Obama's "I inherited this mess" excuse vs reality

[DiveCon]

We are discussing all tax cuts and increases. The GOP likes to cut the progressive income tax and raise all regressive taxes like payroll taxes and the gas tax, etc.

In 1980, according to Congressional Budget Office estimates, middle-income families with children paid 8.2 percent of their income in income taxes, and 9.5 percent in payroll taxes. By 1988 the income tax share was down to 6.6 percent but the payroll tax share was up to 11.8 percent, and the combined burden was up from 17.7% to 18.4%, shifting some of the tax burden from the PROGRESSIVE income tax to the REGRESSIVE payroll tax.

Here is a list of Reagan's tax increases after his tax cut in 1981.

First term

1. Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982

2. Highway Revenue Act of 1982

3. Social Security Amendments of 1983

4. Interest and Dividend Tax Compliance Act of 1983

5. Deficit Reduction Act of 1984

Second term

6. Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985

7. Tax Reform Act of 1986

8. Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987

and who passes "acts"


hint, it isnt POTUS

And who signs the "acts"

hint, it isn't Congress

sometimes a POTUS has no other choice but to sign
and reagan compromised with Tip O'Neil on many issues

 

[bucs90]

This thread is amazing. I take a lot of my foundation for thought from my days playing football through college. And the wisdom of football coaches, which strangely, translates almost 100% to life: The basic ideals that succeed in football will also succeed in daily life.

Thus, I like to judge politicians by the same ideals.

What if 2 years into taking over a college team, Obama was blaming his losses on the poor recruiting of the coaching staff that was fired 2 years before him?

That is a major leadership no-no that all coaches adhere to. It's your watch. Fair or not, it's your fault or your glory during the wins and losses. You never, ever make excuses. You don't blame others. You are the man. You are in charge. You are the leader.

But Obama is now blaming the coach that left 2 years ago on why his team is losing right now. Pitiful, and poor leadership. Thats why no one, including business leaders of our country, have any faith right now in taking hiring risks. They have no clue what this man is leading us into. Bill Clinton on the other hand, with a Republican Congress, was stable and a leader. He, along with is assistant coaches (Congress) showed leadership and stability and business knew it was OK to take big risks because the government was stable.

So, like all great college football fans, we should start www.firecoachobama.com up!!!!!!

 

[cad]

"The debt is now 89% of GDP, up from 51% in 1988."

can you not acknowledge that not all spending is equal?

when you use your AMEX to purchase a $500 television when your limit is 10K and your balance is 2k, that's one thing.

when you want to use that same amex to buy another $500 computer when your balance is 9K, it's a little different story.

either the budget deficit/national debt levels we have now are a problem or they're not. i believe obama has acknowledged that they are. again i ask, what is one step obama has taken that would alleviate those problems?

 

[edthecynic]

and who passes "acts"


hint, it isnt POTUS

And who signs the "acts"

hint, it isn't Congress

sometimes a POTUS has no other choice but to sign
and reagan compromised with Tip O'Neil on many issues

No one had to twist St Ronnie's arm to get him to tax, borrow and spend. He had a plan all along.

July 6, 2010
RUSH: It is said of Reagan -- I think it's true to a certain extent -- Reagan decided to starve the welfare state by creating deficits and spending

 

[edthecynic]

This thread is amazing. I take a lot of my foundation for thought from my days playing football through college. And the wisdom of football coaches, which strangely, translates almost 100% to life: The basic ideals that succeed in football will also succeed in daily life.

Thus, I like to judge politicians by the same ideals.

What if 2 years into taking over a college team, Obama was blaming his losses on the poor recruiting of the coaching staff that was fired 2 years before him?

That is a major leadership no-no that all coaches adhere to. It's your watch. Fair or not, it's your fault or your glory during the wins and losses. You never, ever make excuses. You don't blame others. You are the man. You are in charge. You are the leader.

But Obama is now blaming the coach that left 2 years ago on why his team is losing right now. Pitiful, and poor leadership. Thats why no one, including business leaders of our country, have any faith right now in taking hiring risks. They have no clue what this man is leading us into. Bill Clinton on the other hand, with a Republican Congress, was stable and a leader. He, along with is assistant coaches (Congress) showed leadership and stability and business knew it was OK to take big risks because the government was stable.

So, like all great college football fans, we should start www.firecoachobama.com up!!!!!!

Reagan's 10.8% Unemployment rate 2 full years into his first term was blamed on Carter, and we are told St Ronnie is the paragon of leadership. Hell, CON$ are blaming the Bush Depression on Carter!!! It seems there is no time limit for blaming Dems and the GOP are absolved of all responsibility months before the election.

March 2, 2009
RUSH: To say that Obama has been in office only one month is not accurate from an effect on the world and an effect on the country standpoint. Barack Obama has been the controlling political authority on the economy for six months.

November 6, 2008
RUSH: The Obama recession is in full swing, ladies and gentlemen.* Stocks are dying, which is a precursor of things to come.* This is an Obama recession.* Might turn into a depression.*

 

[cad]

This thread is amazing. I take a lot of my foundation for thought from my days playing football through college. And the wisdom of football coaches, which strangely, translates almost 100% to life: The basic ideals that succeed in football will also succeed in daily life.

Thus, I like to judge politicians by the same ideals.

What if 2 years into taking over a college team, Obama was blaming his losses on the poor recruiting of the coaching staff that was fired 2 years before him?

That is a major leadership no-no that all coaches adhere to. It's your watch. Fair or not, it's your fault or your glory during the wins and losses. You never, ever make excuses. You don't blame others. You are the man. You are in charge. You are the leader.

But Obama is now blaming the coach that left 2 years ago on why his team is losing right now. Pitiful, and poor leadership. Thats why no one, including business leaders of our country, have any faith right now in taking hiring risks. They have no clue what this man is leading us into. Bill Clinton on the other hand, with a Republican Congress, was stable and a leader. He, along with is assistant coaches (Congress) showed leadership and stability and business knew it was OK to take big risks because the government was stable.

So, like all great college football fans, we should start www.firecoachobama.com up!!!!!!

Reagan's 10.8% Unemployment rate 2 full years into his first term was blamed on Carter, and we are told St Ronnie is the paragon of leadership. Hell, CON$ are blaming the Bush Depression on Carter!!! It seems there is no time limit for blaming Dems and the GOP are absolved of all responsibility months before the election.

March 2, 2009
RUSH: To say that Obama has been in office only one month is not accurate from an effect on the world and an effect on the country standpoint. Barack Obama has been the controlling political authority on the economy for six months.

November 6, 2008
RUSH: The Obama recession is in full swing, ladies and gentlemen.* Stocks are dying, which is a precursor of things to come.* This is an Obama recession.* Might turn into a depression.*

i was not aware of reagan's propensity to blame carter years into his administration. i honestly thank you for pointing that out to me.

i believe you will acknowledge that there was a strong period of economic growth and job creation during both the reagan and clinton years. you will point out both raised taxes (although i believe clinton was only one to raise income taxes). however, i doubt you will put forth the argument that it was these tax increases that led to such strong growth. with clinton, it was the dot.com boom and cold war peace dividend that he presided over that were the prevailing factors. his free trade agreements and deregulation no doubt helped. what was it that led to the reagan boom?

which of obama's policies leads you to believe we are headed for another period of economic success, like under reagan or clinton?

 

[jeffrockit]

What Obama inherited was the Iraq and Afghanistan war spending, which Bush kept off the books, Bush's drug bill, and the interest on $8 trillion in debt purposely rung up by Reagan, Bush I and Bush II so the government would have no money to spend on the American people. Back them out and Obama would have little or no debt in spite of the reduced revenue due to the Bush Depression.

July 6, 2010
RUSH: It is said of Reagan -- I think it's true to a certain extent -- Reagan decided to starve the welfare state by creating deficits and spending

None of that explains why Obama increased the deficit. If he "inherited" a deficit, the logical, wise thing to do would be to try and reduce it, not increase it. The fact remains that Obama added to the deficit so he is really no better than Bush who also added to it.

So you are saying Reagan and Cheney are liars for saying deficits don't matter!
Thank you.

"Reagan proved deficits don't matter."
Dick Cheney

'I don't worry about the deficit. It's big enough to take care of itself.'
Ronald Reagan

Absolutely. Nice dodge as you did not respond with an explanation of why Obama increased the already bloated deficit. I guess he really is no better than Bush.

 

[bucs90]

But but but it's no fair!!! Bush got to run us into debt, now it's my turn!!! Mommy, it's not fair!!

But son, we're broke, Bushy boy broke us, sorry, but we're out of money.

But mommy, it's not fair, I WANNA bankrupt us like he did, boo hoo!!!

(Conversation between Obama and Sarah Palin)

 

[Greenbeard]

None of that explains why Obama increased the deficit. If he "inherited" a deficit, the logical, wise thing to do would be to try and reduce it, not increase it. The fact remains that Obama added to the deficit so he is really no better than Bush who also added to it.

Refer again to the primary drivers of the deficit:

Would the logical, wise thing have been to immediately rescind the Bush tax cuts or defund our ongoing military conflicts? Or perhaps economic recovery would've been spurred by starving state budgets, cutting aid to state Medicaid programs, and limiting availability of unemployment benefits or food stamps.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

None of that explains why Obama increased the deficit. If he "inherited" a deficit, the logical, wise thing to do would be to try and reduce it, not increase it. The fact remains that Obama added to the deficit so he is really no better than Bush who also added to it.

Refer again to the primary drivers of the deficit:

Would the logical, wise thing have been to immediately rescind the Bush tax cuts or defund our ongoing military conflicts? Or perhaps economic recovery would've been spurred by starving state budgets, cutting aid to state Medicaid programs, and limiting availability of unemployment benefits or food stamps.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TuLBa-rgBk]YouTube - Blues Brothers - not my fault[/ame]

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Yes, raise taxes in the middle of a recession like Hoover and FDR did.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

None of that explains why Obama increased the deficit. If he "inherited" a deficit, the logical, wise thing to do would be to try and reduce it, not increase it. The fact remains that Obama added to the deficit so he is really no better than Bush who also added to it.

Refer again to the primary drivers of the deficit:

Would the logical, wise thing have been to immediately rescind the Bush tax cuts or defund our ongoing military conflicts? Or perhaps economic recovery would've been spurred by starving state budgets, cutting aid to state Medicaid programs, and limiting availability of unemployment benefits or food stamps.

Progressives keep mistaking the Federal Government for the US economy, then again in their mind it's the same thing.

State budgets are now the responsibility of the Federal government?

Yes, defund the military, the one and only item in the Constitution that the government can spend money on.

Maybe lifetime unemployment is the way to Prosperity...wait! Maybe Obama can make every unemployed person some sort of a Czar!

You mean you can't think of a single Depression era program that has run its course? There's not a single nickle, besides the military, that the government can cut?

I've already shown you that Fannie and Freddie are essentially the same company, why do we need 2 Depression era mission companies doing the exact same function? Why?

 

[Greenbeard]

Yes, raise taxes in the middle of a recession like Hoover and FDR did.

In one post you oppose contractionary fiscal policy during a shaky recovery, in the next you're eager for ways to cut spending.

Either the deficit is a problem and we need to raise taxes and cut spending to deal with it right now, in the current economic situation, or it's not and we'll address it when conditions approve. Figure out what you actually believe and get back to us.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Yes, raise taxes in the middle of a recession like Hoover and FDR did.

In one post you oppose contractionary fiscal policy during a shaky recovery, in the next you're eager for ways to cut spending.

Either the deficit is a problem and we need to raise taxes and cut spending to deal with it right now, in the current economic situation, or it's not and we'll address it when conditions approve. Figure out what you actually believe and get back to us.

Hey Doc, even you can see that Obama $850B Keynesian Bigger than Reagan's Entire 1982 Budget Spending isn't working, right?

Can you see that?

I support real broad spectrum Tax relief, elimination of Capital gains and estate taxes, no taxes on start up businesses, and repeal of ObamaCare in favor of the Whole Food Plan.

Simultaneously, I favor cutting government spending and eliminating whole departments including HUD, Department of Education, Fannie and Freddie, Tennessee Valley, Rural Electrification for starters.

To drive down the cost of energy, I favor a robust and redundant energy program including domestic drilling, refining, coal and nuclear; ideally I'd love to see a company like Walmart get into the energy production and delivery business because then you'd know you're getting a great price.

Nothing "Contradictory" about cutting taxes and cutting wasteful government spending.

 

[skookerasbil]

LOL..........check out Timothy Gietner's article in the NY TImes today.



http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/03/opinion/03geithner.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

He emphasizes, "this latest recession was deeper than we thought"!!!

w0w..........who couldnt have seen that spin coming??!!!!

Target: Independents


I noticed he didnt mention anything about the 8,000+ jobs lost in the Gulf area due to the drilling maratorium!!!


Yup ahhhhhhhhh ( draws long toke on ciggy Denis Leary style )..........Im seeing November just outside my window right now!!!

 

[skookerasbil]

Obama deficits >>>>

Reagan/Bush Deficits >>>>>

still..........the k00ks dont get it.


I always wondered if it was a limpwrister thing???

 

[skookerasbil]

Ok................

Lets try this for the k00ks instead........................

Yo.........yo...............yo.............yo.................Yo !!!!

 

[skookerasbil]

Ohhh.............I'll bet post #76 gets all the feminist bulldogs freaked out!!!


Buckle up your chinstraps!!!

 

[NYcarbineer]

Yes, raise taxes in the middle of a recession like Hoover and FDR did.

In one post you oppose contractionary fiscal policy during a shaky recovery, in the next you're eager for ways to cut spending.

Either the deficit is a problem and we need to raise taxes and cut spending to deal with it right now, in the current economic situation, or it's not and we'll address it when conditions approve. Figure out what you actually believe and get back to us.

Hey Doc, even you can see that Obama $850B Keynesian Bigger than Reagan's Entire 1982 Budget Spending isn't working, right?

Can you see that?

I support real broad spectrum Tax relief, elimination of Capital gains and estate taxes, no taxes on start up businesses, and repeal of ObamaCare in favor of the Whole Food Plan.

Simultaneously, I favor cutting government spending and eliminating whole departments including HUD, Department of Education, Fannie and Freddie, Tennessee Valley, Rural Electrification for starters.

To drive down the cost of energy, I favor a robust and redundant energy program including domestic drilling, refining, coal and nuclear; ideally I'd love to see a company like Walmart get into the energy production and delivery business because then you'd know you're getting a great price.

Nothing "Contradictory" about cutting taxes and cutting wasteful government spending.

The Congress will never eliminate those programs, the Republican Congress prior to this one would have never eliminated those programs, any Congress you elect in the future will never eliminate those programs.

In other words, your beliefs are totally divorced from reality.

But they do represent perfectly the failure of Republicans. They propose to cut taxes and then pay for them by cutting government spending. They then cut taxes and NEVER cut government spending, thus leaving us with massive deficits,

and no way to deal with them that isn't political suicide.

 

[editec]

The sontinuation of the same stupid policies in place leads to a continuation of the rising national debt.

This really should not be all that hard to understand.

Not even for you partisans.