Screw "Tax The Poor" Capitalism.

[danielpalos]

Not sure why you believe that. It is about, equal protection of the law, for the "poor".

To keep them poor you mean. That is what you are accomplishing, and dependence on the government. While the capital class continues to consolidate wealth and political power.

You simply don't understand the social dilemma. It is about solving for simple poverty on an at-will basis, to abolish forms of "wage slavery".

I don't understand how unemployment compensation on an at-will basis works to abolish wage exploitation. Can you explain it?

Sure. It is about solving simple poverty to improve the efficiency of our economy; Because, capital Must circulate to promote the general prosperity and the general welfare, under Any form of Capitalism.

Employment is at-will in our at-will employment States. Our current regime is unjust, oppressive, and unnecessary and improper, because it denies and disparages the least wealthy and most vulnerable, equal protection of the law.

Labor should be able to quit their day job if they simply no longer have any will to work there, and collect unemployment compensation.

Capitalists should have to "compete" for labor ceteris paribus, not indulge a "work or die" ethic, from the fantastical element of the right wing; that simply happens to be in favor of their bottom line. Capital coincidence or capital conspiracy?

No what the biggest thing that would help labor? Get rid of Health care tied to employment, you'd see a boom like the US had post WW2 if we had single payer UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE like every other developed nation!

Solving simple poverty and ensuring capital circulates, does that.

 

[danielpalos]

It's absolutely amazing how far these right wingers go to protect the Gangster capitalism practiced today, then support the biggest conman (El Cheeto) since PT Barnum *shaking head*

Bad Cop, Good Cop Scenario

It's amazing how far the Preppy Progressives will go to pretend they're anything but set-up men, agents provocateurs, for their Right Wing fraternity brothers. Calling us "deplorables" and then saying they hate the rich tricks us into loving the rich. It's amazing that the majority has been so mind-numbed that they can't see through this charade.

Progressives? Oh right the guys ALWAYS on the right side of history


Care to point to the last time CONservatives were on the right side of history?


How about ONE GOP policy the past 50 years that worked as promised?

One of the Dilliest Dills

If you think what the New Age snobs have brought us these last 50 years is progress, your mind has been pickled by their overwhelming self-glorifying propaganda.

Nixon gave us a War on Drugs instead of a Mission to Mars. We could have had a Mars Observatory there, by now, right wingers.

 

[JonKoch]

Your dodge noted Bubs

HINT POLICY MATTERS, INHERITING OTHER'S POLICY (LIKE RONNIE'S/DUBYA'S) DOESN'T FALL ON THE NEXT GUY.

But yes Dubya was left 20% of GDP in spending WITH 20% in revenues and Obama was left 14.6% of GDP in revenues and almost 24% spending, nutjobs like you are the ones who were pushing austerity

OK so everyone else is at fault but Obama and his policies that nearly doubled the debt in 8 years

Weird you continue to say it's Obama's policies yet can't point to a single thing that created the policies that created the debt like I did showing Dubya took Clinton's 20% of GDP in revenues AND spending and dropped it to 14.6% and blew up spending to almost 24%??? Almost like you're a typical right winger who doesn't understand what drives policies???

Poor Obama.
President for 8 years without a single policy.

At least none that right wingers can point to that caused the GOP debt

The Current ReaganBush Debt is:

$18,636,016,016,738.40


which means that in a total of 20 years, these three presidents have led to the creation of
93.85% of the entire national debt
ReaganBushDebt.org

Obama whined for 6 years about the Republican House stopping his desired spending increases, and yet cretins like you hold him blameless for $9.3 trillion.

Unbelievable!

Unbelievable is correct since YOU can't point to POLICIES Obama had that created the debt???

Weird Bubba

 

[Dale Smith]

Trump, as I expected, is talking giving companies tax breaks to create jobs here. Well if you give them tax breaks, then guess who pays the taxes. The Poor! Slavery in action. The more that things change, the more they stay the same.

Here is the way things work in the U.S. Capitalism-Corporations = Society = Government = AMERICA! We are "supposed" to live in a democracy. But the business world rules your lives. How many people in business did you vote for. Do you vote for business or government. People in business who aren't elected shouldn't be directing how people live. That is the government's job.

I say to hell with bribing companies with tax breaks or outright corporate welfare to create jobs. If the private sector can't create jobs, I say that the government should just cut away that that dead weight and start doing the job themselves. Also, want to see something interesting? Go to the internet and look up any year in the last 50 years and see the number of companies in whatever year paid no taxes at all.

I thought we were formed as a republic??? Did you know that composite government is the majority shareholder of every Fortune 500 corporation and subsidiary? This corporate government takes in more from their investments than what is even required to run this corporate entity. They simply give us their credit card bill and keep their profits in offshore accounts which is why Puerto Rico will never be a state...neither will the Cayman Islands. Learn to read a CAFR (Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. They have been skimming off the top since the Bretton Woods agreement and investing while pleading empty pockets. Not one dime of your income tax goes to fund this corporate entity...it goes to pay interest to the foreign owned central bank that extends credit that they create from the stroke of a pen.

That false. Governments don't own stock in Fortune 500 Companies. They got some stocks in the auto companies during the bailout, but those stocks were sold when the companies were profitable again.



Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Composite "gubermint" is the biggest corporation of them all but because of their lies and deciet, I say they are the biggest crime syndicate in the country. Composite "gubermint" is the majority shareholder in every Fortune 500 compnay and using proxy voters, they steer the corporations towards making the most profit possible and if it means moving their operations overseas, so be it. All towns and cities are subsidiaries of the counties, counties are subsidiaries of the states and all the states are subsidiaries of USA.INC whose corporate headquarters are in the District of Columbia.....what is it a district of? Do you know how many city states there are and how they tie in together? Why are there three stars on the flag of the District of Columbia flag? All three of these city states have an obelisk? So much that you do not gave the slightest clue about.

There are two sets of books, the budget and the CAFR (Comprehensive Annual Financial Report) the budget is readily available but the CAFR? Not so much and unless you know how to read one, you will not understand the hard assets they are holding. They have been skimming off the top since the Bretton Woods agreement and through their investments have accumulated tremendous amount of wealth via stocks, cash and hard assets. They own amusement parks, golf courses, race tracks, etc,etc and then give US their credit card bill. You have NO idea on how badly you have been played.

Now, who owns USA.INC that provided the 19 enumerated services per their corporate charter constitution? The last bank that took it into receivership was the International Monetary Fund in 1950 when once again USA.INC was bankrupted.......17 years after they did in 1933 and the foreign owned Federal Reserve bank took it into receivership and required that every one with REAL money (gold) had to turn it in under penalty of a huge fine and five years in jail in exchange for federal reserve debt notes. So much that you do not know because you haven't invested the kind of time I have.

 

[Tehon]

Labor should be able to quit their day job if they simply no longer have any will to work there, and collect unemployment compensation.

Indefinitely?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

OK so everyone else is at fault but Obama and his policies that nearly doubled the debt in 8 years

Weird you continue to say it's Obama's policies yet can't point to a single thing that created the policies that created the debt like I did showing Dubya took Clinton's 20% of GDP in revenues AND spending and dropped it to 14.6% and blew up spending to almost 24%??? Almost like you're a typical right winger who doesn't understand what drives policies???

Poor Obama.
President for 8 years without a single policy.

At least none that right wingers can point to that caused the GOP debt

The Current ReaganBush Debt is:

$18,636,016,016,738.40


which means that in a total of 20 years, these three presidents have led to the creation of
93.85% of the entire national debt
ReaganBushDebt.org

Obama whined for 6 years about the Republican House stopping his desired spending increases, and yet cretins like you hold him blameless for $9.3 trillion.

Unbelievable!

Unbelievable is correct since YOU can't point to POLICIES Obama had that created the debt???

Weird Bubba

He spent like a mutha fucka.....added moronic regulations.
Tried his hardest to cripple our economy.
Would have over-spent and over-regulated, even more, if the voters hadn't spanked him in 2010.
We're resilient. We outlasted him.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Trump, as I expected, is talking giving companies tax breaks to create jobs here. Well if you give them tax breaks, then guess who pays the taxes. The Poor! Slavery in action. The more that things change, the more they stay the same.

Here is the way things work in the U.S. Capitalism-Corporations = Society = Government = AMERICA! We are "supposed" to live in a democracy. But the business world rules your lives. How many people in business did you vote for. Do you vote for business or government. People in business who aren't elected shouldn't be directing how people live. That is the government's job.

I say to hell with bribing companies with tax breaks or outright corporate welfare to create jobs. If the private sector can't create jobs, I say that the government should just cut away that that dead weight and start doing the job themselves. Also, want to see something interesting? Go to the internet and look up any year in the last 50 years and see the number of companies in whatever year paid no taxes at all.

I thought we were formed as a republic??? Did you know that composite government is the majority shareholder of every Fortune 500 corporation and subsidiary? This corporate government takes in more from their investments than what is even required to run this corporate entity. They simply give us their credit card bill and keep their profits in offshore accounts which is why Puerto Rico will never be a state...neither will the Cayman Islands. Learn to read a CAFR (Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. They have been skimming off the top since the Bretton Woods agreement and investing while pleading empty pockets. Not one dime of your income tax goes to fund this corporate entity...it goes to pay interest to the foreign owned central bank that extends credit that they create from the stroke of a pen.

That false. Governments don't own stock in Fortune 500 Companies. They got some stocks in the auto companies during the bailout, but those stocks were sold when the companies were profitable again.



Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Composite "gubermint" is the biggest corporation of them all but because of their lies and deciet, I say they are the biggest crime syndicate in the country. Composite "gubermint" is the majority shareholder in every Fortune 500 compnay and using proxy voters, they steer the corporations towards making the most profit possible and if it means moving their operations overseas, so be it. All towns and cities are subsidiaries of the counties, counties are subsidiaries of the states and all the states are subsidiaries of USA.INC whose corporate headquarters are in the District of Columbia.....what is it a district of? Do you know how many city states there are and how they tie in together? Why are there three stars on the flag of the District of Columbia flag? All three of these city states have an obelisk? So much that you do not gave the slightest clue about.

There are two sets of books, the budget and the CAFR (Comprehensive Annual Financial Report) the budget is readily available but the CAFR? Not so much and unless you know how to read one, you will not understand the hard assets they are holding. They have been skimming off the top since the Bretton Woods agreement and through their investments have accumulated tremendous amount of wealth via stocks, cash and hard assets. They own amusement parks, golf courses, race tracks, etc,etc and then give US their credit card bill. You have NO idea on how badly you have been played.

Now, who owns USA.INC that provided the 19 enumerated services per their corporate charter constitution? The last bank that took it into receivership was the International Monetary Fund in 1950 when once again USA.INC was bankrupted.......17 years after they did in 1933 and the foreign owned Federal Reserve bank took it into receivership and required that every one with REAL money (gold) had to turn it in under penalty of a huge fine and five years in jail in exchange for federal reserve debt notes. So much that you do not know because you haven't invested the kind of time I have.

Composite "gubermint" is the majority shareholder in every Fortune 500 company

Bullshit.
Show your math and I'll point out your error.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Labor should be able to quit their day job if they simply no longer have any will to work there, and collect unemployment compensation.

Indefinitely?

He's a stoner, still living in the basement.
He wants to be paid for sitting on his ass and smoking weed.

 

[JonKoch]

Weird you continue to say it's Obama's policies yet can't point to a single thing that created the policies that created the debt like I did showing Dubya took Clinton's 20% of GDP in revenues AND spending and dropped it to 14.6% and blew up spending to almost 24%??? Almost like you're a typical right winger who doesn't understand what drives policies???

Poor Obama.
President for 8 years without a single policy.

At least none that right wingers can point to that caused the GOP debt

The Current ReaganBush Debt is:

$18,636,016,016,738.40


which means that in a total of 20 years, these three presidents have led to the creation of
93.85% of the entire national debt
ReaganBushDebt.org

Obama whined for 6 years about the Republican House stopping his desired spending increases, and yet cretins like you hold him blameless for $9.3 trillion.

Unbelievable!

Unbelievable is correct since YOU can't point to POLICIES Obama had that created the debt???

Weird Bubba

He spent like a mutha fucka.....added moronic regulations.
Tried his hardest to cripple our economy.
Would have over-spent and over-regulated, even more, if the voters hadn't spanked him in 2010.
We're resilient. We outlasted him.

Your inability to point to specific laws and policies noted Bubs

May 22, 2012

Obama spending binge never happened

Government outlays rising at slowest pace since 1950s
Obama spending binge never happened


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.

....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.

WAPO:

Charts: What if Obama spent like Reagan?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Poor Obama.
President for 8 years without a single policy.

At least none that right wingers can point to that caused the GOP debt

The Current ReaganBush Debt is:

$18,636,016,016,738.40


which means that in a total of 20 years, these three presidents have led to the creation of
93.85% of the entire national debt
ReaganBushDebt.org

Obama whined for 6 years about the Republican House stopping his desired spending increases, and yet cretins like you hold him blameless for $9.3 trillion.

Unbelievable!

Unbelievable is correct since YOU can't point to POLICIES Obama had that created the debt???

Weird Bubba

He spent like a mutha fucka.....added moronic regulations.
Tried his hardest to cripple our economy.
Would have over-spent and over-regulated, even more, if the voters hadn't spanked him in 2010.
We're resilient. We outlasted him.

Your inability to point to specific laws and policies noted Bubs

May 22, 2012

Obama spending binge never happened

Government outlays rising at slowest pace since 1950s
Obama spending binge never happened


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.

....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.
Charts: What if Obama spent like Reagan?

Obama spending binge never happened

Sure it did. It's right there in 2009.
The Treasury spent at least $560 billion on TARP by October 2009, plus all the "stimulus" spending.
Subtract out the TARP spending in 2008/2009, and then add it back into the spending in 2010 and 2011, as it was repaid, to get a truer look at Obama's spending binge.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Poor Obama.
President for 8 years without a single policy.

At least none that right wingers can point to that caused the GOP debt

The Current ReaganBush Debt is:

$18,636,016,016,738.40


which means that in a total of 20 years, these three presidents have led to the creation of
93.85% of the entire national debt
ReaganBushDebt.org

Obama whined for 6 years about the Republican House stopping his desired spending increases, and yet cretins like you hold him blameless for $9.3 trillion.

Unbelievable!

Unbelievable is correct since YOU can't point to POLICIES Obama had that created the debt???

Weird Bubba

He spent like a mutha fucka.....added moronic regulations.
Tried his hardest to cripple our economy.
Would have over-spent and over-regulated, even more, if the voters hadn't spanked him in 2010.
We're resilient. We outlasted him.

Your inability to point to specific laws and policies noted Bubs

May 22, 2012

Obama spending binge never happened

Government outlays rising at slowest pace since 1950s
Obama spending binge never happened


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.

....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.

WAPO:

Charts: What if Obama spent like Reagan?

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.


Yeah, thanks for being so thrifty, Obama. LOL!

 

[JonKoch]

At least none that right wingers can point to that caused the GOP debt

The Current ReaganBush Debt is:

$18,636,016,016,738.40


which means that in a total of 20 years, these three presidents have led to the creation of
93.85% of the entire national debt
ReaganBushDebt.org

Obama whined for 6 years about the Republican House stopping his desired spending increases, and yet cretins like you hold him blameless for $9.3 trillion.

Unbelievable!

Unbelievable is correct since YOU can't point to POLICIES Obama had that created the debt???

Weird Bubba

He spent like a mutha fucka.....added moronic regulations.
Tried his hardest to cripple our economy.
Would have over-spent and over-regulated, even more, if the voters hadn't spanked him in 2010.
We're resilient. We outlasted him.

Your inability to point to specific laws and policies noted Bubs

May 22, 2012

Obama spending binge never happened

Government outlays rising at slowest pace since 1950s
Obama spending binge never happened


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.

....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.
Charts: What if Obama spent like Reagan?

Obama spending binge never happened

Sure it did. It's right there in 2009.
The Treasury spent at least $560 billion on TARP by October 2009, plus all the "stimulus" spending.
Subtract out the TARP spending in 2008/2009, and then add it back into the spending in 2010 and 2011, as it was repaid, to get a truer look at Obama's spending binge.

REALLY? BY OCT 2009? LINKIE?

TARP? OH RIGHT DUBYA'S THING



Jan 7, 2009

$1.2 trillion deficit looms

The U.S. budget deficit in 2009 is projected to spike to a record $1.2 trillion, or 8.3% of gross domestic product, the Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday.

CBO projects record $1.2 trillion deficit - Jan. 7, 2009


BUT AFTER 8 YEARS OF DUBYA/GOP "JOB CREATOR" POLICIES SOMEONE HAD TO KEEP US FROM GOING INTO THE SECOND GOP GREAT DEPRESSION BUBBA!



TARP? Oh right because Dubya had 7 years of "don't need no stinking regulators on the beat" BS going on as he cheered on the Banksters bubble

 

[JonKoch]

At least none that right wingers can point to that caused the GOP debt

The Current ReaganBush Debt is:

$18,636,016,016,738.40


which means that in a total of 20 years, these three presidents have led to the creation of
93.85% of the entire national debt
ReaganBushDebt.org

Obama whined for 6 years about the Republican House stopping his desired spending increases, and yet cretins like you hold him blameless for $9.3 trillion.

Unbelievable!

Unbelievable is correct since YOU can't point to POLICIES Obama had that created the debt???

Weird Bubba

He spent like a mutha fucka.....added moronic regulations.
Tried his hardest to cripple our economy.
Would have over-spent and over-regulated, even more, if the voters hadn't spanked him in 2010.
We're resilient. We outlasted him.

Your inability to point to specific laws and policies noted Bubs

May 22, 2012

Obama spending binge never happened

Government outlays rising at slowest pace since 1950s
Obama spending binge never happened


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.

....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.

WAPO:

Charts: What if Obama spent like Reagan?

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.


Yeah, thanks for being so thrifty, Obama. LOL!

Unlike the GOP who just cuts revenues AS they blow up spending ala Ronnie/Dubya

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Obama whined for 6 years about the Republican House stopping his desired spending increases, and yet cretins like you hold him blameless for $9.3 trillion.

Unbelievable!

Unbelievable is correct since YOU can't point to POLICIES Obama had that created the debt???

Weird Bubba

He spent like a mutha fucka.....added moronic regulations.
Tried his hardest to cripple our economy.
Would have over-spent and over-regulated, even more, if the voters hadn't spanked him in 2010.
We're resilient. We outlasted him.

Your inability to point to specific laws and policies noted Bubs

May 22, 2012

Obama spending binge never happened

Government outlays rising at slowest pace since 1950s
Obama spending binge never happened


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.

....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.
Charts: What if Obama spent like Reagan?

Obama spending binge never happened

Sure it did. It's right there in 2009.
The Treasury spent at least $560 billion on TARP by October 2009, plus all the "stimulus" spending.
Subtract out the TARP spending in 2008/2009, and then add it back into the spending in 2010 and 2011, as it was repaid, to get a truer look at Obama's spending binge.

REALLY? BY OCT 2009? LINKIE?

TARP? OH RIGHT DUBYA'S THING



Jan 7, 2009

$1.2 trillion deficit looms

The U.S. budget deficit in 2009 is projected to spike to a record $1.2 trillion, or 8.3% of gross domestic product, the Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday.

CBO projects record $1.2 trillion deficit - Jan. 7, 2009


BUT AFTER 8 YEARS OF DUBYA/GOP "JOB CREATOR" POLICIES SOMEONE HAD TO KEEP US FROM GOING INTO THE SECOND GOP GREAT DEPRESSION BUBBA!



TARP? Oh right because Dubya had 7 years of "don't need no stinking regulators on the beat" BS going on as he cheered on the Banksters bubble

REALLY? BY OCT 2009? LINKIE?

Bailout Timeline: Another Day, Another Bailout | Eye on the Bailout | ProPublica

TARP? OH RIGHT DUBYA'S THING

Yup.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Obama whined for 6 years about the Republican House stopping his desired spending increases, and yet cretins like you hold him blameless for $9.3 trillion.

Unbelievable!

Unbelievable is correct since YOU can't point to POLICIES Obama had that created the debt???

Weird Bubba

He spent like a mutha fucka.....added moronic regulations.
Tried his hardest to cripple our economy.
Would have over-spent and over-regulated, even more, if the voters hadn't spanked him in 2010.
We're resilient. We outlasted him.

Your inability to point to specific laws and policies noted Bubs

May 22, 2012

Obama spending binge never happened

Government outlays rising at slowest pace since 1950s
Obama spending binge never happened


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.

....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.

WAPO:

Charts: What if Obama spent like Reagan?

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.


Yeah, thanks for being so thrifty, Obama. LOL!

Unlike the GOP who just cuts revenues AS they blow up spending ala Ronnie/Dubya

Unlike the GOP who just cuts revenues

Yup. Cut revenues so much that the FY 2007 deficit was $161 billion.

When was Obama's that low after all the jobs he created and the taxes he hiked on those nasty rich people?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

you really are dense aren't you?

translation: I lost that debate so I"ll try to change the subject with personal attack and hope no one notices

 

[danielpalos]

Labor should be able to quit their day job if they simply no longer have any will to work there, and collect unemployment compensation.

Indefinitely?

lol. capitalism has a "natural" rate of unemployment.

 

[danielpalos]

Labor should be able to quit their day job if they simply no longer have any will to work there, and collect unemployment compensation.

Indefinitely?

He's a stoner, still living in the basement.
He wants to be paid for sitting on his ass and smoking weed.

Create a Jobs Booms with your capital gains preference, right winger.

 

[JonKoch]

Unbelievable is correct since YOU can't point to POLICIES Obama had that created the debt???

Weird Bubba

He spent like a mutha fucka.....added moronic regulations.
Tried his hardest to cripple our economy.
Would have over-spent and over-regulated, even more, if the voters hadn't spanked him in 2010.
We're resilient. We outlasted him.

Your inability to point to specific laws and policies noted Bubs

May 22, 2012

Obama spending binge never happened

Government outlays rising at slowest pace since 1950s
Obama spending binge never happened


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.

....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.
Charts: What if Obama spent like Reagan?

Obama spending binge never happened

Sure it did. It's right there in 2009.
The Treasury spent at least $560 billion on TARP by October 2009, plus all the "stimulus" spending.
Subtract out the TARP spending in 2008/2009, and then add it back into the spending in 2010 and 2011, as it was repaid, to get a truer look at Obama's spending binge.

REALLY? BY OCT 2009? LINKIE?

TARP? OH RIGHT DUBYA'S THING



Jan 7, 2009

$1.2 trillion deficit looms

The U.S. budget deficit in 2009 is projected to spike to a record $1.2 trillion, or 8.3% of gross domestic product, the Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday.

CBO projects record $1.2 trillion deficit - Jan. 7, 2009


BUT AFTER 8 YEARS OF DUBYA/GOP "JOB CREATOR" POLICIES SOMEONE HAD TO KEEP US FROM GOING INTO THE SECOND GOP GREAT DEPRESSION BUBBA!



TARP? Oh right because Dubya had 7 years of "don't need no stinking regulators on the beat" BS going on as he cheered on the Banksters bubble

REALLY? BY OCT 2009? LINKIE?

Bailout Timeline: Another Day, Another Bailout | Eye on the Bailout | ProPublica

TARP? OH RIGHT DUBYA'S THING

Yup.

So by the end of Dubya's final F/Y budget they spent half of Dubya's TARP money he authorized? So the other half was "credited" to Obama???

 

[JonKoch]

Unbelievable is correct since YOU can't point to POLICIES Obama had that created the debt???

Weird Bubba

He spent like a mutha fucka.....added moronic regulations.
Tried his hardest to cripple our economy.
Would have over-spent and over-regulated, even more, if the voters hadn't spanked him in 2010.
We're resilient. We outlasted him.

Your inability to point to specific laws and policies noted Bubs

May 22, 2012

Obama spending binge never happened

Government outlays rising at slowest pace since 1950s
Obama spending binge never happened


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.

....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.

WAPO:

Charts: What if Obama spent like Reagan?

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.


Yeah, thanks for being so thrifty, Obama. LOL!

Unlike the GOP who just cuts revenues AS they blow up spending ala Ronnie/Dubya

Unlike the GOP who just cuts revenues

Yup. Cut revenues so much that the FY 2007 deficit was $161 billion.

When was Obama's that low after all the jobs he created and the taxes he hiked on those nasty rich people?

How about 2008 and 2009 Bubs? Hint 2007 budged was built on Dubya's Bankster ponzi scheme "home ownership" society BS

Taxes he hiked on the "job creators"??? Hint he created MILLIONS more than were created under Dubya