The Incredible Shrinking Obama Deficit.

[Jarhead]

you mean he brought it back to where it was when he started? Wow. What an accomplishment. In the meantime he racked up 10 trillion in debt.

You want to explain how that chart coincides with your comment?

it doesn't, but don't burst their bubble.

actually, it does.
Saying it doesn't just makes you look silly.

Did you look at the chart? Like actually look at it?

yup.
It shows the deficit for 2008 at about half a trillion....deficit in 2009 at about 1.5 trillion and the deficit now at about a half a trillion.

Did you look at it? Like actually look at it?

 

[easyt65]

Every fiscal year of the Clinton Administration, the deficit shrank.
George Bush increased deficits until finally hitting the highest deficit of any country in the history of the Universe.
Every fiscal year of the Obama Administration, the deficit shrank.
Bush ran the deficit up to damn near 1.5 trillion dollars. I defy anyone to say that any successor could have lowered the deficit down to pre-Bush levels within just a couple years with a straight face..

Not saying Bush didn't add to the deficit...but AGAIN:

2000 - 2006: 1st 6 years: $1.5 trillion added.

2006 Liberals take over Congress / Spending: $2.5 Trillion added

2008-2012, 4 Years (Liberal Control of Congress 2006 - 2010: Over $6 Trillion added, setting records, more debt added than EVERY US President Combined.

Numbers don't lie

 

[Kosh]

The incredible shrinking Obama labor force

What are you talking about
View attachment 52693View attachment 52694

Actually what you said looks like a lie.

United States Labor Force Statistics - Seasonally Adjusted

Oh my the far left drones do not understand anything!

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

It's like I always say, the trick to propganda like yours is to carefully frame the picture so the rubes bleev what you want them to perceive.

Let's go back further with the LFPR, shall we?

Oh, my! Look at that! It began tanking when we had a GOP President and a GOP Congress!

And it still proves that Obama is a failure at creating jobs..

But the far left drones can not admit it, but they will show you how a two year old would handle this..

 

[chikenwing]

Deficits go down by increasing revenue or cutting spending.
It is quit obvious what he did and didn't do.

Feds saw more money than ever come in so far this year.
What specific policies that came from the WH have moved it down,beside getting more tax dollars?

 

[Kosh]

Every fiscal year of the Clinton Administration, the deficit shrank.

George Bush increased deficits until finally hitting the highest deficit of any country in the history of the Universe.

Every fiscal year of the Obama Administration, the deficit shrank.



Bush ran the deficit up to damn near 1.5 trillion dollars. I defy anyone to say that any successor could have lowered the deficit down to pre-Bush levels within just a couple years with a straight face.

We're talking serious momentum that is not easy to reverse.

You're obviously a lying liberal, Obama apologist.

See another far left drone agreeing with another far left drone..

Who would have seen that coming!

 

[Kosh]

Every fiscal year of the Clinton Administration, the deficit shrank.
George Bush increased deficits until finally hitting the highest deficit of any country in the history of the Universe.
Every fiscal year of the Obama Administration, the deficit shrank.
Bush ran the deficit up to damn near 1.5 trillion dollars. I defy anyone to say that any successor could have lowered the deficit down to pre-Bush levels within just a couple years with a straight face..

Not saying Bush didn't add to the deficit...but AGAIN:

2000 - 2006: 1st 6 years: $1.5 trillion added.

2006 Liberals take over Congress / Spending: $2.5 Trillion added

2008-2012, 4 Years (Liberal Control of Congress 2006 - 2010: Over $6 Trillion added, setting records, more debt added than EVERY US President Combined.

Numbers don't lie

Well the real numbers to a far left drone do not exist, only far left math exists..

 

[rightwinger]

But..but ...Its not the unemployment rate....Its the deficit that is important
Pay no attention to the deficit.....Its Labor Paticipation rate that matters

 

[rdean]

Deficits go down by increasing revenue or cutting spending.
It is quit obvious what he did and didn't do.

Sessions Wrong on Bush Tax Cuts

We pointed out these figures to the senator's spokesman, Stephen Miller, who blamed the revenue declines of 2001, 2002 and 2003 on the 2001 recession. But that recession ended in November 2001, and federal revenues continued to go down for the next two years. And, as we noted, CBO determined that both income tax revenues and total overall revenues would have increased in 2001, if not for the tax cuts.

Miller also said Sessions was referring to the period after May 2003, when Bush signed the second, and smaller, of his two major tax reductions. But the fact remains that the largest of Bush's cuts was "put in" starting in 2001, and significantly reduced federal revenues.
---------------------
Republicans explaining economics is a lesson in futility. Every one of their policies are failures. Red States are financially dependent on Blue States. Thank God we have history to look back on. But history is part of education and we know what Republicans think of education.

 

[g5000]

END OF THE ARGUMENT:

"I WILL CUT THE DEFICIT IN HALF BY THE END OF MY 1ST TERM."

FAIL! Instead of cutting the deficit in half he added OVER $6 Trillion in 4 years, ADDING (not cutting) more debt than EVERY US President COMBINED!

FAIL. You are conflating deficit with debt. The innumeracy of you rubes is being taken advantage of by hack media.

It is a fact Obama cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term. Bush left behind a $1.4 trillion deficit. By FY2013, the deficit was $680 billion.

 

[Kosh]

you mean he brought it back to where it was when he started? Wow. What an accomplishment. In the meantime he racked up 10 trillion in debt.

You want to explain how that chart coincides with your comment?

it doesn't, but don't burst their bubble.

actually, it does.
Saying it doesn't just makes you look silly.

Did you look at the chart? Like actually look at it?

yup.
It shows the deficit for 2008 at about half a trillion....deficit in 2009 at about 1.5 trillion and the deficit now at about a half a trillion.

Did you look at it? Like actually look at it?

You expect a far left drone to look at facts and figures?

If they did that they would actually7 have to denounce their Messiah and we all know that will never happen..

 

[Jarhead]

The incredible shrinking Obama labor force

What are you talking about
View attachment 52693View attachment 52694

Actually what you said looks like a lie.

United States Labor Force Statistics - Seasonally Adjusted

Oh my the far left drones do not understand anything!

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

It's like I always say, the trick to propganda like yours is to carefully frame the picture so the rubes bleev what you want them to perceive.

Let's go back further with the LFPR, shall we?

Oh, my! Look at that! It began tanking when we had a GOP President and a GOP Congress!

The incredible shrinking Obama labor force

What are you talking about
View attachment 52693View attachment 52694

Actually what you said looks like a lie.

United States Labor Force Statistics - Seasonally Adjusted

Oh my the far left drones do not understand anything!

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

It's like I always say, the trick to propganda like yours is to carefully frame the picture so the rubes bleev what you want them to perceive.

Let's go back further with the LFPR, shall we?

Oh, my! Look at that! It began tanking when we had a GOP President and a GOP Congress!

and then it dropped like a rock off the charts when we had a democratic president and congress. So?

 

[RDD_1210]

you mean he brought it back to where it was when he started? Wow. What an accomplishment. In the meantime he racked up 10 trillion in debt.

You want to explain how that chart coincides with your comment?

it doesn't, but don't burst their bubble.

actually, it does.
Saying it doesn't just makes you look silly.

Did you look at the chart? Like actually look at it?

yup.
It shows the deficit for 2008 at about half a trillion....deficit in 2009 at about 1.5 trillion and the deficit now at about a half a trillion.

Did you look at it? Like actually look at it?

So it's beneath where he started. You just stated it yourself. .5 trillion is less than 1.5 trillion.

You're smarter than this.

 

[Kosh]

END OF THE ARGUMENT:

"I WILL CUT THE DEFICIT IN HALF BY THE END OF MY 1ST TERM."

FAIL! Instead of cutting the deficit in half he added OVER $6 Trillion in 4 years, ADDING (not cutting) more debt than EVERY US President COMBINED!

FAIL. You are conflating deficit with debt. The innumeracy of you rubes is being taken advantage of by hack media.

It is a fact Obama cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term. Bush left behind a $1.4 trillion deficit. By FY2013, the deficit was $680 billion.

The irony impaired far left drones and their comments!

 

[TNHarley]

Deficits go down by increasing revenue or cutting spending.
It is quit obvious what he did and didn't do.

Sessions Wrong on Bush Tax Cuts

We pointed out these figures to the senator's spokesman, Stephen Miller, who blamed the revenue declines of 2001, 2002 and 2003 on the 2001 recession. But that recession ended in November 2001, and federal revenues continued to go down for the next two years. And, as we noted, CBO determined that both income tax revenues and total overall revenues would have increased in 2001, if not for the tax cuts.

Miller also said Sessions was referring to the period after May 2003, when Bush signed the second, and smaller, of his two major tax reductions. But the fact remains that the largest of Bush's cuts was "put in" starting in 2001, and significantly reduced federal revenues.
---------------------
Republicans explaining economics is a lesson in futility. Every one of their policies are failures. Red States are financially dependent on Blue States. Thank God we have history to look back on. But history is part of education and we know what Republicans think of education.

umm ok

 

[Kosh]

Deficits go down by increasing revenue or cutting spending.
It is quit obvious what he did and didn't do.

Sessions Wrong on Bush Tax Cuts

We pointed out these figures to the senator's spokesman, Stephen Miller, who blamed the revenue declines of 2001, 2002 and 2003 on the 2001 recession. But that recession ended in November 2001, and federal revenues continued to go down for the next two years. And, as we noted, CBO determined that both income tax revenues and total overall revenues would have increased in 2001, if not for the tax cuts.

Miller also said Sessions was referring to the period after May 2003, when Bush signed the second, and smaller, of his two major tax reductions. But the fact remains that the largest of Bush's cuts was "put in" starting in 2001, and significantly reduced federal revenues.
---------------------
Republicans explaining economics is a lesson in futility. Every one of their policies are failures. Red States are financially dependent on Blue States. Thank God we have history to look back on. But history is part of education and we know what Republicans think of education.

More far left math being displayed here, by a far left drone!

It is amazing how these drone harp on the tax cuts that even Obama signed..

 

[Jarhead]

END OF THE ARGUMENT:

"I WILL CUT THE DEFICIT IN HALF BY THE END OF MY 1ST TERM."

FAIL! Instead of cutting the deficit in half he added OVER $6 Trillion in 4 years, ADDING (not cutting) more debt than EVERY US President COMBINED!

FAIL. You are conflating deficit with debt. The innumeracy of you rubes is being taken advantage of by hack media.

It is a fact Obama cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term. Bush left behind a $1.4 trillion deficit. By FY2013, the deficit was $680 billion.

one does not leave behind a deficit. It is a year to year thing and has no affect on the following years deficit.

 

[g5000]

END OF THE ARGUMENT:

"I WILL CUT THE DEFICIT IN HALF BY THE END OF MY 1ST TERM."

FAIL! Instead of cutting the deficit in half he added OVER $6 Trillion in 4 years, ADDING (not cutting) more debt than EVERY US President COMBINED!

FAIL. You are conflating deficit with debt. The innumeracy of you rubes is being taken advantage of by hack media.

It is a fact Obama cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term. Bush left behind a $1.4 trillion deficit. By FY2013, the deficit was $680 billion.

The irony impaired far left drones and their comments!

Aaaaaaand Kosh reverts to her default brainless catchphrase when slammed to the ground.

 

[g5000]

END OF THE ARGUMENT:

"I WILL CUT THE DEFICIT IN HALF BY THE END OF MY 1ST TERM."

FAIL! Instead of cutting the deficit in half he added OVER $6 Trillion in 4 years, ADDING (not cutting) more debt than EVERY US President COMBINED!

FAIL. You are conflating deficit with debt. The innumeracy of you rubes is being taken advantage of by hack media.

It is a fact Obama cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term. Bush left behind a $1.4 trillion deficit. By FY2013, the deficit was $680 billion.

one does not leave behind a deficit. It is a year to year thing and has no affect on the following years deficit.

The FY2009 budget was written in September 2008.

Gee, who was President then?

Don't Blame Obama for Bush's 2009 Deficit

The 2009 fiscal year began October 1, 2008, nearly four months before Obama took office. The budget for the entire fiscal year was largely set in place while Bush was in the White House.

 

[easyt65]

I like how blame Obama for our deficits, but when a Republican president runs up deficits, they switch to blaming Congress.

Have you ever watched 'School House Rock'? If not, you should.

The PRESIDENT does not control the budget or the federal govt's purse strings. Congress does.

In 2000 - 2006, with a mixed-control Congress, $1.6 Trillion was added to the debt...during 9/11, the economic aftermath, and 2 wars.

In 2006 Liberals won a near Super Majority of Congress (3 seats shy), taking both the House and Senate. Between 2006 - 2008, with Liberals exclusively controlling the purse strings, $2.5 Trillion was added ...in only 2 years, 1/3rd of the time it took a mixed party-controlled Congress to add $1.5 trillion.
*** Democrats suspended creating and passing a budget for the next 5 years, although an annual budget is required BY LAW to be passed every year. They refused to pass budgets because they did not want to officially go on record as spending this much or limit their spending with a budget.

From 2008-2012, during which time Liberals still held a near Super Majority control of Congress, OVER $6 Trillion in new debt was added. The 1st spending bill Obama passed, after promising to eliminate pork and cut the deficit in half, was the nearly $1 trillion Stimulus that contained over 7,000 pieces of pork

 

[Jarhead]

You want to explain how that chart coincides with your comment?

it doesn't, but don't burst their bubble.

actually, it does.
Saying it doesn't just makes you look silly.

Did you look at the chart? Like actually look at it?

yup.
It shows the deficit for 2008 at about half a trillion....deficit in 2009 at about 1.5 trillion and the deficit now at about a half a trillion.

Did you look at it? Like actually look at it?

So it's beneath where he started. You just stated it yourself. .5 trillion is less than 1.5 trillion.

You're smarter than this.

nice try. Not interested in playing your silly childish games.
His first year deficit was 3 times the previous years deficit....and now this years deficit is what it was the year before he took office.

Exactly what I was saying.