The national debt just crossed $39 trillion—almost doubling since Trump vowed to erase it

[JonKoch]

Obama did not pass the laws - he had his democrat cronies double the debt, and he just signed the massive spending bills when they came across his desk.

So no you can't point to any laws he passed that created the debt. Got it

 

[JohnDB]

"..the money and munitions given to Ukraine and Iran, Obamacare"

Ukraine? lmaorog. Less than $200 billion TOTAL given to Ukraine really hurt the budget shaking head

IRAN? No funding for that, YET. The $200 billion DOD asked for and the $500 billion EXTRA for DOD asked by Cheeto, will hurt.

Obamacares WAS 100% funded via taxes. Didn't add o the debt until GOP unfunded it

Undocumented do not receive SS, though they fund it (and Medicare)

Obamacare EXPLODED in budget size as predicted...its too expensive.
And the Iran money that BOTH Obama and Biden (Carter's payments are going to be ignored at the moment) gave them is the reason why we are warring currently....a few hundred million now can cost tens of billions later....and now is the "later" for those errors.
Iran has been holding the whole world hostage for decades.....and decades of appeasement has not worked and only made things worse.

 

[JonKoch]

Do you think Ronald Reagan believed like democrats that there will never be any harm to the economy if the rich are taxed nearly 100% of their income? What is a fair tax on the rich?

View attachment 1237580

'
Good you posted that 70%, Ronnie's top rate for his first 6 years

 

[markef]

It's not overspending (well maybe GOP wars and unfunded Medicare expansion) but gutting revenues that caused US debt to climb


Clinton had US above 19% of GDP (back where Carter had US) when he had 4 surpluses, 3 after vetoing the GOP's $792+ billion tax cut. Dubya/GOP policy pushed it below 15%. Obama got it back to almost 18% (with ACA taxes too) but Cheeto dropped it to 16%

The sweet spot was 19%-20% of GDP to fund Gov't, but will needs 22%-23% of GDP to have a balance today, over $1 trillion a year in interest alone, and seniors cost more

Democrats do not believe it is possible for the government to overspend because they trust the government will always have all the money it ever needs.

No, The United States Will Not Go Into A Debt Crisis, Not Now, Not Ever

(Image credit: Getty Images via @daylife) (If you read the headline and thought "Well, yeah"--feel free to skip this post.) If there's one article of faith in Washington (and elsewhere), it's the idea that the United States might get into a debt crisis if it doesn't get its fiscal house in...

www.forbes.com

Business

No, The United States Will Not Go Into A Debt Crisis, Not Now, Not Ever​

ByPascal-Emmanuel Gobry,

Contributor.
Follow Author
Oct 19, 2012, 03:44am EDTDec 16, 2020, 06:18am EST

 

[JonKoch]

What economist?

All one has to do is look at the public records, tax revenue increased after those tax cuts

LMAOROG, Sure tax revenues unadjusted for population increase or inflation, which is why ANY credible economists measure taxes via GDP. Ronnie, Dubya AND Cheeto's tax cuts ALL dropped revenues

 

[struth]

So no you can't point to any laws he passed that created the debt. Got it

I already did and that wasn’t even including the numerous CRs

 

[markef]

"Those tax cuts added revenue"


LMAOROG. Sure they did, that's why economists score the tax cuts as costs, because they bring in more revenues

On January 20, 2009, the day President Barack Obama was inaugurated, the total U.S. national debt stood at approximately $10.626 trillion

On January 20, 2017, the day Donald Trump was inaugurated as the 45th President of the United States, the total outstanding federal debt was $19.95 trillion


On January 20, 2021, the total US gross federal debt was $27.75 trillion.


SO IN 8 YEARS, Obama had $9.3+ trillion of new debt. NOW list the laws HE passed that created that debt?


In 4 years Cheeto had $7.8 trillion of new debt.




LET ME HELP YOU WITH OBAMA



Key drivers of this debt increase included:


The Great Recession and Economic Downturn: The financial crisis resulted in significantly lower tax revenues and higher automatic spending on "safety net" programs, which significantly increased the deficit from the moment he took office.



Extension of Bush-Era Tax Cuts: A significant portion of the debt attributed to the Obama administration (over $4 trillion) stemmed from extending tax cuts originally enacted under President George W. Bush, including the 2001/2003 cuts and the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) patch.


The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Stimulus): Passed in 2009, this act added roughly $800 billion to $2 trillion (including interest) in spending aimed at boosting the economy.


Emergency Funding and Defense Spending: Continued funding for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, along with other emergency appropriations, contributed to the debt.


Mandatory Spending and Entitlements: Rising costs for entitlement programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security played a role, as well as the implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), although the ACA had a smaller net impact on the deficit than other factors.

While President Obama signed the legislation, analysts note that debt is a result of joint action between the president and Congress, and much of the increase was driven by policies designed to prevent a deeper economic collapse during the 2008–2009 financial crisis

Has President Obama Doubled the National Debt? | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

2016-07-25-While accepting the Republican nomination for president, Donald Trump sai

www.crfb.org

TAX CUTS BRING IN MORE REVENUES? LMAOROG

Only the foolish believe cutting taxes creates wealth for the government. Socialist governments cannot create wealth; they can only confiscate wealth that people accumulate through actual labor.

 

[JonKoch]

Ummmm....the money and munitions given to Ukraine and Iran, Obamacare, and etc had nothing to do with anything? Kinda one sided ain't ya?

I'm for neither side except the people....which excludes politicians, lawyers and all such types of low moral character.

Sure, we need government to help keeping the sheep from getting fleeced. Anti trust laws firmly enforced, ALL insider trading stopped, a well funded and supplied military. (2% of government budget) and actually fully funding SS for those who have 80-160+ calendar quarters paid in instead of giving SS to illegal aliens.

I'm all for Government investment that the private sector wont or shouldn't....like the interstate system. It assisted the trucking industry and made it grow exponentially. Dock upgrades so shipping is easy and quick. Airports for commercial and recreational traffic.
And IMHO I think that the Government should do something for energy travel routes.....just saying....its feasible and doable. (Pipelines and transmission systems)

But we also have huge rats nests of corruption like Farm Credit....which is at the point of ridiculousness for corruption. Not even Trump nor Elon will touch that mess.

The percentages you stated are subject for debate without party recriminations but general congressional recriminations....that's fair.
Since the criminality of insider trading by Congress has been removed....BOTH sides have been playing games. No one side is innocent. The most frequent trader is a Republican and the biggest winner is a Democrat. WTF! Congress is making decisions that affect their personal pocket regardless of whether the people they represent benefit or not...and usually not....because rhetoric and spin can fix everything. So can backroom deals that keep things from getting voted on. Or poison pill amendments that make the Bill's worthless.

Time to get money out of politics, if Leon Musk showed anything in 2024, it's the corruption of money that hurt US

 

[markef]

Ronnie Reagan had a top rate of 70% his first 6 years, I hear the right loved his economy.

This narrative from a leading democrat politician:

Rep. Gerry Connolly says Reagan raised taxes during five years of presidency

U.S. Rep. Gerry Connolly, D-11th, recently invoked the name of Ronald Reagan to drum up support for raising taxes for a

www.politifact.com

In 1986, the Tax Reform Act lowered the top income tax bracket from 50 percent to 28 percent. To pay for the reductions, however, the legislation closed a number of tax loopholes.

 

[JonKoch]

Wow you really are dumb, the tax rate dropped from 70 percent after the Econ recovery act of 1981-

What years do you think Reagan was president?

Sorry you are correct, it was 50% his first 6 years, what a socialist right? Obama and Clinton only dreamed of 50% top rate

 

[JonKoch]

I already did and that wasn’t even including the numerous CRs

So no, ACA (Obamacare WAS 100% funded). Ukraine? Wasn't Obama want to try again?

Give me LAWS that Obama passed that increased the debt?

 

[JonKoch]

This narrative from a leading democrat politician:

Rep. Gerry Connolly says Reagan raised taxes during five years of presidency

U.S. Rep. Gerry Connolly, D-11th, recently invoked the name of Ronald Reagan to drum up support for raising taxes for a

www.politifact.com

In 1986, the Tax Reform Act lowered the top income tax bracket from 50 percent to 28 percent. To pay for the reductions, however, the legislation closed a number of tax loopholes.

AND Ronnie had 7 other tax increases including the largest tax increase on workers ever, increasing SS taxes

 

[markef]

Yeah, it was the blacks, lol. You know all those housing markets exploding in Harlem, Detroit, DC, Oakland etc during Dubya's cheering on the Banksters world wide ponzi scheme

DAMN YOU BILL CLINTON



View attachment 1237581View attachment 1237582

I did not make up the facts. Obama sued banks for not making more loans to blacks. Obama said "blacks," I didn't.

Obama Justice Department Forces Banks to Make Risky Loans, Planting the Seeds of a Future Financial Crisis - Competitive Enterprise Institute

The Wall Street Journal today writes about how the Obama administration is repeating the "mistakes of the past by intimidating banks into lending to minority borrowers at below-market rates in the name of combating discrimination." Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Thomas Perez has...

cei.org

Obama Justice Department Forces Banks to Make Risky Loans, Planting the Seeds of a Future Financial Crisis​

• Blog
• Hans Bader • 08/31/2011

The Wall Street Journal today writes about how the Obama administration is repeating the “mistakes of the past by intimidating banks into lending to minority borrowers at below-market rates in the name of combating discrimination.” Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Thomas Perez has argued that bankers who don’t make as many loans to blacks as whites (because they make lending decisions based on traditional lending criteria like credit scores, which tend to be higher among white applicants than black applicants) are engaged in a “form of discrimination and bigotry” as serious as “cross-burning.” Perez has compared bankers to “Klansmen,” and extracted settlements from banks “setting aside prime-rate mortgages for low-income blacks and Hispanics with blemished credit,” treating welfare “as valid income in mortgage applications” and providing “favorable interest rates and down-payment assistance for minority borrowers with weak credit,” notes Investors Business Daily.

Under Perez’s “disparate impact” theory, banks are guilty of racial discrimination even if they harbor no discriminatory intent, and use facially-neutral lending criteria, as long as these criteria weed out more black than white applicants.

 

[markef]

So no you can't point to any laws he passed that created the debt. Got it

Are you asking if Obama passed bad laws or if he signed bad laws?

 

[JonKoch]

I did not make up the facts. Obama sued banks for not making more loans to blacks. Obama said "blacks," I didn't.

Obama Justice Department Forces Banks to Make Risky Loans, Planting the Seeds of a Future Financial Crisis - Competitive Enterprise Institute

The Wall Street Journal today writes about how the Obama administration is repeating the "mistakes of the past by intimidating banks into lending to minority borrowers at below-market rates in the name of combating discrimination." Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Thomas Perez has...

cei.org

Obama Justice Department Forces Banks to Make Risky Loans, Planting the Seeds of a Future Financial Crisis​

• Blog
• Hans Bader • 08/31/2011

The Wall Street Journal today writes about how the Obama administration is repeating the “mistakes of the past by intimidating banks into lending to minority borrowers at below-market rates in the name of combating discrimination.” Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Thomas Perez has argued that bankers who don’t make as many loans to blacks as whites (because they make lending decisions based on traditional lending criteria like credit scores, which tend to be higher among white applicants than black applicants) are engaged in a “form of discrimination and bigotry” as serious as “cross-burning.” Perez has compared bankers to “Klansmen,” and extracted settlements from banks “setting aside prime-rate mortgages for low-income blacks and Hispanics with blemished credit,” treating welfare “as valid income in mortgage applications” and providing “favorable interest rates and down-payment assistance for minority borrowers with weak credit,” notes Investors Business Daily.

Under Perez’s “disparate impact” theory, banks are guilty of racial discrimination even if they harbor no discriminatory intent, and use facially-neutral lending criteria, as long as these criteria weed out more black than white applicants.

Sorry YOU are so ignorant, suing Citibank BECAUSE they redlined areas of Chicago, and them settling, proves what exactly? Oh right that you are wearing your KKK hat today

 

[JohnDB]

Time to get money out of politics, if Leon Musk showed anything in 2024, it's the corruption of money that hurt US

Absoefucinglutely!

The congressional hearing where Nancy Pelosi is presiding over an mean faced interview of Facebook founder Zuckerberg while holding $300 million in Facebook stock herself (as well as the entire panel) is the high point of hypocrisy. She, or anyone, was going to do anything but sell once the hearing was over....(They ALL DID)

However,
The answers Zuckerberg gave absolutely demonstrated that he blatantly, knowingly, and willingly violated the terms of protection the laws afforded him. He even later penned a public letter apologizing for his decisions. (As if it was going to do anything)

And that is where we stand today.

We no longer own our own government.
It is NOT "of the people, by the people"

 

[markef]

'
Good you posted that 70%, Ronnie's top rate for his first 6 years

Reagan inherited Carter's astronomically high tax rates and then lowered them as he could from there.



91%
Under President Carter, the highest tax rate for the super rich was 91% for incomes over $200,000. This rate was applied to the portion of income above this threshold, reflecting the high marginal tax rates during that time period.

legalclarity.org

 

[JonKoch]

Are you asking if Obama passed bad laws or if he signed bad laws?

Show me the laws that passed under Obama that CREATED the debt that you an the right blame him for?

You know UNFUNDED tax cuts, UNFUNDED wars, UNFUNDED Medicare privatization that costs US $230+ billion this fiscal year alone. Those are just three examples from Dubya/GOP policies that Obama INHERITED.

Like the ponzi scheme called subprime lending that Dubya cheered on that Obama inherited too

 

[JonKoch]

Reagan inherited Carter's astronomically high tax rates and then lowered them as he could from there.



91%
Under President Carter, the highest tax rate for the super rich was 91% for incomes over $200,000. This rate was applied to the portion of income above this threshold, reflecting the high marginal tax rates during that time period.
legalclarity.org

Nah, 91% was LBJ TAX CUTS IN '64. It went down to 70% in 1964. Carter top rate was 70%, like Nixon, Ford, etc

 

[JonKoch]

Reagan inherited Carter's astronomically high tax rates and then lowered them as he could from there.



91%
Under President Carter, the highest tax rate for the super rich was 91% for incomes over $200,000. This rate was applied to the portion of income above this threshold, reflecting the high marginal tax rates during that time period.
legalclarity.org

Carter 1977
Unemployment rate
Jan 7.5%
Feb 7.6
March 7.4
April 7.2
May 7.0
June 7.2
July 6.9
Aug 7.0
Sept 6.8
Oct 6.8
Nov 6.8
Dec 6.4

1978
Jan 6.4
Feb 6.3
March 6.3
Apr 6.1
May 6.0
Jun 5.9
July 6.2
Aug 5.9
Sep 6.0
Oct 5.8
Nov 5.9
Dec 6.0

1979
Jan 5.9
Feb 5.9
Mar 5.8
Apr 5.8
May 5.6
Jun 5.7
Jul 5.7
Aug 6.0
Sept 5.9
Oct 6.0
Nov 5.9
Dec 6.0

1980
Jan 6.3
Feb 6.3
Mar 6.3
Apr 6.9
May 7.5
Jun 7.6
Jul 7.8
Aug 7.7
Sept 7.5
Oct 7.5
Nov 7.5
Dec 7.2

01/1981 - Unemployment rate 7.5% …. Reagan sworn in.
02/1981 - 7.4%
03/1981 - 7.4%
04/1981 - 7.2%
05/1981 - 7.5%
06/1981 - 7.5%
07/1981 - 7.2%
08/1981 - 7.4% * Reagan CUTS taxes for top 1% and says unemployment will DROP to 6.9%.
09/1981 - 7.6%
10/1981 - 7.9%
11/1981 - 8.3%
12/1981 - 8.5%

01/1982 - 8.6%
02/1982 - 8.9%
03/1982 - 9.0%
04/1982 - 9.3%
05/1982 - 9.4%
06/1982 - 9.6%
07/1982 - 9.8%
08/1982 - 9.8%
09/1982 - 10.1%
10/1982 - 10.4%
11/1982 - 10.8% * Unemployment HITS a post WW2 RECORD of 10.8%.
12/1982 - 10.8%

01/1983 - 10.4%
02/1983 - 10.4%
03/1983 - 10.3%
04/1983 - 10.3%
05/1983 - 10.1%
06/1983 - 10.1%
07/1983 - 9.4%
06/1983 - 9.5%
07/1983 - 9.4%
08/1983 - 9.5%
09/1983 - 9.2%
10/1983 - 8.8%
11/1983 - 8.5%
12/1983 - 8.3%

01/1984 - 8.0%
02/1984 - 7.8%


It took Reagan 28 MONTHS to get unemployment rate back down below 8 percent.


CARTER HAD 9+ MILLION PRIVATE SECTOR JOBS GROWTH IN 4 YEARS VERSUS 14 MILLION FOR REAGAN'S 8

Jan 1979 65,636,000
Jan 1981 74,677,000

INCREASE OF 9,041,000 Total private IN 4 YEARS

Jan 1981 74,677,000
Jan 1989 89,394,000

14,717,00 Total private IN 8 YEARS

Reagan created the recession began under HIM after his disastrous tax cuts.