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

[Soggy in NOLA]

The left bashed Bush for deficits, and now that "their guy" is in and is making Bush look like a piker on deficits, well, it's ok. It had to be done. We'll take it from the "rich".. what they won't admit is, the Dems have become the party of the rich!

Laughable.

 

[Navy1960]

Let me see if I understand this as a justification, the current Administration has created ZERO jobs while in office, in fact ever month the President has been in office there has NEVER been a month in which there has not been job loss. One other thing worth mentioning here on Job loss, this is the same President that said something about stimulus being the solution to umemployment not going above 8.5%. Since then we all have seen the error in that statement. We have increased the national debt from 9 Trillion to 13 Trillion in just 2 years if you keep going at the same rate thats 2 Trillion a year and should the President serve 8 years like the last one , hs debt will make the last one look very small as it is already. Let's be honest here people Keynesian economics does not work and has never worked. Want a good example, recently the President was in MI. touting the comeback of the auto industry because of the bailouts , he neglected to mention that prior to the bailouts the unemployment rate in MI. was 10.% and now it's 14%, he also neglected to mention that the auto bailouts were started under the previous Administration. As someone mentioned eariler here, when you have no accomplishments you revert to the person who came before you because you have nothing left to say, as is the case with our current President.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence. -John Adams


Sorry navy your post reminded me of that quote of adams and I think it says it all about what your getting at .

 

[NYcarbineer]

Let me see if I understand this as a justification, the current Administration has created ZERO jobs while in office, in fact ever month the President has been in office there has NEVER been a month in which there has not been job loss. .

You my friend are full of shit. (John Adams may have said that too lol)

 

[jeffrockit]

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.

Anything other than increasing the deficit should have been discussed. You can't possibly believe that every dollar the Obama administration spent was only for things that were absolutely necessary. Any stimulus funds that were paybacks for Obama getting elected or Pork projects for the Dem constituents should have been rejected. Instead many were rewarded with the end result being not many jobs stimulated. Double digit unemployment in most states would bear out that the stim was ineffective. BTW, there were other ways to cut beside military and medicaid. What happened to going after the waste, fraud and abuse in medicaid and medicare?

 

[007]

Nobody asked Obama to spend another $2 trillion. He should have started cutting immediately, but instead he chose to double the deficit in his second year. It also doesn't help that he and the Dems keep extending unemployment benefits.

By the way....Obama helped greatly with starting the shitstorm. After all...he was in the Senate in 04'. He's been in Washington stirring up shit for around 6 years. Long enough not to inherit shit.

 

[edthecynic]

Nobody asked Obama to spend another $2 trillion. He should have started cutting immediately, but instead he chose to double the deficit in his second year. It also doesn't help that he and the Dems keep extending unemployment benefits.

By the way....Obama helped greatly with starting the shitstorm. After all...he was in the Senate in 04'. He's been in Washington stirring up shit for around 6 years. Long enough not to inherit shit.

Of course that DISHONEST chart does not include Bush's off the books deficit spending. For example, the debt increased over a half a trillion dollars in 2006, but the typically dishonest CON$ervative chart claims less than $200,000 proving yet again that no stat from any CON$ervative source can ever be trusted.
Thank you.

 

[mudwhistle]

1. Show me a link that states tax cuts cost revenue loss. Tax cuts cause growth in the economy which means more revenue because more people have money to invest, to pay for more expensive products, and pay more taxes.

Tax cuts increase tax collections
Total Federal Tax Collections (billions)

Year Constant (87 dollars)
---------------------------------------
1980 $728.1
1981 766.6 < Reagan tax cut passed in August
1982 738.2 < drop in total revenue
1983 684.3 < drop in total revenue
1984 730.4 < Reagan raises taxes
1985 776.6 < Reagan raises taxes again, 81 level recovered
1986 790.0 < Reagan raises taxes yet again
1987 854.1 < Reagan raises taxes some more
1988 877.3

Source - Internal Revenue Service.

Kennedy tax cuts

Federal Income Tax Collections (Constant dollars, CPI-U)

Year Receipts Percent change from previous year
--------------------------------------------------
1961 $138,069 ---
1962 150,567 + 9.0%
1963 155,375 + 3.2
1964 156,804 + 0.9 < tax cut takes effect
1965 154,475 - 1.5 < drop in revenue

Source - U.S. Office of Management and Budget, Historical Tables, Budget of the US Government, FY 1996. Dollar conversions made from CPI-U.

Clinton tax increase

Individual Income Taxes (millions)

Year Current Constant (87 dollars)
-------------------------------------------
1990 $466,884 $413,355
1991 467,827 397,677 < recession year
1992 475,964 392,969
1993 509,680 411,032 < Clinton tax passes
1994 543,055 429,496 < takes effect
1995 590,244 458,300

Corporate Income Taxes (millions)

Year Current Constant (87 dollars)
--------------------------------------------
1990 $93,507 $82,786
1991 98,086 83,378 < recession year
1992 100,270 82,786
1993 117,520 94,774 < Clinton tax passes
1994 140,385 111,029 < takes effect
1995 157,004 121,907

U.S. Office of Management and Budget, Historical Tables, Budget of the U.S. Government, FY 1996. Dollar conversions made from tables located there.

Why don't you look at the revenue increases with the Bush tax cuts instead of tax cuts that have nothing to do with the debate today.

The numbers you posted....was it all revenue or just income tax revenue? Did it include gasoline taxes, tobacco taxes, liquor taxes, government fees, FICA, Medicare taxes, etc,? No it doesn't. Sure....revenues from income and corporate taxes goes down a bit but all of the tax revenue goes up and in the process the economy churns because products are being produced, purchased, and money changes hands which is good for the economy.

Number one....jobs are created in a fair tax environment.....where as in a anti-business heavily taxed state jobs are suppressed and the government ends up eventually increasing the debt supporting millions of the unemployed rather then collecting taxes from employed workers.

 

[mudwhistle]

Let me see if I understand this as a justification, the current Administration has created ZERO jobs while in office, in fact ever month the President has been in office there has NEVER been a month in which there has not been job loss. .

You my friend are full of shit. (John Adams may have said that too lol)

A chart from the office of the Speaker of the House.

Nancy Pelosi seems to have problems with the truth. She claims unemployment payouts is a job maker.

What a lunatic.

 

[mudwhistle]

Nobody asked Obama to spend another $2 trillion. He should have started cutting immediately, but instead he chose to double the deficit in his second year. It also doesn't help that he and the Dems keep extending unemployment benefits.

By the way....Obama helped greatly with starting the shitstorm. After all...he was in the Senate in 04'. He's been in Washington stirring up shit for around 6 years. Long enough not to inherit shit.

Of course that DISHONEST chart does not include Bush's off the books deficit spending. For example, the debt increased over a half a trillion dollars in 2006, but the typically dishonest CON$ervative chart claims less than $200,000 proving yet again that no stat from any CON$ervative source can ever be trusted.
Thank you.

So you want to cherry pick your facts. The CBO is supposed to be non-partisan. Just because it's a bunch of folks that deal with money doesn't mean they're Conservatives.

 

[topspin]

you lost, he won. It's reparations for his boy's, ya got 6 more years to cry about it.

 

[mudwhistle]

you lost, he won. It's reparations for his boy's, ya got 6 more years to cry about it.

He has to get re-elected.

You act like he already has been.

 

[skookerasbil]

41% s0ns!!!!

Im laughing..........hey, this asshat cant get out there enough and blame Bush. Every time I see him, like yesterday, Im like, "Go..........go..........go!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

 

[topspin]

you lost, he won. It's reparations for his boy's, ya got 6 more years to cry about it.

He has to get re-elected.

You act like he already has been.

lol, you win you kick the losers while they are down

 

[NYcarbineer]

Nobody asked Obama to spend another $2 trillion. He should have started cutting immediately, but instead he chose to double the deficit in his second year. It also doesn't help that he and the Dems keep extending unemployment benefits.

By the way....Obama helped greatly with starting the shitstorm. After all...he was in the Senate in 04'. He's been in Washington stirring up shit for around 6 years. Long enough not to inherit shit.

Here's the REALITY of the 2009 deficit:

The CBO reported in October 2009 reasons for the difference between the 2008 and 2009 deficits, which were approximately $460 billion and $1,410 billion, respectively.

Key categories of changes included:

tax receipt declines of $320 billion due to the effects of the recession and another $100 billion due to tax cuts in the stimulus bill (the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act or ARRA);

$245 billion for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) and other bailout efforts;

$100 billion in additional spending for ARRA;

and another $185 billion due to increases in primary budget categories such as Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment insurance, Social Security, and Defense - including the war effort in Afghanistan and Iraq.

This was the highest budget deficit relative to GDP (9.9%) since 1945.[57] The national debt increased by $1.9 trillion during FY2009, versus the $1.0 trillion increase during 2008.[58]

The Obama Administration also made four significant accounting changes, to more accurately report the total spending by the Federal government.

The four changes were:

1) account for the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (”overseas military contingencies”) in the budget rather than through the use of “emergency” supplemental spending bills;

2) assume the Alternative Minimum Tax will be indexed for inflation;

3) account for the full costs of Medicare reimbursements; and

4) anticipate the inevitable expenditures for natural disaster relief. These changes would make the debt over ten years look $2.7 trillion larger, but that debt was always there. It was just hidden




United States federal budget - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As you see, almost all of that IS inherited from Bush.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Let me see if I understand this as a justification, the current Administration has created ZERO jobs while in office, in fact ever month the President has been in office there has NEVER been a month in which there has not been job loss. .

You my friend are full of shit. (John Adams may have said that too lol)

A chart from the office of the Speaker of the House.

Nancy Pelosi seems to have problems with the truth. She claims unemployment payouts is a job maker.

What a lunatic.

What is wrong with you, exactly? Do you get some perverse pleasure from acting retarded, or are you genuinely stupid?

The source of the chart is the Bureau of Labor Statistics, you hopelessly ignorant fuck.

 

[Navy1960]

Let me see if I understand this as a justification, the current Administration has created ZERO jobs while in office, in fact ever month the President has been in office there has NEVER been a month in which there has not been job loss. .

You my friend are full of shit. (John Adams may have said that too lol)

throughout 2005, the networks emphasized layoffs instead of the 2 million new jobs created that year under President George W. Bush. Now in 2009, Obama has presided over the most job losses in a single year since 1940 and some in the media tried to remain cheerful.
Networks Fail to Criticize Obama Despite Most Jobs Lost in a Year Since 1940

Total nonfarm payroll employment declined by 125,000 in June, and the
unemployment rate edged down to 9.5 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics reported today. The decline in payroll employment reflected
a decrease (-225,000) in the number of temporary employees working on
Census 2010.
Employment Situation Summary

If you had bothered to go beyond your chart you would have seen that in fact every single month the President has been in office there has been job loss and the net result is a ZERO job creation. In fact in order for the White House has never seen a a positve month of umployment since the President has been in office. While it's true that things such as the Census created temporary jobs and all the spending has resulted in one sector of employment being robust and thats the Govt. sector, the net result has been a negative since late 2007 with little change other than a surge upward. This would be interesting to say the least when you go from 7.2% unemployment to almost 10% on a constant basis and call that job creation, there used to be a word for that, it was called new math.

 

[edthecynic]

Of course that DISHONEST chart does not include Bush's off the books deficit spending. For example, the debt increased over a half a trillion dollars in 2006, but the typically dishonest CON$ervative chart claims less than $200,000 proving yet again that no stat from any CON$ervative source can ever be trusted.
Thank you.

So you want to cherry pick your facts. The CBO is supposed to be non-partisan. Just because it's a bunch of folks that deal with money doesn't mean they're Conservatives.

That chart did not come from the CBO. It is a variation of the dishonest Heritage Foundation chart. Please post link to actual source of the dishonest chart, not photobucket.

 

[boedicca]

Here's the Germane Chart - and why Obama is in trouble:

Obamanomics has prolonged the delayed recovery of job creation in an unnatural, unnecessary, and completely economically illiterate manner.

The majority of Americans grok this.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

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.

Exactly why my avatar is what it is