How are we going to pay for all this shit?

no it doesn't. it depends on if Putin and the Arabs sell us oil at all. we are both old enough to remember the Arab oil embargo yeah? and what would be the market price if they did that again?


being dependent on foreign oil is just that nutty professor. not only is it a total fuck up to even allow it, if we ramp up production to net exporter status ... what does that do to yer market price, genius???


both Russia and OPEC have only one major source of revenue .. oil. cut that out from under them and their economies flounder.


butt .. you knew that, right, professor?


BAHHAHHAAAA Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

He and EC should meet for domes drinks. Two commies can figure it out.

both Russia and OPEC have only one major source of revenue .. oil. cut that out from under them and their economies flounder.


butt .. you knew that, right, professor?


BAHHAHHAAAA Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

When you invest...you need to pay attention to wtf is done, not said

https://www.audubon.org/news/despite...ng-under-biden

And yet, the White House is on pace to hand out more oil and gas drilling permits this year than any under President Trump and the most since George W. Bush left the Oval Office. The boom, first reported by the Associated Press, undercuts the president’s climate agenda and infuriates environmentalists demanding more aggressive action...

...at a June congressional hearing, Interior Secretary Deb Haaland—a former New Mexico congresswoman—said there is currently no plan for a permanent leasing ban. “Gas and oil production will continue well into the future,” she said, “and we believe that is the reality of our economy and the world we’re living in.”

Sounds Australian? Or an obsequious interjection?


Don't try too hard to sound Australian. Just be yourself and we will decipher for ourselves. Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

WHAT the piss did I say there that was "Australian"??


Ye Christ! ... Some o' you lads are simply sad.

#### Salty

Obama pledged to cut the debt in half by the end of his first term. how'd that work out?
Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

Bush43 inherited a a small budget surplus from Clinton. Bush43 was the first president to introduce a Federal Budget deficit of a Trillion dollars his last year in office. At the end of Obama's second term that the Trillion dollar deficit was reduced to 585 billion dollars. You and "Joe Harvard" have your debt hors confused.

The data is the data!

https://datalab.usaspending.gov/amer...eficit/trends/

Obama pledged to cut the debt in half by the end of his first term. how'd that work out?

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

He pledged to cut the deficit in half. Slight difference than cutting the debt. Well not slight but I'm trying to be nice. Below are Obama's deficits by year.

He failed in that promise in his first term but did achieve it in his 2nd term

‐----------------------

President George W. Bush's last budget—for Fiscal Year (FY) 2009—created a deficit of $1.4 trillion.2 That fiscal year began on Oct. 1, 2008, and continued until Sept. 30, 2009. Although most of that deficit occurred after Obama took office, it was a result of Bush's budget. Similarly, the first deficit that occurred after President Donald Trump took office was due to Obama's last budget.


Here are Obama’s deficits by year. They total $6.807 trillion.

FY 2009: Congress added $253.1 billion from Obama's Economic Stimulus Act to Bush’s last budget after Obama took office. This emergency funding was to stop the Great Recession. That $253 billion accrues to Obama, not Bush.3 Once the $253 billion is subtracted from the FY 2009 deficit, it means Bush’s true budget deficit was $1.16 trillion.

FY 2010: Obama's first budget created a deficit of just under $1.3 trillion.4
FY 2011: This budget deficit was $1.3 trillion.5
FY 2012: The deficit was $1.1 trillion.6
FY 2013: This was the first Obama budget where the deficit, $680 billion, was less than $1 trillion.7
FY 2014: The deficit was $483 billion.8 Tax revenue rose to $3.02 trillion.9
FY 2015: The deficit fell further to $439 billion.10
FY 2016: The deficit rose to $587 billion.11
FY 2017: The deficit was $665 billion.12 It was $162 billion more than the $503 billion deficit estimated in Obama's budget request.13

Bush43 inherited a a small budget surplus from Clinton. Bush43 was the first president to introduce a Federal Budget deficit of a Trillion dollars his last year in office. At the end of Obama's second term that the Trillion dollar deficit was reduced to 585 billion dollars. You and "Joe Harvard" have your debt hors confused.

The data is the data!

https://datalab.usaspending.gov/amer...eficit/trends/ Originally Posted by adav8s28

Me think Wacko got his debt and deficits confused.

No wonder he thinks or is confused about Reagan jumpstarting this huge deficit spending ferris wheel. Hell his other hero, Trump ,had a bigger 4 year deficits than any President before him!

Somehow he has lustylad and Tiny arguing this nonsense too.

The guys think that is you take money from SS ...you do not have to figure out a way to pay it back!

He pledged to cut the deficit in half. Slight difference than cutting the debt. Well not slight but I'm trying to be nice. Below are Obama's deficits by year.

He failed in that promise in his first term but did achieve it in his 2nd term

‐----------------------

President George W. Bush's last budget—for Fiscal Year (FY) 2009—created a deficit of $1.4 trillion.2 That fiscal year began on Oct. 1, 2008, and continued until Sept. 30, 2009. Although most of that deficit occurred after Obama took office, it was a result of Bush's budget. Similarly, the first deficit that occurred after President Donald Trump took office was due to Obama's last budget.


Here are Obama’s deficits by year. They total $6.807 trillion.

FY 2009: Congress added $253.1 billion from Obama's Economic Stimulus Act to Bush’s last budget after Obama took office. This emergency funding was to stop the Great Recession. That $253 billion accrues to Obama, not Bush.3 Once the $253 billion is subtracted from the FY 2009 deficit, it means Bush’s true budget deficit was $1.16 trillion.

FY 2010: Obama's first budget created a deficit of just under $1.3 trillion.4
FY 2011: This budget deficit was $1.3 trillion.5
FY 2012: The deficit was $1.1 trillion.6
FY 2013: This was the first Obama budget where the deficit, $680 billion, was less than $1 trillion.7
FY 2014: The deficit was $483 billion.8 Tax revenue rose to $3.02 trillion.9
FY 2015: The deficit fell further to $439 billion.10
FY 2016: The deficit rose to $587 billion.11
FY 2017: The deficit was $665 billion.12 It was $162 billion more than the $503 billion deficit estimated in Obama's budget request.13 Originally Posted by WTF

+1

The bar graph from the link in post #949 agrees with the numbers you posted.

HAHAHAHAHA! Have you been taking lessons from Trump in how to alter people's perception of reality? That's ass backwards, the exact opposite of the truth. LustyLad said nothing about social security or Medicare. My only comment was that government securities held by social security trust funds are not included in public debt.
Originally Posted by Tiny

I brought up SS because you two either did not realize or chose to close your eyes to the reasons why the government borrowed less money from the private sector during part of Reagan's/Bush tenures.

How about this....say we raised the SS tax and to the cap off the cap on the amount taxed. Then took the surplus and balanced the budget.

What is that if not a slight of hand?

Do we not have to come up with a way to repay these IOU's.

Please can we get the forum's economic guru , lustylad, to answer this riddle.

I brought up SS because you two either did not realize or chose to close your eyes to the reasons why the government borrowed less money from the private sector during part of Reagan's/Bush tenures.

How about this....say we raised the SS tax and to the cap off the cap on the amount taxed. Then took the surplus and balanced the budget.

What is that if not a slight of hand?

Do we not have to come up with a way to repay these IOU's.

Please can we get the forum's economic guru , lustylad, to answer this riddle. Originally Posted by WTF

You're guilty of the slight of hand here WTF, by selective quoting. You left out the part in bold below,

HAHAHAHAHA! Have you been taking lessons from Trump in how to alter people's perception of reality? That's ass backwards, the exact opposite of the truth. LustyLad said nothing about social security or Medicare. My only comment was that government securities held by social security trust funds are not included in public debt.

The truth is I agree, given the realities in America, the tax will have to be raised and/or benefits will have to be cut. I'd prefer transitioning to a system like what Singapore, Australia and Chile have, where people have their own retirement accounts, but that's not going to happen. I believe George W. Bush tried to get something like that off the ground but the geniuses in Congress made short shrift of the idea. Originally Posted by Tiny

Nobody's arguing with you about funding social security, and I've agreed with you.

As to your post above, I don't understand it. The federal government under Reagan and Bush borrowed more money from the public, just like it did during every other presidential term during our lifetimes.

He pledged to cut the deficit in half. Slight difference than cutting the debt. Well not slight but I'm trying to be nice. Below are Obama's deficits by year.

He failed in that promise in his first term but did achieve it in his 2nd term

‐----------------------

President George W. Bush's last budget—for Fiscal Year (FY) 2009—created a deficit of $1.4 trillion.2 That fiscal year began on Oct. 1, 2008, and continued until Sept. 30, 2009. Although most of that deficit occurred after Obama took office, it was a result of Bush's budget. Similarly, the first deficit that occurred after President Donald Trump took office was due to Obama's last budget.


Here are Obama’s deficits by year. They total $6.807 trillion.

FY 2009: Congress added $253.1 billion from Obama's Economic Stimulus Act to Bush’s last budget after Obama took office. This emergency funding was to stop the Great Recession. That $253 billion accrues to Obama, not Bush.3 Once the $253 billion is subtracted from the FY 2009 deficit, it means Bush’s true budget deficit was $1.16 trillion.

FY 2010: Obama's first budget created a deficit of just under $1.3 trillion.4
FY 2011: This budget deficit was $1.3 trillion.5
FY 2012: The deficit was $1.1 trillion.6
FY 2013: This was the first Obama budget where the deficit, $680 billion, was less than $1 trillion.7
FY 2014: The deficit was $483 billion.8 Tax revenue rose to $3.02 trillion.9
FY 2015: The deficit fell further to $439 billion.10
FY 2016: The deficit rose to $587 billion.11
FY 2017: The deficit was $665 billion.12 It was $162 billion more than the $503 billion deficit estimated in Obama's budget request.13 Originally Posted by WTF

Respectfully, this is like your correlations between who's president and GDP growth. How much difference does it make? You yourself have noted more than once that spending bills are initiated in the House of Representatives. Government spending and taxation were mostly a product of bipartisan legislation. Deficits over the period you and LL have been discussing have depended on wars, recessions, COVID, and a lot of other things. Giving all the credit or blame to one man is foolishness.

But if we must play this game, here are deficits as a % of GDP under Reagan,

1981: -2.46%
1982: -3.83%
1983: -5.71%
1984: -4.79%
1985: -4.89%
1986: -4.83%
1987: -3.08%
1988: -2.96%
Average: -4.06%

And under Obama,

2009: -9.76%
2010: -8.60%
2011: -8.33%
2012: -6.62%
2013: -4.03%
2014: -2.76%
2015: -2.42%
2016: -3.13%
2017: -3.41%
Average: -6.13%

Now, there was a recession during both periods. YoY GDP in 1982 fell 1.8% YoY and it fell 2.6% in 2009. As LustyLad noted expenditures on the military in the 1980's helped end the cold war, setting the U.S. up for a peace dividend that was reflected in lower deficits as a % of GDP in the 1990's. And similarly we spent money on Afghanistan and Iraq while Obama was president. I'll agree Obama didn't start those conflicts, but we sure as hell spent a lot more money on them than we had to during his terms.

Another difference, the Republicans never controlled the House of Representatives during Reagan's terms. The deficit spending was entirely bipartisan. The Democrats controlled the whole ball of wax during Obama's first two years, so, in addition to the 2008/2009 recession, you could conceivably blame the -8.6% and -8.3% deficits as a % of GDP in 2010 and 2011 in part on Democratic Party profligacy. I think you'd have to give them a pass in 2009 since the budget for that year would have been mostly determined in 2008.

Biden and the current crop in Congress however are in a whole different league. This year the economy was doing well, the lockdowns were over, and we were winding down our involvement in Afghanistan. What's the excuse for the MINIMUM $2.5 trillion (12% of GDP) in UNFUNDED additional spending that's been passed so far? (That's the $1.9 trillion for the American Rescue Plan and another $600 billion from the infrastructure bill that was not funded.) You can increase that by another $3 trillion (14% of GDP) if the Build Back Better bill is passed in its current form, and if its programs are extended to 10 years.

At least you could blame a good chunk of the deficits during the Reagan and Obama administrations on recessions and, loosely speaking, war. Not so with this bunch.

.

Holy smokes! This erstwhile cesspool actually looks like a semi-normal forum again, instead of the spam folder from my yahoo.com and airmail.net email days. WTF happened? Were the forum hogs told to put the spam back in the can and leave it there?

There's a lot to get caught up with here, but I'll try to give it a shot later. I'd rather avoid all the insults, but figure I'm immune since I'm neither a gay nor a tranny.

First, though, I might tune in for a bit to see if the Cowboys look halfway decent against the Redskins.

(Oops, sorry! Didn't want to offend anyone. Meant the "Washington Football Team!")

.

WFT was a stupid name anyways.


CM, OEB took a break from posting.

You're guilty of the slight of hand here WTF, by selective quoting. You left out the part in bold below,



Nobody's arguing with you about funding social security, and I've agreed with you.

As to your post above, I don't understand it. The federal government under Reagan and Bush borrowed more money from the public, just like it did during every other presidential term during our lifetimes. Originally Posted by Tiny

Well not with the graph you two wanted to use. It was not reflective of the true nature of our borrowing. Remember lustylad called me a liar because I said the ration went from 32 -50%?

This is where lustylad could come in handy.

I posted earlier about Reagan raising the SS rate and this huge class of baby boomers contributing to the system. A system where there were way more workers than retirees. Do you understand what that meant,means and the future problem that presents?

Maybe lustylad can find us the figures about the gross amount coming into both SS and Medicare vs the net payout and how the baby boomers skewed the equation. Those 25-40 year olds were in prime earning years for the last 35 years. But now those folks are retiring and those other Presidents you speak of will not enjoy the surpluses SS spit out for those magical decades.

Another difference, the Republicans never controlled the House of Representatives during Reagan's terms. The deficit spending was entirely bipartisan. Th. Originally Posted by Tiny

Thank you Jesus!

This is wtf I have been saying and you knuckleheads keep wandering off into the bushes bringing me back something I did not ask for.

I have asked or stated "Who started this nonsense?"

It wasn't Carter, it wasn't Nixon, nor LBJ, Kennedy, Eisenhower, Truman.....they all brought the ratio down from WWII record highs.

I have blamed REAGAN for this new mindset of spend spend spend your way out of any and everything. Bush Sr knew that was crazy and paid the price by trying to inject some reality into the mix by raising taxes and the supply side nuts didn't support him and of course there was Perot.

Any how....I stand by my statement that Reagan started this nonsense of spend more money and cut taxes too. Trump tried it and ran trillion dollar deficits even before Covid.

What do you think the next President is going to do? Cut spending?

.

Holy smokes! This erstwhile cesspool actually looks like a semi-normal forum again, instead of the spam folder from my yahoo.com and airmail.net email days. WTF happened? Were the forum hogs told to put the spam back in the can and leave it there?

There's a lot to get caught up with here, but I'll try to give it a shot later. I'd rather avoid all the insults, but figure I'm immune since I'm neither a gay nor a tranny.

First, though, I might tune in for a bit to see if the Cowboys look halfway decent against the Redskins.

(Oops, sorry! Didn't want to offend anyone. Meant the "Washington Football Team!")

. Originally Posted by CaptainMidnight

You've probably been figuring out if or when to unload all the money you've made in the market!

You haven't missed anything....a bunch of Chicken Littles still running around crying about the Fed or Biden....when they should be riding the wave!