The truth about Obama's contribution to the defict


Mostly true, but it depends on just how pissed off they get. I try to keep them stimulated...

Both sources? Business Insider is Business Insider=one source.
Just for fun:
Budget Surplus Definition

Budget Surplus:
A situation in which income exceeds expenditures. The term "budget surplus" is most commonly used to refer to the financial situations of governments; individuals speak of "savings" rather than a "budget surplus." A surplus is considered a sign that government is being run efficiently. A budget surplus might be used to pay off debt, save for the future, or to make a desired purchase that has been delayed. A city government that had a surplus might use the money to make improvements to a run-down park, for example.

A budget is a tool, a projection...that is all.
Looking at only part of a financial piece does not equate the entire fiscal situation.

Budget Deficit Definition

Budget Deficit:
A financial situation that occurs when an entity has more money going out than coming in. The term "budget deficit" is most commonly used to refer to government spending rather than business or individual spending. When it refers to federal government spending, a budget deficit is also known as the "national debt." The opposite of a budget deficit is a budget surplus, and when inflows are equal to outflows, the budget is said to be balanced

Federal Government: Current Expenditures (FGEXPND) - FRED - St. Louis Fed
From YOUR link.
Looks like spending keeps increasing!

Your assignment is to find out how much revenue is being brought in, from your source of course.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Playing the blame game can go on forever.
What's your solution?
 
Last edited:
Obama administration is spending $4.8 billion/day....3x Bush's administration and no one brings that up.:eusa_whistle:

Just because Bush's policies are racking up the deficit at a slower rate, it doesn't mean he isn't responsible for creating the debt crisis.
 
Here is a non-partisan assessment on Obama's contribution to the debt.

PolitiFact | Obama inherited deficits from Bush administration

So guess what, repubs/cons? The Bush Tax cuts were in fact harmful.

However, I do think it is a fair criticism to say Obama had a significant contribution to the deficit. Despite that, I think this article proves that the GOP exaggerated it quite a bit.

Adding 4 trillion to the debt with no return is alot worse than any other president in the history of America has done. While a bunch are just as guilty, Obama took it to a whole other level of corruption/lies and straight up destroying the economy.

Who added the "4 Trillion". Fact is..that was Bush. That was the residual effects of paying for 2 wars, Bush never paid for..a new government entitlement, Bush never paid for..and a new government department, Bush never paid for..and to cap that off..he left Obama with an economic calamity. There's been no "corruption" or "lies". What's it's been is conservatives fucking out of control for the last 3 years cause they fucked everything up..and want desperately to do it again.
 
Obama administration is spending $4.8 billion/day....3x Bush's administration and no one brings that up.:eusa_whistle:

That's because he never provisioned anything to pay for the wars. Obama's been paying down the debt on those..along with every other thing Bush bought on the national credit card.
 
Obama administration is spending $4.8 billion/day....3x Bush's administration and no one brings that up.:eusa_whistle:

That's because he never provisioned anything to pay for the wars. Obama's been paying down the debt on those..along with every other thing Bush bought on the national credit card.

I think the truth will out about this issue when Obama's re-election campaign is in full swing.
 
These truths.....they are really, really painful for some to accept.

Even if we concede that Bush's tax cuts were established with good intentions............an honest approach to the results must conclude that they did not have a positive effect. They were not stimulative enough to make up for the cost of the wars and part D........and especially not enough to prevent unregulated banks from screwing us for quick bucks.

One of Obama's biggest fuck-ups was allowing them to be extended in order to get an unemployment insurance extension. He put the immediate needs of struggling American families and the need to maintain already weak levels of demand ahead of the future impact on the economy.

Fortunately, the discussion has shifted....and he'll have to make no such concession this time.
 
These truths.....they are really, really painful for some to accept.

Even if we concede that Bush's tax cuts were established with good intentions............an honest approach to the results must conclude that they did not have a positive effect. They were not stimulative enough to make up for the cost of the wars and part D........and especially not enough to prevent unregulated banks from screwing us for quick bucks.

One of Obama's biggest fuck-ups was allowing them to be extended in order to get an unemployment insurance extension. He put the immediate needs of struggling American families and the need to maintain already weak levels of demand ahead of the future impact on the economy.

Fortunately, the discussion has shifted....and he'll have to make no such concession this time.

Yeah, extending the Bush tax cuts only added to his image of being a big gov spender.
 
GOPers are too stupid or too dishonest to admit it was Bush who ran up the National Debt. But that has always been the plan of the GOP run up large deficits when they are in office and then blame it on liberals.
I don't think it's a matter of the GOP purposely running-up large deficits/debt, when they're in-office. The only thing that matters, to the GOP, is how to manage their hu$tle (at-any-given-time). Their primary-concern always seems-to-be Bu$ine$$ I$ Bu$ine$$....and, every other issue is secondary. Politics, to them, has always seemed to be more a matter of sales-and-marketing; i.e. tell the "customer" what they want to hear, and they'll buy ANYTHING you're $elling.

The transition(s) (from-Carter-to-Reagan & Clinton-to-Bush) were entirely different.....except for the end-result. Carter tried to move us beyond The Cold War (and, into the future), and the Reagan Admin merely "repackaged" The Cold War ('cause the military/industrial complex had always been a major cash-generator).....and, sold it, again.

From Clinton, to Bush, it was all about scraping-the-cream off the top o' the Clinton-economy (with tax-cuts).....then, back-off until the "bank" is filled, again....kind o' the way Romney had always done business.

"From 1984 until 1999, Romney led Bain Capital, a Boston-based private equity group that earned jaw-dropping profits through leveraged buyouts, debt hedge funds, offshore tax havens and other financial strategies. In some cases, Romney's team closed U.S. factories, causing hundreds of layoffs, or pocketed huge fees shortly before companies collapsed." - Los Angeles Times

When it comes to dispelling ALL o' the GOP's sales-and-marketing efforts (post-Bush), Obama did it.....to their faces!!!!!!


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1y04g6OPLnQ]Obama Dismantles Republican Caucus Part 1 of 7 - YouTube[/ame]

Back in the mid-'70s (when I was doing electronic-assembly work, in a non-Union shop....after doing 5 years as a Union-steelworker), I remember talking to a low-level manager about how poorly direct-labor people were payed....while managers were getting very-generous bonuses. His reply? The workplace is NOT a democracy. So much for Running the Country like a business.​
 
Last edited:
As I recall, before President Obama took office, the wars were "off the books". Gee....I wonder if THAT has anything to do with President Obama's additions to the deficit...
 

Forum List

Back
Top