What Liberals Fear More Than Obama Losing

Sorry bud. You can't turn back progress.

$131,000 owed by each taxpayer is progress? Wow, just wow.

It's called inflation. And you can thank Reagan and Bush Jr for it.

How would you blame Reagan for inflation? In fact, and this is something that has been bothering me for a while, the Democrats held a majority in Congress the entirety of Reagan's administration. Reagan was able to get his economic policies passed, and tax revenue increased, and Congress continued to pass budgets seething with deficit spending. And then know-nothing liberals point to the national deficit under Reagan, and say "look, Reagan was for deficit spending".

Obama began his administration with a clear majority in Congress. He was able to pass the majority of his legislative agenda, and he is responsible for the results of those policies.

A F-ing job plan, NOW? Is that not admitting the policies and legislation Obama promised was going to spur economic growth failed?
 
Doesn't it seem like most of the Tea Party is on Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid? Do a search on "Tea Party Rally's" and there are all these pictures of elderly people.

What is your point? My cat meowing makes more sense than your posts.

The majority of people that attended anti-war rallies, while the left cared about ending the wars--when Bush was in office--, were white. Are they racists?

This is the shallow mentality of the left.
 
$131,000 owed by each taxpayer is progress? Wow, just wow.

It's called inflation. And you can thank Reagan and Bush Jr for it.

How would you blame Reagan for inflation?

Jesus you guys are dense. I did NOT blame Reagan for inflation.

As for the Dem Congress, if you think they were the culprits then it should be easy for you to prove it. Show us a budget Reagan submitted and then show us the final so we can see how much the Dems added. Go for it.
 
It's called inflation. And you can thank Reagan and Bush Jr for it.

I'm sorry, what? Care to explain that one?

Inflation is the means by which such debt may be repaid...hyperinflation is unfortunately what it would take with our level of debt. But please, explain to us how inflation CAUSED our current debt level.

This is going to be good, I can just feel it.

I didn't say it caused it. How did you get that from what I posted?

I was commenting on how it's up to $131,000 per person. It will be higher next year and the year after and for many more to come for no other reason than prices inflate and we need to borrow more every year. Reagan and Bush started us on this trend and added the lion's share to the debt.

I thought that was rather obvious. I guess not.

Not even close pal. Inflation will cause what is owed to be easier to pay back because it requires less dollars to do so in an inflationary environment. Inflation in no way contributes to the existing debt. You've got it exactly backwards. It will be higher next year (hell, next minute!) because we spend more than we take in in revenue...the only thing that adds to the $14.6 trillion of debt you 'progressive' central planners have racked up. And by the way, inflation became on ongoing issue in 1913 with the creation of the Fed, another progressive program. We had no issues with inflation for the first 135 years of the country.

You should probably refrain from commenting on economics until you have some basis of knowledge on the subject.
 
as a liberal I have always worked, worked hard and have more than one job at a time. After Obama leaves office it will be the same, work, work hard until I am in a wheel chair because the disks in my spine are deteriorating. Nothing will change, not even the lies or the fallicies spread by the hate lovers in this thread.

You're not a liberal - you're a progressive - big difference.

I'm a liberal and I find it highly offensive when progressives have the audacity to claim they're "liberal."

Last time I checked liberal was not a synonym of authoritarian.
 
In a mere three years this administration has managed to add more to the national debt than every president from Washington to Lincoln combined, and that is also factoring in inflation.

But not factoring out the Bush Recession, right? Or are you one of those that thinks Obama caused the recession to begin months before he took office?

Were you brain dead the entire previous decade? The Bush Recession? Are you really this uninformed?

"Brendsel and Raines have been deposed in the wake of multibillion-dollar accounting scandals. Brendsel fell in 2003, after government regulators accused Freddie Mac of understating billions in profits in an effort to smooth earnings. More recently the Securities and Exchange Commission ruled that Fannie Mae--the larger and more important of the two companies--had violated accounting rules, overstating profits by an estimated $9 billion since 2001, which represents almost 40% of its total earnings during that period. Raines, who was paid more than $90 million during his six years as CEO--much of it linked to meeting profit targets--made a last-ditch effort to save his job, but to no avail. CFO Tim Howard was also forced out. Fannie's accounting firm of 36 years, KPMG, was fired. " The Fall of Fannie Mae - January 24, 2005

Here are the Congressional hearings before these two were discovered to had defrauded Americans out of billions, and the subsequently were almost solely responsible for the housing crisis.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs]Shocking Video Unearthed Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis - YouTube[/ame]

Who's recession is this?
 
as a liberal I have always worked, worked hard and have more than one job at a time. After Obama leaves office it will be the same, work, work hard until I am in a wheel chair because the disks in my spine are deteriorating. Nothing will change, not even the lies or the fallicies spread by the hate lovers in this thread.

You're not a liberal - you're a progressive - big difference.

I'm a liberal and I find it highly offensive when progressives have the audacity to claim they're "liberal."

Last time I checked liberal was not a synonym of authoritarian.

Sorry,
but you again as usual are wrong.
 
You realize Progressives are undefeated for nearly 100 years, right?

We have rolled back NONE of their agenda, not once, not ever. Reagan got a tax cut and defeated their home team, in response they took over the Democrat Party. We had a "Compassionate" " Conservative" president (he was neither) and a Republican Congress and we got Mo' n' Better Progressivism in the form of Prescription Drugs and Sabotage of our Educational System and the Patriot Act to boot.

We are getting our asses kicked daily and have been since 1913.

WAKE THE FUCK UP!!!!!!!!!!

Agree. But the author is hopeful, and so am I, that we might have finally turned the tide.

But is it too late?

Immie
 
It's called inflation. And you can thank Reagan and Bush Jr for it.

How would you blame Reagan for inflation?

Jesus you guys are dense. I did NOT blame Reagan for inflation.

As for the Dem Congress, if you think they were the culprits then it should be easy for you to prove it. Show us a budget Reagan submitted and then show us the final so we can see how much the Dems added. Go for it.

Are you really this dense? After posting "it's called inflation, and you can thank Reagan...for it", and you believe that someone would be dense for thinking you were blaming Reagan for inflation. You aren't dense, you are dumb :lol::lol:
 
You should probably refrain from commenting on economics until you have some basis of knowledge on the subject.

No. Apparently I need to write all my comments so that a 5-year old can understand them because there are a ton of stupid people here.

Why are deficits higher today than they were 10 years ago? Or 30 years ago? Or 80 years ago? Here's a hint. It is NOT due to progressive policies. Reagan at his worst ran a deficit that was 6% of GDP. In 1983, that was $201B and the highest recorded deficit the country had ever seen. Was this due to progressive policies? What about in 1986 when Reagan got the deficit down to only 5% of GDP. Was this an improvement? Because it was $221B, which was the highest recorded deficit at that time.

You guys scream and cry over Reagan like he was the 5th Beatle, but in today's economy and prices, his 6% deficit would be almost $900B. Not that far behind Obama's, and much worse even when you consider Reagan had far more tax revenue to work with and STILL got the deficit up that level.

This is what I am saying. Reagan started us down this deficit spending road and Bush made it worse. Add in inflation over the past 30 years and this is in part why deficits are as high as they are and are "record setting". Hell, Bush set the record for highest deficit 3 times during his presidency. Was that progressive policies at work there too?
 
Are you really this dense? After posting "it's called inflation, and you can thank Reagan...for it", and you believe that someone would be dense for thinking you were blaming Reagan for inflation.

Ah. Ok. I see why you are confused. I was referring to deficits and not inflation. I think I have clarified that multiple times now.

So, care to address the issue then? With record deficit levels under both Reagan and Bush, how were those caused by progressive policies?
 
You should probably refrain from commenting on economics until you have some basis of knowledge on the subject.

No. Apparently I need to write all my comments so that a 5-year old can understand them because there are a ton of stupid people here.

Why are deficits higher today than they were 10 years ago? Or 30 years ago? Or 80 years ago? Here's a hint. It is NOT due to progressive policies. Reagan at his worst ran a deficit that was 6% of GDP. In 1983, that was $201B and the highest recorded deficit the country had ever seen. Was this due to progressive policies? What about in 1986 when Reagan got the deficit down to only 5% of GDP. Was this an improvement? Because it was $221B, which was the highest recorded deficit at that time.

You guys scream and cry over Reagan like he was the 5th Beatle, but in today's economy and prices, his 6% deficit would be almost $900B. Not that far behind Obama's, and much worse even when you consider Reagan had far more tax revenue to work with and STILL got the deficit up that level.

This is what I am saying. Reagan started us down this deficit spending road and Bush made it worse. Add in inflation over the past 30 years and this is in part why deficits are as high as they are and are "record setting". Hell, Bush set the record for highest deficit 3 times during his presidency. Was that progressive policies at work there too?

All of your posts scream stupidity. Again, Democrats had a majority in both houses of Congress the entire time Reagan was in office.

As for your projections, laughable.

"At the start of business on Tuesday, Aug. 2, according to the Daily Treasury Statement, the national debt subject to the legal limit was $14.293975 trillion. Obama signed legislation that day lifting the limit by as much as $2.4 trillion—with an initial and immediate increase in the limit of $400 billion. By the close of business on Friday, Aug. 5, according to the Daily Treasury Statement, the national debt subject to the limit had grown to $14.536130 trillion.

Over just four days, the debt had jumped $242.155 billion.

By contrast, according to the Bureau of the Public Debt, over the ten-year period from the end of fiscal 1950 to the end of fiscal 1960, the national debt grew from approximately $257.36 billion to approximately $286.33 billion—an increase of approximately $28.97 billion.

Using the Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation calculator, $28.97 billion in 1960 dollars equals $220.92 billion in 2011 dollars.

Thus, the $242.155 billion in 2011 dollars that the Obama administration increased the debt between last Tuesday and last Friday is more in inflation-adjusted terms than the combined debt increases of the Truman and Eisenhower administrations in the ten-year period from the end of fiscal 1950 to the end of fiscal 1960.

Obama Increased Debt More in 4 Days Than Truman and Eisenhower Did in 10 Years | CNSnews.com
 
You should probably refrain from commenting on economics until you have some basis of knowledge on the subject.

No. Apparently I need to write all my comments so that a 5-year old can understand them because there are a ton of stupid people here.

Why are deficits higher today than they were 10 years ago? Or 30 years ago? Or 80 years ago? Here's a hint. It is NOT due to progressive policies. Reagan at his worst ran a deficit that was 6% of GDP. In 1983, that was $201B and the highest recorded deficit the country had ever seen. Was this due to progressive policies? What about in 1986 when Reagan got the deficit down to only 5% of GDP. Was this an improvement? Because it was $221B, which was the highest recorded deficit at that time.

You guys scream and cry over Reagan like he was the 5th Beatle, but in today's economy and prices, his 6% deficit would be almost $900B. Not that far behind Obama's, and much worse even when you consider Reagan had far more tax revenue to work with and STILL got the deficit up that level.

This is what I am saying. Reagan started us down this deficit spending road and Bush made it worse. Add in inflation over the past 30 years and this is in part why deficits are as high as they are and are "record setting". Hell, Bush set the record for highest deficit 3 times during his presidency. Was that progressive policies at work there too?

First, you can drop the whole D vs. R thing with me. We've had pretty much nothing but big spending, central planning politicians in power for at least 100 years. Grover Cleveland would be the last President I could defend as not progressive in his policies nor the resultant spending. Reagan talked a good game but spent like a progressive. Both parties are to blame.

You still don't understand how inflation works with regard to debt. One more time: inflation in no way adds to existing debt. It only helps make it easier to pay back existing debt. Ds and Rs that spend more than we took in, whatever you want to call them, is the ONLY contributor to our debt. Inflation has nothing to do with it.
 
Using the Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation calculator

:clap2:

Well done. That is the first time I have ever seen you talk about numbers and adjust for inflation.

Welcome to the conversation.

Now, care to talk about factoring out the Bush Recession numbers from Obama's deficit? I mean, you do know that when Bush left office the deficit for that year was already $1.2T, right? You know this, right?
 
Are you really this dense? After posting "it's called inflation, and you can thank Reagan...for it", and you believe that someone would be dense for thinking you were blaming Reagan for inflation.

Ah. Ok. I see why you are confused. I was referring to deficits and not inflation. I think I have clarified that multiple times now.

So, care to address the issue then? With record deficit levels under both Reagan and Bush, how were those caused by progressive policies?

If they walked like a duck...

Bush was arguably the worst progressive President ever. Until Obama of course.
 
You realize Progressives are undefeated for nearly 100 years, right?

We have rolled back NONE of their agenda, not once, not ever. Reagan got a tax cut and defeated their home team, in response they took over the Democrat Party. We had a "Compassionate" " Conservative" president (he was neither) and a Republican Congress and we got Mo' n' Better Progressivism in the form of Prescription Drugs and Sabotage of our Educational System and the Patriot Act to boot.

We are getting our asses kicked daily and have been since 1913.

WAKE THE FUCK UP!!!!!!!!!!

Agree. But the author is hopeful, and so am I, that we might have finally turned the tide.

Don't hold your breath. You need real Conservatives in order to roll back the Liberal Agenda, and we have NONE! At least none that are going to win.
 
Are you really this dense? After posting "it's called inflation, and you can thank Reagan...for it", and you believe that someone would be dense for thinking you were blaming Reagan for inflation.

Ah. Ok. I see why you are confused. I was referring to deficits and not inflation. I think I have clarified that multiple times now.

So, care to address the issue then? With record deficit levels under both Reagan and Bush, how were those caused by progressive policies?

Why were conservatives so convinced that the Democrats were insincere in their negotiations in the debt ceiling debate? Reagan got his tax cuts in 1982 and to address the deficit spending that it would initially cause he agreed to consider a compromise deal with the Democrat-controlled Congress. The deficit-reduction plan that resulted, the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 (TEFRA), stipulated that $3 in spending cuts for every $1 in tax increases. Reagan publicly protested the tax increases, and this is where morons like you get the "but Reagan raised taxes"--another bullshit claim.

What happened next? You obviously don't have a clue, so let me clue you in: the promised budget cuts never materialized. In fact, spending for fiscal year 1983 was some $48 billion higher than the budget targets, and no progress was made in lowering the deficit.

But the deficit is the president's fault right? :eusa_eh:
 
But the deficit is the president's fault right? :eusa_eh:

Who submits the budget?

Like I said earlier, if you honestly think the Dems added to Reagan's budgets, then it should be easy to prove. Simply show us one that Reagan submitted, and then show us the final version where the Dems added to it.

Should be easy, right?
 
You still don't understand how inflation works with regard to debt. One more time: inflation in no way adds to existing debt.

I. Never. Said. It. Did.

I have made several posts now talking about deficits and deficit spending. You do know that deficits add to debt, right?

Oh my god. You really are thick. You really believe deficits are due to inflation and not the monumental increases we've seen in government entitlement programs, military spending, and regulator bureaucracies? It's not the growth of government that is causing this deficit spending but the fact that the price of paper and other materials is up? That what you're saying?

Wow.
 

Forum List

Back
Top