Will Republicans ever admit the mess they left President Obama?

[Jroc]

This all seems pretty silly. Hardcore partisans are predictable:

When my guy is in office and something good happens, it's because of my guy.

When my guy is in office and something bad happens, it's because of the other guy.

Bush left behind a disaster. Either a President is responsible for what happens during his term or he is not. Either the buck stops with him, or it does not.
.

When has the buck EVER stopped with Barack Obama, Mac? I don't know as I've ever seen a President who blames his own short comings on others more than this President! He's quick to take credit for things that happen that he's had very little to do with...like the price of gasoline going down...but even quicker to blame George W. Bush or the Republicans for the slow recovery by the economy and a dismal record of job creation.

It's really less of Obama than it is his supporters that do it. Some (life Franco) go all the way back to Reagan to shift the blame. That's a pretty far stretch, but they do it all the time.

On one hand they tell us of this miraculous recovery, and on the other they tell us why we need so many people on government programs. Republicans are the ones responsible for those on government programs, and Obama is responsible for this lower unemployment rate.

That's how it works with these guys.

Do you remember when republicans said criticizing our president was treasonous?? Quite a turn around

Since I was critical of Bush for many of his policy decisions...I guess that makes me the second coming of Benedict Arnold! Criticizing our politicians is as American as apple pie. It's what makes us who we are. If you don't want criticism of government leaders...move to North Korea or Cuba.

Did you want to help out Faun and tell us all what Obama policy initiative created jobs? Or help him explain why if raising taxes supposedly created the Clinton era economic boom...it is that Slick Willie is now saying that the corporate tax rate is too high and needs to be lowered?

Certainly oldone you don't want to give republicans any credit for those 73 straight months of job gains Do you?....maybe it was yellen maybe obama but one thing for sure ,,It would have been more and better if republicans thought of america instead of their party first

Obama's economy is mostly low wage and part time jobs. This economy sucks get your head out of your ass

 

[Deleted member 53821]

I think if any mess was ever left behind Trump will have to fix it.

 

[eddiew]

When has the buck EVER stopped with Barack Obama, Mac? I don't know as I've ever seen a President who blames his own short comings on others more than this President! He's quick to take credit for things that happen that he's had very little to do with...like the price of gasoline going down...but even quicker to blame George W. Bush or the Republicans for the slow recovery by the economy and a dismal record of job creation.

It's really less of Obama than it is his supporters that do it. Some (life Franco) go all the way back to Reagan to shift the blame. That's a pretty far stretch, but they do it all the time.

On one hand they tell us of this miraculous recovery, and on the other they tell us why we need so many people on government programs. Republicans are the ones responsible for those on government programs, and Obama is responsible for this lower unemployment rate.

That's how it works with these guys.

Do you remember when republicans said criticizing our president was treasonous?? Quite a turn around

Since I was critical of Bush for many of his policy decisions...I guess that makes me the second coming of Benedict Arnold! Criticizing our politicians is as American as apple pie. It's what makes us who we are. If you don't want criticism of government leaders...move to North Korea or Cuba.

Did you want to help out Faun and tell us all what Obama policy initiative created jobs? Or help him explain why if raising taxes supposedly created the Clinton era economic boom...it is that Slick Willie is now saying that the corporate tax rate is too high and needs to be lowered?

Certainly oldone you don't want to give republicans any credit for those 73 straight months of job gains Do you?....maybe it was yellen maybe obama but one thing for sure ,,It would have been more and better if republicans thought of america instead of their party first

Obama's economy is mostly low wage and part time jobs. This economy sucks get your head out of your ass

And when dems want to raise minimum pay Pubs hide their heads up their asses

 

[eddiew]

When has the buck EVER stopped with Barack Obama, Mac? I don't know as I've ever seen a President who blames his own short comings on others more than this President! He's quick to take credit for things that happen that he's had very little to do with...like the price of gasoline going down...but even quicker to blame George W. Bush or the Republicans for the slow recovery by the economy and a dismal record of job creation.

It's really less of Obama than it is his supporters that do it. Some (life Franco) go all the way back to Reagan to shift the blame. That's a pretty far stretch, but they do it all the time.

On one hand they tell us of this miraculous recovery, and on the other they tell us why we need so many people on government programs. Republicans are the ones responsible for those on government programs, and Obama is responsible for this lower unemployment rate.

That's how it works with these guys.

Do you remember when republicans said criticizing our president was treasonous?? Quite a turn around

Since I was critical of Bush for many of his policy decisions...I guess that makes me the second coming of Benedict Arnold! Criticizing our politicians is as American as apple pie. It's what makes us who we are. If you don't want criticism of government leaders...move to North Korea or Cuba.

Did you want to help out Faun and tell us all what Obama policy initiative created jobs? Or help him explain why if raising taxes supposedly created the Clinton era economic boom...it is that Slick Willie is now saying that the corporate tax rate is too high and needs to be lowered?

Certainly oldone you don't want to give republicans any credit for those 73 straight months of job gains Do you?....maybe it was yellen maybe obama but one thing for sure ,,It would have been more and better if republicans thought of america instead of their party first

Obama's economy is mostly low wage and part time jobs. This economy sucks get your head out of your ass

And just where did you think those 800000 jobs lost per month under your ah bush went ? Think they all got jobs as scientists etc etc

 

[Jroc]

It's really less of Obama than it is his supporters that do it. Some (life Franco) go all the way back to Reagan to shift the blame. That's a pretty far stretch, but they do it all the time.

On one hand they tell us of this miraculous recovery, and on the other they tell us why we need so many people on government programs. Republicans are the ones responsible for those on government programs, and Obama is responsible for this lower unemployment rate.

That's how it works with these guys.

Do you remember when republicans said criticizing our president was treasonous?? Quite a turn around

Since I was critical of Bush for many of his policy decisions...I guess that makes me the second coming of Benedict Arnold! Criticizing our politicians is as American as apple pie. It's what makes us who we are. If you don't want criticism of government leaders...move to North Korea or Cuba.

Did you want to help out Faun and tell us all what Obama policy initiative created jobs? Or help him explain why if raising taxes supposedly created the Clinton era economic boom...it is that Slick Willie is now saying that the corporate tax rate is too high and needs to be lowered?

Certainly oldone you don't want to give republicans any credit for those 73 straight months of job gains Do you?....maybe it was yellen maybe obama but one thing for sure ,,It would have been more and better if republicans thought of america instead of their party first

Obama's economy is mostly low wage and part time jobs. This economy sucks get your head out of your ass

And when dems want to raise minimum pay Pubs hide their heads up their asses

Conservatives want good paying jobs in this country , Leftist want to raise the minimum pay of McDonald's workers...Friken geniuses

 

[healthmyths]

It's really less of Obama than it is his supporters that do it. Some (life Franco) go all the way back to Reagan to shift the blame. That's a pretty far stretch, but they do it all the time.

On one hand they tell us of this miraculous recovery, and on the other they tell us why we need so many people on government programs. Republicans are the ones responsible for those on government programs, and Obama is responsible for this lower unemployment rate.

That's how it works with these guys.

Do you remember when republicans said criticizing our president was treasonous?? Quite a turn around

Since I was critical of Bush for many of his policy decisions...I guess that makes me the second coming of Benedict Arnold! Criticizing our politicians is as American as apple pie. It's what makes us who we are. If you don't want criticism of government leaders...move to North Korea or Cuba.

Did you want to help out Faun and tell us all what Obama policy initiative created jobs? Or help him explain why if raising taxes supposedly created the Clinton era economic boom...it is that Slick Willie is now saying that the corporate tax rate is too high and needs to be lowered?

Certainly oldone you don't want to give republicans any credit for those 73 straight months of job gains Do you?....maybe it was yellen maybe obama but one thing for sure ,,It would have been more and better if republicans thought of america instead of their party first

Obama's economy is mostly low wage and part time jobs. This economy sucks get your head out of your ass

And when dems want to raise minimum pay Pubs hide their heads up their asses

BECAUSE you idiots... READ the facts OK???

Of the 3.5 million working at minimum wage:
50.6% or 1,797,000 were mostly employed teenagers age 16 to 24 years
Tables 1 - 10; Characteristics of Minimum Wage Workers: 2012

YOU idiots think EVERY HOURLY worker is paid MINIMUM WAGE! There are per the government less then 3.5 million that work at the Federal minimum wage level!

SO you idiots that say raise to $15 for less then 3.5 million guess who will be replaced by robots?
THESE people because it will be CHEAPER for robots to do what these people do!
HERE read what the employers of these people plan to do!!!!

The robot is shown below. It occupies 24 square feet, and is much smaller and efficient than most assembly-line fast-food operations. It provides "gourmet cooking methods never before used in a fast food restaurant" and will deposit the completed burger into a bag. It does all of this without a trace of attitude.
Today, U.S. fast-food workers will strike across 270 cities in a protest for higher wages and union rights that they hope will catch the attention of candidates in 2016 elections, organizers said.

The walkouts will be followed by protests in 500 cities by low-wage workers in such sectors as fast food and home and child care, a statement by organizers of the Fight for $15 campaign said on Monday.

The protests and strikes are aimed at gaining candidates’ support heading into the 2016 election for a minimum wage of $15 an hour and union rights, it said.

The strikes and protests will include workers from McDonald’s, Wendy’s, Burger King , KFC and other restaurants, the statement said.

And while we sympathize with their demands for higher wages, here is the simple reason why they will be very much futile.
Dear Striking Fast-Food Workers: Meet The Machine That Just Put You Out Of A Job | Zero Hedge

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It's really less of Obama than it is his supporters that do it. Some (life Franco) go all the way back to Reagan to shift the blame. That's a pretty far stretch, but they do it all the time.

On one hand they tell us of this miraculous recovery, and on the other they tell us why we need so many people on government programs. Republicans are the ones responsible for those on government programs, and Obama is responsible for this lower unemployment rate.

That's how it works with these guys.

Do you remember when republicans said criticizing our president was treasonous?? Quite a turn around

Since I was critical of Bush for many of his policy decisions...I guess that makes me the second coming of Benedict Arnold! Criticizing our politicians is as American as apple pie. It's what makes us who we are. If you don't want criticism of government leaders...move to North Korea or Cuba.

Did you want to help out Faun and tell us all what Obama policy initiative created jobs? Or help him explain why if raising taxes supposedly created the Clinton era economic boom...it is that Slick Willie is now saying that the corporate tax rate is too high and needs to be lowered?

Certainly oldone you don't want to give republicans any credit for those 73 straight months of job gains Do you?....maybe it was yellen maybe obama but one thing for sure ,,It would have been more and better if republicans thought of america instead of their party first

Obama's economy is mostly low wage and part time jobs. This economy sucks get your head out of your ass

And when dems want to raise minimum pay Pubs hide their heads up their asses

No, we point out the negative ramifications of increased minimum wage such as less jobs and less businesses moving into such an area. That's on top of the problem we already have which is the expansion of automation to replace humans and companies leaving the country for cheaper labor.

As for answering the question we always pose to liberals, they can never seem to answer it: If increasing minimum wage to $15.00 an hour is good, then increasing it to $30.00 should be better. If increasing minimum wage to $30.00 an hour is better, then increasing it to $45.00 an hour is best.

If you don't agree with this, why not????

 

[healthmyths]

So you idiots favoring $15 minimum wage..........
WHAT will happen to the below folks wages when they demand more money for their higher skill wages?

United States Average Hourly Wages | 1964-2016 | Data | Chart | Calendar

 

[Faun]

More bullshit. Wht you describe as raising them "slightly," was in fact...

Two bills passed in 1982 and 1984 together"constituted the biggest tax increase ever enacted during peacetime," Thorndike said.

Taxes: What people forget about Reagan - Sep. 8, 2010​

Simple math here, Faun! So simple even a progressive like you shouldn't have a problem with it!

If you take Reagan's tax cuts and compare them to his tax raises...which is substantially more than the other?

Holyfuckingshit!

Look at the chart Ray From Cleveland posted yesterday. While the decrease was bigger than the increase... the same is true about the corporate tax rate under Obama.

That's why the two of you look like complete idiots. Reagan lowered corporate taxes in a recession and then raised them back to about 27% after the recession ended. You credit that for a booming economy which followed. Obama did exactly the same thing. Ray moronically cites that as a failure for Obama.

Obama lowered corporate tax rates? When?

Holyfuckingshit!

Did you not look at the chart you posted?

Yes I did. And did you not pay attention enough to understand that it's the previous administrations tax reduction and not Obama? He spent his first year entirely on Commie Care. He never lowered the corporate tax rate. He increased it--yes, but never lowered it.

WTF?? The chart you posted indicates the average corporate tax rate hit a historic low in 2011.

You think Bush was still president??

Wall Street Journal

Corporate income-tax receipts typically fall during recessions, and they declined sharply after the 2008 financial crisis, which wiped out big swaths of profits across the huge financial sector. But U.S. profits have rebounded sharply in recent quarters, while tax receipts have stayed low.

So where is the money? There are a lot of moving pieces, budget watchers say, but one view shared inside Washington is that a temporary tax break—supported by both political parties—is a key reason.

This tax break, known as "bonus depreciation," has allowed companies to write off investments in goods like industrial equipment, manufacturing machinery and computers in the year in which they're bought rather than over time. The White House estimates the subsidy has saved companies roughly $55 billion in corporate income taxes over each of the past two years.

[...]

The tax break shrinks for calendar 2012. Now, companies can write off only half of their investments, but the White House has proposed expanding it to again cover 100%. The White House estimated this would cost roughly $5 billion, as it only accelerates deductions businesses would otherwise have taken over time. Business groups have supported the tax break, and some are now lobbying Congress to extend it through 2012.
_____________________________________________________​

Bonus Depreciation Increased and Extended Under 2010 Tax Act

Businesses typically are allowed to deduct the costs of capital expenditures over time according to various depreciation schedules. In 2008, 2009 and 2010 businesses were allowed to deduct 50 percent of the cost of eligible property (generally, tangible personal property with recovery periods of 20 years or less) in the year of acquisition. The recently enacted Tax Relief Act of 2010 extends the first-year 50% write-off for eligible property placed in service during 2011 and 2012 (and in 2013 for aircraft and certain long-term-production-period property), and provides a new first-year 100% write off for certain property placed in service in 2011.​

 

[Faun]

When has the buck EVER stopped with Barack Obama, Mac? I don't know as I've ever seen a President who blames his own short comings on others more than this President! He's quick to take credit for things that happen that he's had very little to do with...like the price of gasoline going down...but even quicker to blame George W. Bush or the Republicans for the slow recovery by the economy and a dismal record of job creation.

It's really less of Obama than it is his supporters that do it. Some (life Franco) go all the way back to Reagan to shift the blame. That's a pretty far stretch, but they do it all the time.

On one hand they tell us of this miraculous recovery, and on the other they tell us why we need so many people on government programs. Republicans are the ones responsible for those on government programs, and Obama is responsible for this lower unemployment rate.

That's how it works with these guys.

Do you remember when republicans said criticizing our president was treasonous?? Quite a turn around

Since I was critical of Bush for many of his policy decisions...I guess that makes me the second coming of Benedict Arnold! Criticizing our politicians is as American as apple pie. It's what makes us who we are. If you don't want criticism of government leaders...move to North Korea or Cuba.

Did you want to help out Faun and tell us all what Obama policy initiative created jobs? Or help him explain why if raising taxes supposedly created the Clinton era economic boom...it is that Slick Willie is now saying that the corporate tax rate is too high and needs to be lowered?

Certainly oldone you don't want to give republicans any credit for those 73 straight months of job gains Do you?....maybe it was yellen maybe obama but one thing for sure ,,It would have been more and better if republicans thought of america instead of their party first

Obama's economy is mostly low wage and part time jobs. This economy sucks get your head out of your ass

Full time jobs: 7,629,000 (84%)
1/2009: 115,818,000
3/2016: 123,447,000

Part time jobs: 1,441,000 (16%)
1/2009: 26,377,000
3/2016: 27,818,000

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Simple math here, Faun! So simple even a progressive like you shouldn't have a problem with it!

If you take Reagan's tax cuts and compare them to his tax raises...which is substantially more than the other?

Holyfuckingshit!

Look at the chart Ray From Cleveland posted yesterday. While the decrease was bigger than the increase... the same is true about the corporate tax rate under Obama.

That's why the two of you look like complete idiots. Reagan lowered corporate taxes in a recession and then raised them back to about 27% after the recession ended. You credit that for a booming economy which followed. Obama did exactly the same thing. Ray moronically cites that as a failure for Obama.

Obama lowered corporate tax rates? When?

Holyfuckingshit!

Did you not look at the chart you posted?

Yes I did. And did you not pay attention enough to understand that it's the previous administrations tax reduction and not Obama? He spent his first year entirely on Commie Care. He never lowered the corporate tax rate. He increased it--yes, but never lowered it.

WTF?? The chart you posted indicates the average corporate tax rate hit a historic low in 2011.

You think Bush was still president??

Wall Street Journal

Corporate income-tax receipts typically fall during recessions, and they declined sharply after the 2008 financial crisis, which wiped out big swaths of profits across the huge financial sector. But U.S. profits have rebounded sharply in recent quarters, while tax receipts have stayed low.

So where is the money? There are a lot of moving pieces, budget watchers say, but one view shared inside Washington is that a temporary tax break—supported by both political parties—is a key reason.

This tax break, known as "bonus depreciation," has allowed companies to write off investments in goods like industrial equipment, manufacturing machinery and computers in the year in which they're bought rather than over time. The White House estimates the subsidy has saved companies roughly $55 billion in corporate income taxes over each of the past two years.

[...]

The tax break shrinks for calendar 2012. Now, companies can write off only half of their investments, but the White House has proposed expanding it to again cover 100%. The White House estimated this would cost roughly $5 billion, as it only accelerates deductions businesses would otherwise have taken over time. Business groups have supported the tax break, and some are now lobbying Congress to extend it through 2012.
_____________________________________________________​

Bonus Depreciation Increased and Extended Under 2010 Tax Act

Businesses typically are allowed to deduct the costs of capital expenditures over time according to various depreciation schedules. In 2008, 2009 and 2010 businesses were allowed to deduct 50 percent of the cost of eligible property (generally, tangible personal property with recovery periods of 20 years or less) in the year of acquisition. The recently enacted Tax Relief Act of 2010 extends the first-year 50% write-off for eligible property placed in service during 2011 and 2012 (and in 2013 for aircraft and certain long-term-production-period property), and provides a new first-year 100% write off for certain property placed in service in 2011.​

Your article talks about write-offs--not lowering the corporate tax rates.

 

[sonic]

 

[Faun]

Holyfuckingshit!

Look at the chart Ray From Cleveland posted yesterday. While the decrease was bigger than the increase... the same is true about the corporate tax rate under Obama.

That's why the two of you look like complete idiots. Reagan lowered corporate taxes in a recession and then raised them back to about 27% after the recession ended. You credit that for a booming economy which followed. Obama did exactly the same thing. Ray moronically cites that as a failure for Obama.

Obama lowered corporate tax rates? When?

Holyfuckingshit!

Did you not look at the chart you posted?

Yes I did. And did you not pay attention enough to understand that it's the previous administrations tax reduction and not Obama? He spent his first year entirely on Commie Care. He never lowered the corporate tax rate. He increased it--yes, but never lowered it.

WTF?? The chart you posted indicates the average corporate tax rate hit a historic low in 2011.

You think Bush was still president??

Wall Street Journal

Corporate income-tax receipts typically fall during recessions, and they declined sharply after the 2008 financial crisis, which wiped out big swaths of profits across the huge financial sector. But U.S. profits have rebounded sharply in recent quarters, while tax receipts have stayed low.

So where is the money? There are a lot of moving pieces, budget watchers say, but one view shared inside Washington is that a temporary tax break—supported by both political parties—is a key reason.

This tax break, known as "bonus depreciation," has allowed companies to write off investments in goods like industrial equipment, manufacturing machinery and computers in the year in which they're bought rather than over time. The White House estimates the subsidy has saved companies roughly $55 billion in corporate income taxes over each of the past two years.

[...]

The tax break shrinks for calendar 2012. Now, companies can write off only half of their investments, but the White House has proposed expanding it to again cover 100%. The White House estimated this would cost roughly $5 billion, as it only accelerates deductions businesses would otherwise have taken over time. Business groups have supported the tax break, and some are now lobbying Congress to extend it through 2012.
_____________________________________________________​

Bonus Depreciation Increased and Extended Under 2010 Tax Act

Businesses typically are allowed to deduct the costs of capital expenditures over time according to various depreciation schedules. In 2008, 2009 and 2010 businesses were allowed to deduct 50 percent of the cost of eligible property (generally, tangible personal property with recovery periods of 20 years or less) in the year of acquisition. The recently enacted Tax Relief Act of 2010 extends the first-year 50% write-off for eligible property placed in service during 2011 and 2012 (and in 2013 for aircraft and certain long-term-production-period property), and provides a new first-year 100% write off for certain property placed in service in 2011.​

Your article talks about write-offs--not lowering the corporate tax rates.

It talks about how the average rate per profits paid by corporations hit historic lows in 2011. You should know that since it was reflected in the chart you posted.

 

[Jroc]

It's really less of Obama than it is his supporters that do it. Some (life Franco) go all the way back to Reagan to shift the blame. That's a pretty far stretch, but they do it all the time.

On one hand they tell us of this miraculous recovery, and on the other they tell us why we need so many people on government programs. Republicans are the ones responsible for those on government programs, and Obama is responsible for this lower unemployment rate.

That's how it works with these guys.

Do you remember when republicans said criticizing our president was treasonous?? Quite a turn around

Since I was critical of Bush for many of his policy decisions...I guess that makes me the second coming of Benedict Arnold! Criticizing our politicians is as American as apple pie. It's what makes us who we are. If you don't want criticism of government leaders...move to North Korea or Cuba.

Did you want to help out Faun and tell us all what Obama policy initiative created jobs? Or help him explain why if raising taxes supposedly created the Clinton era economic boom...it is that Slick Willie is now saying that the corporate tax rate is too high and needs to be lowered?

Certainly oldone you don't want to give republicans any credit for those 73 straight months of job gains Do you?....maybe it was yellen maybe obama but one thing for sure ,,It would have been more and better if republicans thought of america instead of their party first

Obama's economy is mostly low wage and part time jobs. This economy sucks get your head out of your ass

Full time jobs: 7,629,000 (84%)
1/2009: 115,818,000
3/2016: 123,447,000

Part time jobs: 1,441,000 (16%)
1/2009: 26,377,000
3/2016: 27,818,000

Million jobs a year? Pretty bad actually. if not for so many people dropping out of the workforce think of what the unemployment number would actually be...Low paying, low skilled, service jobs and 2% growth. Obama's "booming" economy

 

[Faun]

Do you remember when republicans said criticizing our president was treasonous?? Quite a turn around

Since I was critical of Bush for many of his policy decisions...I guess that makes me the second coming of Benedict Arnold! Criticizing our politicians is as American as apple pie. It's what makes us who we are. If you don't want criticism of government leaders...move to North Korea or Cuba.

Did you want to help out Faun and tell us all what Obama policy initiative created jobs? Or help him explain why if raising taxes supposedly created the Clinton era economic boom...it is that Slick Willie is now saying that the corporate tax rate is too high and needs to be lowered?

Certainly oldone you don't want to give republicans any credit for those 73 straight months of job gains Do you?....maybe it was yellen maybe obama but one thing for sure ,,It would have been more and better if republicans thought of america instead of their party first

Obama's economy is mostly low wage and part time jobs. This economy sucks get your head out of your ass

Full time jobs: 7,629,000 (84%)
1/2009: 115,818,000
3/2016: 123,447,000

Part time jobs: 1,441,000 (16%)
1/2009: 26,377,000
3/2016: 27,818,000

Million jobs a year? Pretty bad actually. if not for so many people dropping out of the workforce think of what the unemployment number would actually be...Low paying, low skilled, service jobs and 2% growth. Obama's "booming" economy

Quite amazing actually when you factor in the Great Recession he inherited which sucked about 4-6 million jobs from his total.

If you wanna see what crap numbers look like, take a gander at the Bush bookends... neither of whom inherited a recession, no less the worst one since the Great Depression...

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Carter .... 10,345,000
Reagan .... 16,131,000
Bush ....... 2,637,000
Clinton ... 22,900,000
Bush ....... 1,348,000
Obama ...... 9,721,000

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Obama lowered corporate tax rates? When?

Holyfuckingshit!

Did you not look at the chart you posted?

Yes I did. And did you not pay attention enough to understand that it's the previous administrations tax reduction and not Obama? He spent his first year entirely on Commie Care. He never lowered the corporate tax rate. He increased it--yes, but never lowered it.

WTF?? The chart you posted indicates the average corporate tax rate hit a historic low in 2011.

You think Bush was still president??

Wall Street Journal

Corporate income-tax receipts typically fall during recessions, and they declined sharply after the 2008 financial crisis, which wiped out big swaths of profits across the huge financial sector. But U.S. profits have rebounded sharply in recent quarters, while tax receipts have stayed low.

So where is the money? There are a lot of moving pieces, budget watchers say, but one view shared inside Washington is that a temporary tax break—supported by both political parties—is a key reason.

This tax break, known as "bonus depreciation," has allowed companies to write off investments in goods like industrial equipment, manufacturing machinery and computers in the year in which they're bought rather than over time. The White House estimates the subsidy has saved companies roughly $55 billion in corporate income taxes over each of the past two years.

[...]

The tax break shrinks for calendar 2012. Now, companies can write off only half of their investments, but the White House has proposed expanding it to again cover 100%. The White House estimated this would cost roughly $5 billion, as it only accelerates deductions businesses would otherwise have taken over time. Business groups have supported the tax break, and some are now lobbying Congress to extend it through 2012.
_____________________________________________________​

Bonus Depreciation Increased and Extended Under 2010 Tax Act

Businesses typically are allowed to deduct the costs of capital expenditures over time according to various depreciation schedules. In 2008, 2009 and 2010 businesses were allowed to deduct 50 percent of the cost of eligible property (generally, tangible personal property with recovery periods of 20 years or less) in the year of acquisition. The recently enacted Tax Relief Act of 2010 extends the first-year 50% write-off for eligible property placed in service during 2011 and 2012 (and in 2013 for aircraft and certain long-term-production-period property), and provides a new first-year 100% write off for certain property placed in service in 2011.​

Your article talks about write-offs--not lowering the corporate tax rates.

It talks about how the average rate per profits paid by corporations hit historic lows in 2011. You should know that since it was reflected in the chart you posted.

I know what it talked about, but that wasn't the debate.

You said Reagan lowered corporate tax rates, but increased them again after the economy got moving. You said that's exactly what DumBama did. I asked when your big-eared dope ever lowered the corporate tax rate. You ran around Google only to find I was correct, and then posted information that dealt with corporate taxes, but couldn't find one that said DumBama lowered the corporate tax rate.

 

[healthmyths]

Since I was critical of Bush for many of his policy decisions...I guess that makes me the second coming of Benedict Arnold! Criticizing our politicians is as American as apple pie. It's what makes us who we are. If you don't want criticism of government leaders...move to North Korea or Cuba.

Did you want to help out Faun and tell us all what Obama policy initiative created jobs? Or help him explain why if raising taxes supposedly created the Clinton era economic boom...it is that Slick Willie is now saying that the corporate tax rate is too high and needs to be lowered?

Certainly oldone you don't want to give republicans any credit for those 73 straight months of job gains Do you?....maybe it was yellen maybe obama but one thing for sure ,,It would have been more and better if republicans thought of america instead of their party first

Obama's economy is mostly low wage and part time jobs. This economy sucks get your head out of your ass

Full time jobs: 7,629,000 (84%)
1/2009: 115,818,000
3/2016: 123,447,000

Part time jobs: 1,441,000 (16%)
1/2009: 26,377,000
3/2016: 27,818,000

Million jobs a year? Pretty bad actually. if not for so many people dropping out of the workforce think of what the unemployment number would actually be...Low paying, low skilled, service jobs and 2% growth. Obama's "booming" economy

Quite amazing actually when you factor in the Great Recession he inherited which sucked about 4-6 million jobs from his total.

If you wanna see what crap numbers look like, take a gander at the Bush bookends... neither of whom inherited a recession, no less the worst one since the Great Depression...

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Carter .... 10,345,000
Reagan .... 16,131,000
Bush ....... 2,637,000
Clinton ... 22,900,000
Bush ....... 1,348,000
Obama ...... 9,721,000

And NO OTHER President has ever faced these events that occurred during G.W. Bush presidency.

NOT ONE president in history ever had all these events that were gigantic earth shaking events and yet idiots like you seem to forget them!

A Major $8 trillion market loss
Are you aware that the dot.com bust occurred and cost $8 trillion in losses?
Again Clinton laid claim BUT someone had to pay and it occurred during Bush's first year!
$8 trillion in market losses MEAN lost tax revenue.
PLUS JOBS!!!!
According to the Los Angeles Times, when the dot-com bubble burst, it wiped out $8 trillion dollars in market value for tech companies.
More than half of the Internet companies created since 1995 were gone by 2004 -
and hundreds of thousands of skilled technology workers were out of jobs.
Source: The dot-com bubble: How to lose $5 trillion

The worst attacks on the USA in History.. 3,000 deaths!!!
Obviously most of you are UNAWARE 9/11 cost 3,000 lives, $2 trillion in lost businesses,market values assets.
Jobs lost in New York owing to the attacks: 146,100 JUST in New York.
Are you aware this happened???
Now before you idiots say "well Bush should have known"! DUMMIES... ever hear of the Gorelick Memo signed under CLINTON??
Gorelick Memo that created the wall between FBI & CIA thus no knowledge of the 9/11 bombers shared with the FBI!!!
Looks especially imprudent 10 years later.
Because the memo created a barrier for U.S. intelligence agencies to share information with the FBI, one of its unintended consequences may have been to prevent the FBI from receiving the necessary intelligence to stop the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, the worst in American history.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1124969/posts
1995 memo [Clinton presidency-concerned about Chinese election sales] Gorelick wrote, stated explicitly that they would “go beyond what is legally required, [to] prevent any risk of creating an unwarranted appearance that FISA is being used to avoid procedural safeguards which would apply in a criminal investigation.” GORELICK Memo!
Here read what NOT my words but other sources:
Jamie Gorelick’s wall barred anti-terror investigators from accessing the computer of Zacarias Moussaoui, the 20th hijacker, already in custody on an immigration violation shortly before 9/11.
At the time, an enraged FBI investigator wrote a prophetic memo to headquarters about the wall.
Whatever has happened to this — someday someone will die — and wall or not — the public will not understand why we were not more effective in throwing every resource we had at certain problems…..especially since the biggest threat to us UBL [Usama bin Laden], is getting the most protection.
So, a year before the 9/11 attacks, a special unit in the U.S. military was aware of the presence of an al-Queda cell in Brooklyn, New York, and sought to share its information with the FBI but was stopped cold.Why?Because (as described in the April 16, 2004 Washington Times piece) “on March 4, 1995, [Jamie Gorelick, the then number 2 official in the Clinton Justice Department, sent a 4-page directive] to FBI Director Louis Freeh and Mary Jo White, the New York-based U.S. attorney investigating the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
In the memo, Ms. Gorelick ordered Mr. Freeh and Ms. White to follow information-sharing procedures that ‘go beyond what is legally required,’ in order to avoid ‘any risk of creating an unwarranted appearance’ that the Justice Department was using Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants, instead of ordinary criminal investigative procedures, in an effort to undermine the civil liberties of terrorism suspects.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1461420/posts

The 9/11 terrorist attacks were the events that helped shape other financial events of the decade. After that terrible day in September 2001, our economic climate was never to be the same again. It was only the third time in history that the New York Stock Exchange was shut down for a period of time. In this case, it was closed from September 10 - 17. Besides the tragic human loss of that day, the economic loss cannot even be estimated. Some estimate that there was over $60 billion in insurance losses alone. Airlines didn't fly for 3 days!
Approximately 18,000 small businesses were either displaced or destroyed in Lower Manhattan after the Twin Towers fell. There was a buildup in homeland security on all levels. 9/11 caused a catastrophic financial loss for the U.S.
Source: 10 Events That Rocked the Financial World
Anthrax Attacks...
The 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States, also known as Amerithrax from its Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) case name, occurred over the course of several weeks beginning on Tuesday, September 18, 2001, one week after the September 11 attacks. Letters containing anthrax spores were mailed to several news media offices and two DemocraticU.S. Senators, killing five people and infecting 17 others.

$1 trillion in losses due to the WORST Hurricane SEASONS in history.
The worst, Katrina made landfall in Louisiana as a Category 3 in 2005. It took 1,836 lives and caused $81.2 billion in damages. It quickly became the biggest natural disaster in U.S. history, almost destroying New Orleans due to severe flooding.
Rank Disaster Year Deaths Damage* $250 Billion in damages in the 8 disasters of the top 15 disasters in history!
1. Hurricane Katrina (LA/MS/AL/FL) 2005 1833 $133,800,000,000
6. Hurricane Ike (TX/LA/MS) 2008 112 $27,000,000,000
7. Hurricane Wilma (FL) 2005 35 $17,100,000,000
8. Hurricane Rita (TX/LA) 2005 119 $17,100,000,000
9. Hurricane Charley (FL) 2004 35 $16,500,000,000
12. Midwest Floods 2008 24 $15,000,000,000
13. Hurricane Ivan (FL/AL) 2004 57 $13,000,000,000
14. 30-State Drought 2002 0 $11,400,000,000
Costliest U.S. Weather Disasters | Weather Underground

THESE events OCCURRED!
YET in SPITE of:
a) 400,000 jobs lost due to Hurricanes Katrina/Rita ,
b) 2,800,000 jobs lost in alone due to 9/11,
c) 300,000 jobs lost due to dot.com busts... In spite of nearly $8 trillion in lost businesses, market values, destroyed property..
IN SPITE of that:
2002 $157.8 billion deficit.. also 9/11 occurred and tax revenues lowered for years later due to dot.com/9-11 losses against revenue.
2003 $377.6 billion deficit.. BRAND new cabinet Homeland Security, plus loans made to businesses.. again tax revenues down..affect of 9/11
2004 $412.7 billion deficit.. Revenues up by 5.5% spending increased and economy getting back.
2005 $318.3 billion deficit.. revenues up by 14.5% deficit decreasing at rate of 22%
2006 $248.2 billion deficit.. revenues up by 11.7% deficit decrease 22%
2007 $160.7 billion deficit.. revenues up by 6.7% deficit decrease 35%
2008 $458.6 billion deficit.. revenues down and deficit INCREASED TARP loan mostly...
Research & Commentary

AFTER the tax cuts Federal Tax REVENUES Increased an average of 9.78% per year!!!
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historical

OH and yea how about THESE EVENTS that no other President ever experienced: 1) Dot.com bust-- 2) 9/11 3) Worst hurricane SEASONS...All of which made these numbers worse BUT still there was growth!!!
BEA National Economic Accounts
Average annual growth over 8 years 2.9% IN Spite of all the events AND if the housing bubble caused by the below people hadn't occurred it would have
been: 4.4% compared to what now???
2001 2.3% increase
2002 2.4%
2003 6.8%
2004 6.4%
2005 5.4%
2006 4.6%
2007 3.2%
2008 -7.7%

 

[Faun]

Holyfuckingshit!

Did you not look at the chart you posted?

Yes I did. And did you not pay attention enough to understand that it's the previous administrations tax reduction and not Obama? He spent his first year entirely on Commie Care. He never lowered the corporate tax rate. He increased it--yes, but never lowered it.

WTF?? The chart you posted indicates the average corporate tax rate hit a historic low in 2011.

You think Bush was still president??

Wall Street Journal

Corporate income-tax receipts typically fall during recessions, and they declined sharply after the 2008 financial crisis, which wiped out big swaths of profits across the huge financial sector. But U.S. profits have rebounded sharply in recent quarters, while tax receipts have stayed low.

So where is the money? There are a lot of moving pieces, budget watchers say, but one view shared inside Washington is that a temporary tax break—supported by both political parties—is a key reason.

This tax break, known as "bonus depreciation," has allowed companies to write off investments in goods like industrial equipment, manufacturing machinery and computers in the year in which they're bought rather than over time. The White House estimates the subsidy has saved companies roughly $55 billion in corporate income taxes over each of the past two years.

[...]

The tax break shrinks for calendar 2012. Now, companies can write off only half of their investments, but the White House has proposed expanding it to again cover 100%. The White House estimated this would cost roughly $5 billion, as it only accelerates deductions businesses would otherwise have taken over time. Business groups have supported the tax break, and some are now lobbying Congress to extend it through 2012.
_____________________________________________________​

Bonus Depreciation Increased and Extended Under 2010 Tax Act

Businesses typically are allowed to deduct the costs of capital expenditures over time according to various depreciation schedules. In 2008, 2009 and 2010 businesses were allowed to deduct 50 percent of the cost of eligible property (generally, tangible personal property with recovery periods of 20 years or less) in the year of acquisition. The recently enacted Tax Relief Act of 2010 extends the first-year 50% write-off for eligible property placed in service during 2011 and 2012 (and in 2013 for aircraft and certain long-term-production-period property), and provides a new first-year 100% write off for certain property placed in service in 2011.​

Your article talks about write-offs--not lowering the corporate tax rates.

It talks about how the average rate per profits paid by corporations hit historic lows in 2011. You should know that since it was reflected in the chart you posted.

I know what it talked about, but that wasn't the debate.

You said Reagan lowered corporate tax rates, but increased them again after the economy got moving. You said that's exactly what DumBama did. I asked when your big-eared dope ever lowered the corporate tax rate. You ran around Google only to find I was correct, and then posted information that dealt with corporate taxes, but couldn't find one that said DumBama lowered the corporate tax rate.

I was talking about the rate displayed in the chart you posted. I even referenced that chart to show Obama, like Reagan, lowered the rate. Yet according to you, it was good for the economy when Reagan did it; but bad when Obama did it.

 

[Wilbur Right]

Certainly oldone you don't want to give republicans any credit for those 73 straight months of job gains Do you?....maybe it was yellen maybe obama but one thing for sure ,,It would have been more and better if republicans thought of america instead of their party first

Obama's economy is mostly low wage and part time jobs. This economy sucks get your head out of your ass

Full time jobs: 7,629,000 (84%)
1/2009: 115,818,000
3/2016: 123,447,000

Part time jobs: 1,441,000 (16%)
1/2009: 26,377,000
3/2016: 27,818,000

Million jobs a year? Pretty bad actually. if not for so many people dropping out of the workforce think of what the unemployment number would actually be...Low paying, low skilled, service jobs and 2% growth. Obama's "booming" economy

Quite amazing actually when you factor in the Great Recession he inherited which sucked about 4-6 million jobs from his total.

If you wanna see what crap numbers look like, take a gander at the Bush bookends... neither of whom inherited a recession, no less the worst one since the Great Depression...

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Carter .... 10,345,000
Reagan .... 16,131,000
Bush ....... 2,637,000
Clinton ... 22,900,000
Bush ....... 1,348,000
Obama ...... 9,721,000

And NO OTHER President has ever faced these events that occurred during G.W. Bush presidency.

NOT ONE president in history ever had all these events that were gigantic earth shaking events and yet idiots like you seem to forget them!

A Major $8 trillion market loss
Are you aware that the dot.com bust occurred and cost $8 trillion in losses?
Again Clinton laid claim BUT someone had to pay and it occurred during Bush's first year!
$8 trillion in market losses MEAN lost tax revenue.
PLUS JOBS!!!!
According to the Los Angeles Times, when the dot-com bubble burst, it wiped out $8 trillion dollars in market value for tech companies.
More than half of the Internet companies created since 1995 were gone by 2004 -
and hundreds of thousands of skilled technology workers were out of jobs.
Source: The dot-com bubble: How to lose $5 trillion

The worst attacks on the USA in History.. 3,000 deaths!!!
Obviously most of you are UNAWARE 9/11 cost 3,000 lives, $2 trillion in lost businesses,market values assets.
Jobs lost in New York owing to the attacks: 146,100 JUST in New York.
Are you aware this happened???
Now before you idiots say "well Bush should have known"! DUMMIES... ever hear of the Gorelick Memo signed under CLINTON??
Gorelick Memo that created the wall between FBI & CIA thus no knowledge of the 9/11 bombers shared with the FBI!!!
Looks especially imprudent 10 years later.
Because the memo created a barrier for U.S. intelligence agencies to share information with the FBI, one of its unintended consequences may have been to prevent the FBI from receiving the necessary intelligence to stop the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, the worst in American history.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1124969/posts
1995 memo [Clinton presidency-concerned about Chinese election sales] Gorelick wrote, stated explicitly that they would “go beyond what is legally required, [to] prevent any risk of creating an unwarranted appearance that FISA is being used to avoid procedural safeguards which would apply in a criminal investigation.” GORELICK Memo!
Here read what NOT my words but other sources:
Jamie Gorelick’s wall barred anti-terror investigators from accessing the computer of Zacarias Moussaoui, the 20th hijacker, already in custody on an immigration violation shortly before 9/11.
At the time, an enraged FBI investigator wrote a prophetic memo to headquarters about the wall.
Whatever has happened to this — someday someone will die — and wall or not — the public will not understand why we were not more effective in throwing every resource we had at certain problems…..especially since the biggest threat to us UBL [Usama bin Laden], is getting the most protection.
So, a year before the 9/11 attacks, a special unit in the U.S. military was aware of the presence of an al-Queda cell in Brooklyn, New York, and sought to share its information with the FBI but was stopped cold.Why?Because (as described in the April 16, 2004 Washington Times piece) “on March 4, 1995, [Jamie Gorelick, the then number 2 official in the Clinton Justice Department, sent a 4-page directive] to FBI Director Louis Freeh and Mary Jo White, the New York-based U.S. attorney investigating the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
In the memo, Ms. Gorelick ordered Mr. Freeh and Ms. White to follow information-sharing procedures that ‘go beyond what is legally required,’ in order to avoid ‘any risk of creating an unwarranted appearance’ that the Justice Department was using Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants, instead of ordinary criminal investigative procedures, in an effort to undermine the civil liberties of terrorism suspects.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1461420/posts

The 9/11 terrorist attacks were the events that helped shape other financial events of the decade. After that terrible day in September 2001, our economic climate was never to be the same again. It was only the third time in history that the New York Stock Exchange was shut down for a period of time. In this case, it was closed from September 10 - 17. Besides the tragic human loss of that day, the economic loss cannot even be estimated. Some estimate that there was over $60 billion in insurance losses alone. Airlines didn't fly for 3 days!
Approximately 18,000 small businesses were either displaced or destroyed in Lower Manhattan after the Twin Towers fell. There was a buildup in homeland security on all levels. 9/11 caused a catastrophic financial loss for the U.S.
Source: 10 Events That Rocked the Financial World
Anthrax Attacks...
The 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States, also known as Amerithrax from its Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) case name, occurred over the course of several weeks beginning on Tuesday, September 18, 2001, one week after the September 11 attacks. Letters containing anthrax spores were mailed to several news media offices and two DemocraticU.S. Senators, killing five people and infecting 17 others.

$1 trillion in losses due to the WORST Hurricane SEASONS in history.
The worst, Katrina made landfall in Louisiana as a Category 3 in 2005. It took 1,836 lives and caused $81.2 billion in damages. It quickly became the biggest natural disaster in U.S. history, almost destroying New Orleans due to severe flooding.
Rank Disaster Year Deaths Damage* $250 Billion in damages in the 8 disasters of the top 15 disasters in history!
1. Hurricane Katrina (LA/MS/AL/FL) 2005 1833 $133,800,000,000
6. Hurricane Ike (TX/LA/MS) 2008 112 $27,000,000,000
7. Hurricane Wilma (FL) 2005 35 $17,100,000,000
8. Hurricane Rita (TX/LA) 2005 119 $17,100,000,000
9. Hurricane Charley (FL) 2004 35 $16,500,000,000
12. Midwest Floods 2008 24 $15,000,000,000
13. Hurricane Ivan (FL/AL) 2004 57 $13,000,000,000
14. 30-State Drought 2002 0 $11,400,000,000
Costliest U.S. Weather Disasters | Weather Underground

THESE events OCCURRED!
YET in SPITE of:
a) 400,000 jobs lost due to Hurricanes Katrina/Rita ,
b) 2,800,000 jobs lost in alone due to 9/11,
c) 300,000 jobs lost due to dot.com busts... In spite of nearly $8 trillion in lost businesses, market values, destroyed property..
IN SPITE of that:
2002 $157.8 billion deficit.. also 9/11 occurred and tax revenues lowered for years later due to dot.com/9-11 losses against revenue.
2003 $377.6 billion deficit.. BRAND new cabinet Homeland Security, plus loans made to businesses.. again tax revenues down..affect of 9/11
2004 $412.7 billion deficit.. Revenues up by 5.5% spending increased and economy getting back.
2005 $318.3 billion deficit.. revenues up by 14.5% deficit decreasing at rate of 22%
2006 $248.2 billion deficit.. revenues up by 11.7% deficit decrease 22%
2007 $160.7 billion deficit.. revenues up by 6.7% deficit decrease 35%
2008 $458.6 billion deficit.. revenues down and deficit INCREASED TARP loan mostly...
Research & Commentary

AFTER the tax cuts Federal Tax REVENUES Increased an average of 9.78% per year!!!
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historical

OH and yea how about THESE EVENTS that no other President ever experienced: 1) Dot.com bust-- 2) 9/11 3) Worst hurricane SEASONS...All of which made these numbers worse BUT still there was growth!!!
BEA National Economic Accounts
Average annual growth over 8 years 2.9% IN Spite of all the events AND if the housing bubble caused by the below people hadn't occurred it would have
been: 4.4% compared to what now???
2001 2.3% increase
2002 2.4%
2003 6.8%
2004 6.4%
2005 5.4%
2006 4.6%
2007 3.2%
2008 -7.7%

Smells like desperation. All your posts smell like that. Why?
Are you that desperate to rewrite history?

I guess I don't blame you. You supported Bush. Had I been that stupid, I would wanted a rewrite also.

 

[Faun]

Certainly oldone you don't want to give republicans any credit for those 73 straight months of job gains Do you?....maybe it was yellen maybe obama but one thing for sure ,,It would have been more and better if republicans thought of america instead of their party first

Obama's economy is mostly low wage and part time jobs. This economy sucks get your head out of your ass

Full time jobs: 7,629,000 (84%)
1/2009: 115,818,000
3/2016: 123,447,000

Part time jobs: 1,441,000 (16%)
1/2009: 26,377,000
3/2016: 27,818,000

Million jobs a year? Pretty bad actually. if not for so many people dropping out of the workforce think of what the unemployment number would actually be...Low paying, low skilled, service jobs and 2% growth. Obama's "booming" economy

Quite amazing actually when you factor in the Great Recession he inherited which sucked about 4-6 million jobs from his total.

If you wanna see what crap numbers look like, take a gander at the Bush bookends... neither of whom inherited a recession, no less the worst one since the Great Depression...

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Carter .... 10,345,000
Reagan .... 16,131,000
Bush ....... 2,637,000
Clinton ... 22,900,000
Bush ....... 1,348,000
Obama ...... 9,721,000

And NO OTHER President has ever faced these events that occurred during G.W. Bush presidency.

NOT ONE president in history ever had all these events that were gigantic earth shaking events and yet idiots like you seem to forget them!

A Major $8 trillion market loss
Are you aware that the dot.com bust occurred and cost $8 trillion in losses?
Again Clinton laid claim BUT someone had to pay and it occurred during Bush's first year!
$8 trillion in market losses MEAN lost tax revenue.
PLUS JOBS!!!!
According to the Los Angeles Times, when the dot-com bubble burst, it wiped out $8 trillion dollars in market value for tech companies.
More than half of the Internet companies created since 1995 were gone by 2004 -
and hundreds of thousands of skilled technology workers were out of jobs.
Source: The dot-com bubble: How to lose $5 trillion

The worst attacks on the USA in History.. 3,000 deaths!!!
Obviously most of you are UNAWARE 9/11 cost 3,000 lives, $2 trillion in lost businesses,market values assets.
Jobs lost in New York owing to the attacks: 146,100 JUST in New York.
Are you aware this happened???
Now before you idiots say "well Bush should have known"! DUMMIES... ever hear of the Gorelick Memo signed under CLINTON??
Gorelick Memo that created the wall between FBI & CIA thus no knowledge of the 9/11 bombers shared with the FBI!!!
Looks especially imprudent 10 years later.
Because the memo created a barrier for U.S. intelligence agencies to share information with the FBI, one of its unintended consequences may have been to prevent the FBI from receiving the necessary intelligence to stop the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, the worst in American history.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1124969/posts
1995 memo [Clinton presidency-concerned about Chinese election sales] Gorelick wrote, stated explicitly that they would “go beyond what is legally required, [to] prevent any risk of creating an unwarranted appearance that FISA is being used to avoid procedural safeguards which would apply in a criminal investigation.” GORELICK Memo!
Here read what NOT my words but other sources:
Jamie Gorelick’s wall barred anti-terror investigators from accessing the computer of Zacarias Moussaoui, the 20th hijacker, already in custody on an immigration violation shortly before 9/11.
At the time, an enraged FBI investigator wrote a prophetic memo to headquarters about the wall.
Whatever has happened to this — someday someone will die — and wall or not — the public will not understand why we were not more effective in throwing every resource we had at certain problems…..especially since the biggest threat to us UBL [Usama bin Laden], is getting the most protection.
So, a year before the 9/11 attacks, a special unit in the U.S. military was aware of the presence of an al-Queda cell in Brooklyn, New York, and sought to share its information with the FBI but was stopped cold.Why?Because (as described in the April 16, 2004 Washington Times piece) “on March 4, 1995, [Jamie Gorelick, the then number 2 official in the Clinton Justice Department, sent a 4-page directive] to FBI Director Louis Freeh and Mary Jo White, the New York-based U.S. attorney investigating the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
In the memo, Ms. Gorelick ordered Mr. Freeh and Ms. White to follow information-sharing procedures that ‘go beyond what is legally required,’ in order to avoid ‘any risk of creating an unwarranted appearance’ that the Justice Department was using Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants, instead of ordinary criminal investigative procedures, in an effort to undermine the civil liberties of terrorism suspects.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1461420/posts

The 9/11 terrorist attacks were the events that helped shape other financial events of the decade. After that terrible day in September 2001, our economic climate was never to be the same again. It was only the third time in history that the New York Stock Exchange was shut down for a period of time. In this case, it was closed from September 10 - 17. Besides the tragic human loss of that day, the economic loss cannot even be estimated. Some estimate that there was over $60 billion in insurance losses alone. Airlines didn't fly for 3 days!
Approximately 18,000 small businesses were either displaced or destroyed in Lower Manhattan after the Twin Towers fell. There was a buildup in homeland security on all levels. 9/11 caused a catastrophic financial loss for the U.S.
Source: 10 Events That Rocked the Financial World
Anthrax Attacks...
The 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States, also known as Amerithrax from its Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) case name, occurred over the course of several weeks beginning on Tuesday, September 18, 2001, one week after the September 11 attacks. Letters containing anthrax spores were mailed to several news media offices and two DemocraticU.S. Senators, killing five people and infecting 17 others.

$1 trillion in losses due to the WORST Hurricane SEASONS in history.
The worst, Katrina made landfall in Louisiana as a Category 3 in 2005. It took 1,836 lives and caused $81.2 billion in damages. It quickly became the biggest natural disaster in U.S. history, almost destroying New Orleans due to severe flooding.
Rank Disaster Year Deaths Damage* $250 Billion in damages in the 8 disasters of the top 15 disasters in history!
1. Hurricane Katrina (LA/MS/AL/FL) 2005 1833 $133,800,000,000
6. Hurricane Ike (TX/LA/MS) 2008 112 $27,000,000,000
7. Hurricane Wilma (FL) 2005 35 $17,100,000,000
8. Hurricane Rita (TX/LA) 2005 119 $17,100,000,000
9. Hurricane Charley (FL) 2004 35 $16,500,000,000
12. Midwest Floods 2008 24 $15,000,000,000
13. Hurricane Ivan (FL/AL) 2004 57 $13,000,000,000
14. 30-State Drought 2002 0 $11,400,000,000
Costliest U.S. Weather Disasters | Weather Underground

THESE events OCCURRED!
YET in SPITE of:
a) 400,000 jobs lost due to Hurricanes Katrina/Rita ,
b) 2,800,000 jobs lost in alone due to 9/11,
c) 300,000 jobs lost due to dot.com busts... In spite of nearly $8 trillion in lost businesses, market values, destroyed property..
IN SPITE of that:
2002 $157.8 billion deficit.. also 9/11 occurred and tax revenues lowered for years later due to dot.com/9-11 losses against revenue.
2003 $377.6 billion deficit.. BRAND new cabinet Homeland Security, plus loans made to businesses.. again tax revenues down..affect of 9/11
2004 $412.7 billion deficit.. Revenues up by 5.5% spending increased and economy getting back.
2005 $318.3 billion deficit.. revenues up by 14.5% deficit decreasing at rate of 22%
2006 $248.2 billion deficit.. revenues up by 11.7% deficit decrease 22%
2007 $160.7 billion deficit.. revenues up by 6.7% deficit decrease 35%
2008 $458.6 billion deficit.. revenues down and deficit INCREASED TARP loan mostly...
Research & Commentary

AFTER the tax cuts Federal Tax REVENUES Increased an average of 9.78% per year!!!
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historical

OH and yea how about THESE EVENTS that no other President ever experienced: 1) Dot.com bust-- 2) 9/11 3) Worst hurricane SEASONS...All of which made these numbers worse BUT still there was growth!!!
BEA National Economic Accounts
Average annual growth over 8 years 2.9% IN Spite of all the events AND if the housing bubble caused by the below people hadn't occurred it would have
been: 4.4% compared to what now???
2001 2.3% increase
2002 2.4%
2003 6.8%
2004 6.4%
2005 5.4%
2006 4.6%
2007 3.2%
2008 -7.7%

We've been through this already. The Great Recession Bush dumped on Obama cost more than all of those disasters combined.