NOW Liberals Care About the National Debt!

[Rexx Taylor]

• LOL! Sheesh, I'd say, "Are you kidding?", but I know you're not. If that's true, then why was Obama's recovery the weakest in decades?

  
  Are you fucking retarded?
  
  Okay, the reason why the recovery was as weak was because it was THE WORST RECESSION IN 80 YEARS!
  
  And we didn't have something like World War II to drag us out of it.

  
  You and I are around the same age so you know this past recession was nothing compared to the one in the early 80's. Back then, even fast food joints weren't hiring.
  
  DumBama was the most anti-business President in our lifetime. That's why such a sluggish recovery. Between Commie Care and multitudes of regulations, businesses didn't want to invest. Trump is just the opposite. Trump is a pro-business President. He rescinded DumBama's regulations, lowered their taxes, and removed the mandates for Commie Care for businesses . Obama raised taxes on corporations.

  I wonder where some of that stimulus went to being most of it went to blue states. Did anyone follow the money trail?

  
  A lot of it went to unions and payroll reductions. The measly few bucks we got in our paychecks didn't do squat for the economy, but they claim it did. I forget now what I did with that extra $25.00 every other week. But whatever I did with it, it didn't help the economy very much.

  Wasn't Joe Biden in charge of making sure none of the stimulus money wound up in the wrong hands\pockets?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Dumocrats only care about the Debt now, because a Republican is in the White House. Anyone with a brain can see that. They're only about 'Party before Country.' If they think it'll hurt Republicans, they'll go all-in on anything. They're disingenuous hypocrites. But who didn't know that about em?

All that being said though, both Parties love spending other peoples' money. The Swamp Creatures are drunk on the power of it. Maybe Trump can drain the Swamp a bit, but i'm not optimistic. I don't see anything changing in regards to the Debt. Both Parties just love spending other folks' money too much. It is what it is.

This is true, but it's all in the philosophy.

Republicans believe that spending money (even debt money) on tax breaks will have a higher return in the expansion of businesses, more taxpaying workers, more economic activity. In other words, it will pay for itself.

On the other hand,, we have Democrats. Democrats believe that wasting money in alternative energy is an investment even though it would cost Americans much more for energy.

Which one do you think will stimulate our economy?

 

[JoeB131]

You and I are around the same age so you know this past recession was nothing compared to the one in the early 80's. Back then, even fast food joints weren't hiring.

Actually, the last one was much worse. I had no problem getting bottom rung jobs in the early 80's... in fact I worked two to pay for college.

DumBama was the most anti-business President in our lifetime. That's why such a sluggish recovery. Between Commie Care and multitudes of regulations, businesses didn't want to invest.

Really? Wasn't it more like they had nothing to invest after the crash wiped out all their assets?

Trump is just the opposite. Trump is a pro-business President. He rescinded DumBama's regulations, lowered their taxes, and removed the mandates for Commie Care for businesses .

Yes, if your rich, Trump is Christmas come early... but it's going to be a disaster because Recessions aren't a bug of Republican Rule, it's a design feature.

 

[JoeB131]

This is true, but it's all in the philosophy.

Republicans believe that spending money (even debt money) on tax breaks will have a higher return in the expansion of businesses, more taxpaying workers, more economic activity. In other words, it will pay for itself.

Yeah, they believe that, but it NEVER ACTUALLY WORKS.

You balloon the debt and eventually you have a recession.

 

[Lakhota]

NOW Liberals Care About the National Debt!

NaziCons are the ones always preaching about religion and the national debt - but now they obviously don't care about either. Roy Moore and the tax cuts prove that.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

This is true, but it's all in the philosophy.

Republicans believe that spending money (even debt money) on tax breaks will have a higher return in the expansion of businesses, more taxpaying workers, more economic activity. In other words, it will pay for itself.

Yeah, they believe that, but it NEVER ACTUALLY WORKS.

You balloon the debt and eventually you have a recession.

So when is the recession from the last 10 trillion DumBama spent?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Really? Wasn't it more like they had nothing to invest after the crash wiped out all their assets?

Not everybody managed their money as bad as you. Companies still had money to invest but nowhere to invest. Nobody knew what the big-eared joker was going to do next. Was he going to raise taxes on businesses, choke off our energy supply, attack banks...... nobody knew.

Yes, if your rich, Trump is Christmas come early... but it's going to be a disaster because Recessions aren't a bug of Republican Rule, it's a design feature.

Yes, Trump is a Christmas come early for our job creators. That's kind of why we voted for him.

 

[RealDave]

Why didn't liberals voice any concern about the national debt when Barack Obama was piling up more debt than George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan combined? And what did we have to show for all that debt? Answer: the weakest economic growth since the Great Depression, the worst median family income levels in decades, and the worst U6 unemployment rate for an 8-year period in decades. Liberals were okay with that debt because it came from government borrowing and spending. Yet now, suddenly, liberals are screaming about the national debt because they mistakenly believe that tax cuts will cause a decrease in federal revenue and that therefore tax cuts will increase the deficit and the debt, yet history shows that federal revenue has gone up after every major tax cut since the early 1900s.

Anyway, let's just get some facts straight about the debt:

• Obama added $7.9 trillion to the national debt in 8 years.
• Bush Jr. added $5.8 trillion to the national debt in 8 years.
• Clinton added $0 to the national debt in 8 years.
• Bush Sr. added $1.5 trillion to the national debt in 4 years.
• Reagan added $1.8 trillion to the national debt in 8 years.

If the Republicans had not forced some modest spending restraint on Obama in his last three years, he likely would have ended up adding more debt than the Bushes and Reagan combined did in 20 years. The Republicans saved Obama from achieving that infamy, but Obama still piled up more debt than both Bushes did in 12 years and more debt than Bush Jr. and Reagan did in 16 years.

More info: Which President Added Most to the U.S. Debt?

Wherte did Obama's debt come from?

What policies did he enact that increased the debt?

If you assjholes had a honest bone in your bodies you would admit to the following:

Obama inherited a trillion dollar plus deficit (1.5 trillion) This was predicted before he took office or changed anything.

Sources for the debt accumulated under Obama:

1) Bush recession. Requiring massive spending for unemployment, welfare, aid to those in need & reduced revenues
2) Bush Tax cuts
3) Two quagmire unfunded wars
4) Massive unfunded expansion to Medicare

As for Obama spending, we had the stimulus bill (800 billion) which Republicans would have also enacted if McCain had won. It might look different but money would have been spent.

We have the ACA but it was funded.

So come on, lets see where Obama added so much to the debt. His policies.

If any of you lying fucks are interested in the truth, go to the below link & see where our debt originated.

I doubt any of you will because you are so freakin happy being ignorant fucks.

Economic Downturn and Legacy of Bush Policies Continue to Drive Large Deficits

Recession Caused

 

[RealDave]

Really? Wasn't it more like they had nothing to invest after the crash wiped out all their assets?

Not everybody managed their money as bad as you. Companies still had money to invest but nowhere to invest. Nobody knew what the big-eared joker was going to do next. Was he going to raise taxes on businesses, choke off our energy supply, attack banks...... nobody knew.

Yes, if your rich, Trump is Christmas come early... but it's going to be a disaster because Recessions aren't a bug of Republican Rule, it's a design feature.

Yes, Trump is a Christmas come early for our job creators. That's kind of why we voted for him.

How is he creating jobs? Handing money to rich people? Handing money to corporations that don't need it?

Do you really think cutting the corporate rate will help US companies export? Other countries won't make changes ? Other companies won;t treat this as subsidizing & slap tarriffs?

You & Trump are equally uninformed & ignorant of the world marketplace.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Really? Wasn't it more like they had nothing to invest after the crash wiped out all their assets?

Not everybody managed their money as bad as you. Companies still had money to invest but nowhere to invest. Nobody knew what the big-eared joker was going to do next. Was he going to raise taxes on businesses, choke off our energy supply, attack banks...... nobody knew.

Yes, if your rich, Trump is Christmas come early... but it's going to be a disaster because Recessions aren't a bug of Republican Rule, it's a design feature.

Yes, Trump is a Christmas come early for our job creators. That's kind of why we voted for him.

How is he creating jobs? Handing money to rich people? Handing money to corporations that don't need it?

Do you really think cutting the corporate rate will help US companies export? Other countries won't make changes ? Other companies won;t treat this as subsidizing & slap tarriffs?

You & Trump are equally uninformed & ignorant of the world marketplace.

Of course we're uninformed. The informed people know that taking money away from companies make them want to hire. The more money you take away from them, the more they want to expand and invest in their businesses. The more money you take away from them, the less they will look for outsourcing and sending jobs overseas.

 

[RealDave]

Really? Wasn't it more like they had nothing to invest after the crash wiped out all their assets?

Not everybody managed their money as bad as you. Companies still had money to invest but nowhere to invest. Nobody knew what the big-eared joker was going to do next. Was he going to raise taxes on businesses, choke off our energy supply, attack banks...... nobody knew.

Yes, if your rich, Trump is Christmas come early... but it's going to be a disaster because Recessions aren't a bug of Republican Rule, it's a design feature.

Yes, Trump is a Christmas come early for our job creators. That's kind of why we voted for him.

How is he creating jobs? Handing money to rich people? Handing money to corporations that don't need it?

Do you really think cutting the corporate rate will help US companies export? Other countries won't make changes ? Other companies won;t treat this as subsidizing & slap tarriffs?

You & Trump are equally uninformed & ignorant of the world marketplace.

Of course we're uninformed. The informed people know that taking money away from companies make them want to hire. The more money you take away from them, the more they want to expand and invest in their businesses. The more money you take away from them, the less they will look for outsourcing and sending jobs overseas.

CORPORATIONS HIRE WHEN THEY HAVE INCREASED DEMAND FOR THEIR PRODUCTS


So, in your business, you would hire more drivers & buy more trucks if you had nothing for them to haul?

 

[deanrd]

The thing is...

Democrats run up debts to keep people from starving during recessions.

Republicans run up debts to fight wars and give tax breaks to billionaires.

Sometimes motives matter a little more than results.

Republicans feel taking care of needy billionaires is far more important.

 

[AntonToo]

The debt only matters when the other guys control the purse strings.

Yep that's why them Democrats in power did not give a crap about the long term cost of their healthcare reform bill which gave away billions to help people pay for health insurance.

They are such hypocrites to have any concern about deficits now!

 

[AntonToo]

Why didn't liberals voice any concern about the national debt when Barack Obama was piling up more debt than George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan combined? And what did we have to show for all that debt? Answer: the weakest economic growth since the Great Depression, the worst median family income levels in decades, and the worst U6 unemployment rate for an 8-year period in decades. Liberals were okay with that debt because it came from government borrowing and spending. Yet now, suddenly, liberals are screaming about the national debt because they mistakenly believe that tax cuts will cause a decrease in federal revenue and that therefore tax cuts will increase the deficit and the debt, yet history shows that federal revenue has gone up after every major tax cut since the early 1900s.

Anyway, let's just get some facts straight about the debt:

• Obama added $7.9 trillion to the national debt in 8 years.
• Bush Jr. added $5.8 trillion to the national debt in 8 years.
• Clinton added $0 to the national debt in 8 years.
• Bush Sr. added $1.5 trillion to the national debt in 4 years.
• Reagan added $1.8 trillion to the national debt in 8 years.

If the Republicans had not forced some modest spending restraint on Obama in his last three years, he likely would have ended up adding more debt than the Bushes and Reagan combined did in 20 years. The Republicans saved Obama from achieving that infamy, but Obama still piled up more debt than both Bushes did in 12 years and more debt than Bush Jr. and Reagan did in 16 years.

More info: Which President Added Most to the U.S. Debt?

100% BULLSHIT.

Just because Obama inherited 1.3T dollar budget deficit does not mean he caused it or could do much about it in the middle of Great Recession.

You CAN blame Obama for not SOLVING these structural problems, but you can't say he caused it considering that his only policy contribution to our deficit was one-time $870 billion Stimulus that adds almost nothing to our deficits today. He also signed expensive extension of the Bush tax-cuts, but it's not as if raising taxes in 2012 was even politically feasible.

 

[NYcarbineer]

LOL! Sheesh, I'd say, "Are you kidding?", but I know you're not. If that's true, then why was Obama's recovery the weakest in decades?

Are you fucking retarded?

Okay, the reason why the recovery was as weak was because it was THE WORST RECESSION IN 80 YEARS!

And we didn't have something like World War II to drag us out of it.

You and I are around the same age so you know this past recession was nothing compared to the one in the early 80's. Back then, even fast food joints weren't hiring.

DumBama was the most anti-business President in our lifetime. That's why such a sluggish recovery. Between Commie Care and multitudes of regulations, businesses didn't want to invest. Trump is just the opposite. Trump is a pro-business President. He rescinded DumBama's regulations, lowered their taxes, and removed the mandates for Commie Care for businesses . Obama raised taxes on corporations.

Pelosi and Choomer have been having a cow over the fact that Trump might add another trillion to the debt...gee. i wonder how much of the 10 Trillion went into the pockets of our leading liberals/rats

So why are you now endorsing something you think the Democrats wrongly did years ago?

 

[Faun]

Why didn't liberals voice any concern about the national debt when Barack Obama was piling up more debt than George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan combined? And what did we have to show for all that debt? Answer: the weakest economic growth since the Great Depression, the worst median family income levels in decades, and the worst U6 unemployment rate for an 8-year period in decades. Liberals were okay with that debt because it came from government borrowing and spending. Yet now, suddenly, liberals are screaming about the national debt because they mistakenly believe that tax cuts will cause a decrease in federal revenue and that therefore tax cuts will increase the deficit and the debt, yet history shows that federal revenue has gone up after every major tax cut since the early 1900s.

Anyway, let's just get some facts straight about the debt:

• Obama added $7.9 trillion to the national debt in 8 years.
• Bush Jr. added $5.8 trillion to the national debt in 8 years.
• Clinton added $0 to the national debt in 8 years.
• Bush Sr. added $1.5 trillion to the national debt in 4 years.
• Reagan added $1.8 trillion to the national debt in 8 years.

If the Republicans had not forced some modest spending restraint on Obama in his last three years, he likely would have ended up adding more debt than the Bushes and Reagan combined did in 20 years. The Republicans saved Obama from achieving that infamy, but Obama still piled up more debt than both Bushes did in 12 years and more debt than Bush Jr. and Reagan did in 16 years.

More info: Which President Added Most to the U.S. Debt?

Obama was handed a massive recession which greatly increased the debt, along with a trillion dollar deficit.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Isn't it amazing that some liberals are claiming that there's no need for tax cuts because the economy is growing well enough without them? 1-3% growth barely creates enough jobs to keep up with workforce population growth. Before the government threw a bunch of shackles on the free market, we used to see growth in the 4-12% range. Under Eisenhower, we had two years of double-digit economic growth and three years of 5%-plus growth. So it can be done, with the right policies.

Liberals look at Obama's pathetic growth record and assume that that's the best we can do. Thankfully, they are wrong.

 

[RealDave]

Isn't it amazing that some liberals are claiming that there's no need for tax cuts because the economy is growing well enough without them? 1-3% growth barely creates enough jobs to keep up with workforce population growth. Before the government threw a bunch of shackles on the free market, we used to see growth in the 4-12% range. Under Eisenhower, we had two years of double-digit economic growth and three years of 5%-plus growth. So it can be done, with the right policies.

Liberals look at Obama's pathetic growth record and assume that that's the best we can do. Thankfully, they are wrong.

What is amazing are assholes like you who think we need to borrow 1.5 trillion dollars & waste the majority of it handing money to those who don't need it & will have little positive effect on the economy.

If you want to boost the economy, only give the money to those who will spend it. That is boosting the economy.

'Trump is just handing big bucks to his rich buddies and duping dumbasses like you.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What is amazing are assholes like you who think we need to borrow 1.5 trillion dollars & waste the majority of it handing money to those who don't need it & will have little positive effect on the economy.

Nobody is handing money to anybody. The money was not governments in the first place. Commies and Socialists think all money belongs to government, but it doesn't. Money belongs to the people that created that money.

If you want to boost the economy, only give the money to those who will spend it. That is boosting the economy.

How much you want to bet that wealthy people spend just as much if not more than you do?

'Trump is just handing big bucks to his rich buddies and duping dumbasses like you.

He is cutting taxes for most people. Again, he's not handing anybody anything.

 

[JoeB131]

Not everybody managed their money as bad as you. Companies still had money to invest but nowhere to invest. Nobody knew what the big-eared joker was going to do next. Was he going to raise taxes on businesses, choke off our energy supply, attack banks...... nobody knew.

Oh, bullshit. First, we had strong growth in the Obama years...

second, the Great Recession was really a lot worse than you pretend it was.