Your delusional. I was there at the time. If anything Obama's spending SAVED the economy. Just saving GM along saved 3 million jobs, including mine.
No, you're delusional. You forget that Obama's stimulus included $275 billion in tax cuts.
Virtually no one disagreed with saving GM.
I take it you've read nothing about how the spending part of Obama's stimulus was wasted.
I know you guys don't like history, but every major tax cut since the early 1900s has been followed by a substantial increase in federal revenue.
Yes, it is true. You're either lying or you can't read. Federal revenue after the 2003 Bush tax cuts:
2003 -- $1.78 trillion
2004 -- $1.88 trillion
2005 -- $2.15 trillion
2006 -- $2.40 trillion
2007 -- $2.56 trillion
Total federal revenue for 2008 dropped slightly, down to $2.52 trillion, because a recession started that year, but revenue was still substantially higher than it was in 2003 or 2004. During the same period, income tax revenue rose dramatically, going from $925 billion in 2003 to $1.53 trillion in 2007. As with other types of federal revenue, income tax revenue dropped slightly in 2008, down to $1.45 trillion, due to the fact that a recession began that year, but it was still much higher than in 2003.
Wasn't true in 2002 when Bush cut taxes and added 6 Trillion more to the debt, turning surpluses into deficits.
Still lying about this stuff, hey? The bulk of the Bush tax cuts came in 2003, not 2002. Deficits came because Congress went on a spending spree that more than cancelled out the huge hike in revenue.
Wasn't true when Ronnie Ray-gun cut taxes,
You're lying again, or again proving you can't read. Federal revenue after the Reagan tax cuts:
1983 -- $326 billion
1984 -- $355 billion
1985 -- $396 billion
1986 -- $412 billion
1987 -- $476 billion
1988 -- $496 billion
1989 -- $549 billion
Ask a conservative to do some basic subtraction to prove to you that federal revenue rose dramatically after the Reagan tax cuts.
And, again, the deficit only rose because Congress raised spending so much that it overtook the revenue increase.
tripled the national debt
Take a math class. The debt did not triple under Reagan, just FYI. See also above.
before he and Bush had to admit they messed up and raised them again in 1987 and 1990.
How many times are you going to repeat this nonsense and ignore the refutation? Reagan reluctantly agreed to tax hikes in exchange for promises of more spending cuts. Same for Bush. And the Reagan tax hikes were a fraction of the tax cuts, which is why tax rates were still far, far lower when Reagan left office than when he took office. Just look at the tax tables for 1981 and 1988. Get a conservative to help you do the basic subtraction.
The reason why you had economic booms in those periods is that you also had increases in government spending. Reagan and Bush may have taxed like supply siders, but they spent like Keynesians.
LOL! Sheesh, I'd say, "Are you kidding?", but I know you're not. If that's true, then why was Obama's recovery the weakest in decades? Why did the economy boom after Harding cut taxes and slashed federal spending? Why did the economy take off after Congress
slashed federal spending in 1947? If government spending creates growth, why are Spain, Italy, England, Greece, etc., mired in debt and saddled with negative/zero/minuscule growth, chronic high unemployment, etc., etc.? Why is Illinois bankrupt? And on and on we could go.
