Who Increased The Debit

Just saying

BL, since the President does not vote on the expenditures and revenues, it is relevant to examine what Party controlled the branch of the government that does.

http://home.adelphi.edu/sbloch/deficits.html

Critical and unbiased readers will conclude that when the Dems controlled Congress, the debt increased ... irrespective of the Party of the President.

"We" had the "discussion" in the Houston "sandpile" ... do we really need it here?

BL, since the President does not vote on the expenditures and revenues, it is relevant to examine what Party controlled the branch of the government that does.

http://home.adelphi.edu/sbloch/deficits.html

Critical and unbiased readers will conclude that when the Dems controlled Congress, the debt increased ... irrespective of the Party of the President.

"We" had the "discussion" in the Houston "sandpile" ... do we really need it here? Originally Posted by LexusLover

You fail to mention that the President has the veto pen!

So for all you eagan lovers....was it the Democratic controlled congress that made him great or was it in spite of them? When you look at all the debt Reagan piled on , you blame congress, when you look at jobs created , you credit Reagan.

Damnest thing I have ever seen!

You fail to mention that the President has the veto pen!.... Originally Posted by WTF

Obama's is dry.

So for all you eagan lovers.... Originally Posted by WTF

Who said I was a R"eagan lover?

There you go again, generalizing and pidgeon holing people to make a point.

Its a long standing argument whether the size of the debt matters. The simple answer is yes and no. It does matter if our revenue stream cannot keep up with the debt (which is happening now). It did not matter much under Reagan because GDP (and corresponding tax revenues) were growing at roughly the same pace as expenditures. The means tested entitlements (not SS and Medicare) is the one area that has grown faster and larger than any other since Reagan was elected.

A simple way to look at the debt is like a mortgage. Someone making $100K per year and having a $400K mortgage is probably a little distressed. His/her mortgage debt will be taking too much of a chunk of his income for him to cover all other expenses.
But suppose he/she makes $500K per year and has an $800K house. In this case, the debt is easily manageable with the income. So, the absolute size matters somewhat because if the $500K person loses their job, they have a bigger debt burden. But as long as revenues stay up, the debt is not a problem.

The democrats in 1980 were in no political position to argue with Reagan/Stockman. They had just presided over the worst fiscal policies since FDR extended the depression.

Then there is always the argument about what president benefits from the previous policies. Given that defense spending increase by 50% under Reagan/Bush1, (actually only until 1990) the corresponding decline in defense spending allowed bubba to claim economic surpluses without really doing much to create those surpluses.

After Bush 2, I thought Obama would have 8 free years because all he had to do was ......NOTHING. The economy was in the middle of a depression and would have rebounded had obama/geithner done nothing. We should be on our third quarter of recovery by now. But spending/printing money/taxing is FDR all over again.

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla...sion-5409.aspx

The link is to UCLA. NOT a conservative group.

The democrats in 1980 were in no political position to argue with Reagan/Stockman.
. Originally Posted by blue3122

Have you read wtf Stockman has said about Reagan's follies?

http://www.businessinsider.com/david...cs-tarp-2011-1

After Bush 2, I thought Obama would have 8 free years because all he had to do was ......NOTHING. The economy was in the middle of a depression and would have rebounded had obama/geithner done nothing. We should be on our third quarter of recovery by now. But spending/printing money/taxing is FDR all over again.
. Originally Posted by blue3122

That is if you believe that this was the usual business cycle.

Read Ken Rogoff for more insight

http://www.project-syndicate.org/com...goff83/English

This is one of the more stupid "it's your fault, no it's your fault" discussions.

the bottom line is that the Conservative Tea Party agenda is the only political movement that is talkiing about reducing spending and cutting our national debt.

So put the blame on whomever; the important question is who do you support going forward !

the bottom line is that the Conservative Tea Party agenda is the only political movement that is talkiing about reducing spending and cutting our national debt.

! Originally Posted by Whirlaway

The Tea Terrorist want to reduce the debt but they do not want to touch SS/MC or Defense or raise taxes.

That is just about as dumb as it gets.

Shit I wanna fuc Miss Amercia. I don't wanns pay her, I don't wann wine and dine her, I don't wanna get in shape....

That is basically WTF the Tea Terrorist are wanting and wanting to do about their wants, which is basically nothing.

Lie !!!!!!!!!

The Tea Terrorist want to reduce the debt but they do not want to touch SS/MC or Defense or raise taxes.
Originally Posted by WTF

Lie !!!!!!!!! Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Who in the Republican Party besides Ron Paul wants to do that? Who is talking about that? Nobody.

God Damn they are lobbying like a muther fucer not to cut Defense spending anymore!

Death Panels is wtf the Tea Terrorist yelled when Obama tried to cut MC.

You damn straight these fuckers do not know a thing about simple math.

They want tp protect their turf. Just like the Wall street protesters.

You might not like it but that is all they are.

Clever how in the early post you say Tea Party; then when called out you say Republican Party....you can't keep your own thread honest without bait and switch tactics.

Here is the Tea Party on definese cuts:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41219824...dget-mix-cuts/

Here is the Tea Party on cuts to social security:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/poli..._his_list.html

Here is the Tea Party on cuts to medicare:
http://wakeupcallamerica.org/210/tea...shes-medicare/

Have you read wtf Stockman has said about Reagan's follies?

http://www.businessinsider.com/david...cs-tarp-2011-1





That is if you believe that this was the usual business cycle.

Read Ken Rogoff for more insight

http://www.project-syndicate.org/com...goff83/English Originally Posted by WTF

Rogoff?? Really?? You might as well cite Obama/Geithner/Summers. Not exactly an independent source.

My comment with Stockman/Reagan was the the democrats in 1980 were in no position to argue. Do you agree or disagree with that? It wasn't what Stockman thought 20 years later when he was making some revisions to his thoughts in 1980. It was simply a statement that the democrats in 1980 had zero political capital and could not argue with Reagan. 1980 is the year the south went republican.

Hmmm . . . A graph from the office of the Democrat Leader. Surprisingly, it makes Obama look good. What a shock.

Here are some more graphs.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/...ebt_chart.html

I have an idea, instead of placing blame for the debt, why don't we fix it? We are still facing an economic disaster of biblical proportions, and blaming it on Reagan, Bush, Clinton or Obama won't make a damn bit of difference.

When a person is struck by a car, you treat the patient first, then go after the perpetrator. Let's fix this, get our economy stable and growing, then we can catch and execute the criminals.