Liberals explain to me what this 700 billion dollars was for

Discussion in 'Politics' started by JRK, Apr 16, 2012.

  1. JRK
    Offline

    JRK Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    7,488
    Thanks Received:
    312
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +312
    Total spending 2007
    2.7 trillion
    2007 United States federal budget - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Total spending 2011
    3.4 trilliom
    2011 United States federal budget - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    I am confused
    What is it that taxing the rich is suppose to do?
    Where spending 700 billion dollars more than we were in 2007

    We had a 163 billion dollar defict in 07 with a 5% UE
    1.5 in 2011 with a "9%" (well kind of)

    Now if we are to tax the rich to balance the budget (not even close), well what is this suppose to do?

    By growing the size of govt 700 billion dollars, what has it done for us is my question.
    looks like to me job creation is the key.
    It also looks like to me that taxing the rich will not help us

    I think your message and reality are not riding in the same boat
     
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2012
  2. francoHFW
    Offline

    francoHFW Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2011
    Messages:
    33,371
    Thanks Received:
    2,172
    Trophy Points:
    1,115
    Location:
    NY 26th FINALLY DEM!
    Ratings:
    +5,575
    UE and welfare for victims of the SECOND Pub Great Depression. Also, wars were put on the books....duh
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. JRK
    Offline

    JRK Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    7,488
    Thanks Received:
    312
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +312
    They have allways been on the books, what do you think they just vanished?


    UPDATE: Many Obama defenders in the comments are claiming that the numbers above do not include spending on Iraq and Afghanistan during the Bush years. They most certainly do. While Bush did fund the wars through emergency supplementals (not the regular budget process), that spending did not simply vanish. It is included in the numbers above. Also, some Obama defenders are claiming the graphic above represents biased Heritage Foundation numbers. While we stand behind the numbers we put out 100%, the numbers, and the graphic itself, above are from the Washington Post. We originally left out the link to WaPo. It has now been added.
    CLARIFICATION: Of course, this Washington Post graphic does not perfectly delineate budget surpluses and deficits by administration. President Bush took office in January 2001, and therefore played a lead role in crafting the FY 2002-2008 budgets. Presidents Bush and Obama share responsibility for the FY 2009 budget deficit that overlaps their administrations, before President Obama assumes full budgetary responsibility beginning in FY 2010. Overall, President Obama’s budget would add twice as much debt as President Bush over the same number of years.

    Posted in Ongoing Priorities

    Print This Post

    Bush Deficit vs. Obama Deficit in Pictures

    That Myth went away a long time ago
    The pubs have not been in power scince 2007
    Explain to us how that could be?

    Neither party caused the housing bubble, and the Dems are the ones who run up the debt
    That link will show clearly whose issue the debt is
     
  4. starcraftzzz
    Offline

    starcraftzzz Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2012
    Messages:
    2,263
    Thanks Received:
    120
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +120
    Allow the government to fund key social services, and increase living standards for the non rich
    I see so you think increasing living standards isn't helpful. Perhaps you english skills do not include knowing the definition of helpful
    I'm sorry put pointing out Federal spending in 2007 and 2011 and then rambling incoherency isn't showing that other people are wrong
     
  5. JRK
    Offline

    JRK Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    7,488
    Thanks Received:
    312
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +312
    Mr English
    You have brought nothing to the discussion but babble
    Grown ups can see the simple math as well as the policies that worked for us in 2007 and that are failing us in 2012
    Now if you dis agree, you might want to try and to tell us why (if you can)

    The point you have totally missed is that we have raised the amount the federal govt spends over 700 billion dollars
    The only peoples lives we have improved is BHO and the UAW as far as I can see, well there was those few chosen "companies" he bank rolled that have failed

    My ignore list is at about 15, go ahead and step up to the plate.
    I have no desire to discuss these issues with idiots who go thru life attacking there fellow Americans and bring nothing to the discussions
    That would be your place in life at this time, so go ahead and step up to the plate
     
  6. Mr. Peepers
    Offline

    Mr. Peepers Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2009
    Messages:
    3,206
    Thanks Received:
    394
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +394
    Are you serious? I mean, you cannot be this intellectually stunted. The housing bubble / market collapse / recession was quickly winding up in 2007 and became full-blown shit-storm in 2008 - I know, I was fearful of MY job importing parts for American car makers. And you can ABSOLUTELY blame the financial sector for that. What happens when you suddenly throw 700,000 out of work every month? You have to pay unemployment so they don't STARVE - not to mention they can't pay their mortgages anymore. You guys also want to pay slave wages and outsource all the decent jobs? Well, what do you expect the outcome to be? I mean, seriously!

    There are ZERO policies in 2007 that would be considered in any way "working" for the economy.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2012
  7. JRK
    Offline

    JRK Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    7,488
    Thanks Received:
    312
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +312
    Extending UE cost us 34 billion, Let me add it is unclear how much of that is funded thru the UE ins We pay for when we buy goods from corporations
    So lets use 50 billion. that leaves 650 billion
    House votes to extend jobless benefits, Senate heads for vacation | cleveland.com
    And hundreds of thousands more will lose their benefits in the coming weeks. The House voted 270-153 Thursday to extend jobless ... at a cost of $33.9 billion
    Please show us what this 650 billion has done for us

    The budget of 2007 worked. The housing bubble had nothing to do with the federal govt. If it did it was the repal of Gramm Leach
    That was in the late 90s

    You are talking Apples and Oranges. The budget we run the govt with has nothing to do with A failedEnergy policy,The threat and promise tax increases, Bailing out GM and Obama-care
    The CBO has confirmed that Obama-care will add to the Debt
    GM still owes us billions
    The failed Energy policy has cost us 1000s of jobs and tax revenue, maybe 100s of thousands

    (obama-care fine turns out is a tax)

    It amazes me that the 700,000 jobs lost a month re-peat is used when we talk about the budget. We are not talking deficts here, BUDGET

    Ok
    we add inflation from 2007 (SS payout did not go up for 2 years)
    we add 50 billion to help those who have lost there jobs
    we are no where near 700 billion

    If adding that much would have created jobs, I would not think the way I do, It has done nothing
     
  8. Mr. Peepers
    Offline

    Mr. Peepers Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2009
    Messages:
    3,206
    Thanks Received:
    394
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +394
    I... just... wow. You said POLICIES of 2007 "worked" and bitched about the rise in spending - which is the fallout from previous and 2007 policies... really? You're going to stand by that?
     
  9. Moonglow
    Offline

    Moonglow Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    81,437
    Thanks Received:
    7,982
    Trophy Points:
    1,870
    Location:
    sw mizzouri
    Ratings:
    +29,296
    My business is back to good compared to 2008, so I don't see you line of thinking and how it applies to the entire nation.
     
  10. uscitizen
    Offline

    uscitizen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    45,941
    Thanks Received:
    4,791
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    My Shack
    Ratings:
    +4,807
    Dear JRK,
    Please do not attempt to understand economics, recessions, etc because they are beyond your comprehension skillset.

    Thank you,
    uscitizen
     

Share This Page