Obama on Pace to Borrow $6.2T in One Term

[Jackson]

Considering borrowing is inexcusable without considering spending cuts to entitlements to the welfare state and the waste in government. The cuts that Obama proposes only makes the country more insecure ( defense) and lip service to the rest of the nation.

The government has to stop the bailouts to his cronyism friends and government backed bailouts to "green" when they have proven to be so ill sighted and generous beyond imagination.

 

[Care4all]

it was caused by increased spending (the huge doubling of total defense spending, and the medicare Pill Bill, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan) and fallen revenues....

the government went from collecting about 2.5 trillion a year in tax revenues in 2000, down to 2 trillion in a year after the bush tax cuts of 2001.... it took until 2005 before the gvt pulled in the 2.5 trillion in revenue again......

 

[Synthaholic]

how is it bullshit? hes already on record for over 5 trillion, hes now, according to the slimy deal ( both of them) they concocted back in august /sept. will get another tranche to carry it over the 6 trillion mark, this is a fact, is it not?

He's not on record for 5 trillion.

August 22, 2011 6:34 PM



National debt has increased $4 trillion under Obama

The latest posting by the Treasury Department shows the national debt has now increased $4 trillion on President Obama's watch.

The debt was $10.626 trillion on the day Mr. Obama took office. The latest calculation from Treasury shows the debt has now hit $14.639 trillion.

It's the most rapid increase in the debt under any U.S. president.

The national debt increased $4.9 trillion during the eight-year presidency of George W. Bush. The debt now is rising at a pace to surpass that amount during Mr. Obama's four-year term.



National debt has increased $4 trillion under Obama - Political Hotsheet - CBS News


its an approved msm source too so, have at it.


and...
from another approved source..


Nov 16, 2011 1:02pm

U.S. Debt Tops $15 Trillion Mark Today



U.S. Debt Tops $15 Trillion Mark Today - ABC News

How much of that is directly tied to Obama's policies?

How much of that is related to spending that preceded Obama taking office?

If you hand over your credit card to me with a $10,000 balance, and I add a $1,000 purchase, is the whole $11,000 because of me? Is the $500 per month interest on that card my fault? Or am I only held responsible for the interest on the $1,000 that I spent? I still have to pay all of the interest, but how much is directly my fault?

 

[ilia25]

1. Government spending has increased by 25% under Obama.

Government spending increased by 60% under Bush. It has been rising since forever, and no faster under Obama than before him.

The rise of the deficit was caused by the falling government revenues, not by increased spending.

It increased 25% as a percentage of GDP under Obama, dipstick.

It increased as a percentage of GDP because GDP was falling like a rock when Obama took the office. It is not Obama's fault.

Bush was not a fiscal conservative? OK, name a president who was! Government spending has been rising forever, get it already.

 

[bripat9643]

How much of that is directly tied to Obama's policies?

How much of that is related to spending that preceded Obama taking office?

If you hand over your credit card to me with a $10,000 balance, and I add a $1,000 purchase, is the whole $11,000 because of me? Is the $500 per month interest on that card my fault? Or am I only held responsible for the interest on the $1,000 that I spent? I still have to pay all of the interest, but how much is directly my fault?

Bush also inherited a "balance" with interest payments as well as a recession and a war against the Taliban. Obama has added more like $6000 in half the time it took Bush to add $5000.

DimoRAT whining about Bush isn't fooling anyone. It only sounds pathetic. Obama campaigned claiming he was going to fix the problem. He has only made it far worse.

 

[GoneBezerk]

But.....but it is Bush's fault.

Bush caused him to create the Porkulus Package, etc.

 

[bripat9643]

It increased 25% as a percentage of GDP under Obama, dipstick.

It increased as a percentage of GDP because GDP was falling like a rock when Obama took the office. It is not Obama's fault.

Bush was not a fiscal conservative? OK, name a president who was! Government spending has been rising forever, get it already.

Horseshit. Obama piled on an additional $850 billion in spending the minute he got into office. Spending in every department is up, up, up.

Reagan was fiscal conservative. He actually tried to cut spending. However, tip O'Neil declared every budget Reagan submitted "dead on arrival" because it didn't have enough spending to suit the Dims in Congress.

 

[ilia25]

It increased 25% as a percentage of GDP under Obama, dipstick.

It increased as a percentage of GDP because GDP was falling like a rock when Obama took the office. It is not Obama's fault.

Bush was not a fiscal conservative? OK, name a president who was! Government spending has been rising forever, get it already.

Horseshit. Obama piled on an additional $850 billion in spending the minute he got into office. Spending in every department is up, up, up.

The numbers tell a different story. Those $850 billion were a stimulus package, and half of it was in tax cuts and aid to the states, so they can pay for medicare, aid for the poor, like food stamps. The rest was a boost in spending over the next 2 years -- less than $200 billion per year (which is peanuts, total federal spending is 15 times 200 billion).

Name me a single department that had a faster than normal spending increase.

Reagan did not cut the spending either -- you want to know why? Because 80% of it goes to the military, social security, medicare and medicaid and unemployment insurance. Reagan was different things, but he was not suicidal.

If you want real spending cuts, you would have to convince Americans to do away with the social security. Or the army. You pick.

 

[ilia25]

Government spending increased by 60% under Bush. It has been rising since forever, and no faster under Obama than before him.

The rise of the deficit was caused by the falling government revenues, not by increased spending.

Comical and very incorrect.

That is how you end up voting for republicans -- by learning to dismiss the facts and numbers.

 

[Jarhead]

Government spending increased by 60% under Bush. It has been rising since forever, and no faster under Obama than before him.

The rise of the deficit was caused by the falling government revenues, not by increased spending.

Comical and very incorrect.

That is how you end up voting for republicans -- by learning to dismiss the facts and numbers.

If you had 50K coming into the household.....and one year you decided that you wanted to spruce up the house and pout all new windows and a new driveway in.
And the result was having to borrow money to pay your evryday bills.

Would you say it was a spending problem or a revenue problem?

 

[Trajan]

it was caused by increased spending (the huge doubling of total defense spending, and the medicare Pill Bill, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan) and fallen revenues....

the government went from collecting about 2.5 trillion a year in tax revenues in 2000, down to 2 trillion in a year after the bush tax cuts of 2001.... it took until 2005 before the gvt pulled in the 2.5 trillion in revenue again......

there a a recession in 2000, revenues were dropping. we don't know if he had not cut if that bump starting in 2004 into 2008 would have occurred without them, and yes bush spent a lot of that, no doubt of it....but blaming the cuts is a circular argument. so wars yes, pill bill some, spending mostly. not revenue.

 

[Stephanie]

1. Government spending has increased by 25% under Obama.

Government spending increased by 60% under Bush. It has been rising since forever, and no faster under Obama than before him.

The rise of the deficit was caused by the falling government revenues, not by increased spending.

Comical and very incorrect.

no kidding...

 

[ilia25]

Comical and very incorrect.

That is how you end up voting for republicans -- by learning to dismiss the facts and numbers.

If you had 50K coming into the household.....and one year you decided that you wanted to spruce up the house and pout all new windows and a new driveway in.
And the result was having to borrow money to pay your evryday bills.

Would you say it was a spending problem or a revenue problem?

Your example is a spending problem -- but it is a poor analogy for US fiscal problems. US run huge deficits because they do not collect enough revenue for two reasons:
1) Tax cuts introduced by Bush
2) Economic crisis that started in 2008, depressed the govt. revenues further.

That is all there is to it -- if the government does not collect enough taxes, then it does not have enough money to provide its services. You can cut spending, but 80% of it goes to the military and to provide help for the poor, the unemployed and seniors.

 

[Trajan]

He's not on record for 5 trillion.

August 22, 2011 6:34 PM



National debt has increased $4 trillion under Obama

The latest posting by the Treasury Department shows the national debt has now increased $4 trillion on President Obama's watch.

The debt was $10.626 trillion on the day Mr. Obama took office. The latest calculation from Treasury shows the debt has now hit $14.639 trillion.

It's the most rapid increase in the debt under any U.S. president.

The national debt increased $4.9 trillion during the eight-year presidency of George W. Bush. The debt now is rising at a pace to surpass that amount during Mr. Obama's four-year term.



National debt has increased $4 trillion under Obama - Political Hotsheet - CBS News


its an approved msm source too so, have at it.


and...
from another approved source..


Nov 16, 2011 1:02pm

U.S. Debt Tops $15 Trillion Mark Today



U.S. Debt Tops $15 Trillion Mark Today - ABC News

How much of that is directly tied to Obama's policies?

How much of that is related to spending that preceded Obama taking office?

If you hand over your credit card to me with a $10,000 balance, and I add a $1,000 purchase, is the whole $11,000 because of me? Is the $500 per month interest on that card my fault? Or am I only held responsible for the interest on the $1,000 that I spent? I still have to pay all of the interest, but how much is directly my fault?

How much of that is related to spending that preceded Obama taking office?

you're wrong, don't trot out the 'oh wait I meant' BS now.


BUT, becasue I wish to pull the plug on that avenue of craven BS as in - bush did it, its approx. 100 billion a year ( 148 projected for fiscal year 2012) when you figure in obama compounded his own debt. on top of the bush debt. ....have at it champ. I have seen the site with the details.


so, 6 trillion in debt.,- 300 billion, hell make it 400 billion, I will be kind and throw you as a sop, so, 5.6 trillion, now what?

 

[ilia25]

so, 5.6 trillion, now what?

Not Obama's fault -- he has inherited the bad economy with depressed tax revenues. That is why the budget deficit ballooned ten-fold even before he took the office!

 

[Stephanie]

so, 5.6 trillion, now what?

Not Obama's fault -- he has inherited the bad economy with depressed tax revenues. That is why the budget deficit ballooned ten-fold even before he took the office!

yeah we know, NOTHING is his fault..yet he hasn't saved us yet...even with ALL that monies he's spent...go figure

 

[ilia25]

so, 5.6 trillion, now what?

Not Obama's fault -- he has inherited the bad economy with depressed tax revenues. That is why the budget deficit ballooned ten-fold even before he took the office!

yeah we know, NOTHING is his fault..yet he hasn't saved us yet...even with ALL that monies he's spent...go figure

Well, one could say that he had stopped the economy from sliding further into depression!

The economy tanked in the fall of 2008 because everyone in the private sector has cut on spending (everyone and their banks had suddenly realized that they took too much of bad debt). If the government would cut its spending as well, it would make the crisis much worse.

The economists call it "the paradox of thrift" -- if everyone in the country decides to reduce their debt at the same time, the whole economy and everyone's income collapse. And in the end everyone's debt problem becomes worse.

 

[Stephanie]

Not Obama's fault -- he has inherited the bad economy with depressed tax revenues. That is why the budget deficit ballooned ten-fold even before he took the office!

yeah we know, NOTHING is his fault..yet he hasn't saved us yet...even with ALL that monies he's spent...go figure

Well, one could say that he had stopped the economy from sliding further into depression!

The economy tanked in the fall of 2008 because everyone in the private sector has cut on spending (everyone and their banks had suddenly realized that they took too much of bad debt). If the government would cut its spending as well, it would make the crisis much worse.

The economists call it "the paradox of thrift" -- if everyone in the country decides to reduce their debt at the same time, the whole economy and everyone's income collapse. And in the end everyone's debt problem becomes worse.

wtf? if the Government CUT spending it would make the crisis much worse..
and you guys and we were heading into a Depression...some say we are headed there now.
and some say everyone in the private sector cut spending was the RESULT of the Obama being elected..

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Not Obama's fault -- he has inherited the bad economy with depressed tax revenues. That is why the budget deficit ballooned ten-fold even before he took the office!

yeah we know, NOTHING is his fault..yet he hasn't saved us yet...even with ALL that monies he's spent...go figure

Well, one could say that he had stopped the economy from sliding further into depression!

The economy tanked in the fall of 2008 because everyone in the private sector has cut on spending (everyone and their banks had suddenly realized that they took too much of bad debt). If the government would cut its spending as well, it would make the crisis much worse.

The economists call it "the paradox of thrift" -- if everyone in the country decides to reduce their debt at the same time, the whole economy and everyone's income collapse. And in the end everyone's debt problem becomes worse.

In other words Bush had bad debt but Obama has good debt right? And when a Republican returns to President it will suddenly be bad debt again, right?

 

[Stephanie]

yeah we know, NOTHING is his fault..yet he hasn't saved us yet...even with ALL that monies he's spent...go figure

Well, one could say that he had stopped the economy from sliding further into depression!

The economy tanked in the fall of 2008 because everyone in the private sector has cut on spending (everyone and their banks had suddenly realized that they took too much of bad debt). If the government would cut its spending as well, it would make the crisis much worse.

The economists call it "the paradox of thrift" -- if everyone in the country decides to reduce their debt at the same time, the whole economy and everyone's income collapse. And in the end everyone's debt problem becomes worse.

In other words Bush had bad debt but Obama has good debt right? And when a Republican returns to President it will suddenly be bad debt again, right?

I believe so..lol