"Obama doubled the national debt"
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 1 of 21 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 407
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Maryland- USA
    Posts
    3,048
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1598
    Likes (Received)
    1871

    Default "Obama doubled the national debt"

    I suppose there is no harm in viewing these trends in real time instead of the out of context distortion by talking points designed to undermine each administrations actions.

    I am a simpleton-
    I believe the government has a valid role as a lender of last resort which uses this capacity to blunt the worse tendencies of downturns.
    I take this as the preferred action to ‘austerity’ which I would judge unnecessarily protracted the recession in Europe in comparison to the support the US rapidly put in place.
    That delaying action in Europe in turn I would judge slowed global growth as we recovered from the downturn.
    This included the oft assigned ‘Obama recovery’ which was slower than the pundits would have preferred and miss represented as a failure of the administration.

    The other measure I take to be part of rational administration of revenue in a nation is to build reserves during times of relative prosperity.
    These reserves can be used for structural investment in the nation which can be judged to augment growth as well as remaining as a buffer for those times when once again drawdowns are required from the national coffers for emergency expenditures and simple maintenance of market strength during downturns.

    What is happening now will define our national prospects a decade from now.
    I don’t think we should wait for talking point distortions.
    We can attempt to judge now how our actions are designed to face those outcomes.


    The U.S. government is set to borrow nearly $1 trillion this year, an 84 percent jump from last year - The Washington Post
    Last edited by Trboatworks; 02-04-2018 at 09:02 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Mebane North Carolina USA
    Posts
    6,437
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    52
    Likes (Received)
    1781

    Default

    I thought giving tax breaks to the rich would fix everything.

    Maybe they should take the trillion and buy power ball tickets.

  3. Likes Milland, JoeE., Hopefuldave, jmead liked this post
  4. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Maryland- USA
    Posts
    3,048
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1598
    Likes (Received)
    1871

    Default

    My post sounds much more partisan than I feel.
    I think this is a very basic question of how revenues should be administered.
    The effect of these actions must be taken in the broader view of the economic conditions under which they are taken and the eventual benefit and liabilities created.

    I believe the condemnation of Obama on this point is simplistic and inaccurate.
    On current actions I cannot judge the eventual effect but they do raise questions.

    “Stimulus” at this juncture appears unwise as the predicted return may be weak while this action strips out future capacity to take such actions at times when they may be more than simply beneficial but required.

  5. Likes Spinit liked this post
  6. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO USA
    Posts
    12,048
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    48
    Likes (Received)
    5389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trboatworks View Post
    My post sounds much more partisan than I feel.
    I think this is a very basic question of how revenues should be administered.
    The effect of these actions must be taken in the broader view of the economic conditions under which they are taken and the eventual benefit and liabilities created.

    I believe the condemnation of Obama on this point is simplistic and inaccurate.
    On current actions I cannot judge the eventual effect but they do raise questions.

    “Stimulus” at this juncture appears unwise as the predicted return may be weak while this action strips out future capacity to take such actions at times when they may be more than simply beneficial but required.
    They dont care.
    They have never had any goal except to bankrupt the nation so they have an excuse to drop all public spending.

  7. Likes JoeE., itsmeBernie, Hopefuldave liked this post
  8. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Houston, USA
    Posts
    346
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1041
    Likes (Received)
    233

    Default

    We have tried it the lefts way for the last decade, let's see what happens when the right takes charge.

  9. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO USA
    Posts
    12,048
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    48
    Likes (Received)
    5389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rbdjr59 View Post
    We have tried it the lefts way for the last decade, let's see what happens when the right takes charge.
    Well...so far they have added a trillion in debt. And at least doubled the deficit.

    Frankly, since the thugs had both house and senate and we've been running under CR and sequester, you can hardly call it the Left running things.

  10. Likes Milland, Spinit, Hopefuldave liked this post
  11. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Maryland- USA
    Posts
    3,048
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1598
    Likes (Received)
    1871

    Default

    It does not appear to make much difference to the economic trajectory of the nation which party resides.
    Do you have a preferred metric for how you would measure success or failure now that right has “taken charge”.

    I am not ignoring your point- I just look at the long view and I am not sure if I can attribute much control of the economy to either party outside of some narrow times of crisis.

    In any case- that point has been well reviewed:

    The Economy Under Democratic vs. Republican Presidents - Reports - United States Joint Economic Committee

    This is not my area of interest.
    I am more concerned with what specific actions are taken in regards to revenue build or destruction.
    Specifically, I am addressing how stimulus is accounted for in the management of those inputs.

  12. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Houston, USA
    Posts
    346
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1041
    Likes (Received)
    233

    Default

    The left wrote the budget in 2008 and we've been on CR's ever since. The best the republicans could do was the sequester, which hurt as much as it helped. Half of your "thugs" were rinos anyway so yeah the left has been running the show up until Trump shook things up.

  13. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO USA
    Posts
    12,048
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    48
    Likes (Received)
    5389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rbdjr59 View Post
    The left wrote the budget in 2008 and we've been on CR's ever since. The best the republicans could do was the sequester, which hurt as much as it helped. Half of your "thugs" were rinos anyway so yeah the left has been running the show up until Trump shook things up.
    Obama wrote the sequester.
    And no, a full budget was not passed in 08.
    Continuing resolution - Wikipedia

    And yes...trump and the thugs added a trillion in debt just now...
    Using reconcilitation to do it.

  14. Likes JoeE., sealark37, Hopefuldave liked this post
  15. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Houston, USA
    Posts
    346
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1041
    Likes (Received)
    233

    Default

    I stand corrected, the democratic house elected in 2006 started the current CR debacle and it continues to this day. They were able to pass the .9 trillion stimulus in 09, which coincidently just about matches the deficit. But I don't give a rat's ass about the deficit or the debt. It's how they spend it and how it interferes with my life that bother me. As I said previously, the left had it's chance and blew it, now lets see what Trump can do. Numbers don't lie.

  16. Likes Louis K, alan speyrer liked this post
  17. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    bainbridge island
    Posts
    941
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    159
    Likes (Received)
    229

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rbdjr59 View Post
    As I said previously, the left had it's chance and blew it, now lets see what Trump can do. Numbers don't lie.
    numbers lie when you don't know where they come from or where they go. this isn't a test, and i don't intend to argue it: but did Clinton cut spending or did he raise taxes to "balance the budget"? now take your answer, go google it, and you'll probably find that 50% of everyone disagrees with you.


    If taxes were raised to the point that the budget were balanced, and private and public pensions were fully funded (at market rates, not a 7.5% fantasy), how many years would it be before all economic activity ceased because it was no longer profitable for anyone to do business in America? i'd say not long.


    its pretty simple math:

    human reserve capacity: say its 120%
    tax rate: say its 40%
    government efficiency: 50%.

    take 40% multiply by 50% (because half of what the government does was good for someone) and we get 20%.

    120% minus 40%, add 20% and you get back to 100%. what does this mean? it means in this hypothetical economy i described, nothing is getting better or worse. in America today, both taxes are too high and the government's efficiency is negative. for every dollar they steal from someone i'd say more than 1 dollar worth of GDP is destroyed at home or abroad. (i'm being slightly hyperbolic here, but you should consider seriously the possibility their efficiency is less than zer0)

    collectively nothing will get better until just about everything is fundamentally changed: and as we look at history, nations go broke before they get better once they get sick.


    so when you look at nations that seem to be doing ok, but they have higher tax rates than America does: its simply because their governments spend the money more efficiently in my opinion.

  18. Likes Monarchist, JoeE. liked this post
  19. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Maryland- USA
    Posts
    3,048
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1598
    Likes (Received)
    1871

    Default

    I always thought Clinton got lucky and served during a very high period of GDP growth and therefore was better positioned to meet expenditures.
    Obama- dramatically not so lucky- collapse in revenue and dire need to extend into stimulus.

    I don't mind being corrected- like I say, I am a bit a simpleton on economics..

  20. Likes JoeE., Ries, morsetaper2 liked this post
  21. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Virginia
    Posts
    10,417
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    5843
    Likes (Received)
    4612

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johansen View Post
    so when you look at nations that seem to be doing ok, but they have higher tax rates than America does: its simply because their governments spend the money more efficiently in my opinion.
    Some do. Others are not that different - just fudging a different suite of numbers in a different manner.

    Some of those held-out as examples of well-off are in worse shape by far, and on "numbers" not many even bother to talk about. This short-shot is just the tip of a very large iceberg:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2016/03/16/rich...n-problem.html

    Add crumbling transport infrastructures - hardly unique to the USA.. and we are using up investments of past generations, neither repairing, sustaining, nor replacing them, and even less expanding them to suit the needs of a larger population.

    Farmer might call that eating yer "seed corn", save that it is already gone and we are ever more often left having to eat s**t - worse, nought but worthless promissory notes FOR it, rather than genuine s**t.

  22. Likes digger doug liked this post
  23. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Country
    UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    4,490
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2138
    Likes (Received)
    1975

    Default

    Like it or not, each four year administration is living with the economy that was created by the previous four year administration.

    President Obama inherited the biggest financial crisis since the great depression. President Trump inherited an economy that was showing steady growth and high employment levels. In both cases, the second term, if there is one, will show whether their policies were good or bad.

    I think that President Obama did quite well in that test. President Trump's performance is still awaiting evaluation.

  24. Likes dcsipo, Greg White liked this post
  25. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    uk
    Posts
    13,293
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3904
    Likes (Received)
    6115

    Default

    You need to understand something, they could not keep slavery, so what you do is you let everyone think there free, then you put a system in place that pays them, at first it seams costly, so the way round that is you devalue the currency. Eventually the rich get there slaves back, its just a game, its just a basic function of society.

    You devalue the currency by removing any connection between it and reality - no longer tie it to a fixed commodity that only exists in a limited qty etc. Then your free to duplicate it, make more of it and therefore some one with say 100,000 of your currency one year effectively only has 50,000 of your currency the next year, rinse and repeat over a few decades and you regain your slaves, just instead of using whips you use numbers and rewards, your slaves are now playing donkey carrot stick and you don't even have to stand there and beat them with the stick to keep them in there place.

    This is what most governments have against the digital currencies like bit coins, yes to a degree there value is manipulated, but its a tangible thing and there’s only X number of them. hence there is in some strange ways more security in them than a lot of other so called real currencies, things like bit-coin are in some ways above government manipulation and thats a big problem to the elite.

    Its like gold, is it truly now worth more or is it still worth what it was 200 years ago and its just the dollars now worth less?

    Equally does it really matter one iota what a countries borrowing is, if that money then gets converted into more jobs for the slaves just at the expense of devaluing any funds the other slaves hold. Replace slaves with citizens, royal subjects etc if that makes you feel better.

    Read George Orwels 1984 and look at when it was written, then watch the Matrix then ask your self do you want to swallow the blue or the red pill and at least realise its a choice your making everyday to some degree.

  26. Likes Demon73 liked this post
  27. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,268
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    412
    Likes (Received)
    751

    Default

    WTF is the national dept?

  28. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Wisconsin (from May to November); Florida (from November to May)
    Posts
    1,618
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    43
    Likes (Received)
    391

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gobo View Post
    WTF is the national dept?
    The National Department, silly!

  29. Likes Bobw, Demon73 liked this post
  30. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    447
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1
    Likes (Received)
    284

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gobo View Post
    WTF is the national dept?
    Its the t-bills we sell that are a safe haven for capital in an unsure world.

  31. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    bainbridge island
    Posts
    941
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    159
    Likes (Received)
    229

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Monarchist View Post
    This short-shot is just the tip of a very large iceberg:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2016/03/16/rich...n-problem.html
    The pension problem is particularly interesting because it is fundamentally impossible for everyone to store up enough real assets to pay for their retirement.



    basically its not possible for everyone/anyone to store up more than about one year of their gross domestic product, if even a few people try to do so the system breaks down almost immediately. this is pretty simple to understand if you're a farmer, or work at a steel plant. you make 60 bucks an hour and you need 500,000 usd to pay for your retirement?

    do you have 10,000 tons of steel stacked in your backyard? of course not. so the assets have to be stored virtually within the financial system which leaves you to the mercy of those skilled in the art of usury.

  32. Likes JoeE. liked this post
  33. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    447
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1
    Likes (Received)
    284

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gobo View Post
    WTF is the national dept?
    I am dyslexic , I need to say the word I will type , to know if I should type b or p, so this slipped right past me.


Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
2