Deficits Falling Under Obama (based on fact)

Here's the article, and it's very unbiased:

http://www.factcheck.org/2013/08/def...g-from-way-up/

Most of these mouthbreathers don't know the difference between the deficit, the debt, their asshole and a hole in the ground.

Loved this quote from the article:"In fact, although the White House didn’t cite it, the newly released mid-year projection from the White House Office of Management and Budget for the 2013 fiscal year shows that due to rising revenues, the 2013 deficit is now projected to be $759 billion — $214 billion lower than the $973 billion deficit projected in the original budget"

For the record, the highest BUSH deficit run up with a REPUBLICAN congress, was roughly $500 Billion. So Obama's SMALLEST deficit so far in 6+ years is higher than Bush's highest until he signed Nancy and Dirty Harry's budget that topped $1 Trillion in 2009.

Amazing how Obama has managed to ramp up the Federal REVENUE to a record $3+ TRILLION.. and still have 3/4's of a TRILLION more spent than he took in.

But hey.. deficits are only bad when a Republican is in the White House..... right?

Most of these mouthbreathers don't know the difference between the deficit, the debt, their asshole and a hole in the ground. Originally Posted by WombRaider

Want to prove it with real information? Wake up dude, money doesn't buy the vote anymore.

Please see Red's post. Your article, ST, shows Obama's deficits as the largest in history. And we know that at the end of his term, he will have added to the national debt morethan all Presidents before him. Don't be fooled. Obama is not a friend to the people. He is owned by the same group that has owned his predecessors.

Please see Red's post. Your article, ST, shows Obama's deficits as the largest in history. And we know that at the end of his term, he will have added to the national debt morethan all Presidents before him. Don't be fooled. Obama is not a friend to the people. He is owned by the same group that has owned his predecessors. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Thanks for pointing this out. I know I saw an article with the opposite view. I'll try and find it. I certainly agree with you that most presidents are bought and paid for by corporate interest groups. The healthcare fiasco that Obama has has passed in not efficent. I still believe that if we got rid of the insurance companies and just had a government financed health system like Europe, all would benefit. In other words, national healthcare for all. Insurance companies are the culprit.

LOL!............... http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015...cmp=latestnews


Nearly half of ObamaCare exchanges face financial woes, report says
Published May 03, 2015FoxNews.com


Almost half of the 17 ObamaCare state insurance exchanges are reportedly suffering financial difficulties, posing a significant challenge to state officials just five years after the passage of President Obama’s signature health care law.

The Washington Post reports that many of the marketplaces set up by the states and the District of Columbia are being hit by high costs and tepid enrollment numbers. In response, officials at state level are mulling raising fees on insurers, sharing costs with nearby states, and are calling for more money to be infused into the system.

Some officials are even considering handing over their exchanges to the federal Healthcare.gov – an exchange that has had widely reported problems of its own.

The troubling report comes at a difficult time for the law. The Supreme Court is considering a challenge to ObamaCare tax subsidies that, if struck down, could affect as many as 8 million Americans.

The justices are to decide whether the law makes people in all 50 states eligible for federal tax subsidies -- or just those who live in states that created their own health insurance marketplaces. This question matters because roughly three dozen states opted against their own marketplace, or exchange, and instead rely on the U.S. Health and Human Services Department's Healthcare.gov. If the court rules against the Obama administration, insurance subsidies for people in those states would be in jeopardy.

Obama administration officials have suggested they have no alternative plan if the subsidies are struck down, while some Republican lawmakers have begun crafting their own alternatives.

If the court upholds subsidies for the federal exchange, then it may accelerate the transfer process to Healthcare.gov from states that have struggling exchanges.

The Post reports that sign-ups for the state marketplace rose only 12 percent in the recent enrollment period, compared to a 61 percent increase for the federal exchange. For most exchanges, income comes from fees imposed on insurers, which are determined by the number of sign-ups. So large enrollment is critical if an exchange is going to be financially viable.

“They are literally looking at huge gaps, and they are not sure how they are going to get through the year,” Caroline F. Pearson, a senior vice president at Avalere Health, told The Post.

In March, Oregon lawmakers abolished the state exchange after it had been plagued with financial and technical difficulties.

The president’s signature law still remains highly controversial. A recent Fox News Poll found that 42 percent of respondents said that they are worse off because of ObamaCare, with only 33 percent saying the health care situation was better since the law was passed in 2010.





drendebe10

All on the watch of the incompetent corrupt divisive arrogant narcissistic illegal indonesian kenyan sociopathic pathological lying fudgepacker living its celebrity grand imperial golf lifestyle while the country goes in the sh*tter.









.

Please see Red's post. Your article, ST, shows Obama's deficits as the largest in history. And we know that at the end of his term, he will have added to the national debt morethan all Presidents before him. Don't be fooled. Obama is not a friend to the people. He is owned by the same group that has owned his predecessors. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Did you read that email before or after wiring the nigerian prince your entire life savings? you gullible idiot.

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/02/due...bt-deceptions/

And it’s also untrue — as claimed in a graphic widely circulated by email and in social media postings — that the debt has increased more under Obama than under all previous 43 presidents combined. In fact, as of Jan. 31, 2012, the rise under Obama had yet to surpass the rise under his predecessor, George W. Bush.

Speaking of, do you even know what the debt actually means? If so, can you please explain the simple difference between intergovernmental debt and debt held by the public? I'm sure you can use google, but I'd like to see you at least try.

Go back and look at the figures. The amount of increase in public debt started under George Bush, as early as January 2008. It was a response to the financial crisis. The same growth rate has continued under Obama.

Loved this quote from the article:"In fact, although the White House didn’t cite it, the newly released mid-year projection from the White House Office of Management and Budget for the 2013 fiscal year shows that due to rising revenues, the 2013 deficit is now projected to be $759 billion — $214 billion lower than the $973 billion deficit projected in the original budget"

For the record, the highest BUSH deficit run up with a REPUBLICAN congress, was roughly $500 Billion. So Obama's SMALLEST deficit so far in 6+ years is higher than Bush's highest until he signed Nancy and Dirty Harry's budget that topped $1 Trillion in 2009.

Amazing how Obama has managed to ramp up the Federal REVENUE to a record $3+ TRILLION.. and still have 3/4's of a TRILLION more spent than he took in.

But hey.. deficits are only bad when a Republican is in the White House..... right? Originally Posted by RedLeg505

Obama inherited the biggest deficit in our history. This is not up for debate. A president can't be held entirely responsible for the deficit in his first year. That budget was set the previous year under the previous administration. Fiscal year 2009 actually began in October of 2008. That's when it's all Obama's.

In fact, two pieces of legislation he signed make up a third of his total deficits run. The stimulus of 2009 and the Tax relief act of 2010 that extended the Bush tax cuts and cut SS for two years. The question we should be asking, instead of trying to play wack-a-mole is to figure out what the hell we are going to do next.

Thanks for pointing this out. I know I saw an article with the opposite view. I'll try and find it. I certainly agree with you that most presidents are bought and paid for by corporate interest groups. The healthcare fiasco that Obama has has passed in not efficent. I still believe that if we got rid of the insurance companies and just had a government financed health system like Europe, all would benefit. In other words, national healthcare for all. Insurance companies are the culprit. Originally Posted by SeekingTruth

Did you read that email before or after wiring the nigerian prince your entire life savings? you gullible idiot.

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/02/due...bt-deceptions/

And it’s also untrue — as claimed in a graphic widely circulated by email and in social media postings — that the debt has increased more under Obama than under all previous 43 presidents combined. In fact, as of Jan. 31, 2012, the rise under Obama had yet to surpass the rise under his predecessor, George W. Bush.

Speaking of, do you even know what the debt actually means? If so, can you please explain the simple difference between intergovernmental debt and debt held by the public? I'm sure you can use google, but I'd like to see you at least try.

Go back and look at the figures. The amount of increase in public debt started under George Bush, as early as January 2008. It was a response to the financial crisis. The same growth rate has continued under Obama. Originally Posted by shanm

Bullshit propaganda that gets conservatives all tingly in the shorts. So tingly, in fact, they don't fact check it and just keep passing it along. If you repeat something enough, people believe it. Especially when it's something they badly want to believe anyway. It's called confirmation bias.

figure out what the hell we are going to do next. Originally Posted by WombRaider

Do Next? What's to do next. All the properly indoctrinated Obama supporters keep telling us the economy is great because the DOW is up. Forget that the labor participation rate is below 63%. Forget that GDP last quarter was 0.2% and a negative 2.7% Q1 FY2015.

Are you saying the economy is NOT "doing great"??

if we got rid of the insurance companies and just had a government financed health system like Europe, all would benefit. In other words, national healthcare for all. Insurance companies are the culprit. Originally Posted by SeekingTruth

Absolutely hilarious, since the one "true government sole provider health care system".. otherwise known as the VA.. is transitioning to "vouchers" to allow VA patients to see "private" medical service providers.

So what you want is for everyone to have VA like coverage where you get in line and wait a year or so to be seen by a doctor and possibly DIE while waiting?

Or was there some other type of "single payer" system you had in mind that is different?

Do Next? What's to do next. All the properly indoctrinated Obama supporters keep telling us the economy is great because the DOW is up. Forget that the labor participation rate is below 63%. Forget that GDP last quarter was 0.2% and a negative 2.7% Q1 FY2015.

Are you saying the economy is NOT "doing great"?? Originally Posted by RedLeg505

Negative growth in GDP for the first quarter of fiscal year 2015? That's interesting, since we only have projections at this point on those figures, not hard figures.

I love how you throw numbers out there with absolutely no context attached to them. The decline in the labor participation rate has been steadily trending downward for at least a decade. In case you didn't know, the baby boomers are reaching retirement age and many are not working any longer.

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/03/dec...ipation-rates/

There's plenty Obama has done wrong. You don't need to just make shit up.

Absolutely hilarious, since the one "true government sole provider health care system".. otherwise known as the VA.. is transitioning to "vouchers" to allow VA patients to see "private" medical service providers.

So what you want is for everyone to have VA like coverage where you get in line and wait a year or so to be seen by a doctor and possibly DIE while waiting?

Or was there some other type of "single payer" system you had in mind that is different? Originally Posted by RedLeg505

There would still be private medical service in a single-payer system. Other countries do it and it works fine for them. Are you saying we aren't capable of doing that?