deficit. I know your heroes Bush and Reagan spend like drunk sailors and just put everything on the credit card (creating the perception that all spending is deficit spending), but back in the real world, programs can be financed by either redirecting funds from other sources (like reducing payments to medical device manufacturers and getting rid of subsidies for insurance companies, in the case of the health care legislation) or increasing revenues (in the case of health care, capping the amount of employer-provided health insurance that isn't taxed in the Baucus bill, or increasing taxes, as the House bills do).

Uh--huh...sure

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OILe40aYhPg&feature=player_embedded]YouTube - Obama / McCain 3rd Debate, Part 13 - Cutting Programs[/ame]

That's proposing cuts to offset other spending, not cutting with reckless abandon.

"We will go through every agency and cut the programs that don't work" paraphrasing not the actual quote. Now your telling me after cutting those programs that are inefficient we still have about a 1.5 trillion dollar deficit? We would have a surplus if the inefficient programs and agencies were cut from govt.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

The portion of the chart for the Bush years is based on the Bush administration's cooked books.

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH COOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOKED THE BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOKS

Polk...I would suggest that you read your replies aloud and tape them...that way when you play them back you will realize how fucking stupid you sound to others.

 

[The Rabbi]

At what point does Obama own his presidency? I'd say about now is right.
Deficit high? It's his problem. What is he doing about it?
War in Afghanistan? Its his problem. What is he doing?
Blaming the previous administration is childish at this point. The American people see this and that is why his poll numbers are tanking.

 

[Care4all]

kinda difficult to take you guys seriously when you're bitching about a deficit that not much larger than the one your guy was running last year. furthermore, when the economy is in recession, there is a broad consensus among economists of all stripes that the right move is to temporarily increase government spending. So if the deficit is such a big issue for you guys, where were the complaints when bush was running a deficit of over 500 billion a year in good economic times? You guys don't really care about the underlying issues. You just care about the extent to which you can use it as a rhetoric weapon.

are you serious??

View attachment 8512

2002-2009 are budgets attributed to president bush's administration, looks like obama administration cuts the deficit spending in half by 2012 on the cbo chart, isn't that what the obama administration promised?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Kinda difficult to take you guys seriously when you're bitching about a deficit that not much larger than the one your guy was running last year. Furthermore, when the economy is in recession, there is a broad consensus among economists of all stripes that the right move is to temporarily increase government spending. So if the deficit is such a big issue for you guys, where were the complaints when Bush was running a deficit of over 500 billion a year in good economic times? You guys don't really care about the underlying issues. You just care about the extent to which you can use it as a rhetoric weapon.

Do you guys have like selective memories? We've been warning about the deficit since Bush started his out of control spending. We were warning about deficit spending during the Clinton years and actually had it under control some.

I'm sick and tired of you people pretending as though we are somehow inconsistant with this when its one of the major things we've been talking about for at least well over a freakin decade.

We havent changed our principles. Just because you change yours depending on who is in office, doesnt mean we do.

O please. You do nothing more than pay lip service to the idea of deficit reduction. You complain that the deficit is too high while saying we need to ramp up defense spending further and have another round of tax cuts. That's like saying you're not really a drunk, you just like to chug a handle of vodka every day.

Then why when people like me suggest reducing the size scope and cost of government do people here call us anarchist and anti government?

the deficit exists because government spends too much fucking money. period.

So your solution is to give to the government or rather allow the government to take even more of our money so it can spend more right? After all isn't it our so called leaders who say if we don't spend more than we have that we'll all die?

 

[PatekPhilippe]

are you serious??

View attachment 8512

2002-2009 are budgets attributed to president bush's administration, looks like obama administration cuts the deficit spending in half by 2012 on the cbo chart, isn't that what the obama administration promised?

and you actually believe this malarkey??? I have some beachfront land in Nevada you may be interested in.

Promises ain't shit.....How can you reduce the deficit by starting ANOTHER multi-trillion dollar entitlement program

 

[Xenophon]

Notice how the only defense from an Obamatron to this mess is to keep screaming 'Bush.'

Hey, it won one election, maybe Barry can ride that another term, but it won't save our ruined economy.

 

[Care4all]

View attachment 8512

2002-2009 are budgets attributed to president bush's administration, looks like obama administration cuts the deficit spending in half by 2012 on the cbo chart, isn't that what the obama administration promised?

and you actually believe this malarkey??? I have some beachfront land in Nevada you may be interested in.

Promises ain't shit.....How can you reduce the deficit by starting ANOTHER multi-trillion dollar entitlement program

oh no, i don't necessarily believe the CBO report....it is only a projection, anything can happen that can change that projection....just saying, from looking at the cbo chart that JR posted, it seemed to match up with what obama said on cutting the deficit in half by 2012....

REGARDLESS of cutting in half, the deficit outlooks are still dismal imho!

 

[ba1614]

Kinda difficult to take you guys seriously when you're bitching about a deficit that not much larger than the one your guy was running last year. Furthermore, when the economy is in recession, there is a broad consensus among economists of all stripes that the right move is to temporarily increase government spending. So if the deficit is such a big issue for you guys, where were the complaints when Bush was running a deficit of over 500 billion a year in good economic times? You guys don't really care about the underlying issues. You just care about the extent to which you can use it as a rhetoric weapon.

Do you guys have like selective memories? We've been warning about the deficit since Bush started his out of control spending. We were warning about deficit spending during the Clinton years and actually had it under control some.

I'm sick and tired of you people pretending as though we are somehow inconsistant with this when its one of the major things we've been talking about for at least well over a freakin decade.

We havent changed our principles. Just because you change yours depending on who is in office, doesnt mean we do.

Good post Avatar, I couldn't agree more.

It won't matter who is in office if we don't get spending under control, even with the strategy of soaking the rich with more taxes. At the rate we are spending we will soon have difficulty paying the interest, never mind tackling the principle.
Republican, Democrat, it don't fuckin' matter, neither have the restraint or balls to say NO! Pet projects and special interest groups are frustrating enough when times are good, but how the fuck can we justify it when we are borrowing the funds to give them?

It's no wonder people don't have any personal responsibility anymore, their government doesn't either.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Where's Paygo Polk? It was long one of your gripes that Booooosh "let it die." Why haven't the Dems, with complete control over Congress since Jan. 2007 and now with the WH as well, brought back a version of Paygo with some teeth?

Did you just sort of forget about it?

 

[Midnight Marauder]

It's kinda difficult to take you liberals seriously especially when you ran on a platform of reducing spending and balancing the budget.

Who did? Certianly not Obama. You might remember, when McCain said he would balance the budget by the middle of a second term, Obama laughed that off and said it was "impractical."

So let's be fair, Obama didn't promise fiscal responsibility. He DID say he would go through spending bills "line by line" and remove any waste, and cut or end programs that "weren't working" but that's far from running on a platform of reducing the deficit and balancing the budget. He never made any such promise that I ever saw.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

It's kinda difficult to take you liberals seriously especially when you ran on a platform of reducing spending and balancing the budget.

Who did? Certianly not Obama. You might remember, when McCain said he would balance the budget by the middle of a second term, Obama laughed that off and said it was "impractical."

So let's be fair, Obama didn't promise fiscal responsibility. He DID say he would go through spending bills "line by line" and remove any waste, and cut or end programs that "weren't working" but that's far from running on a platform of reducing the deficit and balancing the budget. He never made any such promise that I ever saw.

I think the youtube spot previously showed that Obama said he would balance the budget and cut wasteful spending. As far as "promising fiscal responsibility" you are correct....he definately never said that.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

It's kinda difficult to take you liberals seriously especially when you ran on a platform of reducing spending and balancing the budget.

Who did? Certianly not Obama. You might remember, when McCain said he would balance the budget by the middle of a second term, Obama laughed that off and said it was "impractical."

So let's be fair, Obama didn't promise fiscal responsibility. He DID say he would go through spending bills "line by line" and remove any waste, and cut or end programs that "weren't working" but that's far from running on a platform of reducing the deficit and balancing the budget. He never made any such promise that I ever saw.

I think the youtube spot previously showed that Obama said he would balance the budget and cut wasteful spending.

Again, my assertion was I never SAW or HEARD him say anything like that, not that he DID not.

I didn't watch the vid, as you can now clearly see.

 

[PeterS]

U.S. may lose AAA-rating, Moody's warns_English_Xinhua
NEW YORK, Oct. 22 (Xinhua) -- The United States my lose its AAA-rating if it can not control its deficit hike, rating agency Moody's Investors Service warned on Thursday.

Steven Hess, Moody's lead analyst for the United States, said in a TV interview that the AAA rating of the United States is "not guaranteed." He said if the U.S. deficit does not drop to a sustainable level in the next three to four years, the U.S. rating will be "in jeopardy."

The U.S. government posted a record deficit of 1.417 trillion U.S. dollars in the fiscal year ended Sept. 30. Stimulus package to combat the severe recession and a series of bailout rescues to banks and automakers have put a heavy burden on government spending.

The Obama administration has predicted that deficits would top 1 trillion dollars through fiscal year 2011.

Does anyone realize what the implications of what a less than an AAA rating would do to lending and interest rates in this country? Thanks Obama and Congress for leading us down the path of economic destruction!

Take Obama out of the picture and you still have trillion dollar deficits and it should also be noted that if Obama were to balance the budget today by budget cuts you would see a 10% reduction to the economy. No president would do that or are you honestly going to say that McCain would have the balls to throw the country into the deepest recession ever.

 

[MajikMyst]

It is truely amazing how many neotards have no clue what a deficit is.. There is no deficit in Obama's budget so any talking point that says otherwise is a moron..

The deficit is the amount we export minus the amount we import. That is it.. Under Bush our biggest manufacturers and exporters cut millions of jobs..

Now if you want to make yourself look like a complete idiot, out of touch with reality, and an uneducated fool, then go ahead and blame Obama..

11 trillion of our national debt belongs to Bush.. Obama has increased it only 1 trillion.. That is it.. Why aren't you neotards concerned about the 11 trillion that was given to Obama.. Along with 2 wars that Bush never considered paying for.. For 4 of those years, Bush didn't bother putting Iraq on the budget..

Under Bush, the deficit was 1.4 trillion.. Now it is 1.7 trillion.. An increase of 300 billion.. Chump change compared to the damage Left by Bush.. Not to mention a failing economy and people losing their jobs and houses...

THIS IS ALL BUSH'S FAULT! THERE IS NO ARGUEMENT TO SAY OTHERWISE.. THE NUMBERS ARE THERE.. THE EVIDENCE IS THERE..

Now why can't all you patheticly stupid neotards come to reality for a change and be an american.. Be a part of the solution and not the problemm.. Right now, like Bush, you are the problem..

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Yes it makes this whole Health Care Boondoggle seem even worse. Is this really the right time for our Government to spend several more $Trillions? Our Socialists in this country really are shockingly travelling down that same disastrous path that all Third World Banana Republics travel down. Our Dollar wont be worth very much in the near future. It's so frustrating to see so many in this country continue to be so apathetic about these serious issues. The Socialists really are destroying our nation. It's just so sad.

 

[Ame®icano]

 

[saveliberty]

It would help if you people lived in the real world. For starters, Obama didn't run on reducing spending. Beyond that, debt/the deficit is a significant long-run problem. That being said, the idea that you should massive slash government spending in the middle of an economic downturn is juvenile. All historic examples show us that policy is the recipe for extending the downturn. The idea that deficits will be trimmed in the long term by spending cuts is pretty juvenile in general. 75 percent of budget goes to Social Security, Medicare, and defense spending. Does anyone seriously think the budget is going to be balanced by enacting cuts in those three programs? If you do, they've got this place with white coats that may be of some assistance.

Well most people would take a good strong look at ALL parts of their budget in a crisis. Most will start with the frills, but if that isn't enough, they so things like down size the car or house. If 75% of your budget is going to just three areas, only a fool would ignore them. Actually, the ONLY hope of balancing the budget has to include some cuts in these areas.

P.S. Obama is planning on cuts in Medicare isn't he? Got a rubber room for him?