Republicans have a poor understanding of economics. They should have no place in making policy

[EdwardBaiamonte]

> Ronald Reagan’s First Term – $656 billion increase

> Ronald Reagan’s Second Term – $1.036 trillion increase

> George H.W. Bush’s Term – $1.587 trillion increase

> Bill Clinton’s First Term – $1.122 trillion increase

> Bill Clinton’s Second Term – $418 billion increase

> George W. Bush’s First Term – $1.885 trillion increase

> George W. Bush’s Second Term – $3.014 trillion increase

> Barack Obama’s First Term – $5.806 trillion increase

Weird you didn't LINK to those figure? Womder why? EVERY US Prez starts his budget Oct 1 the year he comes into office.

Reagan increased trhe debt by 289% Bubba

BOTH Bush's doubled it

ECONOMISTS DON'T LOOK AT FLAT NUMBERS YOU PRESENTED (CHERRY PICKING TO HIDE THE TRUTH? LOL), BUT BY THE PERCENT OF GDP

October 1, 2009

U.S. Begins Fiscal Year $11,776,112,848,656.17 in Debt
U.S. Begins Fiscal Year 11 776 112 848 656.17 in Debt - CBS News


$5.8 TRILLION FOR OBAMA HIS FIRST TERM HUH? LOL

The United States public debt as a percentage of GDP reached its highest level during Harry Truman's first presidential term, during and after World War II. Public debt as a percentage of GDP fell rapidly in the post-World War II period, and reached a low in 1973 under President Richard Nixon. Debt as a share of GDP has consistently increased since then, except during the terms of Democratic presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. Public debt rose during the 1980s, as President Reagan cut taxes and increased military spending.

...As a result, debt as a share of GDP increased from 26.2% in 1980 to 40.9% in 1988, and it continued to rise during the presidency of George H. W. Bush, reaching 48.3% of GDP in 1992

Debt held by the public reached a high of 49.5% of GDP at the beginning of President Clinton's first term. However, it fell to 34.5% of GDP by the end of Clinton's presidency

History of the United States public debt - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

WEIRD, LIKE HARDING/COOLIDGE DID TO HOOVER, DUBYA HOSED OBAMA WHEN REVENUES FELL BECAUSE OF HIS GREAT RECESSION RIGHT? lol

HONESTY, TRY IT BUBBA

The simple fact is Republicans sign the pledge and Democrats don't. The simple fact is Republicans introduce Balanced Budget Amendments and Democrats kill them. Case closed. Sorry

 

[regent]

It seems Republicans sit around all day signing pledges. When Reagan got into office, Republicans were so busy signing sessions pledges they missed part about Republicans borrowing more money, this time, tripling the debt. When Bush got into office and in their haste to sign even more pledges the Republicans borrowed more, this time doubling the debt. A law should be passed preventing Republicans from signing any more pledges, our economy might not be able to handle it.

 

[regent]

It seems Republicans sit around all day signing pledges. When Reagan got into office, Republicans were so busy signing sessions pledges they missed part about Republicans borrowing more money, this time, tripling the debt. When Bush got into office and in their haste to sign even more pledges the Republicans borrowed more, this time doubling the debt. A law should be passed preventing Republicans from signing any more pledges, our economy might not be able to handle it.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

It seems Republicans sit around all day signing pledges. When Reagan got into office, Republicans were so busy signing sessions pledges they missed part about Republicans borrowing more money, this time, tripling the debt. When Bush got into office and in their haste to sign even more pledges the Republicans borrowed more, this time doubling the debt. A law should be passed preventing Republicans from signing any more pledges, our economy might not be able to handle it.

well then I guess Democrats should start supporting a Balanced Budget Amendment too!!

 

[Oldstyle]

It seems Republicans sit around all day signing pledges. When Reagan got into office, Republicans were so busy signing sessions pledges they missed part about Republicans borrowing more money, this time, tripling the debt. When Bush got into office and in their haste to sign even more pledges the Republicans borrowed more, this time doubling the debt. A law should be passed preventing Republicans from signing any more pledges, our economy might not be able to handle it.

Does your concern over the debt carry over to the Obama Administration...or is it reserved for Republicans only? Who piled more debt on the country...Ronald Reagan or Barack Obama? I'll give you a hint...it's not even CLOSE!

 

[Dad2three]

> Ronald Reagan’s First Term – $656 billion increase

> Ronald Reagan’s Second Term – $1.036 trillion increase

> George H.W. Bush’s Term – $1.587 trillion increase

> Bill Clinton’s First Term – $1.122 trillion increase

> Bill Clinton’s Second Term – $418 billion increase

> George W. Bush’s First Term – $1.885 trillion increase

> George W. Bush’s Second Term – $3.014 trillion increase

> Barack Obama’s First Term – $5.806 trillion increase

Weird you didn't LINK to those figure? Womder why? EVERY US Prez starts his budget Oct 1 the year he comes into office.

Reagan increased trhe debt by 289% Bubba

BOTH Bush's doubled it

ECONOMISTS DON'T LOOK AT FLAT NUMBERS YOU PRESENTED (CHERRY PICKING TO HIDE THE TRUTH? LOL), BUT BY THE PERCENT OF GDP

October 1, 2009

U.S. Begins Fiscal Year $11,776,112,848,656.17 in Debt
U.S. Begins Fiscal Year 11 776 112 848 656.17 in Debt - CBS News


$5.8 TRILLION FOR OBAMA HIS FIRST TERM HUH? LOL

The United States public debt as a percentage of GDP reached its highest level during Harry Truman's first presidential term, during and after World War II. Public debt as a percentage of GDP fell rapidly in the post-World War II period, and reached a low in 1973 under President Richard Nixon. Debt as a share of GDP has consistently increased since then, except during the terms of Democratic presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton. Public debt rose during the 1980s, as President Reagan cut taxes and increased military spending.

...As a result, debt as a share of GDP increased from 26.2% in 1980 to 40.9% in 1988, and it continued to rise during the presidency of George H. W. Bush, reaching 48.3% of GDP in 1992

Debt held by the public reached a high of 49.5% of GDP at the beginning of President Clinton's first term. However, it fell to 34.5% of GDP by the end of Clinton's presidency

History of the United States public debt - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

WEIRD, LIKE HARDING/COOLIDGE DID TO HOOVER, DUBYA HOSED OBAMA WHEN REVENUES FELL BECAUSE OF HIS GREAT RECESSION RIGHT? lol

HONESTY, TRY IT BUBBA

The simple fact is Republicans sign the pledge and Democrats don't. The simple fact is Republicans introduce Balanced Budget Amendments and Democrats kill them. Case closed. Sorry

Sign a pledge? Oh you mean Grover's attempt o shrink Gov't small enough to drown it in a tub? Hell I thought they were elected and took a pledge to follow the Constitution and do what's best for America? lol


Weird, 90%+ of current public debt can be traced back to POLICY of Reagan, Bush AND Dubya...Case closed

 

[Dad2three]

It seems Republicans sit around all day signing pledges. When Reagan got into office, Republicans were so busy signing sessions pledges they missed part about Republicans borrowing more money, this time, tripling the debt. When Bush got into office and in their haste to sign even more pledges the Republicans borrowed more, this time doubling the debt. A law should be passed preventing Republicans from signing any more pledges, our economy might not be able to handle it.

Does your concern over the debt carry over to the Obama Administration...or is it reserved for Republicans only? Who piled more debt on the country...Ronald Reagan or Barack Obama? I'll give you a hint...it's not even CLOSE!

True, Reagan came into office as debt was going down as the share of GDP (and tax revenues were 20% of GDP), he fixed that FAST and ended up increasing US debt by 289%. Obama on the other hand came into office after Dubya had CREATED a recession and took US to below 15% of GDP in tax revenues, AND will only increase the debt by about 70% in his term (after Dubya doubled it, lol)

 

[Dad2three]

Instead of criticizing the people who create the businesses that employ millions as "money goalers"...I would suggest that you thank them for providing employment to the many who are content just to punch a time clock and pick up a check.

lol, SURE we didn't have jobs when the 1%ers ('job creators') ONLY had 6%-9% of the pie instead of the current 20% (though 23% in 2007) paying about 40% less on the total revenues that had been paid 1945-1980

and to follow your thoughts on Ford, so IF that is true, him being driven to 'create', would he do it with less money at the end? lol

 

[Dad2three]

Once again you're trying to mask reality by using the % of INCREASE from the proceeding President instead of simply looking at what each President added to the debt. Since Obama followed Bush's use of TARP as an emergency short term spending blast to keep our financial institutions afloat and Obama has spent as much as Bush in each of his years in office even though the recession ended back in 2009 your claim that he's not a big spender is as ludicrous as most of your posts!

Got it, YOU can't be honest


Charts: What if Obama spent like Reagan?

January 31, 2013

In 10 of the past 12 quarters, total government spending and investment has fallen, dragging down the Obama economy. That's in large part because state and local cutbacks have been so severe, but it's also because federal spending and investment has, on the whole, been falling since 2010.

This isn't an unusual analysis. You can see the numbers for yourself if you head to the Bureau of Economic Analysis's GDP data and scroll through column 21 of table 1.1.2. It's simply a fact that real government spending fell in three of President Obama's first four years.

That made me curious: How does government spending and investment during Obama's first term compare to Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush's first terms? The answer is poorly. Whereas total government spending dropped in 10 out of the 16 quarters that comprised Obama's first term, it rose in 13 out of Reagan's first 16 quarters, and 13 out of Bush's first 16 quarters.

Or, to put it differently, over Obama's first term, falling government spending and investment snipped, on average, .11 percentage points of GDP off of (annualized) quarterly growth. During Reagan's first term, it added .68 percentage points, and during Bush's first term, it added .52 percentage points.

The point isn't that Reagan and Bush were big spenders while Obama favors austerity. If it were up to Obama, the federal government would have spent much more since 2010. Moreover, these numbers are, in large part, functions of the economies the three men inherited. Each saw a recession in their first term, but Obama's was by far the worst, and so it led to much more severe cutbacks in state and local spending.

Rather, these graphs simply establish a basic fact about Obama's term: While deficits have indeed been high, government spending and investment has been falling since 2010. This is, in recent presidential administrations, a simply unprecedented response to a recession. Just for fun, I took Obama's GDP growth, netted out the effect of government spending and investment, and then added the total government spending and investment numbers — which include state and local government — from Reagan's first term. The result is a significantly better economy, with growth since 2010 averaging 3.2 percent rather than 2.4 percent.

Basic economic theory would hold that you want a larger contribution from government spending during a big recession in which private demand is weak than you do during a mild recession or a healthy economy. But that's been the case in Obama's economy, and all signs are that the pace of government spending cuts will accelerate sharply over the next year.

Charts What if Obama spent like Reagan - The Washington Post

 

[Dad2three]

The truth is that Barack Obama added more than twice as much to the National Debt in one term than Reagan added to it in his two terms.

Sure he did, Reagan nearly tripled EVERY other Prez's debt by tripling the debt in his 8 years (INHERITING A TRENDING DOWN DEBT TO GDP RATIO). That lousy Obama will MAYBE increase debt by 70% (AFTER Dubya doubled it) AND that's including Dubya pushing US revenues to 1950's levels AND handing Obama the second worst GOP crash on record!

 

[Dad2three]

This is one of those strings where liberals embarrass themselves!

Gee, Dad...what would YOU rather owe...the amount that Reagan indebted us for...or the amount that Obama has indebted us for?

So NO, you'll choose to be ignorant and NOT look at it like economists do, GDP to debt ratio. I'm shocked, shocked I tell you

One guy CREATED the debt by blowing up Gov't spending WHILE gutting taxes for the 'job creators' AND cutting 2%+ off of federal revenues./ The other guy was handed a steaming pile of shit AND STILL brought US back from the brink with strong fiscally conservative policy (getting US back to near Reagan's GDP of revenues (STILL not Carter/Clinton's 20% of GDP, but 17%+ is MUCH better than below 15% Dubya took US too)!

 

[Dad2three]

The truth is that Barack Obama added more than twice as much to the National Debt in one term than Reagan added to it in his two terms.

Correct...in terms of absolute dollars.

Reagan did triple our debt, but he also had an economy that rebounded to help level it out (and might have even eliminated it).

Clinton had the revenues because the economy was different (the dot com bubble helped). Clinton (with the help of Newt) did the right thing.

Obama does not have that same economy. It's been on the slide since Clinton. It's changing and evolving not to our favor.

Obama should know that and recognize he is more constrained that Reagan. Much of our spending is not discretionary. All the more reason for him to pull things in.

Maybe we need another recession. It's time people realize you can't spend more than you make.

NEWT? You mean the guy who got a $700+ billion tax cut THROUGH AFTER Clinton had HIS first surplus? Clinton had to veto it to get 3 more?

Let's think of it like this, 'JOB CREATORS' HAVEN'T HAD IT THIS GOOD IN BOTH THE RECORD LOW TAX 'BURDEN' OR THE RECORD AMOUNT OF THE PIE THE TAKE. HOW ABOUT GETTING THEM OFF CORP WELFARE AND BACK TO A FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE LEVEL OF TAXES??

3/4THS OF THE BUDGET IS MILITARY, SS OR MEDICARE.

To Establish Fiscal Discipline, President Clinton:

Enacted the 1993 Deficit Reduction Plan without a Single Republican Vote.


"The deficit has come down, and I give the Clinton Administration and President Clinton himself a lot of credit for that. [He] did something about it, fast. And I think we are seeing some benefits." — Paul Volcker, Federal Reserve Board Chairman (1979-1987), in Audacity, Fall 1994

"Clinton's 1993 budget cuts, which reduced projected red ink by more than $400 billion over five years, sparked a major drop in interest rates that helped boost investment in all the equipment and systems that brought forth the New Age economy of technological innovation and rising productivity."
— Business Week, May 19, 1997





Andrew Mellon had a few distinctly progressive ideas. Of particular note, he suggested taxing "earned" income from wages and salaries more lightly that "unearned" income from investments. As he argued:


The fairness of taxing more lightly income from wages, salaries or from investments is beyond question. In the first case, the income is uncertain and limited in duration; sickness or death destroys it and old age diminishes it; in the other, the source of income continues; the income may be disposed of during a man's life and it descends to his heirs.

Surely we can afford to make a distinction between the people whose only capital is their mental and physical energy and the people whose income is derived from investments. Such a distinction would mean much to millions of American workers and would be an added inspiration to the man who must provide a competence during his few productive years to care for himself and his family when his earnings capacity is at an end.



Tax History Project -- The Republican Roots of New Deal Tax Policy

 

[Dad2three]

No Bubba, I NEVER vote Repubs

ok, you just are a dumbass idiot, aka a libtard

Got it, you don't have ANYTHING to refute FACTS so instead you'll follow your leader, Druggie down to the gutter

PLEASE, PRETTY PLEASE tell me ONE policy conservatives have EVER been on the correct side of history in the US? Just one?

Lol nope not a chance. You libtards don't have any integrity. You idiots simply don't care about the truths and the facts.

Stop projecting Bubba

But thanks, I couldn't come up with even one policy conservatives were on the correct side of history either

Cons were the guys standing with King George in 1776 (Torry/Loyalists), They were the confederates, they were the isolationists during both WW's, they 'believed in' markets self correcting that gave US the GOP great depression, Ronnie's S&L and Dubya's subprime messes, they fought labor laws and labor rights that created the worlds largest middle class, said that SS and Medicare would ruin America, fought EVERY environmental or safety law that has been implemented for 100+ years!

Yeah, with a record like that, I'd high tale it too

What is your issue with all the lies?

So NO, YOU can't come up with ONE policy conservatives have EVER been on the correct side of history either

 

[Oldstyle]

It seems Republicans sit around all day signing pledges. When Reagan got into office, Republicans were so busy signing sessions pledges they missed part about Republicans borrowing more money, this time, tripling the debt. When Bush got into office and in their haste to sign even more pledges the Republicans borrowed more, this time doubling the debt. A law should be passed preventing Republicans from signing any more pledges, our economy might not be able to handle it.

Does your concern over the debt carry over to the Obama Administration...or is it reserved for Republicans only? Who piled more debt on the country...Ronald Reagan or Barack Obama? I'll give you a hint...it's not even CLOSE!

True, Reagan came into office as debt was going down as the share of GDP (and tax revenues were 20% of GDP), he fixed that FAST and ended up increasing US debt by 289%. Obama on the other hand came into office after Dubya had CREATED a recession and took US to below 15% of GDP in tax revenues, AND will only increase the debt by about 70% in his term (after Dubya doubled it, lol)

It's a simple question, Dad...

How much debt has Barack Obama created during his six years in office compared to Ronald Reagan's eight years in office? Your continued insistence on using the percentage of increase is laughably misleading and you know it.

 

[The Rabbi]

It seems Republicans sit around all day signing pledges. When Reagan got into office, Republicans were so busy signing sessions pledges they missed part about Republicans borrowing more money, this time, tripling the debt. When Bush got into office and in their haste to sign even more pledges the Republicans borrowed more, this time doubling the debt. A law should be passed preventing Republicans from signing any more pledges, our economy might not be able to handle it.

Does your concern over the debt carry over to the Obama Administration...or is it reserved for Republicans only? Who piled more debt on the country...Ronald Reagan or Barack Obama? I'll give you a hint...it's not even CLOSE!

True, Reagan came into office as debt was going down as the share of GDP (and tax revenues were 20% of GDP), he fixed that FAST and ended up increasing US debt by 289%. Obama on the other hand came into office after Dubya had CREATED a recession and took US to below 15% of GDP in tax revenues, AND will only increase the debt by about 70% in his term (after Dubya doubled it, lol)

It's a simple question, Dad...

How much debt has Barack Obama created during his six years in office compared to Ronald Reagan's eight years in office? Your continued insistence on using the percentage of increase is laughably misleading and you know it.

Well see, if you compare their respective debts to the GDP of Belize at the time and adjust for inflation in the Zimbabwe dollar then Reagan's debt is much bigger.
See!

 

[Oldstyle]

Ronald Reagan’s First Term – $656 billion increase

Ronald Reagan’s Second Term – $1.036 trillion increase

Barack Obama’s First Term – $5.806 trillion increase

 

[Oldstyle]

Only an idiot like Dad could take THOSE numbers and say that Reagan was a big spender and Obama wasn't!

 

[The Rabbi]

Ronald Reagan’s First Term – $656 billion increase

Ronald Reagan’s Second Term – $1.036 trillion increase

Barack Obama’s First Term – $5.806 trillion increase

Yes but but Congress sets spending!
Oh wait, that doesnt look so good either as Democrats controlled Congress under both Presidents.

 

[JoeB131]

How much debt has Barack Obama created during his six years in office compared to Ronald Reagan's eight years in office? Your continued insistence on using the percentage of increase is laughably misleading and you know it.

Well, no, it really isn't.

Especially since most of the debt that Obama accumulated was already baked into the pie by bush's tax cuts for rich people, wars and interest on the debt.

Oddly, since he ended the wars and revoked the tax breaks for the rich, the deficit has gone down.

 

[The Rabbi]

How much debt has Barack Obama created during his six years in office compared to Ronald Reagan's eight years in office? Your continued insistence on using the percentage of increase is laughably misleading and you know it.

Well, no, it really isn't.

Especially since most of the debt that Obama accumulated was already baked into the pie by bush's tax cuts for rich people, wars and interest on the debt.

Oddly, since he ended the wars and revoked the tax breaks for the rich, the deficit has gone down.

No actually ever since he raised taxes and the economy began recovering so revenues increased the deficit has gone down. And it has not gone down to where it was before the recession started.
Poor Joe. His ignorance is so deep he has to make up shit.