Obama has increased government spending less than any president in at least a generation.

[billyerock1991]

do you have any source any information any link of any kind or are you fascinated by your clever use of "left drone" Einstein ?..... you are just another Blow hard no information right wing laughing stock repeating meme s...

See the irony impaired far left drone (that supports Obama's illegal wars) believes the CBO here, but ignores the CBO when it comes to Obamacare.

Typical far left drone..

you have nothing to counter what I posted so you have two strategies

change the subject to claims about Obamacare...

and of course the brilliant "left drone" ...you have it going on there Einstein...I am laughing at you....you are struggling....

Just point out that the far left drone uses the CBO in this case, but ignores it when it comes to anything that speaks bad of the messiah.

So did you believe the CBO when it showed that Obamacare was not really going to fix any problems except spend trillions of dollars?

See how the far left drones want it to be a valid source here, but not when it runs up against their programmed narrative. Especially as they support Obama's illegal wars.

So if the CBO is a valid source now then it should be when it says that we sill spend trillions on Obamacare that will not really do any good. Or did the far left drone not understand the word Trillions?

Of Couse you truly do not understand the source that you posted, it just fit the programmed narrative..

I understand that you are a low information no information right wing nut bag repeating meme s no sources no nothing ...

Yes the far left drones show that the CBO is only valid prior to 2009..

The estimates of the net costs for 2014 stem almost entirely from spending for subsidies that are to be provided through insurance exchanges (often called marketplaces) and from an increase in spending for Medicaid. For the 2015–2024 period, the projected net costs consist of the following:

• Gross costs of $1,839 billion for subsidies and related spending for insurance obtained through the exchanges, Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and tax credits for small employers ($165 billion less than the previous projection); and
• A partial offset of $456 billion in receipts from penalty payments, additional revenues resulting from the excise tax on high-premium insurance plans, and the effects on income and payroll tax revenues and associated outlays arising from projected changes in employer coverage ($61 billion less than the previous projection).

Those estimates address only the insurance coverage provisions of the ACA; they do not constitute all of the act’s budgetary effects. Many other provisions, on net, are projected to reduce budget deficits. Considering all of the provisions—including the coverage provisions—CBO and JCT estimated in July 2012 (their most recent comprehensive estimates) that the ACA’s overall effect would be to reduce federal deficits.

CBO and JCT have updated their baseline estimates of the budgetary effects of the ACA’s insurance coverage provisions many times since that legislation was enacted in March 2010. As time has passed, the period spanned by the estimates has changed. But a year-by-year comparison shows that CBO and JCT’s estimates of the net budgetary impact of the ACA’s insurance coverage provisions have decreased, on balance, over the past four years (see the figure below). That net downward revision is attributable to many factors, including changes in law, revisions to CBO’s economic projections, judicial decisions, administrative actions, new data, numerous improvements in CBO and JCT’s modeling, and lower projected health care costs for both the federal government and the private sector.

 

[zeke]

dear, America was founded to be about freedom from liberal govt.

Dear, you think the English monarchy was "liberal" at the time the USA was founded? Maybe you could expand on that thought? Just to show everyone how smart you think you are.

 

[billyerock1991]

Nutters are very find of pretending that liberals don't know the difference between the deficit and the debt. That's silly of course.

What isn't silly....is that nutters don't know the relationship between the two.

Obama will have added more to the debt than all other Presidents combined. That is the only fact that matters.

Brilliant!

Adding to the deficit Bush vs. Obama - The Washington Post

What a crock of shit. The usual leftard propaganda. Bush tax cuts added to the deficit? Total bullshit. And btw....Obama extended those tax cuts!

The math is real simple. Debt when Obama took office. $10 trillion. Debt when Obama leaves office $20 Trillion. Even complete idiots should be able to compute math that simple.

if its soooooooooooo simple tell us what bills did Obama sign into law that cause this debt you speak of ... you seem to forget debt is cause by signing spending bills ... please enlighten us all where are these bill that he sign that caused all of this debt ??? so far you have failed on how we got this 20 tillion dollars of dept ... by you just saying "The math is real simple. Debt when Obama took office. $10 trillion. Debt when Obama leaves office $20 Trillion."
I say there is a source for your debt accusation... where did it come from ???? so tell us oh wise one with its simple ...where did it come from

 

[Redfish]

That is a total crock of shit, statistics lie and liars use statistics. The national debt when he took office was 10 trillion, it took 43 presidents more than 200 years to run that up, your dear leader is on pace to double that in 8 years, so it is ludicrous to say he's spending less.

The graph is from the Office of Management and Budget ; Congressional Budget Office ...what is your source Einstein ?

The other poster is incorrect. These two posters are exactly right.

If you take the Federal budget in 2010, as the base line, and plot spending increases from then until now, then based on that difference, Obama has increased the Federal Budget less than any president in recent history.

Keep in mind, this involves attributing all the bailouts, that Obama himself voted for, and was in favor of, and continued, as all being Bush, and thus not Obama's fault.

That's one of the keys to this specific argument. If you consider the Bailouts, which Obama supported, voted for, and continued when he got into office, as being part of Obama's budget, then the picture isn't a rosy.

However, none of that matters.

If I am promoted to CEO of GM, and I take over the company budget, and find that GM is losing $5 Million a year.... simply increasing corporate spending by a lower rate, won't solve anything. I'm still going to go bankrupt.

If revenue declines to $4 Million, and I decide "well I'm only going to increase spending from $5 Million, to ONLY $5.1 Million! Yay look at me! I increased spending less than the previous CEO!"

Um... Bankrupt?

You would fire that CEO, or end up bankrupt.

Those on the left, such as the posters quoted in this post, fail to grasp the reason for limiting the Federal budget. We're not doing this for any arbitrary purpose. We don't just magically enjoy small numbers.

The entire purpose of limited, reducing, or cutting the Federal budget, is to stop growing, and hopefully start reducing, the Federal debt.

To the point, when Obama got into office, the national debt was $10 Trillion. Now it's $18 Trillion.

When Bush was in office in 2008, the national deficit was $450 Billion, which was a record high. Now we dream of only having a $450 Billion deficit.

Regardless of the "gov spending has not increased 'as much' as prior presidents", it doesn't matter. What matter is, the deficit. The purpose of holding spending down, to to prevent the run up of debt. This Obama, has failed to do.

They way I read it only the Black guy is responsible the white Presidents are all off the hook LOL

obama would be responsible for what happens during his term if he was a lilly white red headed irishman. It has nothing to do with skin pigment-----------get over the race bullshit. But you won't because it all you have to defend your failed messiah.

 

[Redfish]

dear, America was founded to be about freedom from liberal govt.

Dear, you think the English monarchy was "liberal" at the time the USA was founded? Maybe you could expand on that thought? Just to show everyone how smart you think you are.

as the term liberal is used today, yes it was. Todays liberals want a dictatorial government that runs every aspect of the citizens lives. Exactly what the engish monarchy was in the 1700s.

 

[billyerock1991]

Hey redfish, list the bills Obama got passed that accounted for the 10 trillion dollars he spent. Can you do that?

he can't ... thats his problem.. he will make a lot of nasty remarks becasue thats all he knows how to do ...to tell us how, he won't be able to list one bill

 

[zeke]

if its soooooooooooo simple tell us what bills did Obama sign into law that cause this debt you speak of ... you seem to forget debt is cause by signing spending bills ... please enlighten us all where are these bill that he sign that caused all of this debt ??? so far you have failed on how we got this 20 tillion dollars of dept ... by you just saying "The math is real simple. Debt when Obama took office. $10 trillion. Debt when Obama leaves office $20 Trillion."
I say there is a source for your debt accusation... where did it come from ???? so tell us oh wise one with its simple ...where did it come from

Their information came from FOX News. FOX's motto; if we tell a big enough lie often enough, a few million stupid Americans that call themselves "Republicans" will believe what we tell them. And go forth and spread our bullshit all over the land. And the Koch Brothers and Rupert will be proud and oh so glad........that our country has so many ignorant Republicans. They are counting on that. All the way to the bank.

 

[Redfish]

Nutters are very find of pretending that liberals don't know the difference between the deficit and the debt. That's silly of course.

What isn't silly....is that nutters don't know the relationship between the two.

Obama will have added more to the debt than all other Presidents combined. That is the only fact that matters.

Brilliant!

Adding to the deficit Bush vs. Obama - The Washington Post

What a crock of shit. The usual leftard propaganda. Bush tax cuts added to the deficit? Total bullshit. And btw....Obama extended those tax cuts!

The math is real simple. Debt when Obama took office. $10 trillion. Debt when Obama leaves office $20 Trillion. Even complete idiots should be able to compute math that simple.

if its soooooooooooo simple tell us what bills did Obama sign into law that cause this debt you speak of ... you seem to forget debt is cause by signing spending bills ... please enlighten us all where are these bill that he sign that caused all of this debt ??? so far you have failed on how we got this 20 tillion dollars of dept ... by you just saying "The math is real simple. Debt when Obama took office. $10 trillion. Debt when Obama leaves office $20 Trillion."
I say there is a source for your debt accusation... where did it come from ???? so tell us oh wise one with its simple ...where did it come from

here's one: Senate Passes 1.1 Trillion Omnibus Spending Bill

took me 10 seconds to find it in Huffpuff of all places. If you really care you can easily find the rest of them.

 

[billyerock1991]

That is a total crock of shit, statistics lie and liars use statistics. The national debt when he took office was 10 trillion, it took 43 presidents more than 200 years to run that up, your dear leader is on pace to double that in 8 years, so it is ludicrous to say he's spending less.

The graph is from the Office of Management and Budget ; Congressional Budget Office ...what is your source Einstein ?

The other poster is incorrect. These two posters are exactly right.

If you take the Federal budget in 2010, as the base line, and plot spending increases from then until now, then based on that difference, Obama has increased the Federal Budget less than any president in recent history.

Keep in mind, this involves attributing all the bailouts, that Obama himself voted for, and was in favor of, and continued, as all being Bush, and thus not Obama's fault.

That's one of the keys to this specific argument. If you consider the Bailouts, which Obama supported, voted for, and continued when he got into office, as being part of Obama's budget, then the picture isn't a rosy.

However, none of that matters.

If I am promoted to CEO of GM, and I take over the company budget, and find that GM is losing $5 Million a year.... simply increasing corporate spending by a lower rate, won't solve anything. I'm still going to go bankrupt.

If revenue declines to $4 Million, and I decide "well I'm only going to increase spending from $5 Million, to ONLY $5.1 Million! Yay look at me! I increased spending less than the previous CEO!"

Um... Bankrupt?

You would fire that CEO, or end up bankrupt.

Those on the left, such as the posters quoted in this post, fail to grasp the reason for limiting the Federal budget. We're not doing this for any arbitrary purpose. We don't just magically enjoy small numbers.

The entire purpose of limited, reducing, or cutting the Federal budget, is to stop growing, and hopefully start reducing, the Federal debt.

To the point, when Obama got into office, the national debt was $10 Trillion. Now it's $18 Trillion.

When Bush was in office in 2008, the national deficit was $450 Billion, which was a record high. Now we dream of only having a $450 Billion deficit.

Regardless of the "gov spending has not increased 'as much' as prior presidents", it doesn't matter. What matter is, the deficit. The purpose of holding spending down, to to prevent the run up of debt. This Obama, has failed to do.

They way I read it only the Black guy is responsible the white Presidents are all off the hook LOL

obama would be responsible for what happens during his term if he was a lilly white red headed irishman. It has nothing to do with skin pigment-----------get over the race bullshit. But you won't because it all you have to defend your failed messiah.

Actually we do have a way of defending his time in office... he has never sign a bill that caused the us any debt ... where you haven't, to date, shown us one bill that he signed into law to cause this debt you speak of ... why's that redfish please enlighten us ignorant liberals how he did this .. if you can

 

[Redfish]

Hey redfish, list the bills Obama got passed that accounted for the 10 trillion dollars he spent. Can you do that?

he can't ... thats his problem.. he will make a lot of nasty remarks becasue thats all he knows how to do ...to tell us how, he won't be able to list one bill

Senate Passes 1.1 Trillion Omnibus Spending Bill

 

[Redfish]

That is a total crock of shit, statistics lie and liars use statistics. The national debt when he took office was 10 trillion, it took 43 presidents more than 200 years to run that up, your dear leader is on pace to double that in 8 years, so it is ludicrous to say he's spending less.

The graph is from the Office of Management and Budget ; Congressional Budget Office ...what is your source Einstein ?

The other poster is incorrect. These two posters are exactly right.

If you take the Federal budget in 2010, as the base line, and plot spending increases from then until now, then based on that difference, Obama has increased the Federal Budget less than any president in recent history.

Keep in mind, this involves attributing all the bailouts, that Obama himself voted for, and was in favor of, and continued, as all being Bush, and thus not Obama's fault.

That's one of the keys to this specific argument. If you consider the Bailouts, which Obama supported, voted for, and continued when he got into office, as being part of Obama's budget, then the picture isn't a rosy.

However, none of that matters.

If I am promoted to CEO of GM, and I take over the company budget, and find that GM is losing $5 Million a year.... simply increasing corporate spending by a lower rate, won't solve anything. I'm still going to go bankrupt.

If revenue declines to $4 Million, and I decide "well I'm only going to increase spending from $5 Million, to ONLY $5.1 Million! Yay look at me! I increased spending less than the previous CEO!"

Um... Bankrupt?

You would fire that CEO, or end up bankrupt.

Those on the left, such as the posters quoted in this post, fail to grasp the reason for limiting the Federal budget. We're not doing this for any arbitrary purpose. We don't just magically enjoy small numbers.

The entire purpose of limited, reducing, or cutting the Federal budget, is to stop growing, and hopefully start reducing, the Federal debt.

To the point, when Obama got into office, the national debt was $10 Trillion. Now it's $18 Trillion.

When Bush was in office in 2008, the national deficit was $450 Billion, which was a record high. Now we dream of only having a $450 Billion deficit.

Regardless of the "gov spending has not increased 'as much' as prior presidents", it doesn't matter. What matter is, the deficit. The purpose of holding spending down, to to prevent the run up of debt. This Obama, has failed to do.

They way I read it only the Black guy is responsible the white Presidents are all off the hook LOL

obama would be responsible for what happens during his term if he was a lilly white red headed irishman. It has nothing to do with skin pigment-----------get over the race bullshit. But you won't because it all you have to defend your failed messiah.

Actually we do have a way of defending his time in office... he has never sign a bill that caused the us any debt ... where you haven't, to date, shown us one bill that he signed into law to cause this debt you speak of ... why's that redfish please enlighten us ignorant liberals how he did this .. if you can

Senate Passes 1.1 Trillion Omnibus Spending Bill

 

[zeke]

as the term liberal is used today, yes it was.

WOW, just WOW. You one stupid ************ there red. I mean stupid. You think you just get to change the definition of terms to suit your stupid argument? Stupid ******.

 

[billyerock1991]

if its soooooooooooo simple tell us what bills did Obama sign into law that cause this debt you speak of ... you seem to forget debt is cause by signing spending bills ... please enlighten us all where are these bill that he sign that caused all of this debt ??? so far you have failed on how we got this 20 tillion dollars of dept ... by you just saying "The math is real simple. Debt when Obama took office. $10 trillion. Debt when Obama leaves office $20 Trillion."
I say there is a source for your debt accusation... where did it come from ???? so tell us oh wise one with its simple ...where did it come from

Their information came from FOX News. FOX's motto; if we tell a big enough lie often enough, a few million stupid Americans that call themselves "Republicans" will believe what we tell them. And go forth and spread our bullshit all over the land. And the Koch Brothers and Rupert will be proud and oh so glad........that our country has so many ignorant Republicans. They are counting on that. All the way to the bank.

ain't that the truth

 

[zeke]

Senate Passes 1.1 Trillion Omnibus Spending Bill

Well ok then red. You only 9 trillion short now. Way to go dude. Where is the rest of the money spent?

 

[Redfish]

Senate Passes 1.1 Trillion Omnibus Spending Bill

Well ok then red. You only 9 trillion short now. Way to go dude. Where is the rest of the money spent?

I know that you think I am here to educate you, but I am not going to do it. There are spending bills every year. Look it up yourself, dude.

 

[Redfish]

as the term liberal is used today, yes it was.

WOW, just WOW. You one stupid ************ there red. I mean stupid. You think you just get to change the definition of terms to suit your stupid argument? Stupid ******.

its not my definition, its yours. Did Henry VIII run a democracy? Did he control every aspect of his subjects lives?

So how about if you tell us what kind of government you libs want? Do you want free medical care, free food, free housing, free education, free gas, welfare, unemployment payments, high taxes, the EPA, the IRS, a government controlled media? If you said yes, you are a liberal by today's definition, and so were the monarchs of england in the 1700s.

and for the record, calling someone who is vastly more intelligent than you a stupid ************, just proves that you are one.

 

[billyerock1991]

The graph is from the Office of Management and Budget ; Congressional Budget Office ...what is your source Einstein ?

The other poster is incorrect. These two posters are exactly right.

If you take the Federal budget in 2010, as the base line, and plot spending increases from then until now, then based on that difference, Obama has increased the Federal Budget less than any president in recent history.

Keep in mind, this involves attributing all the bailouts, that Obama himself voted for, and was in favor of, and continued, as all being Bush, and thus not Obama's fault.

That's one of the keys to this specific argument. If you consider the Bailouts, which Obama supported, voted for, and continued when he got into office, as being part of Obama's budget, then the picture isn't a rosy.

However, none of that matters.

If I am promoted to CEO of GM, and I take over the company budget, and find that GM is losing $5 Million a year.... simply increasing corporate spending by a lower rate, won't solve anything. I'm still going to go bankrupt.

If revenue declines to $4 Million, and I decide "well I'm only going to increase spending from $5 Million, to ONLY $5.1 Million! Yay look at me! I increased spending less than the previous CEO!"

Um... Bankrupt?

You would fire that CEO, or end up bankrupt.

Those on the left, such as the posters quoted in this post, fail to grasp the reason for limiting the Federal budget. We're not doing this for any arbitrary purpose. We don't just magically enjoy small numbers.

The entire purpose of limited, reducing, or cutting the Federal budget, is to stop growing, and hopefully start reducing, the Federal debt.

To the point, when Obama got into office, the national debt was $10 Trillion. Now it's $18 Trillion.

When Bush was in office in 2008, the national deficit was $450 Billion, which was a record high. Now we dream of only having a $450 Billion deficit.

Regardless of the "gov spending has not increased 'as much' as prior presidents", it doesn't matter. What matter is, the deficit. The purpose of holding spending down, to to prevent the run up of debt. This Obama, has failed to do.

They way I read it only the Black guy is responsible the white Presidents are all off the hook LOL

obama would be responsible for what happens during his term if he was a lilly white red headed irishman. It has nothing to do with skin pigment-----------get over the race bullshit. But you won't because it all you have to defend your failed messiah.

Actually we do have a way of defending his time in office... he has never sign a bill that caused the us any debt ... where you haven't, to date, shown us one bill that he signed into law to cause this debt you speak of ... why's that redfish please enlighten us ignorant liberals how he did this .. if you can

Senate Passes 1.1 Trillion Omnibus Spending Bill

you do realize the bill was passed in 2014 don't ya??? so you listed a budget bill that was passed and you have been able yet to tell us how the debt came into play by 2014 ... all you did was show us a budget bill that was passed which by they way, it won't tell us what the debt on this bill is until 2015 moron ... so again please show us any bills he passed that cost us 20 truillions .... budget bills incase you don't know is what we need to run the government ... its not a spending bill ... so again please show us a spending bill that he signed into law that caused this debt can ya do that for us ...

 

[zeke]

and for the record, calling someone who is vastly more intelligent than you a stupid ************, just proves that you are one.

LMAO.

And calling the English monarchy of 1776 a "liberal" form of government, is that the part that shows you to be vastly more intelligent........than a box of rocks. I don't know about that. A box of rocks at least knows when to shut the **** up. Rather than prove how stupid a box of rocks IS. With your posts, you leave no doubt.

 

[zeke]

So how about if you tell us what kind of government you libs want? Do you want free medical care, free food, free housing, free education, free gas, welfare, unemployment payments, high taxes, the EPA, the IRS, a government controlled media? If you said yes, you are a liberal by today's definition, and so were the monarchs of england in the 1700s.

I want a government and a country free of "stupid Republican politicians".and "stupid Republican voters" such as yourself. But unfortunately I don't think that's gonna happen. But that's what I want. Thanks for asking though.

 

[Redfish]

The other poster is incorrect. These two posters are exactly right.

If you take the Federal budget in 2010, as the base line, and plot spending increases from then until now, then based on that difference, Obama has increased the Federal Budget less than any president in recent history.

Keep in mind, this involves attributing all the bailouts, that Obama himself voted for, and was in favor of, and continued, as all being Bush, and thus not Obama's fault.

That's one of the keys to this specific argument. If you consider the Bailouts, which Obama supported, voted for, and continued when he got into office, as being part of Obama's budget, then the picture isn't a rosy.

However, none of that matters.

If I am promoted to CEO of GM, and I take over the company budget, and find that GM is losing $5 Million a year.... simply increasing corporate spending by a lower rate, won't solve anything. I'm still going to go bankrupt.

If revenue declines to $4 Million, and I decide "well I'm only going to increase spending from $5 Million, to ONLY $5.1 Million! Yay look at me! I increased spending less than the previous CEO!"

Um... Bankrupt?

You would fire that CEO, or end up bankrupt.

Those on the left, such as the posters quoted in this post, fail to grasp the reason for limiting the Federal budget. We're not doing this for any arbitrary purpose. We don't just magically enjoy small numbers.

The entire purpose of limited, reducing, or cutting the Federal budget, is to stop growing, and hopefully start reducing, the Federal debt.

To the point, when Obama got into office, the national debt was $10 Trillion. Now it's $18 Trillion.

When Bush was in office in 2008, the national deficit was $450 Billion, which was a record high. Now we dream of only having a $450 Billion deficit.

Regardless of the "gov spending has not increased 'as much' as prior presidents", it doesn't matter. What matter is, the deficit. The purpose of holding spending down, to to prevent the run up of debt. This Obama, has failed to do.

They way I read it only the Black guy is responsible the white Presidents are all off the hook LOL

obama would be responsible for what happens during his term if he was a lilly white red headed irishman. It has nothing to do with skin pigment-----------get over the race bullshit. But you won't because it all you have to defend your failed messiah.

Actually we do have a way of defending his time in office... he has never sign a bill that caused the us any debt ... where you haven't, to date, shown us one bill that he signed into law to cause this debt you speak of ... why's that redfish please enlighten us ignorant liberals how he did this .. if you can

Senate Passes 1.1 Trillion Omnibus Spending Bill

you do realize the bill was passed in 2014 don't ya??? so you listed a budget bill that was passed and you have been able yet to tell us how the debt came into play by 2014 ... all you did was show us a budget bill that was passed which by they way, it won't tell us what the debt on this bill is until 2015 moron ... so again please show us any bills he passed that cost us 20 truillions .... budget bills incase you don't know is what we need to run the government ... its not a spending bill ... so again please show us a spending bill that he signed into law that caused this debt can ya do that for us ...

The National Debt by President The National Debt Crisis