Casper Posted April 18, 2011 Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42643641/ns/business-eye_on_the_economy/http://money.cnn.com/2011/04/18/markets/markets_newyork/index.htm?hpt=T2S&P is only giving until 2013 for major progress before they downgrade America's credit rating. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted April 18, 2011 Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 All of a sudden we need to hurry up and balance the budget, and of course if Obama doesn't do it, it's the Dems fault, right? Boy, would've been nice to keep that surplus Clinton had... I wonder what happened between Clinton and now that royally f*(ked us? Things that make you go hmmmm.... I'm just enjoying my tax break that you poor people keep giving me.Super rich see federal taxes drop dramaticallyhttp://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110417/ap_on_re_us/us_no_taxes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casper Posted April 18, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 All of a sudden we need to hurry up and balance the budget, and of course if Obama doesn't do it, it's the Dems fault, right? Boy, would've been nice to keep that surplus Clinton had... I wonder what happened between Clinton and now that royally f*(ked us? Things that make you go hmmmm.... I'm just enjoying my tax break that you poor people keep giving me.Super rich see federal taxes drop dramaticallyhttp://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110417/ap_on_re_us/us_no_taxesTypical. Immediately goes to the blame game. How about just shut up and fix the problem at hand? That's my motto. If my credit rating drops, I'm going to find out why and fix the problem. PS: Keep blaming Bush. That's cool. I see we're still in Afghanistan and Iraq, Gitmo is still open, we're still sending billions in financial aid overseas, etc. Oh, and bailing out GM and Chrysler totally helped too. Wait? What's that? When Bush left the debt was at $10 trillion, and now it's at $14.2 trillion? Well hows that? It took Bush eight years to raise the debt $4 trillion dollars. Obama did it in 2? No way. You're lying. Oh, and Clinton? Really? That's who you're going to hype? The man who passed the "American Dream" bill that enabled alternative financing for homes and encouraged people who couldn't afford it to buy homes, thus creating the housing bubble that just popped? Really? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted April 18, 2011 Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 If you don't understand what mistakes were made in the past, then you're doomed to repeat them. Obama isn't perfect, and I never said he was, but he's only ONE guy.The U-turn president: Barack Obama’s top ten flip-flopshttp://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100083104/the-u-turn-president-barack-obama-top-ten-flip-flops/Of course, the people who most often say "Let's not place blame" are the ones where the blame lays, so I don't find that shocking.You really don't want to get into the numbers game on the deficit, because you're not giving percentages. Bush all but DOUBLED the deficit -- 100%, and you'll grill Obama for raising it 40% as a temporary measure Besides, President Bush presided over one of the longest periods of economic stagnation since Herbert Hoover. Look at the S&P index from 2000 to 2010 and tell me how much it grew... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonik Posted April 18, 2011 Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 (edited) Obama isn't perfect, and I never said he was, but he's only ONE guy.Yet for most of the rest of your post you continue to blame Bush. He was only ONE guy.and you'll grill Obama for raising it 40% as a temporary measure.The next 10 years or so is not temporary...it is moving the problem to beyond your term limit. Typical of all Presidents. Edited April 18, 2011 by Tonik Wow do I suck at editing, quoting and posting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casper Posted April 18, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 If you don't understand what mistakes were made in the past, then you're doomed to repeat them. Obama isn't perfect, and I never said he was, but he's only ONE guy.The U-turn president: Barack Obama’s top ten flip-flopshttp://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100083104/the-u-turn-president-barack-obama-top-ten-flip-flops/Of course, the people who most often say "Let's not place blame" are the ones where the blame lays, so I don't find that shocking.You really don't want to get into the numbers game on the deficit, because you're not giving percentages. Bush all but DOUBLED the deficit -- 100%, and you'll grill Obama for raising it 40% as a temporary measure Besides, President Bush presided over one of the longest periods of economic stagnation since Herbert Hoover. Look at the S&P index from 2000 to 2010 and tell me how much it grew... Bush didn't double it. In his eight years, he raised it 75.2%. He was just one man. Reagan did much worse. Reagan raised it 168%. He, too, was just one man. Obama in two years has raised it 28.8%. Let's look at dollars. Bush came in with a debt of $5.9 trillion dollars. Senior Clinton wasn't your savior. He just didn't do much. The debt still went up while he was in office (22.5% actually). When Bush left office, the debt was at $10.6 trillion. That's what Obama inherited. We're currently over $14.2 trillion dollars. Now, you can sit there and say so and so was worse or so and so caused this. However, the only relevant fact here is that instead of fixing a problem, Obama has made it worse. Any increases are unacceptable. As for this massive increase in national debt being temporary, I'll believe that one when I see it. He's promised a whole lot of stuff. Kinda reminds me of the old saying, "shit in one hand and wish in the other, see which one fills up first". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted April 18, 2011 Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 Define, worse? The unemployment rate is dropping, and the vast amount of economists don't back what the GOP is doing... So, just because it's not happening RIGHT NOW, ZOMFG!!1!!11!, doesn't mean progress isn't being made. We can yo-yo the economy all you want, but slow and steady wins the race. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFM Posted April 18, 2011 Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 The US went from being a British Colony, to a Chinese Colony in under 300 years. Meh... 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted April 18, 2011 Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 It's called "starving the beast". Give huge tax cuts to create a defecit, then claim you need to shrink the size of the gov't to recoup the loss. In the end, the businesses get tax cuts, social services get gutted, and the working people get the shaft. The perfect triple play for the modern Republican. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casper Posted April 18, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 Define, worse? The unemployment rate is dropping, and the vast amount of economists don't back what the GOP is doing... So, just because it's not happening RIGHT NOW, ZOMFG!!1!!11!, doesn't mean progress isn't being made. We can yo-yo the economy all you want, but slow and steady wins the race. Really? The unemployment rate is dropping? Huh. That's odd. When Bush left, it was at 7.1%. It's now at 9.2%. Sure it spiked to 10.6%, so technically it has dropped, but if you look at the past 9 months to a year, it sure looks like it's holding steady in the 9% range with a jump to over 10%. And you can't forget the underemployment rate. Where's that one right now? Nearly 20%? The highest ever? Slow and steady? The US went from being a British Colony, to a Chinese Colony in under 300 years. Meh... Pretty much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonik Posted April 18, 2011 Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 In the end, the businesses get tax cuts, social services get gutted, and the working people get the shaft. The perfect triple play for the modern Republican.Raise taxes on businesses, social services balloon to an unsustainable level and the people that create jobs get the shaft. The perfect triple play for the modern Democrat.If you are driving your bike down the road and veer off the road and crash in the ditch does it really matter whether it is the 'left' ditch or the 'right' ditch? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casper Posted April 18, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 It's called "starving the beast". Give huge tax cuts to create a defecit, then claim you need to shrink the size of the gov't to recoup the loss. In the end, the businesses get tax cuts, social services get gutted, and the working people get the shaft. The perfect triple play for the modern Republican.Get rid of tax credits, cuts, loopholes, etc. One flat percent for individuals, and one flat percent for businesses. No way around it. Must pay. You could substantially lower the tax rates while the government would see see larger incomes. Or, get rid of income tax altogether and use instead a Federal sales tax. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted April 18, 2011 Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 The party of the rich, by the rich, for the richhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/dec/02/taxandspending-us-politicsGovernment of the rich, by the rich, for the richhttp://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2011/02/political_economyNine Charts to Better Understand the Budgethttp://www.good.is/post/nine-charts-to-better-understand-the-budget/?utm_content=headline&utm_medium=hp_carousel&utm_source=slide_3Do-Nothing Congress as a Curehttp://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/13/business/economy/13leonhardt.html?_r=1Dems Maneuver GOP Into Voting Against Their Own Budget Proposal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casper Posted April 18, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 The party of the rich, by the rich, for the richhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/dec/02/taxandspending-us-politicsGovernment of the rich, by the rich, for the richhttp://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2011/02/political_economyNine Charts to Better Understand the Budgethttp://www.good.is/post/nine-charts-to-better-understand-the-budget/?utm_content=headline&utm_medium=hp_carousel&utm_source=slide_3Do-Nothing Congress as a Curehttp://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/13/business/economy/13leonhardt.html?_r=1Dems Maneuver GOP Into Voting Against Their Own Budget ProposalThink for yourself for once. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casper Posted April 18, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 Here are some more percentages for you. When Bush came into office, the debt to GDP ratio was at 57.7%. When he left office, it was at 74.1%, the worst in history. It took him eight years to raise it 16.4%. Obama has raised it to 95.1%, an incredible 21%, in just two years. You really think this is progress? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted April 18, 2011 Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 Think for yourself for once.Yea, because I'm an expert on everything. I'm going to put my blinders on and not take ANY other opinions or data into account and end up just doing what's right by my 'gut feel' since I'm going to go pray on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casper Posted April 18, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 Yea, because I'm an expert on everything. I'm going to put my blinders on and not take ANY other opinions or data into account and end up just doing what's right by my 'gut feel' since I'm going to go pray on it.No, you'll just be a sheep and think what you're told to think. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disclaimer Posted April 18, 2011 Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 No, you'll just be a sheep and think what you're told to think.That doesn't even make sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casper Posted April 18, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 That doesn't even make sense.Really? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted April 18, 2011 Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 Here are some more percentages for you. When Bush came into office, the debt to GDP ratio was at 57.7%. When he left office, it was at 74.1%, the worst in history. It took him eight years to raise it 16.4%. Obama has raised it to 95.1%, an incredible 21%, in just two years. You really think this is progress?the real question here is when does the effect of one administrations policy end, and when does the effect of another's begin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casper Posted April 18, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 the real question here is when does the effect of one administrations policy end, and when does the effect of another's begin.So, you're blaming Clinton for what happened to the economy while Bush was in office? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFM Posted April 18, 2011 Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 I regularly cited myself on my thesis. The professors loved that I could think for myself. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted April 18, 2011 Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 So, you're blaming Clinton for what happened to the economy while Bush was in office?i never said that.do you always answer questions with other questions? im honestly asking this question:when do the effects of an administrations policies end, and the policies of the next administration begin? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buildit Posted April 18, 2011 Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 I regularly cited myself on my thesis. The professors loved that I could think for myself.You went to Phenix online didn't you. Oddly enough a bad credit rating may be the ticket to cutting our debt. I mean if the value of the dollar goes down then we can pay the debt easier. Kind of like offering a million shares of stock at $100 a share, then having a 2:1 split and revaluing the stock to $10 a share and buying them all back. When the dollar is worth 1/1000 of the value at which the investors purchased the bonds we'll turn 14 trillion in debt into 1.4 billion. Then we can borrow like no tomorrow again, see it's easy! Just as the USSR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fusion Posted April 18, 2011 Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 You went to Phenix online didn't you. Oh yeah? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.