Obama spending binge never happened

[PredFan]

You should be. Obama has no control over non discretionary spending.

Right...No control.

That's why he has failed to submit a budget that would pass muster in the most leftist of congressional delegations in history, and only run the gubmint on one continuing resolution after another.

Just balloon the debt, wash your hands of it and say "non-discretionary spending!"

Fucking cowards....Every one of y'all.

The most basic point all you yayhoos continue to miss is that the biggest part of the yearly deficits are due to drops in tax revenue. 73% of Obama's deficits are due to losses in revenue, yet nobody wants to increase taxes, which is what needs to happen.

Bush got us to these spending levels; Obama just has not reduced them any. The biggest problem is that we can't get the economy growing again. While Cons tell us it is because of excess regulation and taxes being too high, the real truth is that having this huge debt hanging over our heads is scaring the bejesus out of everyone, so they are not spending. If we got revenues in line and attacked the debt problem, business would start spending again. The biggest lie we have been sold is that business won't invest because tax rates are too high. We all know it's a lie, and there is more than enough proof to back that up. We have the lowest effective tax rates in over 60 years, and the economy has been dead for the last four to five years, and it was stalled for the five to six years before that. The only reason there was any growth from 2000 forward was due to the housing bubble. Had all that paper money not been available, we would have seen a long recession much sooner. But since the housing bubble kept things afloat for a while, when it burst, it actually made things much worse.

Bottom line is that we need to get revenues back in line.

Dead wrong. we have a spending problem, not a revenue problem.

 

[BDBoop]

Government spending under Obama, including his signature stimulus bill, is rising at a 1.4% annualized pace — slower than at any time in nearly 60 years.

Obama spending binge never happened - Rex Nutting - MarketWatch

Good link.

Historical Tables | The White House

From the one I'm quoting,

Here are the facts, according to the official government statistics:

• In the 2009 fiscal year — the last of George W. Bush’s presidency — federal spending rose by 17.9% from $2.98 trillion to $3.52 trillion. Check the official numbers at the Office of Management and Budget.

• In fiscal 2010 — the first budget under Obama — spending fell 1.8% to $3.46 trillion.

• In fiscal 2011, spending rose 4.3% to $3.60 trillion.

• In fiscal 2012, spending is set to rise 0.7% to $3.63 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of the budget that was agreed to last August.

• Finally in fiscal 2013 — the final budget of Obama’s term — spending is scheduled to fall 1.3% to $3.58 trillion.

Read the CBO's latest budget outlook.

 

[California Girl]

That is true, but it requires a grade school graduate to understand it.

You couldn't graduate your way out of a grade school lavatory, pinhead.

Which may well explain why she supports Obama... he struggled with the whole education thing too.

 

[The Infidel]

You should be. Obama has no control over non discretionary spending.

Right...No control.

That's why he has failed to submit a budget that would pass muster in the most leftist of congressional delegations in history, and only run the gubmint on one continuing resolution after another.

Just balloon the debt, wash your hands of it and say "non-discretionary spending!"

Fucking cowards....Every one of y'all.

The most basic point all you yayhoos continue to miss is that the biggest part of the yearly deficits are due to drops in tax revenue. 73% of Obama's deficits are due to losses in revenue, yet nobody wants to increase taxes, which is what needs to happen.

Bush got us to these spending levels; Obama just has not reduced them any. The biggest problem is that we can't get the economy growing again. While Cons tell us it is because of excess regulation and taxes being too high, the real truth is that having this huge debt hanging over our heads is scaring the bejesus out of everyone, so they are not spending. If we got revenues in line and attacked the debt problem, business would start spending again. The biggest lie we have been sold is that business won't invest because tax rates are too high. We all know it's a lie, and there is more than enough proof to back that up. We have the lowest effective tax rates in over 60 years, and the economy has been dead for the last four to five years, and it was stalled for the five to six years before that. The only reason there was any growth from 2000 forward was due to the housing bubble. Had all that paper money not been available, we would have seen a long recession much sooner. But since the housing bubble kept things afloat for a while, when it burst, it actually made things much worse.

Bottom line is that we need to get revenues back in line.

Guess thats why businesses are leaving states like California and New York and going to states with lower taxes and no state income taxes.

Its not a revenue problem, its a spending problem.

 

[DiamondDave]

We have the lowest effective tax rates in over 60 years

Do not continue to lie....

Historical Effective Federal Tax Rates for All Households

 

[PoliticalChic]

Another right wing lie debunked.

Obama spending binge never happened
Commentary: Government outlays rising at slowest pace since 1950s

Of all the falsehoods told about President Barack Obama, the biggest whopper is the one about his reckless spending spree.

As would-be president Mitt Romney tells it: “I will lead us out of this debt and spending inferno.”

Almost everyone believes that Obama has presided over a massive increase in federal spending, an “inferno” of spending that threatens our jobs, our businesses and our children’s future. Even Democrats seem to think it’s true.

But it didn’t happen. Although there was a big stimulus bill under Obama, federal spending is rising at the slowest pace since Dwight Eisenhower brought the Korean War to an end in the 1950s.

Why would you waste your time posting material so patently false....?



You might profit by studying the following:

'You can either be quietly phony or loudly honest, but loud and phony will always bring trouble eventually.'—McKreck

 

[Dick Tuck]

Another right wing lie debunked.

Obama spending binge never happened
Commentary: Government outlays rising at slowest pace since 1950s

Of all the falsehoods told about President Barack Obama, the biggest whopper is the one about his reckless spending spree.

As would-be president Mitt Romney tells it: “I will lead us out of this debt and spending inferno.”

Almost everyone believes that Obama has presided over a massive increase in federal spending, an “inferno” of spending that threatens our jobs, our businesses and our children’s future. Even Democrats seem to think it’s true.

But it didn’t happen. Although there was a big stimulus bill under Obama, federal spending is rising at the slowest pace since Dwight Eisenhower brought the Korean War to an end in the 1950s.

Kind of like the holocaust huh?

Yes. It's another big right wing lie that you've succeeded to make into conventional wisdom.

 

[Dick Tuck]

Every penny of new debt is new debt.

Stop being foolish. I mean, more foolish than usual.

Yes, but when was that debt incurred?

On each an every new budget, of course.

I know that you know you're lying. Debt was incurred every year that Bush's debt financed tax cut was in place. It was realized when the debt became due.

 

[DiamondDave]

Government - Public Debt Reports

'nuff said

 

[The Infidel]

Kind of like the holocaust huh?

Yes. It's another big right wing lie that you've succeeded to make into conventional wisdom.

So now Hitler didn't kill millions?



Wow

 

[Dick Tuck]

Where my Obama money at?

Your racist attempt at Eubonics is a huge fail. I'm glad you're showing people what your real values are about.

 

[auditor0007]

Right...No control.

That's why he has failed to submit a budget that would pass muster in the most leftist of congressional delegations in history, and only run the gubmint on one continuing resolution after another.

Just balloon the debt, wash your hands of it and say "non-discretionary spending!"

Fucking cowards....Every one of y'all.

The most basic point all you yayhoos continue to miss is that the biggest part of the yearly deficits are due to drops in tax revenue. 73% of Obama's deficits are due to losses in revenue, yet nobody wants to increase taxes, which is what needs to happen.

Bush got us to these spending levels; Obama just has not reduced them any. The biggest problem is that we can't get the economy growing again. While Cons tell us it is because of excess regulation and taxes being too high, the real truth is that having this huge debt hanging over our heads is scaring the bejesus out of everyone, so they are not spending. If we got revenues in line and attacked the debt problem, business would start spending again. The biggest lie we have been sold is that business won't invest because tax rates are too high. We all know it's a lie, and there is more than enough proof to back that up. We have the lowest effective tax rates in over 60 years, and the economy has been dead for the last four to five years, and it was stalled for the five to six years before that. The only reason there was any growth from 2000 forward was due to the housing bubble. Had all that paper money not been available, we would have seen a long recession much sooner. But since the housing bubble kept things afloat for a while, when it burst, it actually made things much worse.

Bottom line is that we need to get revenues back in line.

Dead wrong. we have a spending problem, not a revenue problem.

Obviously, you have no understanding of basic math. In 2001, Clinton's final budget, revenues were 20.5% of GDP. The last couple of years, revenues have been under 15% of GDP. That is a net loss in revenue of nearly 30%, and that loss in revenue of 30% accounts for over 65% of the yearly deficits. That is a revenue problem, and anyone that denies it is a moron, plain and simple. In the last 60 plus years, we have never run the federal government on 14% of GDP. This is the problem with cons; you can't figure out basic math.

 

[Dick Tuck]

Another liar who's too dumb to know the difference between discretionary and nondiscretionary spending. Keep living the lie.

Fact: Obama has added more debt than any administration in history.

Partisan lies will not alter this fact.

Only to hyperpartisan liars like yourself. The debt was accumulated under Bush. It became due under Obama. The fact remains that Obama grew the Federal government at its slowest rate since the 1950s.

When you go to Vegas and max out your credit cards on whores and gambling, you take on debt at that time. You don't take it on when you receive your bill.

 

[auditor0007]

Another right wing lie debunked.

Obama spending binge never happened
Commentary: Government outlays rising at slowest pace since 1950s

Of all the falsehoods told about President Barack Obama, the biggest whopper is the one about his reckless spending spree.

As would-be president Mitt Romney tells it: “I will lead us out of this debt and spending inferno.”

Almost everyone believes that Obama has presided over a massive increase in federal spending, an “inferno” of spending that threatens our jobs, our businesses and our children’s future. Even Democrats seem to think it’s true.

But it didn’t happen. Although there was a big stimulus bill under Obama, federal spending is rising at the slowest pace since Dwight Eisenhower brought the Korean War to an end in the 1950s.

Why would you waste your time posting material so patently false....?



You might profit by studying the following:

'You can either be quietly phony or loudly honest, but loud and phony will always bring trouble eventually.'—McKreck

Actually, the material is spot on. It's just more fun for cons to deny the truth.

 

[DiamondDave]

The most basic point all you yayhoos continue to miss is that the biggest part of the yearly deficits are due to drops in tax revenue. 73% of Obama's deficits are due to losses in revenue, yet nobody wants to increase taxes, which is what needs to happen.

Bush got us to these spending levels; Obama just has not reduced them any. The biggest problem is that we can't get the economy growing again. While Cons tell us it is because of excess regulation and taxes being too high, the real truth is that having this huge debt hanging over our heads is scaring the bejesus out of everyone, so they are not spending. If we got revenues in line and attacked the debt problem, business would start spending again. The biggest lie we have been sold is that business won't invest because tax rates are too high. We all know it's a lie, and there is more than enough proof to back that up. We have the lowest effective tax rates in over 60 years, and the economy has been dead for the last four to five years, and it was stalled for the five to six years before that. The only reason there was any growth from 2000 forward was due to the housing bubble. Had all that paper money not been available, we would have seen a long recession much sooner. But since the housing bubble kept things afloat for a while, when it burst, it actually made things much worse.

Bottom line is that we need to get revenues back in line.

Dead wrong. we have a spending problem, not a revenue problem.

Obviously, you have no understanding of basic math. In 2001, Clinton's final budget, revenues were 20.5% of GDP. The last couple of years, revenues have been under 15% of GDP. That is a net loss in revenue of nearly 30%, and that loss in revenue of 30% accounts for over 65% of the yearly deficits. That is a revenue problem, and anyone that denies it is a moron, plain and simple. In the last 60 plus years, we have never run the federal government on 14% of GDP. This is the problem with cons; you can't figure out basic math.

Again.. wrong

US Government Spending As Percent Of GDP United States 1903-2010 - Federal State Local Data
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=205

We have a HUGE spending problem

 

[BlindBoo]

Oh, so the $5 trillion in new debt is just a figment of everyone's imagination.

I'm so relieved.

Having been handed a 1.2 trillion dollar deficit from all other Administration represents how much of that new debt? How about interest on the previous debt is that anywhere in the 5 trillion.

 

[Conservative]

Another liar who's too dumb to know the difference between discretionary and nondiscretionary spending. Keep living the lie.

Fact: Obama has added more debt than any administration in history.

Partisan lies will not alter this fact.

Only to hyperpartisan liars like yourself. The debt was accumulated under Bush. It became due under Obama. The fact remains that Obama grew the Federal government at its slowest rate since the 1950s.

When you go to Vegas and max out your credit cards on whores and gambling, you take on debt at that time. You don't take it on when you receive your bill.

I think that is the most ironic and amusing thing you have ever posted. If you were not such a hyper-partisan bitch yourself, I'd pos rep you just for the laugh!

 

[SniperFire]

Oh, so the $5 trillion in new debt is just a figment of everyone's imagination.

I'm so relieved.

You should be. Obama has no control over non discretionary spending.

'Wow. A real job is WAY harder than I thought!'

- B. Hussein Obama

 

[The Infidel]

The most basic point all you yayhoos continue to miss is that the biggest part of the yearly deficits are due to drops in tax revenue. 73% of Obama's deficits are due to losses in revenue, yet nobody wants to increase taxes, which is what needs to happen.

Bush got us to these spending levels; Obama just has not reduced them any. The biggest problem is that we can't get the economy growing again. While Cons tell us it is because of excess regulation and taxes being too high, the real truth is that having this huge debt hanging over our heads is scaring the bejesus out of everyone, so they are not spending. If we got revenues in line and attacked the debt problem, business would start spending again. The biggest lie we have been sold is that business won't invest because tax rates are too high. We all know it's a lie, and there is more than enough proof to back that up. We have the lowest effective tax rates in over 60 years, and the economy has been dead for the last four to five years, and it was stalled for the five to six years before that. The only reason there was any growth from 2000 forward was due to the housing bubble. Had all that paper money not been available, we would have seen a long recession much sooner. But since the housing bubble kept things afloat for a while, when it burst, it actually made things much worse.

Bottom line is that we need to get revenues back in line.

Dead wrong. we have a spending problem, not a revenue problem.

Obviously, you have no understanding of basic math. In 2001, Clinton's final budget, revenues were 20.5% of GDP. The last couple of years, revenues have been under 15% of GDP. That is a net loss in revenue of nearly 30%, and that loss in revenue of 30% accounts for over 65% of the yearly deficits. That is a revenue problem, and anyone that denies it is a moron, plain and simple. In the last 60 plus years, we have never run the federal government on 14% of GDP. This is the problem with cons; you can't figure out basic math.

So if a guy loses his job (revenue problem) but yet he continues to spend the same amount every month (spending problem).
He comes up with a scheme to go to his neighbors home and take the TV and microwave to supplement his lifestyle.
His neighbor is not going to take to kindly to his scheme to continue life as normal.

Oh, and dont dare complain... you will be called all sorts of nasty names.

 

[SniperFire]

Yes, but when was that debt incurred?

On each an every new budget, of course.

I know that you know you're lying.

No. You go into debt when you buy stuff of credit which you don't have the cash to cover.

Here's hoping your boyfriend is the one who handles the checkbook in your civil union.