# Why I voted for Obama

Discussion in 'Politics' started by BoredDead, Nov 4, 2012.

1. Offline

Joined:
Nov 4, 2012
Messages:
54
3
Trophy Points:
6
Location:
Washington (state)
Ratings:
+3
Mainly for his budget, which I feel has unnecessary things in it.

Here is a wall of text! If you care about defending Romney you will wade through it and discuss it!

Here are my problems with Romney's budget: He has a 10 year 5 trillion dollar spending cut, he has large holes in what he wants to cut, he is likely to cut something important, and his budget won't create jobs when he thinks it will.

Romney has said he doesn't have a 5 trillion dollar tax cut, but I have a good source on this, his own website. In it he says he wants to take spending from 24.3% of our GDP to less than 20% of it.

(open the link, hit ctrl f, type 24.3)

Here are my base numbers:

3.6 trillion - 2011 spending (source)
less than 20% - Romney's planned percent GDP spending
15.09 trillion - 2011 GDP (wikipedia, scroll down, the table)
(I'm going to raise the GDP to 15.50 because Romney expects growth)

Here are my calculations:

15.50x.20=3.1 trillion - Romney's proposed spending
3.6-3.1=.5 trillion - Romney's total spending cuts
.5x10=5 trillion - Romney's total spending cuts after 10 years

So Romney has a 5 trillion dollar tax cut according to my calculations and the various sources I used.

So another problem I had with Romney's budget is that it has spending cut holes. When you add up all his cuts he listed on his website, it totals 319.6 billion yearly. (source, (ctrl f, type American people)). so you subtract yearly 319.6 billion from 500 billion yearly (his planned total spending cut) and get 180.4 billion yearly. We also have to take into account his increased defense spending, which goes from 3.3% of gdp to 4% of gdp. (source). That totals 100 billion when you calculate it. In all, this totals 280.4 billion yearly dollars he has not accounted for which he plans to cut.

500-319.6+100=280.4

Romney also wants to replace Obamacare which costs 95 billion yearly, so unless he wants to make it less potent, we can assume it will cost a similar amount (although he wants to move it to the states control and budget, not the federal budget, so we can't count it here)

So what can he cut?

Here is a pie chart of the federal governments expenditures.

24% defense 878.5 billion
24% health care 858.2 billion
22% pensions 775.6 billion
13% welfare 472.9 billion
6% interest 230.0 billion
3% education 113.7 billion
3% transportation 93.0 billion
2% protection 56.1 billion
1% general government 29.0 billion
3% other spending 96.3 billion

(source)

so Romney needs to find another 280.4 billion to cut, 8.2%, what do you think is not important?

My last problem is that Romney believes that reducing taxes and reducing spending will creates jobs, while that isn't true.

When I think about taxing and spending I have a hypothesis: taxing costs jobs, spending creates jobs, and taxing and spending is neutral in job creation. It's hard to deny that it's reasonable. Can you deny that spending money on healthcare doesn't increase the demand of it? And that increases in demand cause increases in supply of healthcare? And that to increase the supply of healthcare requires a hospital to expand and hire more doctors? To me it's basic economics, but I'm sure I will hear about it.

So cutting taxes and cutting spending doesn't create jobs.

Another problem for which I can't blame Romney is the debt to foreign nations. Because of our debt we will have to tax money and give it to people overseas to pay it off. This means taxing without job creating spending. So my view overall is that Romney's budget has to cost a small amount of jobs (my same view of Obama's budget on job creation). But that part is Bush, Obama, and the economy's fault.

2. Offline

### GoneBezerkBANNED

Joined:
May 14, 2011
Messages:
7,603
492
Trophy Points:
0
Ratings:
+495
Ok nutjob.

My BA in Economics and MBA say you are full of shit.

The majority of the budget is made up of the entitlement programs that Obamination will never touch, so his other option is to slice up the DoD budget. The Constitution has nothing in it about entitlement programs but it discusses the Feds are responsible for maintaing the "Army and Navy."

So what you and Obamination are doing is ignoring the Constitution and spending money on things not the responsbility of the Federal Govt while cutting the most important piece of the Feds....national defense of the states. Nevermind the million jobs that will be lost in January-March when the \$500B DoD budget cuts kick in...that should do wonders for the economy.

Speaking of tax cuts, you might want to see what JFK said about endlessly spending and raising taxes to keep up with spending....get to it, idiot.

3. Offline

Joined:
Nov 4, 2012
Messages:
54
3
Trophy Points:
6
Location:
Washington (state)
Ratings:
+3
I have doubts about your education, I'm sure anyone with a respectable understanding of economics would be cultured and wouldn't immediately resort to attacks over a simple political discussion. You have the look of a an angry conservative who is trying fake economic degrees to gain an advantage in an argument. If you really do have a good education in economics you would use that knowledge in your arguments, but I see none of it.

That aside, since you've ignored my arguments on how taxing and spending are neutral, I'm going to reiterate that jobs are not being lost and taxes are just being put on those who can afford it. Please debunk my theory with your glorious economic degree.

As for your responsibility arguments, they are already defeated by the supreme court allowing the government to provide "for the general welfare". So logically we should enter a discussion on whether or not they should. You know we can't allow people to go into severe poverty because of sudden job loss or disability.

• Thank You! x 1
4. Offline

### Two ThumbsPlatinum Member

Joined:
Sep 27, 2010
Messages:
37,292
6,244
Trophy Points:
1,140
Location:
Where ever I go, there I am.
Ratings:
+14,859
9.2 million more Americans are jobless today than there was 4 years ago.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

• Thank You! x 1
5. Offline

### WillowTreeDiamond Member

Joined:
Sep 15, 2008
Messages:
73,448
11,275
Trophy Points:
2,030
Ratings:
+20,599
Twenty trillion dollars of debt. That's what a democrat votes for. Twenty Trillion.

• Thank You! x 1
6. Offline

### Soggy in NOLAPlatinum Member

Joined:
Jul 31, 2009
Messages:
39,078
5,152
Trophy Points:
1,130
Ratings:
+17,362
Dude.. You went off into left wing moon bat land with your claim that if the gov't spends more on healthcare that it will magically create more demand and supply.

As for the rest, just more left wing talking points.

7. Offline

### AmericanFirstGold Member

Joined:
Dec 17, 2009
Messages:
12,204
1,047
Trophy Points:
175
Ratings:
+2,007
We have doubts about your math. Most of all we have obamaturds record to work for us.

8. Offline

### blackhawkGold Member

Joined:
Apr 2, 2012
Messages:
22,066
4,223
Trophy Points:
280
Location:
Deep in the heart of Texas.
Ratings:
+14,369
I am looking at what Obama has done over the last four year's in regards to debt, deficit, spending and the overall economy and I'm not impressed. Can Romney do any better I don't know but Obama has given no indication he would do anything any different in the next four years than he has for the last four.

9. Offline

### VottoGold Member

Joined:
Oct 31, 2012
Messages:
15,994
2,461
Trophy Points:
280
Ratings:
+12,594
You voted for Obama for his budget? He proposed a budget that was so extreme with spending that not one democrat voted for it. In fact, here is what then Senator Obama said of Bush in terms of his budgets in 2006.

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US government can't pay it's own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our government's reckless fiscal policies. Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. America deserves better."

How can anyone vote for Obama after this quote? He increased spending, not decreased spending. He then goes on to say that such spending weakens the nation at home and abroad. Considering that such spending is defended by progressives under the general welfare clause to see to the general welfare of the people, it could also be concluded that overspending is in direct violation of the same general welfare clause used to legitimize such spending because Obama conceeds that it weakens the nation.

Face it, the gig is about up and the progressive movement, now over a century old, has run its course. We need to now embark on a new path.

• Thank You! x 1
Last edited: Nov 4, 2012
10. Offline

### DarkwindGold Member

Joined:
Jun 18, 2009
Messages:
19,518
3,679
Trophy Points:
290
Ratings:
+9,413
I stopped at budget..

If you don't even know that he does not have a budget, the rest of your post is a worthless read.

Title
Replies Views
Last Message

Replies:
18
Views:
84

Replies:
12
Views:
133

Replies:
75
Views:
584

Replies:
120
Views:
1,162

Replies:
3
Views:
4