Yeah, It's Obama's "fault"

[ScienceRocks]

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

I get it Bubba, when FACTS aren't on your side, run away right?

Wow, Reaganonomics have slit the throat of our middle class and given everything to the super rich. Time to end it for good!

Weird SOOOO many have looked at the thread but for some odd reason (Credible links using logic, history and MATH) the GOPers have decided not to question a damn thing? HMM

It's far to glarely obvious that their economics is wrong...So no, they don't want to debate. Reagan and Bush have caused nearly a complete collapse of our middle class.

The only reason they bitch about government is it stands in the way of mega corps taking every last cent away from everyone else.


Trickle down is treasonous!

 

[ScienceRocks]

According to the projection, Obama would have made peace in our lifetime too!!

Reaganonomics is killing this nation and all you have is insults? lol

 

[Dad2three]

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Obama "Lowered the deficit!"

OMFG!!!

It's like saying the Captain of the Titanic bailed out the most seawater ever!!!

LOL

Obama Fluffers are a scream!!!

 

[Dad2three]

According to the projection, Obama would have made peace in our lifetime too!!

So you have NOTHING. Got it

 

[Dad2three]

Obama "Lowered the deficit!"

OMFG!!!

It's like saying the Captain of the Titanic bailed out the most seawater ever!!!

LOL

Obama Fluffers are a scream!!!

 

[deltex1]

D23 can put up all the bs she wants...but it's all overwhelmed by the stunning stupidity of The Gonad, on 60 minutes yesterday.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Weird, how none of this debt helped the people of our nation. WE're not spending more on infrastructure, science, r&d or education.

Hell, we're spending the least now on infrastructure of the past 30 years.

Why? Because all this money went to the middle east and the top .5% of our population.

Yet, the republicans bitch about the debt and want to cut more money from areas that haven't caused it.

 

[ScienceRocks]

You do realize that Clinton was spending more on infrastructure when he had a surplus? It isn't the problem.

Our kids education isn't the problem

Our first rate science institutions aint the problem!


No your tax cuts for the rich and wars are!!!!

 

[Dad2three]

 

[Dad2three]

Deficits, Debts and Democrats vs Republicans — US national debt in graphs by year and president


As you read this article on Democrats vs Republicans when it comes to who did better or worse with the U.S. national debt, bear in mind that I am an independent voter. I cast my virgin vote for Ronald Reagan. I voted for President George II … but only the first time! After installing Bush 2.0, I repented. I refused to reboot the Bush administration and laid down my voting rights for awhile so as not to inflict more damage on America. I consoled myself by saying, “At least, I’ve learned not to do it again. I was not a hanging-chad voter.”



In fact, I’ve voted Republican more often than Democrat. I did not vote for Clinton or Al Gore. Bear all of that in mind, as you read the following, for I am writing against my own bias and was surprised by what I learned.



Personal income under Republicans vs Democrats


Here is a stunning fact in a simple graph:





This graph goes against what I think would be conventional wisdom — that Republicans do a better job with the economy than those taxing, government-worshipping Democrats. Surprisingly, if you look at personal income growth over the last fifty years under each kind of president (Democrat vs Republican), you discover that no matter which income percentile you fall into, you saw your income grow more during Democratic presidential administrations than during Republican administrations.

The other telling thing shown here is that the amount of income growth under Democrats gets better as you move to poorer segments of the population, even though ALL groups experienced greater income growth under Democrats (except for the top five percent) than under Republicans.

Republican vs Democrat on the US National Debt


The next US national debt graph is equally telling in its Democrat vs Republican comparison, year by year:




( Graphic provided by The Creative Commons and found on Wikipedia at: File:Federal Debt 1901-2010.png - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia )


Studying this graphic, you can clearly see that US government debt by year after WWII (1945) declined as a percentage of the nation’s gross domestic product (GDP) continually all the way until the Reagan years. You can also see that most of those post-war years were under solid Democratic control in both houses. Throughout the years of Reagonomics, however, the United State’s national debt as a percentage of GDP — after decades of decline – grew rapidly and continued to do so under President George Bush the First. Then U.S. debt plunged for the first time throughout the Clinton years (when taxes on the wealthy were raised) and finally began to rise again during the Bush II years (when taxes on the wealthy were cut again … even more than they were cut by Reagan).

So, while individual income grew better for everyone during Democratic administrations, the U.S.A. national debt grew much better for everyone under Republican administrations.


US national debt by year and by president


Here’s an interesting timeline of Republican vs Democrat presidents in relation to growth of the national debt:

1980: Ronald Reagan runs for president during a recession in which the national debt as a percentage of GDP held completely flat. (Prior to those Carter recession years, the gross national debt grew slowly (top of graph below), yet slightly decreased as a percentage of GDP (bottom of graph)).




The biggest plank in Reagan’s platform, which he presents with poster infographics and considerable zeal is the promise to balance the budget against deficits that he claims will soon destroy the nation’s prosperity. Carter, he claims, is running the nation toward economic bankruptcy.



1981-1989: With full support from congressional Republicans, Reagan begins the worst annual deficits the nation has seen since WWII. During the Reagan and Bush I years, the gross national debt quadruples as a result of huge Republican military spending increases (and of course gutting revenues even with Ronnie's 11 tax increases on the working man)


1993-2000: As seen above, Bill Clinton inherits a national debt that is now ballooning at an alarming rate, but he gets an economic plan through congress that eliminates deficit spending entirely




There is no getting around the fact that the Republican track record for deficit spending is abysmal or that the Great Recession began for the entire world in the eighth year of their watch under George Bush II. Not only has personal income for ALL segments of the population (except the top 1%) done worse during Republican administrations over the past fifty years, but the United States’ gross debt has skyrocketed under every Republican administration from the beginning of Nixon’s second term onward. That’s a numerical fact, and their feet should be held to the fire for it. Moreover, the top five percent of the U.S. populace pays a lower percentage of income taxes in proportion to their total wealth than do the bottom ninety-five. (See “Bush Whacked by the Bush Tax Cuts.”)


Deficits, Debts and Democrats vs Republicans — US national debt in graphs by year and president

 

[ScienceRocks]

In fact, I’ve voted Republican more often than Democrat. I did not vote for Clinton or Al Gore. Bear all of that in mind, as you read the following, for I am writing against my own bias and was surprised by what I learned.

I used to believe the same ideas our conservative friends believe and voted for Bush, McCain and Romney. The past 4-5 years have slowly turned me as the more i read on the subject with the more the extreme right pushes for no government the more I hate what they stand for. Cruzes shut down was the nail in the coffin of my blind support for that party. This asshole would rather see our roads fall into rivers, science institutions shut down and corporations be unregulated.

The rights trickle down and anti-worker attitude has hurt this country very badly...They put h1b's ahead of our own people.

They want to cut infrastructure, science, r&d and take away any chance for our children to get a decent education if they're not super rich.

I was fooled simply because Bush was smart enough not to cut from these areas to badly. He understood that they were needed...But, I come to find out he was a jackass in other areas that have hurt us very bad.

Today if you don't want to cut everything and give everything to the top 1% = you're a rino. That isn't a party I want to be a part of.

 

[jwoodie]

Bush Lead During Weakest Economy in Decades


President Bush has presided over the weakest eight-year span for the U.S. economy in decades, according to an analysis of key data, and economists across the ideological spectrum increasingly view his two terms as a time of little progress on the nation's thorniest fiscal challenges.


"The expansion was a continuation of the way the U.S. has grown for too long, which was a consumer-led expansion that was heavily concentrated in housing," said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a onetime Bush White House staffer and one of Sen. John McCain's top economic advisers for his presidential campaign. "There was very little of the kind of saving and export-led growth that would be more sustainable."

"For a group that claims it wants to be judged by history, there is no evidence on the economic policy front that that was the view," Holtz-Eakin said. "It was all Band-Aids."

Bush Lead During Weakest Economy in Decades



The Economic Consequences of Mr. Bush


The next president will have to deal with yet another crippling legacy of George W. Bush: the economy. A Nobel laureate, Joseph E. Stiglitz, sees a generation-long struggle to recoup.


The Economic Consequences of Mr. Bush

WHICH POLITICAL PARTY IS IN FAVOR OF A BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

WHICH POLITICAL PARTY IS IN FAVOR OF A BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT?

the same party that signs The Pledge!!