What Obama Isn't Telling You About The Debt

[hortysir]

show me the time when decreasing federal income tax rates has helped a bad economy.

when has increasing federal income tax rates helped ?

Couple examples: Reagan lowered taxes hugely in 1981. Net result within 14 months unemployment went from 7 to almost 11%. He then raised taxes on 11 occasions, and borrowed enough to triple the national debt.
Clinton raised taxes, agains republican protests that it would tube the economy, and we had a great economy and lower unemployment for his term.

So, again, when did lowering taxes and lowering spending help in a bad economy?? Still waiting.....

The Bush tax cuts worked so well Obama's been trying to duplicate the results ever since

 

[Misaki]

2. I'll answer yours as soon as you can tell me when an economy has ever taxed them selves into prosperity.

You don't really believe that revenue collected from raising taxes will go towards the debt/deficit do you?

The US was doing pretty well economically from 1940~1980.

 

[Rshermr]

when has increasing federal income tax rates helped ?

Couple examples: Reagan lowered taxes hugely in 1981. Net result within 14 months unemployment went from 7 to almost 11%. He then raised taxes on 11 occasions, and borrowed enough to triple the national debt.
Clinton raised taxes, agains republican protests that it would tube the economy, and we had a great economy and lower unemployment for his term.

So, again, when did lowering taxes and lowering spending help in a bad economy?? Still waiting.....

The Bush tax cuts worked so well Obama's been trying to duplicate the results ever since

Great example. Led to little employment, at a time when the economy was good. But the economy did tube, the worst in over 70 years. Great example. Now do you have one that proves your point, rather than one that disproves your point.

 

[Rshermr]

Because decreasing taxes and decreasing spending actually help to make unemployment worse.

If I am wrong show me the time when a bad economy has been helped by decreasing taxes. Or decreasing gov. spending.

It is tiresome seeing cons like you extolling the right wing agenda without ever showing where that agenda has ever done anything but make the wealthy more so.

your proposal, for economic recovery, is

• taxes
• designed to impoverish (wealthy) people

? What about re-legalizing low-pay (sub minimum wage) jobs, that would give some money, to many millions of Americans ?

"The unemployed are just lazy!"

Again, give me an example when decreasing income taxes and gov spending helped the us economy in a bad economic time. I do not believe you can.
Impoverishing the wealthy???? Are you kidding me. We are talking about raising the tax rates for the wealthy by about 3 points. Back to the rates during the clinton presidency. Please explain your stupid statement about impoverishing the wealthy. And get a grip.

 

[hortysir]

2. I'll answer yours as soon as you can tell me when an economy has ever taxed them selves into prosperity.

You don't really believe that revenue collected from raising taxes will go towards the debt/deficit do you?

The US was doing pretty well economically from 1940~1980.

Pretty colors but doesn't show where those higher taxes actually wen to pay down the debt

 

[hortysir]

Couple examples: Reagan lowered taxes hugely in 1981. Net result within 14 months unemployment went from 7 to almost 11%. He then raised taxes on 11 occasions, and borrowed enough to triple the national debt.
Clinton raised taxes, agains republican protests that it would tube the economy, and we had a great economy and lower unemployment for his term.

So, again, when did lowering taxes and lowering spending help in a bad economy?? Still waiting.....

The Bush tax cuts worked so well Obama's been trying to duplicate the results ever since

Great example. Led to little employment, at a time when the economy was good. But the economy did tube, the worst in over 70 years. Great example. Now do you have one that proves your point, rather than one that disproves your point.

I still haven't seen an economy that taxed itslef into prosperity.

Ask Great Britian what happens when you raise taxes during recovery.

Can you spell "double-dip"?

 

[edthecynic]

The Bush tax cuts worked so well Obama's been trying to duplicate the results ever since

Great example. Led to little employment, at a time when the economy was good. But the economy did tube, the worst in over 70 years. Great example. Now do you have one that proves your point, rather than one that disproves your point.

I still haven't seen an economy that taxed itslef into prosperity.

Ask Great Britian what happens when you raise taxes during recovery.

Can you spell "double-dip"?

CON$ have been predicting a "double-dip" for 3 years now, just wishful thinking? Don't worry, you'll get your hoped for "double-dip" if Willard is elected.

 

[Widdekind]

"The unemployed are just lazy!"

Profit margins tend to track prices. So low prices, implying lower profit margins, imply that poorer people produced the product, and would receive its revenue in wages.

corporate profits go to people who are already rich... profit can generally be assumed to go to someone richer than you unless you are also very rich

 

[Widdekind]

Reagan lowered taxes hugely in 1981.

From the 1980s - 2000s, the US economy benefited from the "Great Moderation", when business cycles stabilized. The GM is partly attributable, to reduced taxation.

Taxes burden the economy. Some taxation, for Public goods, is necessary. But taxing the economy cannot possibly promote economic growth. If some taxes are good, and more are better, then why not hike taxes to 100%? Where should we apply 100% tax rates?

 

[tjvh]

· On the day that President Obama took office, the federal debt was $10.626 trillion. The debt now stands at $15.851 trillion.

· From 2000 to 2008, our average annual deficit was $190 billion. Since 2008, it has been $1.3 trillion.

· The National Debt now exceeds 100% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product

· Barack Obama has overseen the three largest deficits in United States history

· President Bush was in office for 96 months. In that time, the debt increased $4.899 trillion. In the 42 months that Obama has been in office, the debt has increased $5.2 trillion. Bush’s average monthly debt accumulated was $51 billion. Obama’s average monthly debt accumulated is $125.6 billion

· Obamacare effectively adds $17 trillion tolong-term unfunded debt which the Obama administration is not required to report in their federal debt numbers


Find more at Cameron Harris: What Obama Isn't Telling You About The Federal Debt

Is there anyone who believes they are voting for fiscal responsibility when they pull the lever for a Democrat? They're nothing more than the giveaway Party.

 

[Rshermr]

The Bush tax cuts worked so well Obama's been trying to duplicate the results ever since

Great example. Led to little employment, at a time when the economy was good. But the economy did tube, the worst in over 70 years. Great example. Now do you have one that proves your point, rather than one that disproves your point.

I still haven't seen an economy that taxed itslef into prosperity.

Ask Great Britian what happens when you raise taxes during recovery.

Can you spell "double-dip"?

Tax into a good economy?
No one I know would believe that taxing itself would improve an economy. That is a conservative line used against anyone who would want to see the economy improve. Not by taxing, but by the stimulus possible with the money covered by taxes.
So, I could point to Reagan, or I could point to Roosevelt.
If you believe that taxes do not help, but rather hurt a bad economy, you could point to Hoover. Or you could point to Bush 2, or Bush 1 for that matter.
So you do not believe that stimulating demand works. What can you point to??? Decreased taxes, or decreased national debt, or decreased regulations? None have ever worked, or ever will work, to correct a bad economy. Rather, they are all part of the wish list of the far right who are financed and driven by some very wealthy ideologues who want to be more wealthy and more powerful. Regular as the sun rising.

 

[Rshermr]

Reagan lowered taxes hugely in 1981.

From the 1980s - 2000s, the US economy benefited from the "Great Moderation", when business cycles stabilized. The GM is partly attributable, to reduced taxation.

Taxes burden the economy. Some taxation, for Public goods, is necessary. But taxing the economy cannot possibly promote economic growth. If some taxes are good, and more are better, then why not hike taxes to 100%? Where should we apply 100% tax rates?

Look, I can not believe that you are that ignorant. I do not like taxes. I do not want to see taxes rise. I do want taxes to be lowered.
However, I do live in the real world. You are living in a world where truth is based on what you want to believe, and I am sure, what you are told by the right wing.
So, let me make it plain. If, of course, you cared to consider anything other than what you are told and want to believe, you would notice that tax increases have been used in the past, as has been borrowing when taxes could not be passed in congress, to increase demand. Plain and simple. Any economics class will show you that. But only to an open mind.
And, an open mind will notice that at no time in history has a tax decrease or decreased gov spending helped to get us out of a bad economy.
So, if you disagree, try showing us nut case progressives where I am wrong. And I know that you can not, as you have not and will not really try. Con dogma is not a substitute for reason in the normal world.

 

[Widdekind]

No one I know would believe that taxing itself would improve an economy... Not by taxing, but by the stimulus possible with the money covered by taxes. So, I could point to Reagan, or I could point to Roosevelt.

First, what was wrong, with the people who had the money previously?

Second, "Fiscal Stimulus" is not tax & spend, but borrow & spend. The New Deal, like Reagan-era deficit spending, was funded by borrowing. Low taxes and high spending, pouring money into the economy (spending), without impeding expansion (with taxes).

Third, in many threads, i perceive a pattern:

• people point to past Public Investment programs (infrastructure, interstates, internet)
• then demand more Public assistance & welfare

If you think taxes are so good, then what Public Investment program are you willing to work 40 hours a week on? Or, do you simply want a 40 hour salary, for free?

 

[Widdekind]

tax increases have been used in the past, as has been borrowing when taxes could not be passed in congress, to increase demand.

what is your specific proposal? Take taxes... and then spend on _______________, for "We the People".

Are you not advocating tax-funded transfer payments, from wealthy people, to welfare recipients ? "Take their money, and go shopping" ?

 

[Care4all]

· On the day that President Obama took office, the federal debt was $10.626 trillion. The debt now stands at $15.851 trillion. the first day of Obama's first fiscal budget, the deficit was 11.9 trillion, between his first day in office and the ending of President Bush's last fiscal budget of his 8 years, Obama's actions, with stimulus etc... attributed $150 billion to 200 billion to President Bush's last fiscal budget...making President Bush responsible for nearly 1.3 trillion in deficit his last fiscal budget.

· From 2000 to 2008, our average annual deficit was $190 billion. Since 2008, it has been $1.3 trillion. why are you using the year 2000 as your beginning? President Bush's fiscal budgets for his 8 years in office are fiscal years 2002 through 2009...that's his 8 years. Clinton's fiscal budgets were from fiscal 1994 through fiscal 2001, President Obama's first fiscal 4 years began with fiscal 2010, and will end with fiscal year 2013.

· The National Debt now exceeds 100% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product when you are in a deep recession this is bound to happen!

This is also why in good times, the gvt should have been saving up and spending less for the rainy day down the road.

· Barack Obama has o less verseen the three largest deficits in United States history,

the largest deficit goes to President Bush for 2009 fiscal budget deficit, 2010 and 2011 are attributed to President Obama

· President Bush was in office for 96 months. In that time, the debt increased $4.899 trillion. In the 42 months that Obama has been in office, the debt has increased $5.2 trillion. Bush’s average monthly debt accumulated was $51 billion. Obama’s average monthly debt accumulated is $125.6 billion

when President Bush Began, with his first fiscal budget, the Total National Debt was $5.6 trillion, on President bush's last fiscal budget of his 8 year term, the Total National Debt was $11.9 tillion. Under President Bush's fiscal reign of responsibility, his 8 years, he more than DOUBLED, our total National Debt....more than a 100% increase in total National Debt....even if you take the $150 billion to $200 billion of Obama policies and actions out of it.

· Obamacare effectively adds $17 trillion tolong-term unfunded debt which the Obama administration is not required to report in their federal debt numbers How much would be added to the National Debt over those 10 years if Obamacare was not inacted?


Find more at Cameron Harris: What Obama Isn't Telling You About The Federal Debt

what this dude isn't telling you is the truth, he and you have twisted dates of responsibility for presidencies to try to make an invalid point.

Let's at LEAST begin with facts, and not some made up arbitrary dates that you choose to attach to certain presidents for pure political purposes.

 

[Rshermr]

No one I know would believe that taxing itself would improve an economy... Not by taxing, but by the stimulus possible with the money covered by taxes. So, I could point to Reagan, or I could point to Roosevelt.

First, what was wrong, with the people who had the money previously?

Second, "Fiscal Stimulus" is not tax & spend, but borrow & spend. The New Deal, like Reagan-era deficit spending, was funded by borrowing. Low taxes and high spending, pouring money into the economy (spending), without impeding expansion (with taxes).

Third, in many threads, i perceive a pattern:

• people point to past Public Investment programs (infrastructure, interstates, internet)
• then demand more Public assistance & welfare

If you think taxes are so good, then what Public Investment program are you willing to work 40 hours a week on? Or, do you simply want a 40 hour salary, for free?

You seem to enjoy seeing things I say in posts that I did NOT say. Typical of cons, go directly back to the con dogma. Which is your way of never having to deal with the real world.
I said nothing about welfare. I do believe in increasing demand.
By the way, do you have a solution to unemployment? If so, can you point to a case where it has worked in the history of the US? Or are you simply interested in posting more con dogma?

 

[Rshermr]

tax increases have been used in the past, as has been borrowing when taxes could not be passed in congress, to increase demand.

what is your specific proposal? Take taxes... and then spend on _______________, for "We the People".

Are you not advocating tax-funded transfer payments, from wealthy people, to welfare recipients ? "Take their money, and go shopping" ?

Infrastructure. Others.

No

So, what IS your solution to unemployment, or do you just want to continue to post con dogma?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

· On the day that President Obama took office, the federal debt was $10.626 trillion. The debt now stands at $15.851 trillion.

· From 2000 to 2008, our average annual deficit was $190 billion. Since 2008, it has been $1.3 trillion.

· The National Debt now exceeds 100% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product

· Barack Obama has overseen the three largest deficits in United States history

· President Bush was in office for 96 months. In that time, the debt increased $4.899 trillion. In the 42 months that Obama has been in office, the debt has increased $5.2 trillion. Bush’s average monthly debt accumulated was $51 billion. Obama’s average monthly debt accumulated is $125.6 billion

· Obamacare effectively adds $17 trillion tolong-term unfunded debt which the Obama administration is not required to report in their federal debt numbers


Find more at Cameron Harris: What Obama Isn't Telling You About The Federal Debt

This is a perfect examply of the gullibility of the Right. If you take Bush's average monthly debt of $51 billion and multiply by 12 months you get $612 billion, not the $190 billion per year the lie the OP starts with. The dishonest author linked in the Op knows no one on the Right is intelligent enough to multiply by 12 so it is a safe lie.

Apparently, its tine to post this again -

Welcome to ReaganBushDebt.org

This site tracks the current Reagan Bush Debt.
The Reagan-Bush Debt is how much of the national debt of the United States is attributable to the presidencies of Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, George W. Bush, and
the Republican fiscal policy of Borrow-And-Spend.

As of Sunday, July 22, 2012 at 7:46:00AM CT,
The Current ReaganBush Debt is:
$10,589,016,658,278.00
which means that in a total of 20 years,
these three presidents have led to the creation of
91.88%
of the entire national debt
in only 8.4746% of the 236 years of the existence of the United States of America.

ReaganBushDebt.org

 

[Widdekind]

I said nothing about welfare. I do believe in increasing demand.
By the way, do you have a solution to unemployment?

eliminating the minimum wage would regenerate the millions of jobs, that have been prohibited by the same.

Meanwhile, what Public Investment program do you think warrants "We the People's" money (taxes) and time (labor) ? you have not answered my questions. Please stop referring to "con dogma". you may be feeding me dogma, but i do not, nor have i ever, subscribed to anybody else's dogma.

eliminating the minimum wage would regenerate millions of jobs; Public Investment spending, on productive projects, could well be profitable (worthwhile)

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I said nothing about welfare. I do believe in increasing demand.
By the way, do you have a solution to unemployment?

eliminating the minimum wage would regenerate the millions of jobs, that have been prohibited by the same.

Meanwhile, what Public Investment program do you think warrants "We the People's" money (taxes) and time (labor) ? you have not answered my questions. Please stop referring to "con dogma". you may be feeding me dogma, but i do not, nor have i ever, subscribed to anybody else's dogma.

eliminating the minimum wage would regenerate millions of jobs; Public Investment spending, on productive projects, could well be profitable (worthwhile)

Eliminating minimum wage would be a disaster for our economy. All other wages and salaries would follow suit and the result would be that no one could afford to buy much of anything.

All manufacturing would come to a halt as would sales of houses (there goes construction and it would never make it back), auto sales (mechanics, tires etc) and no one would be able to afford even the most basic of needs.

In short, we wouldn't be able to support either the very wealthy OR China.