Political Discussion thread

1962---There was alot of turmoil back then. Cold War, Cuban Missile Cris, Civil Rights and so on.

It's a mindset that holds no water or has any logic. Eventually it will reach a point when it can not sustain itself. I think we have reached that point, so I am going to jump on the taker bandwagon and take every thing I can get my hands on. Hope and change my ass. Lets take this country back about 50 years when we were number one in everything. Originally Posted by GP

There was always something going on no matter what time I would have chosen. The fact remains, our country is being changed for the worse. Let go back to what it was.

national debt grew 2 trillion in Reagan years, who by the proposed a balanced amendment that was rejected by the dems in congress. if we had that, everyone could have an obamo phone. below, debt under the obama admin

FY 2013* $17.5 trillion
FY 2012* $16.4 trillion
FY 2011 $14.8 trillion
FY 2010 $13.5 trillion
FY 2009 $11.9 trillion

may as well move on.

And remember Clinton? He took credit for looting the social security trust and making it part of the general fund. He called it a surplus. LOL uh huh!

fed tax revenue 2012 = 2.4 trillion
fed gross spend 2012= 3.8 trillion

so not double the spend, but taxes would have significantly jump, or deep spending cuts

national debt grew 2 trillion in Reagan years, who by the proposed a balanced amendment that was rejected by the dems in congress. if we had that, everyone could have an obamo phone. below, debt under the obama admin

FY 2013* $17.5 trillion
FY 2012* $16.4 trillion
FY 2011 $14.8 trillion
FY 2010 $13.5 trillion
FY 2009 $11.9 trillion

may as well move on. Originally Posted by lostforkate

And 2 trillion with 30 years interest is how much? 5 trillion. You don't seem to understand how much the debt obama inherited A) increased the deficit(compounding interest)and B) the way that money was spent was extremely unproductive. Nice try with the balanced budget amendment, but reagan could have vetoed any spending bill he wanted. The reason the deficit exploded under reagan was he cut taxes too low initially and had to raise them 11 or 12 times to keep the deficit from growing too large and he increased spending(defense dept) You may be too young to remember reagan's plan was to get into an arms race with the soviet union to force themselves into bankruptcy( even tough they were doing a perfectly fine job of bankrupting themselves without our help). Osama bin laden had the same rationale when he was fighting the russians in the 80"s, but that's when he was our "friend". So we never paid for reagan's debt and it's really hurting us now. Why is last dollar of debt more important than the first? If bush hadn't squandered the clinton surplus, spent trillion in the middle east, and could recognize an over heating housing market we'd be in much better shape.

fed tax revenue 2012 = 2.4 trillion
fed gross spend 2012= 3.8 trillion

so not double the spend, but taxes would have significantly jump, or deep spending cuts Originally Posted by lostforkate

The improving ecoonomy is already reducing the deficit, Didn't you consider that in your " analysis" of our budgetary woes.

bullshit, obama's plan is spending 2x the tax revenue, never happened before. Originally Posted by lostforkate

I see you corrected yourself in a following post. I really don't see your point. We're in a major recession. Most of the reason the deficit from bush's last budget and obama's budgets increased from the $700 billion or so we were running before the housing collapse to 1 trillion plus deficits after was the loss of revenue from people being unemployed and the increased costs of having unemployed people. Bush increased federal spending 50% in his terms. obama has increased it about 20%, mostly to clean up the mess he was left with.

And remember Clinton? He took credit for looting the social security trust and making it part of the general fund. He called it a surplus. LOL uh huh! Originally Posted by GP

I think you winged me,AGAIN. I believe it was reagan who started the practice you are Alluding to. Didn't help him balance any budgets though.

fed tax revenue 2012 = 2.4 trillion
fed gross spend 2012= 3.8 trillion

so not double the spend, but taxes would have significantly jump, or deep spending cuts Originally Posted by lostforkate

You do realize (probably not) don't you, that collectively, we're currently being taxed at about 15% of GDP, whereas historically it's typically closer to 19 or 20%?

So spare me the crocodile tears.

no problem, lets just the terrorist, and nations that support them establish terrorist training camps, plant opium field, and fly planes into buildings, and whatever other things they had planned.

under clinton, remember when our boys got dragged through the streets, and there was no retaliation? we became the paper tiger. And gave the terrortists the taste for blood with no consequences, so they moved to bigger and better things

And 2 trillion with 30 years interest is how much? 5 trillion. You don't seem to understand how much the debt obama inherited A) increased the deficit(compounding interest)and B) the way that money was spent was extremely unproductive. Nice try with the balanced budget amendment, but reagan could have vetoed any spending bill he wanted. The reason the deficit exploded under reagan was he cut taxes too low initially and had to raise them 11 or 12 times to keep the deficit from growing too large and he increased spending(defense dept) You may be too young to remember reagan's plan was to get into an arms race with the soviet union to force themselves into bankruptcy( even tough they were doing a perfectly fine job of bankrupting themselves without our help). Osama bin laden had the same rationale when he was fighting the russians in the 80"s, but that's when he was our "friend". So we never paid for reagan's debt and it's really hurting us now. Why is last dollar of debt more important than the first? If bush hadn't squandered the clinton surplus, spent trillion in the middle east, and could recognize an over heating housing market we'd be in much better shape. Originally Posted by drluv1

ok, obama supporting brainiacks, what has obama administration done to support to support (how about stimulating growth) in the private sector, you know the people that pay taxes, and jobs are not reliant upon tax revenue or continued debt?

ok, obama supporting brainiacks, what has obama administration done to support to support (how about stimulating growth) in the private sector, you know the people that pay taxes, and jobs are not reliant upon tax revenue or continued debt? Originally Posted by lostforkate

Thanks for asking!



The inconvenient fact is, the lagging economy is caused by, as much as anything, public sector job losses.



Isn't that what conservatives want? A growing private sector, and a shrinking public sector? Then when they get it, they bitch about the economy it causes.

another lame argument posed, is blaming the former presidents like Reagan for what we have today, like its all his fault. If you want to blame, I will blame Carter. Look at the mess he inherited from Carter. double digit inflation, and energy crisis, high unemployment. Reagan greatly improved america, and one could say that the clinton's surplus was the benefit of reagan's supply side economics coming to fruition.
Oh yea, for rural people, the grain embargo, which was an carter attempt to get russia out of afghanistan, at the expense of the farmer. The farmers never signed up to fight that battle, which is why fully support our military. Our military is full of brave who signed up to defend freedom.
I support federal spending to get people working, this is Roosevelt ideal. I do not support federal spending to keep people home, or other entitlement. I know several people who say they are better unemployed than working.

that chart is only the adds, not the losses