Why the Left Doesn't Care about $9.7 Trillion Debt

[PubliusInfinitum]

Republicans started caring about the debt as soon as they were out of power and realized that they wouldn't get to spend on what they wanted anymore.

That's one problem that shouldn't be tolerated...not being able to spend money on what you need and want. In stead of "stimulus" spending on projects that stuff money into a few pockets (money that was extracted from taxpayers) we should release the same amount of money to the people (by way of tax cuts or direct payments) and let them spend it on whatever they wish, stimulating the local economy like no stimulus money has done to date.

We have been in debt for decades, but president Bush doubled our entire history's national debt in 8 years.

It looks like our debt will also double the next 10 years as well....and as toro's articles and charts and analysis SHOWS, we were put on that road to debt by President Bush's administration and congresses.

Obama is adding to the projected debt that Bush put us on the road to...

clinton administration and his congresses, put us on a road to surpluses.

The Clinton "surpluses" resulted from voodoo economics and redefinitions of things like spending cuts. You know it all depends on what the definition of is is.

simply not factual, the numbers speak for themselves....clinton with his congresses was the most fiscally responsible president in my lifetime...

Clinton's Congress was a CONSERVATIVE congress... which came ABOUT BECAUSE OF CLINTON'S POLICY INITIATIVES when Clinton and his congress were trying to take over HEALTHCARE and normalize sexual abnormality in the US MILITARY... just prior to the American People kicking the Left in Clinton's Congress to the political curb.

And it was THAT CONSERVATIVE CONGRESS that dragged Clinton KICKIN' AND SCREAMIN' to 'balancing the budget,' gutting welfare and other social spending; which resulted in the closest thing TO a balanced budget since Kennedy...

Sadly, it didn't take long before the Republican ranks were infiltrated by Leftists, OKA: Moderate, Centrist, Main-stream Progressives... and the Leftist social spending started all over again.

Here's the thing Care... Leftist Policy does not become 'right-wing policy' when it's advanced under a Republican administration.

Meaning in short that the PROBLEM is SOCIAL SPENDING and SOCIAL SPENDING IS LEFTIST POLICY; THUS THE PROBLEM IS ROOTED IN LEFTISM... PERIOD; wholly, solely... completely.

 

[Vast LWC]

FDR created Socialist Security, how much has that added to the US debt?

Nothing, until government started stealing from the till to pay for various pork spending, military spending, etc...

If that didn't happen, Social Security would still be paying for itself.

FDR spent like crazy during the Depression and WWII - ever hear of war bonds - how much of the US debt is due to that?

None. Not one penny. It was all paid off decades ago.

LBJ instituted Medifraud - more debt.

So you want to take Medicare away from old people? Wow, that's cold.

Take all those expenses away and the Republicans did not add so much - in fact without those expenses (prior debt and socialist programs) the Republicans added almost nothing.

Completely false. Just look at all my posts on the prior few pages where I list exactly what the Republicans did in fact add.

You RDean frequently talk about how Obama is not responsible for any of the Debt resulting from programs instituted by earlier presidents, so why should Republican's be blamed for the actions of Democratic presidents?

Or are you talking with your forked tongue again?

Both parties have contributed to the current debt. Republicans have contributed more than Democrats, but both are at fault.

 

[Vast LWC]

Clinton's Congress was a CONSERVATIVE congress... which came ABOUT BECAUSE OF CLINTON'S POLICY INITIATIVES when Clinton and his congress were trying to take over HEALTHCARE and normalize sexual abnormality in the US MILITARY... just prior to the American People kicking the Left in Clinton's Congress to the political curb.

And it was THAT CONSERVATIVE CONGRESS that dragged Clinton KICKIN' AND SCREAMIN' to 'balancing the budget,' gutting welfare and other social spending; which resulted in the closest thing TO a balanced budget since Kennedy...

Sadly, it didn't take long before the Republican ranks were infiltrated by Leftists, OKA: Moderate, Centrist, Main-stream Progressives... and the Leftist social spending started all over again.

Here's the thing Care... Leftist Policy does not become 'right-wing policy' when it's advanced under a Republican administration.

Meaning in short that the PROBLEM is SOCIAL SPENDING and SOCIAL SPENDING IS LEFTIST POLICY; THUS THE PROBLEM IS ROOTED IN LEFTISM... PERIOD; wholly, solely... completely.

So, in your opinion any kind of social spending is "leftist policy".

Meaning you want us to stop paying Social Security and Medicare benefits altogether, no more FEMA or any other Emergency response, no more highways, no more federally subsidized and regulated airwaves, no more post office, no more military, etc, etc, etc...

All of those are "social spending".

 

[Truthmatters]

Dennis Prager - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Some dip shit con writes an stupid hate article and you think anyone should care?

 

[Contumacious]

Clinton's Congress was a CONSERVATIVE congress... which came ABOUT BECAUSE OF CLINTON'S POLICY INITIATIVES when Clinton and his congress were trying to take over HEALTHCARE and normalize sexual abnormality in the US MILITARY... just prior to the American People kicking the Left in Clinton's Congress to the political curb.

And it was THAT CONSERVATIVE CONGRESS that dragged Clinton KICKIN' AND SCREAMIN' to 'balancing the budget,' gutting welfare and other social spending; which resulted in the closest thing TO a balanced budget since Kennedy...

Sadly, it didn't take long before the Republican ranks were infiltrated by Leftists, OKA: Moderate, Centrist, Main-stream Progressives... and the Leftist social spending started all over again.

Here's the thing Care... Leftist Policy does not become 'right-wing policy' when it's advanced under a Republican administration.

Meaning in short that the PROBLEM is SOCIAL SPENDING and SOCIAL SPENDING IS LEFTIST POLICY; THUS THE PROBLEM IS ROOTED IN LEFTISM... PERIOD; wholly, solely... completely.

So, in your opinion any kind of social spending is "leftist policy".

".

Absolutely.

In a free country the government has no authority to steal from "A" in order to support "B".

.

 

[Vast LWC]

Absolutely.

In a free country the government has no authority to steal from "A" in order to support "B".

.

And the absence of any such taxing and spending is also commonly known as "Anarchy".

Which reminds me of an excellent article by conservative columnist David Brooks about the similarities of the 60's left-wing anarchists and today's right-wing anarchists.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/05/opinion/05brooks.html

Really good stuff actually.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The real question is why did the right "create" such a debt?

2.5 trillion tax cut
3 trillion in war
trillion stimulus package
Who knows how much wasted on Katrina cleanup that never happened?
Who know how much their drug package cost?

Then the left get's stuck with this mess. Worse, the Republicans, the very people who created this disaster, think they know how to clean it up? Are they insane?

The right didn't create the Trillion Stimulus Package.

Bush put in the Bailout. which wasn't even a Trillion..

You got it mixed up.. Obama was the one who put in the Stimulus.

The Republicans have contributed to the vast majority of the national debt. This isn't a Republican or Democrat problem, it's a government problem.

 

[Charles Stucker]

FDR created Socialist Security, how much has that added to the US debt?

Nothing, until government started stealing from the till to pay for various pork spending, military spending, etc...

If that didn't happen, Social Security would still be paying for itself.


Both parties have contributed to the current debt. Republicans have contributed more than Democrats, but both are at fault.

Johnson and the Democrats started robbing Socialist Security to pay for Vietnam. Thus the Democrats are responsible for FAR more of the debt than the republicans.

 

[Vast LWC]

Johnson and the Democrats started robbing Socialist Security to pay for Vietnam. Thus the Democrats are responsible for FAR more of the debt than the republicans.

Got a credible link?

Or are you just blowing out your buttocks again?

 

[Charles Stucker]

Johnson and the Democrats started robbing Socialist Security to pay for Vietnam. Thus the Democrats are responsible for FAR more of the debt than the republicans.

Got a credible link?

Do your own research, it's a well recorded fact. You might start with congressional budget records starting in 1965.

 

[Vast LWC]

Do your own research, it's a well recorded fact. You might start with congressional budget records starting in 1965.

Yes, well, considering your "Well-recorded" facts turn out to be Anne Coulter-ite revisionist history more often than not, I would prefer you backed up your wild unfounded explanations with a credible source.

It's not my job to research your assertions. It's YOUR job to back up what you say.

 

[Charles Stucker]

Both parties have contributed to the current debt. Republicans have contributed more than Democrats, but both are at fault.

Give me a source for this bold faced lie. Not some set of talking DNC party points, but actual congressional budget records along with the party in control of each house and the presidency at the time.
Otherwise you are just blowing smoke at us CLAIMING the republicans are to blame.

 

[Vast LWC]

Ooh, sorry, I was away for a while.

Sure I'd be happy to. Give me a few minutes to collect the data.

And I'll expect you to back up your accusation with some facts.

 

[Charles Stucker]

Give me a few minutes to collect the data.

Make sure it is raw data, not some compilation by a biased source that picks and chooses what to report.
Remember I want the party in the House and senate too.

 

[Vast LWC]

*Edited: Math Corrected.

Let's start in the Johnson administration, when the debt rose from $305 Billion Dollars to $350 Billion Dollars. A total increase of $45 Billion Dollars over 5+ years

By the end of the Ford Administration the debt stood at $620 Billion Dollars. An Increase of $270 Billion Dollars over 8 Years.

The National Debt at the end of the Carter administration stood at $907 Billion Dollars. An Increase of $287 Billion dollars over 4 years.

During that entire period, Democrats held congress, so we'll halve the damage from the Nixon/Ford era.

So far the Democrats caused more debt, 467 Billion Dems to 135 Billion Reps, but here's where things start to change...

In January 1981, the House of Representatives went Republican on the wave of Reagan's popularity, and remained that way until 1987. This meant that Republicans were effectively in control of spending, having the House, the presidency and a good portion of the Senate.

During this period, the debt rose from 907 Billion to 2.2 Trillion Dollars, an increase of 1.3 Trillion Dollars.

For everyone keeping count, that is now 467 Billion Dems, 1.43 Trillion Reps.

(cont.)

 

[BolshevikHunter]

All the Morons in D.C are to blame for this sinking ship. The mentally Ill Democrats and Obama however are attempting to run straight into an iceberg and bring her down for good. ~BH

 

[Charles Stucker]

Let's start in the Johnson administration, when the debt rose from $305 Billion Dollars to $350 Billion Dollars. A total increase of $45 Billion Dollars over 5+ years

By the end of the Ford Administration the debt stood at $620 Billion Dollars. An Increase of $270 Billion Dollars over 8 Years.

The National Debt at the end of the Carter administration stood at $907 Billion Dollars. An Increase of $287 Billion dollars over 4 years.

During that entire period, Democrats held congress, so we'll halve the damage from the Nixon/Ford era.

So far the Democrats caused more debt, 465 Billion Dems to 135 Billion Reps, but here's where things start to change...

In January 1981, the House of Representatives went Republican on the wave of Reagan's popularity, and remained that way until 1987. This meant that Republicans were effectively in control of spending, having the House, the presidency and a good portion of the Senate.

During this period, the debt rose from 907 Billion to 2.2 Trillion Dollars, an increase of 1.3 Trillion Dollars.

For everyone keeping count, that is now 465 Billion Dems, 1.43 Trillion Reps.

(cont.)

Could you account for
1 - Interest on the Debt
and
2 - Inflation of the currency
NO - then your numbers mean nothing.

 

[Vast LWC]

*Edited: Math Corrected.

(cont.)

From Jan 1987 to Jan 1993, Republicans held the presidency and the Democrats held congress.

During that period, the debt rose from 2.2 Trillion to 4.1 Trillion. An increase of 1.9 Trillion Dollars.

Again, as the branches were split, we'll split the blame evenly. Bringing the totals up to:

Dems: 1.42 Trillion, Reps: 2.39 Trillion

Now we reach the Clinton Era.

From Jan 1993 to Jan 1995 the debt increased from 4.1 Trillion to 4.7 Trillion. For a total increase of 600 Billion dollars.

During this period Democrats were in control of both branches, so:

Dems: 2.02 Trillion, Reps: 2.39 Trillion

In January of 1995, Republicans took control of both houses of congress. From Jan 1995 to Jan 2001, The president was Democratic and Congress Republican, so again we split the difference. During this period, the Debt rose from 4.7 Trillion to 5.7 Trillion, an increase of 1 Trillion Dollars.

Dems: 2.5 Trillion, Reps: 2.89 Trillion

Now, in Jan 2001, President Bush took office. From Jan 2001 to Jan 2007, except for a brief tie in the senate (with a republican tie-breaker as VP), the Republicans held both houses of Congress.

During this period, the debt rose from 5.7 Trillion to 9 Trillion. An Increase of 3.3 Trillion Dollars.

Dems: 2.5 Trillion, Reps: 6.2 Trillion Dollars

From Jan 2007 to Jan 2009, the Democrats controlled Congress, and George W Bush was president, so, again, we split the difference. During that period, the debt rose from 9 Trillion to 11.2 Trillion. A difference of 2.2 Trillion dollars.

Dems: 3.6 Trillion, Reps: 7.3 Trillion

Which brings us to 2010, where congress and the presidency are both controlled by Democrats.

In the past year the debt has risen to 12.6 Trillion dollars, for an increase of 1.4 Trillion dollars.

Thus the totals are:


Dems: 5 Trillion Dollars, Reps: 7.3 Trillion dollars

Sources:
Composition of Congress, by Political Party, 1855?2008 — Infoplease.com
National Debt Clock - Defeat the Debt
Google

Questions? Comments?

 

[beowolfe]

FDR created Socialist Security, how much has that added to the US debt?

Nothing, until government started stealing from the till to pay for various pork spending, military spending, etc...

If that didn't happen, Social Security would still be paying for itself.


Both parties have contributed to the current debt. Republicans have contributed more than Democrats, but both are at fault.

Johnson and the Democrats started robbing Socialist Security to pay for Vietnam. Thus the Democrats are responsible for FAR more of the debt than the republicans.

Again, not true. SS surpluses have always been used to buy federal bonds. From everything I can find, that investment component is a part of the orignal law that created SS. But by buying federal bonds, they are in effect, 'loaning' the money to the federal government. Once that is done, the federal government is free to spend it on whatever congress sees fit. It gets complicated, but that's it in a nutshell.

 

[Vast LWC]

Could you account for
1 - Interest on the Debt
and
2 - Inflation of the currency
NO - then your numbers mean nothing.

I did not account for that, as it would require a hell of a lot of math.

But since the numbers are spread between administrations over a long period of years, the effects of inflation and interest even out between the controlling parties.

With perhaps a slight gain in debt going to the Democrats due to the age of their debt, and a slight gain on the Republican side owing to the larger amount of money interest was paid on.