Why republicans should stop whining about the debt that has accumulated under Obama

[eflatminor]

Your ignorance on this issue is laughable. Here is ample proof revenue is way too low by historical standards .

Sorry, Folks, We Don't Just Have 'A Spending Problem' - Business Insider

We have a taxing problem, not just a spending problem - The Washington Post

Revenue way too low, eh? Consider this: If in 2013, government lived with the spending levels we had ALL THE WAY BACK in 2003, we wouldn't need a federal income tax...nothing...zero percent.

But hey, that would IMPOSSIBLE, right?! We all remember the horrors of 2003...the dead bodies in the street! The grandmas starving to death! The rampant chaos!!!

Not enough revenue my ass.

And yes, I can post all kinds of opinion pieces that demonstrate spending is the problem, not inadequate taxation.

Spending Problem, Still | Cato Institute

GOP on Message: Revenue Not the Problem, Spending Is | Fox News

You must be the biggest nanny state suck up in history to witness the MONUMENTAL increase in government spending and claim the problem to be inadequate revenue. My God man, have you ever looked to anything other than your overlords for a solution to your own damn problems? How about you try thinking for yourself, just once? Put on your big boy shoes and realize that all this deficit spending and taxes have a significant downside, a restricting element on jobs, growth and prosperity. For once, try not looking to central planners to make your life better. Do it yourself for christsake. Watching you whine for more and more confiscation and handouts is just pathetic.

You are such a moron.

You argue like a ten year old boy on a schoolyard play ground.

I made it clear from the beginning we had a spending problem, but to blame our debt on over spending alone is moronic.

Riiight...because living within our means is what caused $17+ trillion of debt.

You were saying something about 'moronic'???

Here is the graph that shows revenue is way too low in comparison to the past.

Sorry, Folks, We Don't Just Have 'A Spending Problem' - Business Insider

Yes, I understand one can post an opinion piece from a Progressive blogger that also never saw a tax he didn't like. Doesn't make it any less pathetic.

Bottom line, we collect more in taxes than we ever have. We collect more in inflation adjust dollars than we have in decades. We collect more in taxes compared to the GDP than we do on average...but we still keep posting near trillion dollar deficits.

And your solution? Not to live within our means...no, you want to tax us more.

Well, all I can say is...I pass. Stick your nanny state central planning bullshit. I've had enough of the redistribution that never ends and only causes more harm than good. Sorry, but neither you nor your benevolent overlords know what's best for everyone else.

 

[Billy000]

Revenue way too low, eh? Consider this: If in 2013, government lived with the spending levels we had ALL THE WAY BACK in 2003, we wouldn't need a federal income tax...nothing...zero percent.

But hey, that would IMPOSSIBLE, right?! We all remember the horrors of 2003...the dead bodies in the street! The grandmas starving to death! The rampant chaos!!!

Not enough revenue my ass.

And yes, I can post all kinds of opinion pieces that demonstrate spending is the problem, not inadequate taxation.

Spending Problem, Still | Cato Institute

GOP on Message: Revenue Not the Problem, Spending Is | Fox News

You must be the biggest nanny state suck up in history to witness the MONUMENTAL increase in government spending and claim the problem to be inadequate revenue. My God man, have you ever looked to anything other than your overlords for a solution to your own damn problems? How about you try thinking for yourself, just once? Put on your big boy shoes and realize that all this deficit spending and taxes have a significant downside, a restricting element on jobs, growth and prosperity. For once, try not looking to central planners to make your life better. Do it yourself for christsake. Watching you whine for more and more confiscation and handouts is just pathetic.

You are such a moron.

You argue like a ten year old boy on a schoolyard play ground.

I made it clear from the beginning we had a spending problem, but to blame our debt on over spending alone is moronic.

Riiight...because living within our means is what caused $17+ trillion of debt.

You were saying something about 'moronic'???

Here is the graph that shows revenue is way too low in comparison to the past.

Sorry, Folks, We Don't Just Have 'A Spending Problem' - Business Insider

Yes, I understand one can post an opinion piece from a Progressive blogger that also never saw a tax he didn't like. Doesn't make it any less pathetic.

Bottom line, we collect more in taxes than we ever have. We collect more in inflation adjust dollars than we have in decades. We collect more in taxes compared to the GDP than we do on average...but we still keep posting near trillion dollar deficits.

And your solution? Not to live within our means...no, you want to tax us more.

Well, all I can say is...I pass. Stick your nanny state central planning bullshit. I've had enough of the redistribution that never ends and only causes more harm than good. Sorry, but neither you nor your benevolent overlords know what's best for everyone else.

All this from a simpleton who posts a Fox News article that sums up what republicans say about the debt.

Even if I did post "progressive blog", which I didn't, the graph still doesn't lie. Just because you are too stupid to realize that the only accurate way to measure revenue is by comparing it to the GDP, it doesn't mean you have an argument. Any economist will tell you I am right. Both you and the GOP are ******* dumb.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Your ignorance on this issue is laughable. Here is ample proof revenue is way too low by historical standards .

Sorry, Folks, We Don't Just Have 'A Spending Problem' - Business Insider

We have a taxing problem, not just a spending problem - The Washington Post

Revenue way too low, eh? Consider this: If in 2013, government lived with the spending levels we had ALL THE WAY BACK in 2003, we wouldn't need a federal income tax...nothing...zero percent.

But hey, that would IMPOSSIBLE, right?! We all remember the horrors of 2003...the dead bodies in the street! The grandmas starving to death! The rampant chaos!!!

Not enough revenue my ass.

And yes, I can post all kinds of opinion pieces that demonstrate spending is the problem, not inadequate taxation.

Spending Problem, Still | Cato Institute

GOP on Message: Revenue Not the Problem, Spending Is | Fox News

You must be the biggest nanny state suck up in history to witness the MONUMENTAL increase in government spending and claim the problem to be inadequate revenue. My God man, have you ever looked to anything other than your overlords for a solution to your own damn problems? How about you try thinking for yourself, just once? Put on your big boy shoes and realize that all this deficit spending and taxes have a significant downside, a restricting element on jobs, growth and prosperity. For once, try not looking to central planners to make your life better. Do it yourself for christsake. Watching you whine for more and more confiscation and handouts is just pathetic.

You are such a moron. I made it clear from the beginning we had a spending problem, but to blame our debt on over spending alone is moronic.

Here is the graph that shows revenue is way too low in comparison to the past.

Sorry, Folks, We Don't Just Have 'A Spending Problem' - Business Insider

Um.. come again? Just what causes spending problems?? OVERSPENDING. Just like overeating causes weight problems. You really are oblivious aren't you?

 

[g5000]

 

[g5000]

 

[nodoginnafight]

does this graph include money for Iraq and Afghanistan?

 

[eflatminor]

You are such a moron.

You argue like a ten year old boy on a schoolyard play ground.



Riiight...because living within our means is what caused $17+ trillion of debt.

You were saying something about 'moronic'???

Here is the graph that shows revenue is way too low in comparison to the past.

Sorry, Folks, We Don't Just Have 'A Spending Problem' - Business Insider

Yes, I understand one can post an opinion piece from a Progressive blogger that also never saw a tax he didn't like. Doesn't make it any less pathetic.

Bottom line, we collect more in taxes than we ever have. We collect more in inflation adjust dollars than we have in decades. We collect more in taxes compared to the GDP than we do on average...but we still keep posting near trillion dollar deficits.

And your solution? Not to live within our means...no, you want to tax us more.

Well, all I can say is...I pass. Stick your nanny state central planning bullshit. I've had enough of the redistribution that never ends and only causes more harm than good. Sorry, but neither you nor your benevolent overlords know what's best for everyone else.

All this from a simpleton who posts a Fox News article that sums up what republicans say about the debt.

Even if I did post "progressive blog", which I didn't, the graph still doesn't lie. Just because you are too stupid to realize that the only accurate way to measure revenue is by comparing it to the GDP, it doesn't mean you have an argument.

Like I said, you argue like a school child on the playground. Good luck with that.

Any economist will tell you I am right. Both you and the GOP are ******* dumb.

"Any" economist, eh? You go with that comrade, you go with that...

 

[M14 Shooter]

Your ignorance on this issue is laughable. Here is ample proof revenue is way too low by historical standards .

Revenue as % of GDP, average, since 1944: 17.5%
Revenue as % of GDP, average, since 2001: 16.3%

Spedning as % of GDP, average, since 1944: 20.2%
Spending as % of GDP, average, since 2001: 20.5%
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/historicals
Table 1.2

Thus:
Your claim that revenue is "too low" is one born from mindless partisan bigotry.

Never mind that none of this changes the fact that the -only- reason we have a deficit is that we choose to spend more than we take in.

 

[Billy000]

Your ignorance on this issue is laughable. Here is ample proof revenue is way too low by historical standards .

Revenue as % of GDP, average, since 1944: 17.5%
Revenue as % of GDP, average, since 2001: 16.3%

Spedning as % of GDP, average, since 1944: 20.2%
Spending as % of GDP, average, since 2001: 20.5%
Historical Tables | The White House
Table 1.2

Thus:
Your claim that revenue is "too low" is one born from mindless partisan bigotry.

Never mind that none of this changes the fact that the -only- reason we have a deficit is that we choose to spend more than we take in.

What the **** are you talking about?

Look dude. It's right here. This graph proves revenue is too low historically.

Sorry, Folks, We Don't Just Have 'A Spending Problem' - Business Insider

 

[Erand7899]

One side blames the other for what they both do. Liberals blamed bush for it when he was prez, but give obama a pass. Conservatives acknowledge, after the fact, that Bush was a huge government proponent and spender, now blame Obama for doing the same.

neither of side has any ethical or moral high ground here. The current contender is certainly liberals as they aren't going to blame him, or find excuses for it. But again, no side has clean hands. And until we recognize that neither party is going to reel in the spending binge that will ultimately destroy our economy, we will continue to vote for snake oil salesmen that claim they will reel it in and then go ahead and spend like drunken sailors at the saloon.

You confuse Republicans with conservatives. Although conservatives make up the base of the Republican party, not all Republicans are conservative, and that includes the majority of Republican politicians. Conservatives did not like the high spending of Bush and the Republican congress, and helped elect Democrats who campaigned on being more fiscally conservative than the Republican incumbants. They lied, and after they took over the congress, they increased spending dramatically.

Both parties are responsible for the debt, but don't blame conservatives for that. We are now engaged in an internal battle, in the Republican party, to oust the free spending crowd and put real fiscal conservatives in office. This drive is being fought by the leadership of both parties because they both know that once conservatives gain political power, the con game is over.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Here is a no bullshit assessment about what exactly the debt under Obama composed of. As you can see Obama's biggest expenses were his TAX CUTS and defense spending.



US Debt by President

talk about biased bullshit reporting------------

lets cut the crap. the debt when obama took over was around 10 trillion, today it is around 17 trillion, when he leaves it will be over 20 trillion.

forget the % increase bullshit, lets talk about actual dollars added to the debt

obama will have added more to the the debt than all previous presidents COMBINED.

as to your charts--------figures don't lie, but liars figure.

I am not disputing this. You are right. However it is important to realize that Obama is spending at the same rate Bush was at the end of his term.

Keep lying liar, it shows libtards true colors.

 

[Mac1958]

.

Balanced Budget Amendment. Make each party justify their taxing and spending agendas.

What we're doing right now is a travesty, and both parties should be looking in the mirror.

The politicians are getting away with this horrific behavior, and we're enabling them.

All they care about is fundraising, and ya gotta spend money to make money, right?

.

 

[whitehall]

Here is a no bullshit assessment about what exactly the debt under Obama is composed of. As you can see Obama's biggest expenses were his TAX CUTS and defense spending.

President Barack Obama - The second largest contributor to the debt dollar-wise was President Obama. He added $4.8 trillion, a 41% increase, in just one term. Obama's budgets included the economic stimulus package, which added $787 billion by cutting taxes, extending unemployment benefits, and funding job-creating public works projects. The Obama tax cuts added $858 billion to the debt over two years. Obama's budget included increased defense spending to around $800 billion a year. Federal income was down, thanks to lower tax receipts from the 2008 financial crisis.

Both Presidents Bush and Obama had to contend with higher mandatory mandatory spending for Social Security and Medicare. He also sponsored the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which was designed to reduce the debt by $143 billion over 10 years. However, these savings didn't show up until the later years.

US Debt by President

Of course, all this being said, I do agree Obama has spent too much on defense and he shouldn't have extended Bush's tax cuts. My point is that Repubs are ignorant about what exactly Obama's expenses are.

With a dozen scandals, foreign policy in disarray and unemployment unchanged during the Obama administration why would the radical left suddenly worry about what the GOP thinks about the debt? Answer: it beats talking about the abject mess of Obama care.

 

[The T]

Here is a no bullshit assessment about what exactly the debt under Obama is composed of. As you can see Obama's biggest expenses were his TAX CUTS and defense spending.

President Barack Obama - The second largest contributor to the debt dollar-wise was President Obama. He added $4.8 trillion, a 41% increase, in just one term. Obama's budgets included the economic stimulus package, which added $787 billion by cutting taxes, extending unemployment benefits, and funding job-creating public works projects. The Obama tax cuts added $858 billion to the debt over two years. Obama's budget included increased defense spending to around $800 billion a year. Federal income was down, thanks to lower tax receipts from the 2008 financial crisis.

Both Presidents Bush and Obama had to contend with higher mandatory mandatory spending for Social Security and Medicare. He also sponsored the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which was designed to reduce the debt by $143 billion over 10 years. However, these savings didn't show up until the later years.

US Debt by President

Of course, all this being said, I do agree Obama has spent too much on defense and he shouldn't have extended Bush's tax cuts. My point is that Repubs are ignorant about what exactly Obama's expenses are.

With a dozen scandals, foreign policy in disarray and unemployment unchanged during the Obama administration why would the radical left suddenly worry about what the GOP thinks about the debt? Answer: it beats talking about the abject mess of Obama care.

And what about in the Senate and the speeches of CLIMATE CHANGE this past week? These people are scrambling to change the subject. Democrats are scared they are going to lose power...and they well should be...because they are. They cannot HIDE from ObamaCare.

 

[Billy000]

Here is a no bullshit assessment about what exactly the debt under Obama is composed of. As you can see Obama's biggest expenses were his TAX CUTS and defense spending.

US Debt by President

Of course, all this being said, I do agree Obama has spent too much on defense and he shouldn't have extended Bush's tax cuts. My point is that Repubs are ignorant about what exactly Obama's expenses are.

With a dozen scandals, foreign policy in disarray and unemployment unchanged during the Obama administration why would the radical left suddenly worry about what the GOP thinks about the debt? Answer: it beats talking about the abject mess of Obama care.

And what about in the Senate and the speeches of CLIMATE CHANGE this past week? These people are scrambling to change the subject. Democrats are scared they are going to lose power...and they well should be...because they are. They cannot HIDE from ObamaCare.

Lol and republicans can't hide from their shitty approval ratings and their ideological civil war. Look, I'm not saying the dems are infallible, but to suggest republicans are winning right now is completely ridiculous.

 

[Andylusion]

With a dozen scandals, foreign policy in disarray and unemployment unchanged during the Obama administration why would the radical left suddenly worry about what the GOP thinks about the debt? Answer: it beats talking about the abject mess of Obama care.

And what about in the Senate and the speeches of CLIMATE CHANGE this past week? These people are scrambling to change the subject. Democrats are scared they are going to lose power...and they well should be...because they are. They cannot HIDE from ObamaCare.

Lol and republicans can't hide from their shitty approval ratings and their ideological civil war. Look, I'm not saying the dems are infallible, but to suggest republicans are winning right now is completely ridiculous.

Personally I don't care about their approval ratings. Nor do I care who wins.

But.... that said, no, I'm not going to stop pointing out the level of fiscal incompetence has been going on under tax and spend Obama. Yes I am going to hammer Democraps over and over about the debt.

Why? Cause I'm right. The debt is a huge issue. Over spending is a huge issue. I don't give a crap about 'well party X is going to win!'... big whoopty doo. The fact is, Democraps have caused the debt we're in, and it needs to stop. Period.

All your blaw blaw blaw blaw blaw doesn't change anything.

 

[Clementine]

The debt is mainly welfare and benefits being tripled under Obama. NOT infrastructure, science or real investment within our country!

But as you can see the increase in welfare spending was mandatory. It was not Obama's doing.

sure it was moron; and 5-plus years into all this prosperity you idiots are insisting things are so much better; and out of the other side of your mouths crying that welfare, food stamps and unemployment cant be cut by one penny or one day


explain

Those votes don't buy themselves. We must fund it so those people can keep their keepers in office.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Your ignorance on this issue is laughable. Here is ample proof revenue is way too low by historical standards .

Revenue as % of GDP, average, since 1944: 17.5%
Revenue as % of GDP, average, since 2001: 16.3%

Spedning as % of GDP, average, since 1944: 20.2%
Spending as % of GDP, average, since 2001: 20.5%
Historical Tables | The White House
Table 1.2

Thus:
Your claim that revenue is "too low" is one born from mindless partisan bigotry.

Never mind that none of this changes the fact that the -only- reason we have a deficit is that we choose to spend more than we take in.

What the **** are you talking about?

Just giving you the facts, along with the source for those facts.

The fact that you choose to ignore those facts because they disrupt your chosen narrative only i(further) llustrates your mindless, partisan bigotry.

The -only- reason we have a deficit is that we choose to spend more than we take in. Period.

 

[Billy000]

Revenue as % of GDP, average, since 1944: 17.5%
Revenue as % of GDP, average, since 2001: 16.3%

Spedning as % of GDP, average, since 1944: 20.2%
Spending as % of GDP, average, since 2001: 20.5%
Historical Tables | The White House
Table 1.2

Thus:
Your claim that revenue is "too low" is one born from mindless partisan bigotry.

Never mind that none of this changes the fact that the -only- reason we have a deficit is that we choose to spend more than we take in.

What the **** are you talking about?

Just giving you the facts, along with the source for those facts.

The fact that you choose to ignore those facts because they disrupt your chosen narrative only i(further) llustrates your mindless, partisan bigotry.

The -only- reason we have a deficit is that we choose to spend more than we take in. Period.

Even if you were right, it means nothing. At one brief period revenue was very low which would obviously bring down the average. It means nothing. Revenue rarely got below 19%.

 

[M14 Shooter]

What the **** are you talking about?

Just giving you the facts, along with the source for those facts.

The fact that you choose to ignore those facts because they disrupt your chosen narrative only i(further) llustrates your mindless, partisan bigotry.

The -only- reason we have a deficit is that we choose to spend more than we take in. Period.

Even if you were right, it means nothing.

It means you are wrong.
And there's no question I am right.