Reagan blamed Jimmy Carter for years, Roosevelt blamed Herbert Hoover for years

[IcebergSlim]

Nah.....you posted some idiocy sourced from an illiterate calling itself "robo" something.....

and dated crap from "Liberty Works" or whatever....

Here's me doing you a massive solid

Federal Reserve Economic Data - FRED - St. Louis Fed

Whenever you are looking for information about the economy......unless, of course, you prefer it predigested.....

Your Federal Reserve data doesn't prove a damn thing, moron.

Where do you think the idiots you cribbed from got THEIR data?

Seriously......you are a 4 Sigma to the Left of the Mean.......

So, are you saying the graphs I posted are accurate, or are they not?

Posting a column of numbers doesn't prove a damn thing.

How do you think those graphs are constructed?

Do you work with your hands, Bri?

Then construct them. Don't expect me to do your work for you.

Bri,

You don't do ANYTHING, except share your uninformed opinions......

What does it say after "Source:" in the lower left hand corner?

 

[ZackB]

No it wasn't.

spot the dots.....



Obama made it worse with his noxious economic policies.

neat trick, given that the recession ended in June. 2009...

and here is why...

The real economy also responded to the massive stimulus but remained heavily dependent on it. In the United States, growth during the second half of 2009 probably averaged about 3 percent. Absent temporary fiscal stimulus and inventory rebuilding, which taken together added about 4 percentage points to U.S. growth, the economy would have contracted at about a 1 percent annual rate during the second half of 2009.

The Year Ahead

Before you bleat something stupid, bear in mind that this is an economist from AEI......(yeah, I know....you have no idea what that is....trust me....it is NOT "Obama friendly")

We aren't discussing just the length of the period that economists define officially as a "recession." We're discussing the performance of Obama's economic policies for his entire term, and they suck.

Claiming the economy "would have contracted" without Obama's magic elixir is pure abracadabra. Economists have a poor record of predicting what the economy will do. Their prognostications are almost entirely worthless.

The bottom line is that Obama's economic numbers suck.

Bri,

Where did you get the idea that your Bold Assertions carry any weight?

Do you understand how argument works?

They aren't mere "assertions." I posted the damning evidence. You continue to ignore it.

He cannot copy and paste logic, experience, or anything else but stats.

Yep. He posts a list of numbers and thinks he has proved something. He's very similar to Dad2three in that respect. Do you suppose he's a sock?

I am pretty sure he has a hand up his ass.

 

[bripat9643]

Government does contribute squat to real GDP growth.

You're an imbecile...

GDP is the sum of Consumption (C), Investment (I), Government Spending (G) and Net Exports (X – M): Y = C + I + G + (X - M). ...

You can't count government spending unless you subtract taxing and government borrowing. The net is less than zero.

Sez who?

Says any honest economist. How is government spending a contribution to GDP? Note the "P" stands for "production." What does the government produce?

Name an economist who says any such thing......

It means PRODUCT.......when the government buys, and consumes, something, it is no different than when anyone else does it, with respect to calculating GDP......

Bri......level with me......have you ever actually studied economics?

Buying and consuming isn't a "product." Taking money from 'A' and giving it to 'B' is not a "product" either, unless you count theft as a product. The claim it's "no different than anyone else" shows what a colossal ignoramus you are.

 

[bripat9643]

Your Federal Reserve data doesn't prove a damn thing, moron.

Where do you think the idiots you cribbed from got THEIR data?

Seriously......you are a 4 Sigma to the Left of the Mean.......

So, are you saying the graphs I posted are accurate, or are they not?

Posting a column of numbers doesn't prove a damn thing.

How do you think those graphs are constructed?

Do you work with your hands, Bri?

Then construct them. Don't expect me to do your work for you.

Bri,

You don't do ANYTHING, except share your uninformed opinions......

What does it say after "Source:" in the lower left hand corner?

Yeah? So that means you accept the information as accurate?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

We'll be blaming Obama for years for all of his fuck-ups. We will never see another black President.

Horse Shit! You right wing bastards aren't satisfied with anything less than a middle eastern oil war. Obama assumed two hot ones and ended them both. Maybe that's why government spending has been the best in a long time:

A) He surrender in Iraq/Afghanstan! Where have you been? ISIS/Al-Qaeda run these states:
View attachment 65002
B) Here are the FACTS about Obama's Spending!!!
View attachment 65003

After I kicked your ass, you're still spreading those fake percentages?
6696.2 is NOT 334% more than 2005.5, got it?

 

[IcebergSlim]

You're an imbecile...

GDP is the sum of Consumption (C), Investment (I), Government Spending (G) and Net Exports (X – M): Y = C + I + G + (X - M). ...

You can't count government spending unless you subtract taxing and government borrowing. The net is less than zero.

Sez who?

Says any honest economist. How is government spending a contribution to GDP? Note the "P" stands for "production." What does the government produce?

Name an economist who says any such thing......

It means PRODUCT.......when the government buys, and consumes, something, it is no different than when anyone else does it, with respect to calculating GDP......

Bri......level with me......have you ever actually studied economics?

Buying and consuming isn't a "product." Taking money from 'A' and giving it to 'B' is not a "product" either, unless you count theft as a product. The claim it's "no different than anyone else" shows what a colossal ignoramus you are.

Bri,


If you don't buy, or consume product, what DO you consume?

If the Federal Government passes on tax receipts through the Earned Income Tax Credit, what do you think the recipients do with the money?



You never answered the questions....

Have you ever studied economics?

Do you work with your hands?

The lines may accurately represent the underlying data.....everything else in the meme is pretty much bullshit.....

and, in the event you've failed to notice.....it is now 2016......


Think about what I've just told you before regurgitating another bit of mindless propaganda....

 

[healthmyths]

Get the f out of here....and learn what an economic cycle looks like.

A slowing of the rate of growth doesn’t constitute a recession.....it merely means that the cycle is nearing a peak....it is only when growth turns negative that you are in recession, by the technical definition....

NBER measures recession and recovery by the trends in 4 cycles.....this makes the call more subjective...

Under neither standard did the recession of 01 begin before Scrub came into office....though I note that I don't consider Scrub responsible for it.....what followed is a tribute to his unrivaled ineptitude (though the idiots on whom he relied for advice bear a considerable part of the blame)

You know idiot. You don't have a fucking clue as to what you are talking about. You are a typical leftist shit bag who thinks copy-and-paste equates with knowledge.

Uh....what I am "cutting and pasting" are OBJECTIVE facts....

You spend your time gorging on opinions and second hand interpretations at the likes of Breitbart, NYPost, Washington Times and CNS....it's like a feedback loop of idiocy......you proceed from your biases, exclude everything which is in conflict in favor of confirming them at sites whose entire reason for existing is to indulge you...

I tend to rely on primary sources, like BLS and BEA, and combine the facts with a professional and academic background in economic analysis.....

Where do you think THESE facts come from??? NYPOST,etc.... NOTE Whitehouse!!
View attachment 65159
Obama has spent MORE with NO major events like recessions/9-11/worst hurricane seasons/dot.com busts... nothing like those events have occurred since 2008!
What has happened is $672 billion has been repaid and added to the revenues and Obama has blown way past that!
Tell me then based on NO major events like the above and nearly $1 trillion paid back Obama still spent more in 6 years then Bush in 8 years!
All Paid back...Bailout Scorecard | Eye on the Bailout | ProPublica
View attachment 65160

Obama spent 175% more than Bush in 7 years?

Seriously.......this is your brain on random memes.....

Bush over spent from 2002 (his first budget) to 2009 his last budget Total: $3.546 trillion
But TARP which was charged against Bush's budget for 2009 has paid back over $672 billion.
Subtract from Obama's receipts of $15.320 trillion the $672 billion leaves $15.320 trillion
Obama's over spending from 2010 to 2015 $5.926 trillion...
Divide $5.926 by $3.546 equals 167%

 

[bripat9643]

You can't count government spending unless you subtract taxing and government borrowing. The net is less than zero.

Sez who?

Says any honest economist. How is government spending a contribution to GDP? Note the "P" stands for "production." What does the government produce?

Name an economist who says any such thing......

It means PRODUCT.......when the government buys, and consumes, something, it is no different than when anyone else does it, with respect to calculating GDP......

Bri......level with me......have you ever actually studied economics?

Buying and consuming isn't a "product." Taking money from 'A' and giving it to 'B' is not a "product" either, unless you count theft as a product. The claim it's "no different than anyone else" shows what a colossal ignoramus you are.

Bri,


If you don't buy, or consume product, what DO you consume?

If the Federal Government passes on tax receipts through the Earned Income Tax Credit, what do you think the recipients do with the money?



You never answered the questions....

Have you ever studied economics?

Do you work with your hands?

The lines may accurately represent the underlying data.....everything else in the meme is pretty much bullshit.....

and, in the event you've failed to notice.....it is now 2016......


Think about what I've just told you before regurgitating another bit of mindless propaganda....

We are discussing "product" not consumption. What does the government produce when it write checks to deadbeats?

 

[IcebergSlim]

You know idiot. You don't have a fucking clue as to what you are talking about. You are a typical leftist shit bag who thinks copy-and-paste equates with knowledge.

Uh....what I am "cutting and pasting" are OBJECTIVE facts....

You spend your time gorging on opinions and second hand interpretations at the likes of Breitbart, NYPost, Washington Times and CNS....it's like a feedback loop of idiocy......you proceed from your biases, exclude everything which is in conflict in favor of confirming them at sites whose entire reason for existing is to indulge you...

I tend to rely on primary sources, like BLS and BEA, and combine the facts with a professional and academic background in economic analysis.....

Where do you think THESE facts come from??? NYPOST,etc.... NOTE Whitehouse!!
View attachment 65159
Obama has spent MORE with NO major events like recessions/9-11/worst hurricane seasons/dot.com busts... nothing like those events have occurred since 2008!
What has happened is $672 billion has been repaid and added to the revenues and Obama has blown way past that!
Tell me then based on NO major events like the above and nearly $1 trillion paid back Obama still spent more in 6 years then Bush in 8 years!
All Paid back...Bailout Scorecard | Eye on the Bailout | ProPublica
View attachment 65160

Obama spent 175% more than Bush in 7 years?

Seriously.......this is your brain on random memes.....

Bush over spent from 2002 (his first budget) to 2009 his last budget Total: $3.546 trillion
But TARP which was charged against Bush's budget for 2009 has paid back over $672 billion.
Subtract from Obama's receipts of $15.320 trillion the $672 billion leaves $15.320 trillion
Obama's over spending from 2010 to 2015 $5.926 trillion...
Divide $5.926 by $3.546 equals 167%

You're a crackhead....

Actual outlays for TARP in fiscal 2009 totaled $154 billion, according to the CBO. So the one-time bump in spending amounted to about 4 percent of fiscal 2009 spending.

Obama’s Spending: ‘Inferno’ or Not?


And, from the looks of it you are using "reported deficit", which under Scrub didn't include 850 billion of ESAs for Iraqnam....

 

[IcebergSlim]

Sez who?

Says any honest economist. How is government spending a contribution to GDP? Note the "P" stands for "production." What does the government produce?

Name an economist who says any such thing......

It means PRODUCT.......when the government buys, and consumes, something, it is no different than when anyone else does it, with respect to calculating GDP......

Bri......level with me......have you ever actually studied economics?

Buying and consuming isn't a "product." Taking money from 'A' and giving it to 'B' is not a "product" either, unless you count theft as a product. The claim it's "no different than anyone else" shows what a colossal ignoramus you are.

Bri,


If you don't buy, or consume product, what DO you consume?

If the Federal Government passes on tax receipts through the Earned Income Tax Credit, what do you think the recipients do with the money?



You never answered the questions....

Have you ever studied economics?

Do you work with your hands?

The lines may accurately represent the underlying data.....everything else in the meme is pretty much bullshit.....

and, in the event you've failed to notice.....it is now 2016......


Think about what I've just told you before regurgitating another bit of mindless propaganda....

We are discussing "product" not consumption. What does the government produce when it write checks to deadbeats?

Read it again, and as many times as you require to understand it.

Damn, are you thick....

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You know idiot. You don't have a fucking clue as to what you are talking about. You are a typical leftist shit bag who thinks copy-and-paste equates with knowledge.

Uh....what I am "cutting and pasting" are OBJECTIVE facts....

You spend your time gorging on opinions and second hand interpretations at the likes of Breitbart, NYPost, Washington Times and CNS....it's like a feedback loop of idiocy......you proceed from your biases, exclude everything which is in conflict in favor of confirming them at sites whose entire reason for existing is to indulge you...

I tend to rely on primary sources, like BLS and BEA, and combine the facts with a professional and academic background in economic analysis.....

Where do you think THESE facts come from??? NYPOST,etc.... NOTE Whitehouse!!
View attachment 65159
Obama has spent MORE with NO major events like recessions/9-11/worst hurricane seasons/dot.com busts... nothing like those events have occurred since 2008!
What has happened is $672 billion has been repaid and added to the revenues and Obama has blown way past that!
Tell me then based on NO major events like the above and nearly $1 trillion paid back Obama still spent more in 6 years then Bush in 8 years!
All Paid back...Bailout Scorecard | Eye on the Bailout | ProPublica
View attachment 65160

Obama spent 175% more than Bush in 7 years?

Seriously.......this is your brain on random memes.....

Bush over spent from 2002 (his first budget) to 2009 his last budget Total: $3.546 trillion
But TARP which was charged against Bush's budget for 2009 has paid back over $672 billion.
Subtract from Obama's receipts of $15.320 trillion the $672 billion leaves $15.320 trillion
Obama's over spending from 2010 to 2015 $5.926 trillion...
Divide $5.926 by $3.546 equals 167%

Divide $5.926 by $3.546 equals 167%

Strictly from a math standpoint, going from 3.546 to 5.926 is a 67% increase.
Not a 167% increase.

You stupid fucking git.

 

[bripat9643]

Says any honest economist. How is government spending a contribution to GDP? Note the "P" stands for "production." What does the government produce?

Name an economist who says any such thing......

It means PRODUCT.......when the government buys, and consumes, something, it is no different than when anyone else does it, with respect to calculating GDP......

Bri......level with me......have you ever actually studied economics?

Buying and consuming isn't a "product." Taking money from 'A' and giving it to 'B' is not a "product" either, unless you count theft as a product. The claim it's "no different than anyone else" shows what a colossal ignoramus you are.

Bri,


If you don't buy, or consume product, what DO you consume?

If the Federal Government passes on tax receipts through the Earned Income Tax Credit, what do you think the recipients do with the money?



You never answered the questions....

Have you ever studied economics?

Do you work with your hands?

The lines may accurately represent the underlying data.....everything else in the meme is pretty much bullshit.....

and, in the event you've failed to notice.....it is now 2016......


Think about what I've just told you before regurgitating another bit of mindless propaganda....

We are discussing "product" not consumption. What does the government produce when it write checks to deadbeats?

Read it again, and as many times as you require to understand it.

Damn, are you thick....

"What do the recipients do with the money?" doesn't answer my question.

 

[regent]

I don't remember ever hearing or reading of FDR asking Hoover for help, but I did read a number of times that Hoover as president asked candidate FDR for help. FDR did not give President Hoover help, and It supposedly explains the Hoover look as he and FDR rode to the FDR inauguration.

 

[IcebergSlim]

Name an economist who says any such thing......

It means PRODUCT.......when the government buys, and consumes, something, it is no different than when anyone else does it, with respect to calculating GDP......

Bri......level with me......have you ever actually studied economics?

Buying and consuming isn't a "product." Taking money from 'A' and giving it to 'B' is not a "product" either, unless you count theft as a product. The claim it's "no different than anyone else" shows what a colossal ignoramus you are.

Bri,


If you don't buy, or consume product, what DO you consume?

If the Federal Government passes on tax receipts through the Earned Income Tax Credit, what do you think the recipients do with the money?



You never answered the questions....

Have you ever studied economics?

Do you work with your hands?

The lines may accurately represent the underlying data.....everything else in the meme is pretty much bullshit.....

and, in the event you've failed to notice.....it is now 2016......


Think about what I've just told you before regurgitating another bit of mindless propaganda....

We are discussing "product" not consumption. What does the government produce when it write checks to deadbeats?

Read it again, and as many times as you require to understand it.

Damn, are you thick....

"What do the recipients do with the money?" doesn't answer my question.

Maybe THIS will.....(I had forgotten this detail)


Transfer payments include Social Security, Medicare, unemployment insurance, welfare programs, and subsidies. These are not included in GDP because they are not payments for goods or services, but rather means of allocating money to achieve social ends.

 

[healthmyths]

Uh....what I am "cutting and pasting" are OBJECTIVE facts....

You spend your time gorging on opinions and second hand interpretations at the likes of Breitbart, NYPost, Washington Times and CNS....it's like a feedback loop of idiocy......you proceed from your biases, exclude everything which is in conflict in favor of confirming them at sites whose entire reason for existing is to indulge you...

I tend to rely on primary sources, like BLS and BEA, and combine the facts with a professional and academic background in economic analysis.....

Where do you think THESE facts come from??? NYPOST,etc.... NOTE Whitehouse!!
View attachment 65159
Obama has spent MORE with NO major events like recessions/9-11/worst hurricane seasons/dot.com busts... nothing like those events have occurred since 2008!
What has happened is $672 billion has been repaid and added to the revenues and Obama has blown way past that!
Tell me then based on NO major events like the above and nearly $1 trillion paid back Obama still spent more in 6 years then Bush in 8 years!
All Paid back...Bailout Scorecard | Eye on the Bailout | ProPublica
View attachment 65160

Obama spent 175% more than Bush in 7 years?

Seriously.......this is your brain on random memes.....

Bush over spent from 2002 (his first budget) to 2009 his last budget Total: $3.546 trillion
But TARP which was charged against Bush's budget for 2009 has paid back over $672 billion.
Subtract from Obama's receipts of $15.320 trillion the $672 billion leaves $15.320 trillion
Obama's over spending from 2010 to 2015 $5.926 trillion...
Divide $5.926 by $3.546 equals 167%

Divide $5.926 by $3.546 equals 167%

Strictly from a math standpoint, going from 3.546 to 5.926 is a 67% increase.
Not a 167% increase.

You stupid fucking git.

 

[Campbell]

Had about all you can take of THIS

?

And to think all we had to do was borrow an extra years worth GDP, $13 Trillion of "unpatriotic debt" to get there!

Well done Macaca Joe! Well done!

Yesterday it was 14 trillion......and I invited you to show me your math....at which point you took a runner...

let's try it again...

Obama added $8+T and the Fed added $4+T that's around $13 and it will be north of 14 when Macaca Joe and the Establishment is done fucking over the USA

There would never have been a debt if it hadn't been for Republican tax cuts for the rich. They've never cut spending a dime......just taxes:

..............................................Total U S Debt................................................

Figures Easily Verified....Taken From the Bureau of the Debt

US: $18,775,084,981,440 - Debt as of December 2015?

09/30/2014 $17,824,071,380,733.82

09/30/2013 $16,738,183,526,697.32

09/30/2012 $16,066,241,407,385.89

09/30/2011 $14,790,340,328,557.15

09/30/2010 $13,561,623,030,891.79

09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)

09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accommodate Tens of Trillions)

09/30/2007 $9,007,653,372,262.48

09/30/2006 $8,506,973,899,215.23

09/30/2005 $7,932,709,661,723.50

09/30/2004 $7,379,052,696,330.32

09/30/2003 $6,783,231,062,743.62(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86(Administration And Congress Arguing About How To Use Surplus)

09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43(First Surplus Generated...On Track To Pay Off Debt By 2012)

09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62

09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34

09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73

09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39

09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32 (Bill Clinton Raised Taxes On The Rich early 1993)

09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 ( Debt Quadrupled By Reagan/Bush41)

09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66

09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03

09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25

09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32

09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16

09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00

09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42

09/30/1985 $1,823,103,000,000.00

09/30/1984 $1,572,266,000,000.00

09/30/1983 $1,377,210,000,000.00

09/30/1982 $1,142,034,000,000.00(Total Debt Passes $1 Trillion)(Reagan Slashed Tax Rates To Pre Depression Levels)

09/30/1981 $997,855,000,000.00

We would not have had the deficits if we had cut spending, asshole. Deficit means spending more than you bring in in revenue. Spending was allowed to get way out of control and cannot be sustained even with the imposition of onerous tax burdens that are detrimental to our economy.

You can cite all the stats you want. But if you cannot interpret them then what's the point? Dumbass.

Each time the Republicans had a chance to be a hero and make us fiscally sound they cut taxes for the rich and completely blew it. Clinton left a balanced budget with a path in place to completely pay down the national debt and the first thing Bush did was cut tax rates for the rich twice, 2001 and 2003:

..............................................Total U S Debt................................................

Figures Easily Verified....Taken From the Bureau of the Debt

US: $18,775,084,981,440 - Debt as of December 2015?

09/30/2014 $17,824,071,380,733.82

09/30/2013 $16,738,183,526,697.32

09/30/2012 $16,066,241,407,385.89

09/30/2011 $14,790,340,328,557.15

09/30/2010 $13,561,623,030,891.79

09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)

09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accommodate Tens of Trillions)

09/30/2007 $9,007,653,372,262.48

09/30/2006 $8,506,973,899,215.23

09/30/2005 $7,932,709,661,723.50

09/30/2004 $7,379,052,696,330.32

09/30/2003 $6,783,231,062,743.62(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86(Administration And Congress Arguing About How To Use Surplus)

09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43(First Surplus Generated...On Track To Pay Off Debt By 2012)

09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62

09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34

09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73

09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39

09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32 (Bill Clinton Raised Taxes On The Rich early 1993)

09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 ( Debt Quadrupled By Reagan/Bush41)

09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66

09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03

09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25

09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32

09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16

09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00

09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42

09/30/1985 $1,823,103,000,000.00

09/30/1984 $1,572,266,000,000.00

09/30/1983 $1,377,210,000,000.00

09/30/1982 $1,142,034,000,000.00(Total Debt Passes $1 Trillion)(Reagan Slashed Tax Rates To Pre Depression Levels)

09/30/1981 $997,855,000,000.00

 

[healthmyths]

And to think all we had to do was borrow an extra years worth GDP, $13 Trillion of "unpatriotic debt" to get there!

Well done Macaca Joe! Well done!

Yesterday it was 14 trillion......and I invited you to show me your math....at which point you took a runner...

let's try it again...

Obama added $8+T and the Fed added $4+T that's around $13 and it will be north of 14 when Macaca Joe and the Establishment is done fucking over the USA

There would never have been a debt if it hadn't been for Republican tax cuts for the rich. They've never cut spending a dime......just taxes:

..............................................Total U S Debt................................................

Figures Easily Verified....Taken From the Bureau of the Debt

US: $18,775,084,981,440 - Debt as of December 2015?

09/30/2014 $17,824,071,380,733.82

09/30/2013 $16,738,183,526,697.32

09/30/2012 $16,066,241,407,385.89

09/30/2011 $14,790,340,328,557.15

09/30/2010 $13,561,623,030,891.79

09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)

09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accommodate Tens of Trillions)

09/30/2007 $9,007,653,372,262.48

09/30/2006 $8,506,973,899,215.23

09/30/2005 $7,932,709,661,723.50

09/30/2004 $7,379,052,696,330.32

09/30/2003 $6,783,231,062,743.62(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86(Administration And Congress Arguing About How To Use Surplus)

09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43(First Surplus Generated...On Track To Pay Off Debt By 2012)

09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62

09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34

09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73

09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39

09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32 (Bill Clinton Raised Taxes On The Rich early 1993)

09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 ( Debt Quadrupled By Reagan/Bush41)

09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66

09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03

09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25

09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32

09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16

09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00

09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42

09/30/1985 $1,823,103,000,000.00

09/30/1984 $1,572,266,000,000.00

09/30/1983 $1,377,210,000,000.00

09/30/1982 $1,142,034,000,000.00(Total Debt Passes $1 Trillion)(Reagan Slashed Tax Rates To Pre Depression Levels)

09/30/1981 $997,855,000,000.00

We would not have had the deficits if we had cut spending, asshole. Deficit means spending more than you bring in in revenue. Spending was allowed to get way out of control and cannot be sustained even with the imposition of onerous tax burdens that are detrimental to our economy.

You can cite all the stats you want. But if you cannot interpret them then what's the point? Dumbass.

Each time the Republicans had a chance to be a hero and make us fiscally sound they cut taxes for the rich and completely blew it. Clinton left a balanced budget with a path in place to completely pay down the national debt and the first thing Bush did was cut tax rates for the rich twice, 2001 and 2003:

..............................................Total U S Debt................................................

Figures Easily Verified....Taken From the Bureau of the Debt

US: $18,775,084,981,440 - Debt as of December 2015?

09/30/2014 $17,824,071,380,733.82

09/30/2013 $16,738,183,526,697.32

09/30/2012 $16,066,241,407,385.89

09/30/2011 $14,790,340,328,557.15

09/30/2010 $13,561,623,030,891.79

09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)

09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accommodate Tens of Trillions)

09/30/2007 $9,007,653,372,262.48

09/30/2006 $8,506,973,899,215.23

09/30/2005 $7,932,709,661,723.50

09/30/2004 $7,379,052,696,330.32

09/30/2003 $6,783,231,062,743.62(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86(Administration And Congress Arguing About How To Use Surplus)

09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43(First Surplus Generated...On Track To Pay Off Debt By 2012)

09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62

09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34

09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73

09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39

09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32 (Bill Clinton Raised Taxes On The Rich early 1993)

09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 ( Debt Quadrupled By Reagan/Bush41)

09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66

09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03

09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25

09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32

09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16

09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00

09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42

09/30/1985 $1,823,103,000,000.00

09/30/1984 $1,572,266,000,000.00

09/30/1983 $1,377,210,000,000.00

09/30/1982 $1,142,034,000,000.00(Total Debt Passes $1 Trillion)(Reagan Slashed Tax Rates To Pre Depression Levels)

09/30/1981 $997,855,000,000.00

Let's see what happened during that time OK?

US: $18,775,084,981,440 - Debt as of December 2015?
Any hurricanes happen? NOPE! Any attacks EQUAL to 9/11 happen? NOPE! Any gigantic stock market losses that cut down tax receipts? NOPE!

09/30/2014 $17,824,071,380,733.82
Any hurricanes happen? NOPE! Any attacks EQUAL to 9/11 happen? NOPE! Any gigantic stock market losses that cut down tax receipts? NOPE!
09/30/2013 $16,738,183,526,697.32
Any hurricanes happen? NOPE! Any attacks EQUAL to 9/11 happen? NOPE! Any gigantic stock market losses that cut down tax receipts? NOPE!
TARP has been paid $672 BILLION and included in receipts!

09/30/2012 $16,066,241,407,385.89
Any hurricanes happen? NOPE! Any attacks EQUAL to 9/11 happen? NOPE! Any gigantic stock market losses that cut down tax receipts? NOPE!
09/30/2011 $14,790,340,328,557.15
Any hurricanes happen? NOPE! Any attacks EQUAL to 9/11 happen? NOPE! Any gigantic stock market losses that cut down tax receipts? NOPE!
09/30/2010 $13,561,623,030,891.79
Any hurricanes happen? NOPE! Any attacks EQUAL to 9/11 happen? NOPE! Any gigantic stock market losses that cut down tax receipts? NOPE!
09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)

09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accommodate Tens of Trillions)
9/18/08 Economic terrorist attack with $500 billion taken out of $4 trillion Money market that CAUSED everyone to be concerned about the WORLD's economy collapsing! This caused TARP

09/30/2007 $9,007,653,372,262.48
Any hurricanes happen? YUP..
09/30/2006 $8,506,973,899,215.23
Any hurricanes happen? YUP..
09/30/2005 $7,932,709,661,723.50
Any hurricanes happen? YUP..
09/30/2004 $7,379,052,696,330.32
Any hurricanes happen? YUP..
09/30/2003 $6,783,231,062,743.62(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16
GUESS What you idiots!!!
Year 2001: September 11 Terrorist Attacks
The 9/11 terrorist attacks were the events that helped shape other financial events of the decade. After that terrible day in September 2001, our economic climate was never to be the same again. It was only the third time in history that the New York Stock Exchange was shut down for a period of time. In this case, it was closed from September 10 - 17. Besides the tragic human loss of that day, the economic loss cannot even be estimated. Some estimate that there was over $60 billion in insurance losses alone. Airlines didn't fly for 3 days!
Approximately 18,000 small businesses were either displaced or destroyed in Lower Manhattan after the Twin Towers fell. There was a buildup in homeland security on all levels. 9/11 caused a catastrophic financial loss for the U.S.
Source: 10 Events That Rocked the Financial World

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)
AND guess what a RECESSION that showed a slow down of the economy starting in July 2000 became official.

All of these events... WHAT has Obama had happen? Stock market collapse losses won't be felt till Trump becomes President in 2017 and then you idiots will
be bitching and moaning about Trump's executive actions!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

View attachment 65257

Where do you think THESE facts come from??? NYPOST,etc.... NOTE Whitehouse!!
View attachment 65159
Obama has spent MORE with NO major events like recessions/9-11/worst hurricane seasons/dot.com busts... nothing like those events have occurred since 2008!
What has happened is $672 billion has been repaid and added to the revenues and Obama has blown way past that!
Tell me then based on NO major events like the above and nearly $1 trillion paid back Obama still spent more in 6 years then Bush in 8 years!
All Paid back...Bailout Scorecard | Eye on the Bailout | ProPublica
View attachment 65160

Obama spent 175% more than Bush in 7 years?

Seriously.......this is your brain on random memes.....

Bush over spent from 2002 (his first budget) to 2009 his last budget Total: $3.546 trillion
But TARP which was charged against Bush's budget for 2009 has paid back over $672 billion.
Subtract from Obama's receipts of $15.320 trillion the $672 billion leaves $15.320 trillion
Obama's over spending from 2010 to 2015 $5.926 trillion...
Divide $5.926 by $3.546 equals 167%

Divide $5.926 by $3.546 equals 167%

Strictly from a math standpoint, going from 3.546 to 5.926 is a 67% increase.
Not a 167% increase.

You stupid fucking git.

View attachment 65257

If you don't understand the difference between a 167% increase and a 67% increase, you may be a liberal.

 

[healthmyths]

View attachment 65257

Where do you think THESE facts come from??? NYPOST,etc.... NOTE Whitehouse!!
View attachment 65159
Obama has spent MORE with NO major events like recessions/9-11/worst hurricane seasons/dot.com busts... nothing like those events have occurred since 2008!
What has happened is $672 billion has been repaid and added to the revenues and Obama has blown way past that!
Tell me then based on NO major events like the above and nearly $1 trillion paid back Obama still spent more in 6 years then Bush in 8 years!
All Paid back...Bailout Scorecard | Eye on the Bailout | ProPublica
View attachment 65160

Obama spent 175% more than Bush in 7 years?

Seriously.......this is your brain on random memes.....

Bush over spent from 2002 (his first budget) to 2009 his last budget Total: $3.546 trillion
But TARP which was charged against Bush's budget for 2009 has paid back over $672 billion.
Subtract from Obama's receipts of $15.320 trillion the $672 billion leaves $15.320 trillion
Obama's over spending from 2010 to 2015 $5.926 trillion...
Divide $5.926 by $3.546 equals 167%

Divide $5.926 by $3.546 equals 167%

Strictly from a math standpoint, going from 3.546 to 5.926 is a 67% increase.
Not a 167% increase.

You stupid fucking git.

View attachment 65257

If you don't understand the difference between a 167% increase and a 67% increase, you may be a liberal.

Explain something to me.
Each new budget year there is ZERO spending.
Bush spending was zero at beginning of budget year. Then receipts came in and spending went out.
But Bush spending started at Zero Just as Obama's started at zero.
So when the end of Bush's term his spending year in year out over 8 years had spent each year starting each year at zero by the end of 2009 $3.546 trillion more
then receipts.
Obama in just 6 years starting at zero each year has accumulated $6.220 trillion in more outlays then receipts.
So Bush starting at zero in 8 years had spent $3.546 trillion more.
Obama in 6 years has spent $6.220 trillion.
How much more then zero when Bush started did he increase outlays. $3.546 trillion.
Obama starting at Zero increased out lays starting at zero to $6.220 trillion which is 175% more then Bush's spending!
Case closed!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

View attachment 65257

Obama spent 175% more than Bush in 7 years?

Seriously.......this is your brain on random memes.....

Bush over spent from 2002 (his first budget) to 2009 his last budget Total: $3.546 trillion
But TARP which was charged against Bush's budget for 2009 has paid back over $672 billion.
Subtract from Obama's receipts of $15.320 trillion the $672 billion leaves $15.320 trillion
Obama's over spending from 2010 to 2015 $5.926 trillion...
Divide $5.926 by $3.546 equals 167%

Divide $5.926 by $3.546 equals 167%

Strictly from a math standpoint, going from 3.546 to 5.926 is a 67% increase.
Not a 167% increase.

You stupid fucking git.

View attachment 65257

If you don't understand the difference between a 167% increase and a 67% increase, you may be a liberal.

Explain something to me.
Each new budget year there is ZERO spending.
Bush spending was zero at beginning of budget year. Then receipts came in and spending went out.
But Bush spending started at Zero Just as Obama's started at zero.
So when the end of Bush's term his spending year in year out over 8 years had spent each year starting each year at zero by the end of 2009 $3.546 trillion more
then receipts.
Obama in just 6 years starting at zero each year has accumulated $6.220 trillion in more outlays then receipts.
So Bush starting at zero in 8 years had spent $3.546 trillion more.
Obama in 6 years has spent $6.220 trillion.
How much more then zero when Bush started did he increase outlays. $3.546 trillion.
Obama starting at Zero increased out lays starting at zero to $6.220 trillion which is 175% more then Bush's spending!
Case closed!

How much more then zero when Bush started did he increase outlays. $3.546 trillion.
Obama starting at Zero increased out lays starting at zero to $6.220 trillion which is 175% more then Bush's spending!

Let's pretend the Bush number was $100. Let's pretend the Obama number was $175.

Do you think the $175 is 75% more than $100 or 175% more?