Republicans so worried about the debt, yet they cause most of it.

[Siete]

You truly don't have a clue about the real world, do you?

You've already made it clear you refuse to live in the real-world, from gaslighting actual economic numbers from non-partisan agencies, to adhering to bullshit trickle-down economic nonsense.

leave these morons to their own design and let them try and convince history theyre right.

 

[Siete]

So there's a magic formula that exists where tax cuts pay for themselves? Well, we've been seeking that formula for 37 years, isn't it possible such a formula doesn't actually exist?

/-----/
OK Sparky, now that I'm of my iPhone on on my PC I can find the charts I needed. Please note the tax revenue increases during the Reagan tax cut years:
Sooooooo how is it possible that revenues went up while the tax rates went down? Well Libtard? Explain it.
Who Really Pays Uncle Sam's Bills?

• FY 2005 - $2.15 trillion.
• FY 2004 - $1.88 trillion.
• FY 2003 - $1.72 trillion.
• FY 2002 - $1.85 trillion.
• FY 2001 - $1.99 trilion.
• FY 2000 - $2.03 trillion.
• FY 1999 - $1.82 trillion.
• FY 1998 - $1.72 trillion.
• FY 1997 - $1.58 trillion.
• FY 1996 - $1.45 trillion.
• FY 1995 - $1.35 trillion.
• FY 1994 - $1.26 trillion.
• FY 1993 - $1.15 trillion.
• FY 1992 - $1.09 trillion.
• FY 1991 - $1.05 trillion.
• FY 1990 - $1.03 trillion.
• FY 1989 - $991 billion.
• FY 1988 - $909 billion.
• FY 1987 - $854 billion.
• FY 1986 - $769 billion.
• FY 1985 - $734 billion.
• FY 1984 - $666 billion.
• FY 1983 - $601 billion.
• FY 1982 - $618 billion.
• FY 1981 - $599 billion.
• FY 1980 - $517 billion.

revenue increased under reagan -- prolly why he increased the debt 189% isnt it, you f'n dope.

/----/ Spending increased because Reagan had to rebuild the military after Jimma Carter slashed it to the bone. BTW Billy Clintoon and Obozo slashed the military as well. Why? Because DemocRATS hate the military.

43 increased the debt 101%

50 years of imperical data and stats say youre full of shit.

ergo;

youre full of shit

43 increased the debt 101%

I know!
$4.9 trillion, just awful!

Obama's $9.3 trillion, meh.......

ok, now quote the increase percentages big boy ..

ready set go ...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I know!
$4.9 trillion, just awful!
Obama's $9.3 trillion, meh.......

Obama's $9.3T = unemployment rate below 5%, 11 million net private sector jobs, record low uninsured rate, record low renewable energy prices, stock market above 20,000, record corporate profits, dead OBL.

Bush's $4.9T = unemployment rate doubling, 460,000 net private sector jobs lost, erasing of a surplus, worst economic growth since Great Depression, 2 unwinnable wars of occupation, mortgage bubble, doubling debt, four record deficits, 3,000 dead on 9/11, 4,000 dead troops, millions of wounded troops we will spend the next 60+ years paying for, OBL hanging out in Abbotabad.

When you stack up what each President's debt gave us, it becomes clear that this isn't a debt argument at all but rather an argument about results.

Obama's $9.3T =

.....slowest recovery since WWII.

Maybe he needed 100,000 more pages of regulations and another tax hike to really get us moving, eh?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

/-----/
OK Sparky, now that I'm of my iPhone on on my PC I can find the charts I needed. Please note the tax revenue increases during the Reagan tax cut years:
Sooooooo how is it possible that revenues went up while the tax rates went down? Well Libtard? Explain it.
Who Really Pays Uncle Sam's Bills?

• FY 2005 - $2.15 trillion.
• FY 2004 - $1.88 trillion.
• FY 2003 - $1.72 trillion.
• FY 2002 - $1.85 trillion.
• FY 2001 - $1.99 trilion.
• FY 2000 - $2.03 trillion.
• FY 1999 - $1.82 trillion.
• FY 1998 - $1.72 trillion.
• FY 1997 - $1.58 trillion.
• FY 1996 - $1.45 trillion.
• FY 1995 - $1.35 trillion.
• FY 1994 - $1.26 trillion.
• FY 1993 - $1.15 trillion.
• FY 1992 - $1.09 trillion.
• FY 1991 - $1.05 trillion.
• FY 1990 - $1.03 trillion.
• FY 1989 - $991 billion.
• FY 1988 - $909 billion.
• FY 1987 - $854 billion.
• FY 1986 - $769 billion.
• FY 1985 - $734 billion.
• FY 1984 - $666 billion.
• FY 1983 - $601 billion.
• FY 1982 - $618 billion.
• FY 1981 - $599 billion.
• FY 1980 - $517 billion.

revenue increased under reagan -- prolly why he increased the debt 189% isnt it, you f'n dope.

/----/ Spending increased because Reagan had to rebuild the military after Jimma Carter slashed it to the bone. BTW Billy Clintoon and Obozo slashed the military as well. Why? Because DemocRATS hate the military.

43 increased the debt 101%

50 years of imperical data and stats say youre full of shit.

ergo;

youre full of shit

43 increased the debt 101%

I know!
$4.9 trillion, just awful!

Obama's $9.3 trillion, meh.......

ok, now quote the increase percentages big boy ..

ready set go ...

Ahhhhhh, $9.3 trillion is less than $4.9 trillion, because percentages!

Moron.

 

[Siete]

I know!
$4.9 trillion, just awful!
Obama's $9.3 trillion, meh.......

Obama's $9.3T = unemployment rate below 5%, 11 million net private sector jobs, record low uninsured rate, record low renewable energy prices, stock market above 20,000, record corporate profits, dead OBL.

Bush's $4.9T = unemployment rate doubling, 460,000 net private sector jobs lost, erasing of a surplus, worst economic growth since Great Depression, 2 unwinnable wars of occupation, mortgage bubble, doubling debt, four record deficits, 3,000 dead on 9/11, 4,000 dead troops, millions of wounded troops we will spend the next 60+ years paying for, OBL hanging out in Abbotabad.

When you stack up what each President's debt gave us, it becomes clear that this isn't a debt argument at all but rather an argument about results.

Obama's $9.3T =

.....slowest recovery since WWII.

Maybe he needed 100,000 more pages of regulations and another tax hike to really get us moving, eh?

no? here ya go chickenshit .

Barack Obama - The national debt grew the most dollar-wise during President Obama's two terms. He added $7.917 trillion, a 68 percent increase, in seven years. This was the fifth-largest increase percentage-wise. Obama's budgets included the economic stimulus package. It added $787 billion by cutting taxes, extending unemployment benefits, and funding public works projects. The Obama tax cuts added $858 billion to the debt in two years.

George W. Bush - President Bush added the second-greatest amount to the debt, at $5.849 trillion. But this was the fourth-largest percentage increase out of all the presidents. Bush increased the debt 101 percent from where it started on September 30, 2001, at $5.8 trillion. That's the end of FY 2001, which was President Clinton's last budget. Bush responded to the 9/11 attacks by launching the War on Terror. That drove military spending to record levels of $600-$800 billion a year. It included the Iraq War, which cost $807.5 billion.


next supply side pissant.

 

[The Derp]

I said BUDGET SURPLUSES don't matter - a budget is nothing more than a planning document. It ain't what you plan, it's what you produce. A surplus in planning doesn't mean jack -- a surplus in performance is all that matters.

Which was achieved between 1998-2001 and why over that time, the Public Debt was reduced. As the OMB says, you can only reduce Public Debt if there's a budget surplus. So we're right back to square one on this, where you are telling me budget surpluses don't matter, even though they're how Clinton managed to reduce Public Debt from 1998-2001.

As for your childish little "go **** yourself" - to that I can only respond in two ways ... 1) you are amazingly immature, totally incapable of mounting a coherent and cogent counter-argument and, thus, are forced to resort to childish and vulgar responses in order to try to camouflage your ineptitude, or 2) at least I can reach ... don't you wish you could say the same?.

1) You have yet to actually make an argument that doesn't rely on a "take my word for it" approach. You submit your own conventional wisdom like they're fact. But your conventional wisdom is wrong.

2) If budget surpluses don't matter, then neither do budget deficits. And if deficits don't matter, we're just right back to where we were during Bush the Dumber.

What I'd like from you is some consistency in your position. Not constant redefinition and resetting of the parameters.

 

[The Derp]

Ahhhhhh, $9.3 trillion is less than $4.9 trillion, because percentages

Looking only at gross numbers absent of context is an action of a moron.

Also, we got stuff from Obama's debt...we got nothing from Bush's.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I know!
$4.9 trillion, just awful!
Obama's $9.3 trillion, meh.......

Obama's $9.3T = unemployment rate below 5%, 11 million net private sector jobs, record low uninsured rate, record low renewable energy prices, stock market above 20,000, record corporate profits, dead OBL.

Bush's $4.9T = unemployment rate doubling, 460,000 net private sector jobs lost, erasing of a surplus, worst economic growth since Great Depression, 2 unwinnable wars of occupation, mortgage bubble, doubling debt, four record deficits, 3,000 dead on 9/11, 4,000 dead troops, millions of wounded troops we will spend the next 60+ years paying for, OBL hanging out in Abbotabad.

When you stack up what each President's debt gave us, it becomes clear that this isn't a debt argument at all but rather an argument about results.

Obama's $9.3T =

.....slowest recovery since WWII.

Maybe he needed 100,000 more pages of regulations and another tax hike to really get us moving, eh?

no? here ya go chickenshit .

Barack Obama - The national debt grew the most dollar-wise during President Obama's two terms. He added $7.917 trillion, a 68 percent increase, in seven years. This was the fifth-largest increase percentage-wise. Obama's budgets included the economic stimulus package. It added $787 billion by cutting taxes, extending unemployment benefits, and funding public works projects. The Obama tax cuts added $858 billion to the debt in two years.

George W. Bush - President Bush added the second-greatest amount to the debt, at $5.849 trillion. But this was the fourth-largest percentage increase out of all the presidents. Bush increased the debt 101 percent from where it started on September 30, 2001, at $5.8 trillion. That's the end of FY 2001, which was President Clinton's last budget. Bush responded to the 9/11 attacks by launching the War on Terror. That drove military spending to record levels of $600-$800 billion a year. It included the Iraq War, which cost $807.5 billion.


next supply side pissant.

Barack Obama - The national debt grew the most dollar-wise during President Obama's two terms

And since we pay debt back in dollars, his $9.3 trillion was much worse than Bush's $4.9 trillion.

It added $787 billion by cutting taxes, extending unemployment benefits, and funding public works projects.

Obama cut taxes to stimulate the economy? Shhhhhh.....don't tell the idiot liberals.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Ahhhhhh, $9.3 trillion is less than $4.9 trillion, because percentages

Looking only at gross numbers absent of context is an action of a moron.

Also, we got stuff from Obama's debt...we got nothing from Bush's.

Also, we got stuff from Obama's debt...

Exactly! A slow, weak recovery.
Libya, Syria and a flood of Muslims wreaking havoc across Europe.

 

[Spare_change]

I said BUDGET SURPLUSES don't matter - a budget is nothing more than a planning document. It ain't what you plan, it's what you produce. A surplus in planning doesn't mean jack -- a surplus in performance is all that matters.

Which was achieved between 1998-2001 and why over that time, the Public Debt was reduced. As the OMB says, you can only reduce Public Debt if there's a budget surplus. So we're right back to square one on this, where you are telling me budget surpluses don't matter, even though they're how Clinton managed to reduce Public Debt from 1998-2001.

As for your childish little "go **** yourself" - to that I can only respond in two ways ... 1) you are amazingly immature, totally incapable of mounting a coherent and cogent counter-argument and, thus, are forced to resort to childish and vulgar responses in order to try to camouflage your ineptitude, or 2) at least I can reach ... don't you wish you could say the same?.

1) You have yet to actually make an argument that doesn't rely on a "take my word for it" approach. You submit your own conventional wisdom like they're fact. But your conventional wisdom is wrong.

2) If budget surpluses don't matter, then neither do budget deficits. And if deficits don't matter, we're just right back to where we were during Bush the Dumber.

What I'd like from you is some consistency in your position. Not constant redefinition and resetting of the parameters.

Perhaps you can give me a link to that ridiculously inane statement by the OMB? Though - frankly - having seen their work in the past, it wouldn't surprise me.

1) I made the argument - provided the facts - you didn't even read them - and you sure as hell can't refute them. So, instead you chose to ignore them.

2) You're right -- neither budget "surpluses" or budget "deficits" matter. That's your plan -- though why the **** you would plan to fail (deficit) eludes me ---- it's your performance that matters (or lack of it).

 

[The Derp]

Obama's $9.3T =.....slowest recovery since WWII.

1. Worst economic collapse since before WWII (thanks, Bush and Conservatives for destroying the economy again)
2. Conservative Congress that refused to do anything to recover the economy for purely racial and political reasons

Maybe he needed 100,000 more pages of regulations and another tax hike to really get us moving, eh?

The economy was moving during Obama. Maybe you didn't feel it because you lack the skills necessary to succeed in the new economy. So you sit there on your fat ass and complain about how the economy is leaving you behind. The only reason it does so is because of the choice you made to not change with the economy.

Grow the **** up. Stop being lazy. Get over yourself.

 

[The Derp]

Exactly! A slow, weak recovery.

Only because it was the second worst financial collapse in modern history. Second only to the other economic collapse caused by right-wing policies while a right-wing MBA sat in the White House.

Despite that:

• 11,000,000 net private sector jobs (Conservatives lost net 460,000 during Bush)
• Stock market above 20,000 (Conservatives left a market at 6,500 and falling)
• Record corporate profits (Achieved every single year Obama was President)
• Record low uninsured rate (Conservatives left a record high uninsured rate)
• Record low renewable energy costs (Conservatives never once reduced energy costs)
• Dead Osama bin Laden (Conservatives let OBL go from Tora Bora then gave up the hunt in 2006)
• Deficit reduced by 2/3 (Conservatives left a record high deficit behind)

Libya, Syria and a flood of Muslims wreaking havoc across Europe.

All thanks to your shit Bush Doctrine policy of invading Iraq and destabilizing the region. Had you shitheads not invaded Iraq in 2003, there wouldn't have been all the chaos in the Middle East today.

Libya - you all supported Khaddafi, remember?
Syria - Civil War caused by drought, exacerbated by all the former Ba'athists who were kicked out of Iraq thanks to the Shi'ite Prime Minister you Conservatives installed who then ethnically cleansed Baghdad. Syria is entirely, 100% YOUR ******* FAULT.

As for your islamophobia, Europe is most definitely not in a state of havoc, as anyone who has visited there can tell you. And Muslims there have killed as many people as right-wing Christians have here. So not sure what you're trying to do, but it's undermined by your own ******* people murdering here.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Obama's $9.3T =.....slowest recovery since WWII.

1. Worst economic collapse since before WWII (thanks, Bush and Conservatives for destroying the economy again)
2. Conservative Congress that refused to do anything to recover the economy for purely racial and political reasons

Maybe he needed 100,000 more pages of regulations and another tax hike to really get us moving, eh?

The economy was moving during Obama. Maybe you didn't feel it because you lack the skills necessary to succeed in the new economy. So you sit there on your fat ass and complain about how the economy is leaving you behind. The only reason it does so is because of the choice you made to not change with the economy.

Grow the **** up. Stop being lazy. Get over yourself.

Worst economic collapse since before WWII

Yup.

(thanks, Bush and Conservatives for destroying the economy again)

If we honestly assigned blame for the government contribution to the bubble, liberals deserve much, much more of the blame than conservatives.

The economy was moving during Obama.

Sure. What was his average economic growth compared to Bush?

So you sit there on your fat ass and complain about how the economy is leaving you behind.

My net worth has never been higher.

 

[The Derp]

Perhaps you can give me a link to that ridiculously inane statement by the OMB? Though - frankly - having seen their work in the past, it wouldn't surprise me..

The OMB is a non-partisan government agency. If I do post the link to the OMB page explicitly saying that budget surpluses are used to reduce Public Debt, will you admit you're wrong, full of shit, and that all this time you've wasted has been in service of your ego and nothing more?

 

[The Derp]

1) I made the argument - provided the facts - you didn't even read them - and you sure as hell can't refute them. So, instead you chose to ignore them.

NO! Your conventional wisdom is not fact. You saying something doesn't make it so. You have no authority to say it, you have no credibility to say it, you have no qualification to say it. Your personal opinion means as much as my cat's. And he has the good sense to clean his butt after he shits, whereas you....jury's out on that one.

2) You're right -- neither budget "surpluses" or budget "deficits" matter. That's your plan -- though why the **** you would plan to fail (deficit) eludes me ---- it's your performance that matters (or lack of it).

So if deficits don't matter, why do you care so much about the debt?

A deficit doesn't mean failure. What makes you think it does? Who taught you that? Or are you applying what you think is the standard for individuals to that of the government? Why would you do that? INdividuals die, governments don't. The risk in lending to individuals is the risk they will never pay back the loan because they could die and leave the debts uncollected. No such risk exists for the government because it isn't a person that "dies", and we issue bonds every year which means the debt will not, and cannot all be paid off at one time.

So why are you so consumed with federal debt? Tell me what you think will ultimately happen, and I'll be happy to tell you how you're wrong.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Exactly! A slow, weak recovery.

Only because it was the second worst financial collapse in modern history. Second only to the other economic collapse caused by right-wing policies while a right-wing MBA sat in the White House.

Despite that:

• 11,000,000 net private sector jobs (Conservatives lost net 460,000 during Bush)
• Stock market above 20,000 (Conservatives left a market at 6,500 and falling)
• Record corporate profits (Achieved every single year Obama was President)
• Record low uninsured rate (Conservatives left a record high uninsured rate)
• Record low renewable energy costs (Conservatives never once reduced energy costs)
• Dead Osama bin Laden (Conservatives let OBL go from Tora Bora then gave up the hunt in 2006)
• Deficit reduced by 2/3 (Conservatives left a record high deficit behind)

Libya, Syria and a flood of Muslims wreaking havoc across Europe.

All thanks to your shit Bush Doctrine policy of invading Iraq and destabilizing the region. Had you shitheads not invaded Iraq in 2003, there wouldn't have been all the chaos in the Middle East today.

Libya - you all supported Khaddafi, remember?
Syria - Civil War caused by drought, exacerbated by all the former Ba'athists who were kicked out of Iraq thanks to the Shi'ite Prime Minister you Conservatives installed who then ethnically cleansed Baghdad. Syria is entirely, 100% YOUR ******* FAULT.

As for your islamophobia, Europe is most definitely not in a state of havoc, as anyone who has visited there can tell you. And Muslims there have killed as many people as right-wing Christians have here. So not sure what you're trying to do, but it's undermined by your own ******* people murdering here.

11,000,000 net private sector jobs

That's only $845,455 in added debt for each additional job.

All thanks to your shit Bush Doctrine policy of invading Iraq and destabilizing the region.

Bush was gone when Obama and Hillary destabilized Libya and Syria.
And Bush was gone when Obama made Iraq much worse.

Libya - you all supported Khaddafi, remember?

Libya is all better now that Obama and Hillary so skillfully removed him, eh?

As for your islamophobia

Why would I be afraid of Islam?
Is it their mistreatment of women?
Their hobby of throwing homos off buildings?
Their disturbing habit of attacking Christians and Jews?

And Muslims there have killed as many people as right-wing Christians have here.

How many Christians here versus how many Muslims there?

 

[The Derp]

Yup..

So then if it was the worse economic collapse, why wouldn't it also be the worst recovery?

If we honestly assigned blame for the government contribution to the bubble, liberals deserve much, much more of the blame than conservatives.

No they don't. Not at all. There was no bubble until you all made one in 2004 by reducing lending standards for subprime loans. And you made that bubble for one reason and one reason only; to cover for the fact that the tax cuts did not deliver on any of the promises made of them. From the time they were passed to the time the subprime bubble started, Bush lost net 841,000 private sector jobs in just 3-4 years. Because the economy is the #1 issue with voters any election cycle, Bush and the Conservatives knew that a floundering economy would cost them re-election. So they hastily and sloppily cobbled together a subprime bubble beginning in 2004 to give the illusion the economy was growing as a result of the tax cuts when it was really growing because of debt.

Bush even tied his tax cuts to the housing market while campaigning in 2004. From Fox News, March 26th 2004:

Touting his tax cuts as the economy's savior — and pointing to the strong housing market as proof — Bush said "more people own their own home now than ever." More than 50 percent of minorities owned their own homes in the last three months of 2003 for the first time ever, the president said.​

So Bush said the growth in the housing market was due to his tax cuts. Which means the subsequent collapse of the housing market was also due to his tax cuts. Hence, Bush's Tax Cuts are to blame for the mortgage bubble just as his shit Conservative policies of deregulation were too.

If you're going to lay the blame on liberals (who weren't even in power from 2003-2007, the same years the bubble appeared and popped), then you have to give them credit for the economic gains from that bubble. But I'm sure you're not willing to do that because then what do you have to show for 8 years of trickle-down hackneyed Reaganomics? Nothing.

Sure. What was his average economic growth compared to Bush?

The same - 1.76%. Only difference is Obama's economy wasn't fueled by debt, as HH-debt-to-GDP declined (after skyrocketing during Bush), and Obama created jobs whereas Bush and the Conservatives lost jobs.

My net worth has never been higher.

Don't believe you. Not something you can prove. Relying on the "take my word for it" approach to debate. Bullshit cowardice.

 

[Siete]

Exactly! A slow, weak recovery.

Only because it was the second worst financial collapse in modern history. Second only to the other economic collapse caused by right-wing policies while a right-wing MBA sat in the White House.

Despite that:

• 11,000,000 net private sector jobs (Conservatives lost net 460,000 during Bush)
• Stock market above 20,000 (Conservatives left a market at 6,500 and falling)
• Record corporate profits (Achieved every single year Obama was President)
• Record low uninsured rate (Conservatives left a record high uninsured rate)
• Record low renewable energy costs (Conservatives never once reduced energy costs)
• Dead Osama bin Laden (Conservatives let OBL go from Tora Bora then gave up the hunt in 2006)
• Deficit reduced by 2/3 (Conservatives left a record high deficit behind)

Libya, Syria and a flood of Muslims wreaking havoc across Europe.

All thanks to your shit Bush Doctrine policy of invading Iraq and destabilizing the region. Had you shitheads not invaded Iraq in 2003, there wouldn't have been all the chaos in the Middle East today.

Libya - you all supported Khaddafi, remember?
Syria - Civil War caused by drought, exacerbated by all the former Ba'athists who were kicked out of Iraq thanks to the Shi'ite Prime Minister you Conservatives installed who then ethnically cleansed Baghdad. Syria is entirely, 100% YOUR ******* FAULT.

As for your islamophobia, Europe is most definitely not in a state of havoc, as anyone who has visited there can tell you. And Muslims there have killed as many people as right-wing Christians have here. So not sure what you're trying to do, but it's undermined by your own ******* people murdering here.

11,000,000 net private sector jobs

That's only $845,455 in added debt for each additional job.

All thanks to your shit Bush Doctrine policy of invading Iraq and destabilizing the region.

Bush was gone when Obama and Hillary destabilized Libya and Syria.
And Bush was gone when Obama made Iraq much worse.

Libya - you all supported Khaddafi, remember?

Libya is all better now that Obama and Hillary so skillfully removed him, eh?

As for your islamophobia

Why would I be afraid of Islam?
Is it their mistreatment of women?
Their hobby of throwing homos off buildings?
Their disturbing habit of attacking Christians and Jews?

And Muslims there have killed as many people as right-wing Christians have here.

How many Christians here versus how many Muslims there?

STFU.. stop moving the goal post.

suck this ..

Comparing the Social Security Shortfall and the Cost of the Bush Tax Cuts


cant pay for SS, lets pay twice as much for tax cuts.

GFYM

(go figure you moron)

 

[Cellblock2429]

Exactly! A slow, weak recovery.

Only because it was the second worst financial collapse in modern history. Second only to the other economic collapse caused by right-wing policies while a right-wing MBA sat in the White House.

Despite that:

• 11,000,000 net private sector jobs (Conservatives lost net 460,000 during Bush)
• Stock market above 20,000 (Conservatives left a market at 6,500 and falling)
• Record corporate profits (Achieved every single year Obama was President)
• Record low uninsured rate (Conservatives left a record high uninsured rate)
• Record low renewable energy costs (Conservatives never once reduced energy costs)
• Dead Osama bin Laden (Conservatives let OBL go from Tora Bora then gave up the hunt in 2006)
• Deficit reduced by 2/3 (Conservatives left a record high deficit behind)

Libya, Syria and a flood of Muslims wreaking havoc across Europe.

All thanks to your shit Bush Doctrine policy of invading Iraq and destabilizing the region. Had you shitheads not invaded Iraq in 2003, there wouldn't have been all the chaos in the Middle East today.

Libya - you all supported Khaddafi, remember?
Syria - Civil War caused by drought, exacerbated by all the former Ba'athists who were kicked out of Iraq thanks to the Shi'ite Prime Minister you Conservatives installed who then ethnically cleansed Baghdad. Syria is entirely, 100% YOUR ******* FAULT.

As for your islamophobia, Europe is most definitely not in a state of havoc, as anyone who has visited there can tell you. And Muslims there have killed as many people as right-wing Christians have here. So not sure what you're trying to do, but it's undermined by your own ******* people murdering here.

11,000,000 net private sector jobs

That's only $845,455 in added debt for each additional job.

All thanks to your shit Bush Doctrine policy of invading Iraq and destabilizing the region.

Bush was gone when Obama and Hillary destabilized Libya and Syria.
And Bush was gone when Obama made Iraq much worse.

Libya - you all supported Khaddafi, remember?

Libya is all better now that Obama and Hillary so skillfully removed him, eh?

As for your islamophobia

Why would I be afraid of Islam?
Is it their mistreatment of women?
Their hobby of throwing homos off buildings?
Their disturbing habit of attacking Christians and Jews?

And Muslims there have killed as many people as right-wing Christians have here.

How many Christians here versus how many Muslims there?

STFU.. stop moving the goal post.

suck this ..

Comparing the Social Security Shortfall and the Cost of the Bush Tax Cuts


cant pay for SS, lets pay twice as much for tax cuts.

GFYM

/----/ Did you bother to read the article or did you stop at the headline?
"Let’s be clear: as we note in our analysis of the trustees’ report, letting the tax cuts expire would not “pay for” fixing Social Security, which has different sources of revenues; conversely, letting them continue would not directly harm Social Security. "

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yup..

So then if it was the worse economic collapse, why wouldn't it also be the worst recovery?

If we honestly assigned blame for the government contribution to the bubble, liberals deserve much, much more of the blame than conservatives.

No they don't. Not at all. There was no bubble until you all made one in 2004 by reducing lending standards for subprime loans. And you made that bubble for one reason and one reason only; to cover for the fact that the tax cuts did not deliver on any of the promises made of them. From the time they were passed to the time the subprime bubble started, Bush lost net 841,000 private sector jobs in just 3-4 years. Because the economy is the #1 issue with voters any election cycle, Bush and the Conservatives knew that a floundering economy would cost them re-election. So they hastily and sloppily cobbled together a subprime bubble beginning in 2004 to give the illusion the economy was growing as a result of the tax cuts when it was really growing because of debt.

Bush even tied his tax cuts to the housing market while campaigning in 2004. From Fox News, March 26th 2004:

Touting his tax cuts as the economy's savior — and pointing to the strong housing market as proof — Bush said "more people own their own home now than ever." More than 50 percent of minorities owned their own homes in the last three months of 2003 for the first time ever, the president said.​

So Bush said the growth in the housing market was due to his tax cuts. Which means the subsequent collapse of the housing market was also due to his tax cuts. Hence, Bush's Tax Cuts are to blame for the mortgage bubble just as his shit Conservative policies of deregulation were too.

If you're going to lay the blame on liberals (who weren't even in power from 2003-2007, the same years the bubble appeared and popped), then you have to give them credit for the economic gains from that bubble. But I'm sure you're not willing to do that because then what do you have to show for 8 years of trickle-down hackneyed Reaganomics? Nothing.

Sure. What was his average economic growth compared to Bush?

The same - 1.76%. Only difference is Obama's economy wasn't fueled by debt, as HH-debt-to-GDP declined (after skyrocketing during Bush), and Obama created jobs whereas Bush and the Conservatives lost jobs.

My net worth has never been higher.

Don't believe you. Not something you can prove. Relying on the "take my word for it" approach to debate. Bullshit cowardice.

So then if it was the worse economic collapse, why wouldn't it also be the worst recovery?

Obama's bad economic policies made it the worst recovery.

No they don't. Not at all.

Which conservatives were pushing for government coercion of lending to high risk borrowers?
I can think of plenty of liberals who did. Who still do.

There was no bubble until you all made one in 2004

Baloney.

by reducing lending standards for subprime loans.

Which conservatives were pushing for weakened standards?
Obama was pushing for that before he even held elective office.

If you're going to lay the blame on liberals (who weren't even in power from 2003-2007, the same years the bubble appeared and popped)

Bush also to blame for the bubbles across the world? I knew he was powerful, but wow!

The same - 1.76%. Only difference is Obama's economy wasn't fueled by debt

Except for his added $9.3 trillion in new debt. DERP!

Don't believe you.

Don't give a shit.

Not something you can prove.

Like your unprovable claims about me? LOL!