Unemployment Under Biden

Have you seen the deficits of the last 3 years and the one soon to be?



Originally Posted by WTF

Damn, we're beginning to sound like Stalin and Trotsky. We're both deficit hawks and each is accusing the other of not being hawkish enough:

You yourself have wisely speculated that we may be up shit creek without a paddle if interest rates go back to 10%. I don’t know if that has changed. That is, if Satan has further poisoned your mind so that you no longer fear the national debt that will result from the 25% of GDP that we will allocate to stimulus during Covid if the additional Pelosi/Biden/Trump $2 trillion bill passes. Originally Posted by Tiny

I'm Stalin btw.

Does wtf imagine himself as :
Johann Reichhart

???

Does wtf imagine himself as :
Johann Reichhart

??? Originally Posted by oeb11

In your imaginary world.....you better hope I ain't!

WTF, Your last two posts, in terms of the representations you make about my beliefs and what I've written are complete and total bull shit. I've complained about deficits more than anyone in this forum except you. The difference is that you don't see fit or don't believe it's possible to make government more efficient and control expenditures. You want big government and high taxes. Yes, you do say the right things about reducing defense expenditures. But that's just a drop in the bucket compared to everything else.

So what are the models for how you'd like America to be? Well, if you read post #63 above and spend some time with the Wikipedia tables in post #61, you'll see the best case scenario for a large country would be that we become like Germany-- our GDP per capita drops 15%. We become 15% poorer than we were before. But Germans are smarter and more industrious than we are. More realistically, we become like France, 20% poorer. Oh, but you argue, the USA has resources, like oil and gas, that those countries don't. Well, not as long as the New Progressive Democratic Party controls the federal government. They've shown in the last four days they're going to make sure those resources stay in the ground. Originally Posted by Tiny

I've shown you the model I prefer.

I can't make you drink the holy water....I can only show it to you.

Reagan and his Voodoo Economics aren't the answer. You seem to be a proponent of that. If not , my apologies.

We have four big drivers of debt.

Defense
Medicare
Social Security
Tax Rate (To high lower tax revenues, To low lower tax revenues.

So the model that worked was the HWBush/Clinton model.

Bush raised taxes after 8 years of Reagan's nonsense, Clinton raised them again during an uptick in the economy. And Clinton and Newt cut entitlement and Defense Spending. So you had 2 tax increases and a slowing of spending....that combined with the SS tax increase of Reagan in 1986 made it seem we like Good times were her to stay. They along came junior Bush who cut taxes during a economic slow down {nothing wrong with that) and yet did not raise the tax rate when times started smoking. Then the credit crisis and Obama and then Trump. Two shitters when it comes to debt.

But if you want just a general view of the best economic plan...it is a Democrat in the WH and a Republican's House. 50/50 Senate.

That is a receipt for success no matter the President or House Leaders.

Damn, we're beginning to sound like Stalin and Trotsky. We're both deficit hawks and each is accusing the other of not being hawkish enough:

I'm Stalin btw. Originally Posted by Tiny

what??? I figured you'd be Trotsky; wtf Stalin. lol

Intersting how wtf claims to be a Libertarian - for small government and balanced budgets.
Then supports the DPST/ccp fiden cabal fulminant overspending on pork, graft, and corruption - including millions for Pakistan transexual education disguised in a 'stimulus relief bill" - from which Americans get peanuts - and islamic and totalitarian countries get millions and billions in graft and corruption from the largess of teh DPST/ccp party - fleeced from the America Citizen taxpayors the DPST/ccp hate with a passion!

Intersting how wtf claims to be a Libertarian - for small government and balanced budgets.
Then supports the DPST/ccp fiden cabal fulminant overspending on pork, graft, and corruption - including millions for Pakistan transexual education disguised in a 'stimulus relief bill" - from which Americans get peanuts - and islamic and totalitarian countries get millions and billions in graft and corruption from the largess of teh DPST/ccp party - fleeced from the America Citizen taxpayors the DPST/ccp hate with a passion! Originally Posted by oeb11

Interesting how you lie about what I support.

This message is hidden because WTF is on your ignore list.

The deceit of the oobidinss economy has started , we gonna give you 1400 and you will like it while we destroy thousands of jobs

The deceit of the oobidinss economy has started , we gonna give you 1400 and you will like it while we destroy thousands of jobs Originally Posted by rexdutchman

Even Trump wanted to give away that 1400 dollars...

Yup they held it up for this ,,,, wow are we stupid

Yup they held it up for this ,,,, wow are we stupid Originally Posted by rexdutchman

You do admit Trump wanted to give everyone 2000 dollars?

I've shown you the model I prefer.

I can't make you drink the holy water....I can only show it to you.

Reagan and his Voodoo Economics aren't the answer. You seem to be a proponent of that. If not , my apologies.

We have four big drivers of debt.

Defense
Medicare
Social Security
Tax Rate (To high lower tax revenues, To low lower tax revenues.

So the model that worked was the HWBush/Clinton model.

Bush raised taxes after 8 years of Reagan's nonsense, Clinton raised them again during an uptick in the economy. And Clinton and Newt cut entitlement and Defense Spending. So you had 2 tax increases and a slowing of spending....that combined with the SS tax increase of Reagan in 1986 made it seem we like Good times were her to stay. They along came junior Bush who cut taxes during a economic slow down {nothing wrong with that) and yet did not raise the tax rate when times started smoking. Then the credit crisis and Obama and then Trump. Two shitters when it comes to debt.

But if you want just a general view of the best economic plan...it is a Democrat in the WH and a Republican's House. 50/50 Senate.

That is a receipt for success no matter the President or House Leaders. Originally Posted by WTF

Obama had to clean up the mess that Bush43 and Dick Cheney left behind. He bailed out a thousand "troubled assets" on Wall street by giving them 650 plus billion dollars through TARP. Twenty five million people got jobs. Twenty million people got Health Insurance from the ACA. Ten million people got a private health insurance plan, the same type of policy you get if you worked for IBM. Ten million people got the expanded Medicaid. All of that can't be done for free.

Social Security is a big driver of dept because the original formula has never been changed. The birth rate has declined. During the swinging sixties, people would go up to Woodstock and still have sex, but were not having kids. That's not a good scenario for social security. You need the birthrate to stay the same or increase, you don't want it to decline. Social Security would be fine by 2035 if they would just change the formula to account for the slow birth rate.

Obama had to clean up the mess that Bush43 and Dick Cheney left behind. He bailed out a thousand "troubled assets" on Wall street by giving them 650 plus billion dollars through TARP. Twenty five million people got jobs. Twenty million people got Health Insurance from the ACA. Ten million people got a private health insurance plan, the same type of policy you get if you worked for IBM. Ten million people got the expanded Medicaid. All of that can't be done for free.

Social Security is a big driver of dept because the original formula has never been changed. The birth rate has declined. During the swinging sixties, people would go up to Woodstock and still have sex, but were not having kids. That's not a good scenario for social security. You need the birthrate to stay the same or increase, you don't want it to decline. Social Security would be fine by 2035 if they would just change the formula to account for the slow birth rate. Originally Posted by adav8s28

I'm still not a fan of all the debt Obama packed on.

While I agree with your assertion that the SS formula needs tweaking and in fact should be done every decade.

The bigger problem imho is not just the birth rate decline but the success of Medicare with its life extending improved health of the elderly in this country. That is where the huge cost is coming....and you're right fewer workers paying for a larger and larger group of selfish old workers who did not have the foresight nor desire to pay more into SS and Medicare like they should have is the problem.

I could go on and on about the Reagan tax cut and entitlement increases of 1986 giving the illusion of a balancing of the budget but what it has done spur a whole group into thinking tax cuts always result in tax revenue gains.

Tiny suffers from this illusion

Idiotism is display , remember yeelllins and the housing bubbles