This financial crisis is more serious of a threat to the USA and yet I haven’t heard a single idea come out of the GOP to address it. “No” is not an idea.
And while I’m up on my soap box, the GOP pointed to the stock market as proof of Obama’s poor leadership only three weeks ago. Is the current rally evidence that he has figured it all out?
Honestly Kyle, I refuse to believe you’re that dense. I think instead you’re being deliberately obtuse. You’ve read here long enough to know that I’m no GOP apologist and that I was very vocal in my opposition to the first bailout that Bush and sadly, my own Congressman supported.
The answer to head-up-the-buttedness stupidity is not pushing your head further up your backside. The answer to excessive spending is not more excessive spending. The answer to bad policy is not worse policy.
Yes, it’s from The Heritage Foundation. But the numbers in the chart are from the White House and the Congressional Budget office.
At some point, you’re going to have to get over blaming George Bush for everything from Katrina to New Coke to Season 7 of 24. He’s gone. He’s retired. He’s history. Even Obama says it’s his problem now. Heaven help us all.
Obama likes to boast about how he’ll cut the deficit in half in his four years in office. Well, do the math. He’s talking about the budget that he QUADRUPLED in his first FOUR WEEKS. Not as impressive now is it?
Just because the GOP screwed up, and I’ve admitted that on COUNTLESS occasions, doesn’t give the Democrats the right to screw up more. Principles and truth don’t change, no matter what letter you carry behind your name. But that’s a concept you either can’t grasp, or more likely refuse to grasp.
And you’ve never answered MY questions. Just how much government is too much? Just how much money is too much for them to spend? Where does it stop?
When you get to that number, then you can tell me were the money is coming from. We don’t have it. It doesn’t exist. So the choice will be to print it or borrow it from China.
The deficit HAS NOT QUADRUPLED!!! That is part of my frustration. The numbers in that chart are not an apples to apples comparison.
I know they try to explain it away and say that the wars are included in the chart but those are the same numbers Bush reported and he didn’t include the wars.
On the federal treasury’s web site they have a page that will tell you the outstanding federal debt on for any day over the past few decades.
The deficit by those numbers for the fiscal year ending Oct 1 2008 was $1.06 Trillion. Do it yourself and then tell me where the heritage foundation got its numbers.
Additionally between Oct 2008 and Jan 2009 the debt increased $500 billion.
My problem with all of this is that the GOP likes to move the goal posts. They distort both the problem and the Obama administration to gain political points. I even heard one GOP pundit on CNN say that Bush took the blame for 9/11, so Obama needed to start taking the blame for the fiscal meltdown. That’s three feet deep of BS and everyone just took it with a straight face.
To the point of how much money is enough. I’ll agree with you that we will not be able to spend like there is no tomorrow and not suffer the consequences. But I truly believe that this fiscal crisis is a larger threat to the USA than any terrorist, Iraqi WMD, or Taliban fighter ever has been. As such it would be a disaster for the largest single consumer in the economy (the US government) to make deep cuts. To put it another way would you have cut the Dept of Defense budget at the start of the Iraq war? We will need to cut spending and we will need to raise taxes, but not in the middle of the worst recession since WWII.
Play around with that treasury debt history. One of the startling things you’ll find is that the most fiscally conservative president in the past 30 years was Bill Clinton, and that the modern trend toward massive deficits began with Ronald Regan. I found that somewhat ironic.
You’re trying to interchange the debt (the link you provided) vs. the deficit.
The chart is from The Washington Post. The number on the chart are from the Congressional Budget Office and The White House. That would be the Obama White House.
No, I am talking about the increase in debt over a fiscal year. That is how much more the US spent than it collected in taxes in one year. What other definition of deficit is there?
On Oct 1st 2007 the total debt was approximately $9 trillion. On Oct 1st 2008 the total debt was approximately $10 trillion. We spent $1 trillion more than we had to spend over that fiscal year. How that is related to the $400 billion from the chart, I don’t know but I clearly remember that the Bush administration DID NOT include the wars in their numbers and these numbers look very similar to the numbers the Bush White House releases.
As an aside, how can the Heritage Foundation be so sure that the numbers in the graph include war spending when they did not create the graph and war spending not mentioned by the creator (the Washington Post). Also, you try claim that the historic deficit numbers came from the Obama Administration, but the graph clearly labels what information came from Obama and what came from the CBO. The historic numbers are not cited, so you can not say where they came from.
What your numbers really reveal is the power of Congress over the purse.
The Republican Congresses under President Bush (2001-2007) added just under $3T to the nation’s deat over 6 years; not admirable, but since the Dems took over (2007 -) we’ve already seen $2.4T added in less than three years.
By Obama’s own admission, his first year will see nearly as much debt increase as Bush’s entire first term.
Moreover, as bad as the economy is right now, it pales in comparison to the Wahhabist-Ba’athist-Khomeinist War. To think otherwise is painfully naive.
What all of these numbers show is that the political class is utterly out of control.
That the present administration wants to pour gasoline on an already raging spending fire shows both a critical lack of judgment and a cavalier attitude toward the future.
what you all fail to realize is that budgets for the govt are set 3 years out. The stimulus does not follow that as it is rushed through. For everyone who feels that govt spending is out of control I cant disagree but until an alternate solution is brought to the table you are going to have to sit down and shut the @#$% up. Thanks for telling what is going on, that is great that you can read charts and graphs, but guess what people…. these are not just graphs these are peoples lives.
As far as the 9/11 comment…. Bush didnt have a choice SMART GUY. He was not in the middle of transition when that took place and he didn’t inherit a mess… the comment was baseless and compared apples to oranges
The Write Side of My Brain 
How does it feel to be “anti-America”?
Funny, I think that picture was taken Jan 19, 2009.
CNN backs me up here. The GOP likes to forget that the Bush administration spent $7.2 trillion on the bailout before Obama took office.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/06/news/economy/where_stimulus_fits_in/?postversion=2009010610
This financial crisis is more serious of a threat to the USA and yet I haven’t heard a single idea come out of the GOP to address it. “No” is not an idea.
And while I’m up on my soap box, the GOP pointed to the stock market as proof of Obama’s poor leadership only three weeks ago. Is the current rally evidence that he has figured it all out?
Honestly Kyle, I refuse to believe you’re that dense. I think instead you’re being deliberately obtuse. You’ve read here long enough to know that I’m no GOP apologist and that I was very vocal in my opposition to the first bailout that Bush and sadly, my own Congressman supported.
The answer to head-up-the-buttedness stupidity is not pushing your head further up your backside. The answer to excessive spending is not more excessive spending. The answer to bad policy is not worse policy.
If you want to look at the actual picture of the Bush vs. Obama deficits take a look at this article: http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bush-deficit-vs-obama-deficit-in-pictures/
Yes, it’s from The Heritage Foundation. But the numbers in the chart are from the White House and the Congressional Budget office.
At some point, you’re going to have to get over blaming George Bush for everything from Katrina to New Coke to Season 7 of 24. He’s gone. He’s retired. He’s history. Even Obama says it’s his problem now. Heaven help us all.
Obama likes to boast about how he’ll cut the deficit in half in his four years in office. Well, do the math. He’s talking about the budget that he QUADRUPLED in his first FOUR WEEKS. Not as impressive now is it?
Just because the GOP screwed up, and I’ve admitted that on COUNTLESS occasions, doesn’t give the Democrats the right to screw up more. Principles and truth don’t change, no matter what letter you carry behind your name. But that’s a concept you either can’t grasp, or more likely refuse to grasp.
And you’ve never answered MY questions. Just how much government is too much? Just how much money is too much for them to spend? Where does it stop?
When you get to that number, then you can tell me were the money is coming from. We don’t have it. It doesn’t exist. So the choice will be to print it or borrow it from China.
Brilliant.
The deficit HAS NOT QUADRUPLED!!! That is part of my frustration. The numbers in that chart are not an apples to apples comparison.
I know they try to explain it away and say that the wars are included in the chart but those are the same numbers Bush reported and he didn’t include the wars.
On the federal treasury’s web site they have a page that will tell you the outstanding federal debt on for any day over the past few decades.
The deficit by those numbers for the fiscal year ending Oct 1 2008 was $1.06 Trillion. Do it yourself and then tell me where the heritage foundation got its numbers.
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np
Additionally between Oct 2008 and Jan 2009 the debt increased $500 billion.
My problem with all of this is that the GOP likes to move the goal posts. They distort both the problem and the Obama administration to gain political points. I even heard one GOP pundit on CNN say that Bush took the blame for 9/11, so Obama needed to start taking the blame for the fiscal meltdown. That’s three feet deep of BS and everyone just took it with a straight face.
To the point of how much money is enough. I’ll agree with you that we will not be able to spend like there is no tomorrow and not suffer the consequences. But I truly believe that this fiscal crisis is a larger threat to the USA than any terrorist, Iraqi WMD, or Taliban fighter ever has been. As such it would be a disaster for the largest single consumer in the economy (the US government) to make deep cuts. To put it another way would you have cut the Dept of Defense budget at the start of the Iraq war? We will need to cut spending and we will need to raise taxes, but not in the middle of the worst recession since WWII.
Play around with that treasury debt history. One of the startling things you’ll find is that the most fiscally conservative president in the past 30 years was Bill Clinton, and that the modern trend toward massive deficits began with Ronald Regan. I found that somewhat ironic.
You’re trying to interchange the debt (the link you provided) vs. the deficit.
The chart is from The Washington Post. The number on the chart are from the Congressional Budget Office and The White House. That would be the Obama White House.
No, I am talking about the increase in debt over a fiscal year. That is how much more the US spent than it collected in taxes in one year. What other definition of deficit is there?
On Oct 1st 2007 the total debt was approximately $9 trillion. On Oct 1st 2008 the total debt was approximately $10 trillion. We spent $1 trillion more than we had to spend over that fiscal year. How that is related to the $400 billion from the chart, I don’t know but I clearly remember that the Bush administration DID NOT include the wars in their numbers and these numbers look very similar to the numbers the Bush White House releases.
As an aside, how can the Heritage Foundation be so sure that the numbers in the graph include war spending when they did not create the graph and war spending not mentioned by the creator (the Washington Post). Also, you try claim that the historic deficit numbers came from the Obama Administration, but the graph clearly labels what information came from Obama and what came from the CBO. The historic numbers are not cited, so you can not say where they came from.
Kyle —
So what you’re trying to say is that you are OK with the $10 trillion in additional debt the Obama budget is going to saddle America’s future with?
Regards,
What your numbers really reveal is the power of Congress over the purse.
The Republican Congresses under President Bush (2001-2007) added just under $3T to the nation’s deat over 6 years; not admirable, but since the Dems took over (2007 -) we’ve already seen $2.4T added in less than three years.
By Obama’s own admission, his first year will see nearly as much debt increase as Bush’s entire first term.
Moreover, as bad as the economy is right now, it pales in comparison to the Wahhabist-Ba’athist-Khomeinist War. To think otherwise is painfully naive.
What all of these numbers show is that the political class is utterly out of control.
That the present administration wants to pour gasoline on an already raging spending fire shows both a critical lack of judgment and a cavalier attitude toward the future.
what you all fail to realize is that budgets for the govt are set 3 years out. The stimulus does not follow that as it is rushed through. For everyone who feels that govt spending is out of control I cant disagree but until an alternate solution is brought to the table you are going to have to sit down and shut the @#$% up. Thanks for telling what is going on, that is great that you can read charts and graphs, but guess what people…. these are not just graphs these are peoples lives.
As far as the 9/11 comment…. Bush didnt have a choice SMART GUY. He was not in the middle of transition when that took place and he didn’t inherit a mess… the comment was baseless and compared apples to oranges