What caused the national debt?

[OohPooPahDoo]

These must be todays Democrat talking points because Obama is on TV saying this. Of course he neglects the 3 additional wars he's gotten us into.

Cost of Obama's "wars" vs. cost of Bush's


Thanks.

 

[shintao]

These must be todays Democrat talking points because Obama is on TV saying this. Of course he neglects the 3 additional wars he's gotten us into.

Cost of Obama's "wars" vs. cost of Bush's


Thanks.

Someone finally understands.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVySGO8Ak_Q&playnext=1&list=PL1C184A6E038677E4]‪Ooh Poo Pah Doo (Part I & Part II) - Jessie Hill‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

These must be todays Democrat talking points because Obama is on TV saying this. Of course he neglects the 3 additional wars he's gotten us into.

Cost of Obama's "wars" vs. cost of Bush's


Thanks.

Someone finally understands.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVySGO8Ak_Q&playnext=1&list=PL1C184A6E038677E4]‪Ooh Poo Pah Doo (Part I & Part II) - Jessie Hill‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

They call me the most!

 

[JoeB131]

U.S. companies are reluctant to hire—but not because of uncertainty over government policies, as Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke mentioned in his testimony before Congress last week. A majority of the 53 economists surveyed from July 8-13 by the Wall Street Journal say it is the lack of demand that is keeping hiring down.

The U.S. economy added just 18,000 jobs in June, less than one-fifth of consensus estimates, as unemployment rose to 9.2 percent. Asked by the Journal to name the main reason for employers not hiring more readily, sixty-five percent of the 51 economists who responded said it was due to lack of demand. Twenty-seven percent said it was uncertainty over the government, and others cited the appeal of hiring overseas.

WSJ Survey: Lack of Demand, Not Uncertainty, Keeps Hiring Down - Catherine Hollander - NationalJournal.com

These would be the same economists who predicted we'd be out of this mess by now.

Screw the economists. If you gave them a million bucks and told them to start a business, 99% of them would go bust.

I give a lot more credence to Steve Wynn and Bernie Marcus, who have said that Obama is really the problem. Guys who actually run businesses.

Home Depot Co-Founder: Obama Is Choking Recovery - Investors.com

IBD: If you could sit down with Obama and talk to him about job creation, what would you say?

Marcus: I'm not sure Obama would understand anything that I'd say, because he's never really worked a day outside the political or legal area. He doesn't know how to make a payroll, he doesn't understand the problems businesses face. I would try to explain that the plight of the busi nessman is very reactive to Washington. As Washington piles on regulations and mandates, the impact is tremendous. I don't think he's a bad guy. I just think he has no knowledge of this.

But let's take that point seriously. Why is there a lack of demand? Because people are cutting back, even if they have jobs. I've cut back. Heck, between Obama's inflation and the fact I'm making 10% less than I did during the bad old Bush years, I dont have as much to spend.

 

[Dr Grump]

U.S. companies are reluctant to hire—but not because of uncertainty over government policies, as Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke mentioned in his testimony before Congress last week. A majority of the 53 economists surveyed from July 8-13 by the Wall Street Journal say it is the lack of demand that is keeping hiring down.

The U.S. economy added just 18,000 jobs in June, less than one-fifth of consensus estimates, as unemployment rose to 9.2 percent. Asked by the Journal to name the main reason for employers not hiring more readily, sixty-five percent of the 51 economists who responded said it was due to lack of demand. Twenty-seven percent said it was uncertainty over the government, and others cited the appeal of hiring overseas.

WSJ Survey: Lack of Demand, Not Uncertainty, Keeps Hiring Down - Catherine Hollander - NationalJournal.com

These would be the same economists who predicted we'd be out of this mess by now.

Screw the economists. If you gave them a million bucks and told them to start a business, 99% of them would go bust.

I give a lot more credence to Steve Wynn and Bernie Marcus, who have said that Obama is really the problem. Guys who actually run businesses.

Home Depot Co-Founder: Obama Is Choking Recovery - Investors.com

IBD: If you could sit down with Obama and talk to him about job creation, what would you say?

Marcus: I'm not sure Obama would understand anything that I'd say, because he's never really worked a day outside the political or legal area. He doesn't know how to make a payroll, he doesn't understand the problems businesses face. I would try to explain that the plight of the busi nessman is very reactive to Washington. As Washington piles on regulations and mandates, the impact is tremendous. I don't think he's a bad guy. I just think he has no knowledge of this.

But let's take that point seriously. Why is there a lack of demand? Because people are cutting back, even if they have jobs. I've cut back. Heck, between Obama's inflation and the fact I'm making 10% less than I did during the bad old Bush years, I dont have as much to spend.

And your answer to the mess is?

 

[Neotrotsky]

Let me guess, the imaginary 400 who you feel own half the country's wealth?

Imaginary?

You got a lot of learn'n to do

Yes, imaginary.
Chris imagines 400 Americans control half of America's wealth.
His math is lacking.

Indeed, the Left is concerned with these 400 who own more than half the wealth in the US
like it is their's to be concerned with...

But the thought of "400 million" Chinese eventually owning more than half of our future wealth that Papa Obama and the Left want to keep giving it to,

does not bother them

Funny how that works



Of course, if the Left and Papa Obama can sell enough of our future wealth to the Chinese
then we might be communist by default, since they will own us


This is actually dated, since the debt is even more now


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsrFa9jrpv8]‪Child's Pay 2‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

 

[editec]

Actually, on January 20, 2009, most rational Americans found themselves start of a massive depression that hasn't let up yet ... for some reason.

There is plenty of money in the country.

It's just concentrated in too few hands.

There is $2 trillion dollars parked in treasuries.

Let me guess, the imaginary 400 who you feel own half the country's wealth?

Here's FORBES list of those "imaginary people" Tod.

The Richest People in America 2010 - Forbes.com

I always thought these people really existed, but apparently they don't.

Thanks for the heads up, amigo.

 

[waltky]

OooPoo wrote: Cost of Obama's "wars" vs. cost of Bush's

It never ceases to amaze me how short peoples' memory is...

... in order to placate the American public...

... Bush's tax cuts went into effect when he was tryin' to finance his wars.

Now anyone with a lick of common sense would realize ya don't finance a war with tax cuts...

... kinda like outsourcin' jobs and then wonderin' why tax revenue drops and unemployment goes up...

... basically it's like burnin' the candle at both ends.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Three Little Pigs: How Entitlements Will Destroy Us

In the next few years, our major entitlement programs, in particular Social Security and Medicare, will begin to run cash-flow deficits, adding hundreds of billions each year to the debt. In fact, Social Security's total unfunded liabilities top $15.8 trillion, and depending on what accounting measure is used, Medicare's future shortfall could exceed $100 trillion.​

Nor can you tax your way out of debt. Eliminate all of the Bush tax cuts, including the tax cuts for low- and middle-income Americans, and you would reduce the debt by perhaps 10% — assuming you didn't cripple the economy in the process. Tax the rich? That won't get you there either. In fact, according to the Congressional Budget Office, in order to pay for all currently scheduled federal spending would require raising both the corporate tax rate and top income tax rate from their current 35% to 88%, the current 25% tax rate for middle-income workers to 63%, and the 10% tax bracket for low-income workers to 25%.​

 

[JoeB131]

And your answer to the mess is?

Why is it incumbant upon me to come up with a detailed plan to get us out of this mess?

I'm always amazed at this kind of deflection. Obama crashes the car into the wall, and I'm asked, "Well, how would you fix it?"

Well, here's what I'd do.

1) Admit Free Trade is a terrible idea. Require all products to be labeled with the flag of the country they are made in, and have a nice cross reference sheet so you know what human rights attrocities those countries are involved in. Put tariffs back into place, and become more reliant. Stop giving tax breaks to companies that move jobs overseas.

2) Drill, baby, drill- Sorry, Why are we giving billions to buy oil from people who are trying to kill us because we are protecting caribou and snail darters? That's just the short term solution, though. We need to have a Manhatten Project to find the eventual replacements for petroleum when it does run out.

3) Stop spending billions to protect rich countries. Announce we are withrdawing our troops back to our borders, unless we are compensated the cost of keeping them in your country.

4) Replace Welfare with Workfare - Our welfare system is what Heinlein called "The Socialist Disease in it worst form- the belief the world owes you a living." It you get welfare, you are expected to show up somewhere and put in a full day doing something useful- Cleaning graffitti off walls, picking up trash along the street, whatever.

5) Fix Education - Another reason we are falling behind. Our education system sucks. End social promotion, end this nonsense that you can't fire incompetant teachers.

6) End Work Visas and enforce immigration laws - This is a two-fer. First, with 9.2% unemployment, what the hell are we doing issuing 1.5 million work Visas to foreign nationals every year? It is impossible for me to believe that you simply can't find an American to do this kind of work. Second, with 20 million illegals taking jobs from Americans, why in heaven's name are you talking about amnesty or not cracking down on the workplaces that hire them?

7 Smart Regulation- The problem with regulations are that they are too complicated and sporadically enforced. So while OSHA is out there getting the guy for not having his training documentation all filled out right, the guy who is running the death trap gets a pass. No point going after him, he doens't have any money. The guy is trying to do the right thing and run a safe workplace actually has money you can hit with minor fines.

 

[Liability]

Debt happens when you spend more than you take in and more than you have.

Libs hear the news about that and think, "No problem! Easily solved. Just 'take in' MORE money." As this pertains to GOVERNMENT spending and "revenue," however, "take in more money" translates into TAX the people MORE and MORE and MORE! Yeehaw.

It never EVER dawns on the nitwit spend-aholic liberals that POSSIBLY (just maybe) it might make sense, instead, to STOP SPENDING so fucking much.

 

[boedicca]

Nope. They just think they can keep spending money on entitlements and blame the deficit on Defense spending. The real problems are entitlements and interest on the debt.

Federal Spending in Perspective | Mercatus


Trying to keep the size of the federal government above 18% of GDP is the problem. If we are ever going to get the financial situation under control, the government needs to be rescoped to live within an 18% of GDP limit.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There is plenty of money in the country.

It's just concentrated in too few hands.

There is $2 trillion dollars parked in treasuries.

Let me guess, the imaginary 400 who you feel own half the country's wealth?

Here's FORBES list of those "imaginary people" Tod.

The Richest People in America 2010 - Forbes.com

I always thought these people really existed, but apparently they don't.

Thanks for the heads up, amigo.

The list of America's 400 richest is very nice, but they own less than 2% of America's wealth.
I want the list of the 400 that Chris imagined owned more than 50% of America's wealth.
Let me know when you pull that list together, amigo.

 

[rightwinger]

Debt happens when you spend more than you take in and more than you have.

Libs hear the news about that and think, "No problem! Easily solved. Just 'take in' MORE money." As this pertains to GOVERNMENT spending and "revenue," however, "take in more money" translates into TAX the people MORE and MORE and MORE! Yeehaw.

It never EVER dawns on the nitwit spend-aholic liberals that POSSIBLY (just maybe) it might make sense, instead, to STOP SPENDING so fucking much.

Or you could just do both

 

[Chris]

The solution is pretty simple.

We need to repeal the Bush tax cuts and cut spending.

The Republicans want to use this to kill Social Security and Medicare

Programs some of us have paid into for 40 years.

Good luck with that Republicans. Americans will remember who tried to kill Social Security and Medicare in 2012.

 

[mudwhistle]

murkins lack of ability to think for themselves and do a little research before pulling the lever ( or stamping the chad)

That's not exclusive to murkins.

 

[Dr.House]

Debt happens when you spend more than you take in and more than you have.

Libs hear the news about that and think, "No problem! Easily solved. Just 'take in' MORE money." As this pertains to GOVERNMENT spending and "revenue," however, "take in more money" translates into TAX the people MORE and MORE and MORE! Yeehaw.

It never EVER dawns on the nitwit spend-aholic liberals that POSSIBLY (just maybe) it might make sense, instead, to STOP SPENDING so fucking much.

Or you could just do both

Won't need to if you cut enough....

 

[Liability]

Debt happens when you spend more than you take in and more than you have.

Libs hear the news about that and think, "No problem! Easily solved. Just 'take in' MORE money." As this pertains to GOVERNMENT spending and "revenue," however, "take in more money" translates into TAX the people MORE and MORE and MORE! Yeehaw.

It never EVER dawns on the nitwit spend-aholic liberals that POSSIBLY (just maybe) it might make sense, instead, to STOP SPENDING so fucking much.

Or you could just do both

In some cases that might be the right determination and the proper course. In OTHER cases that would be quite foolish.

It is ridiculously high levels of spending that created this mess. Addressing THAT problem is the way out.

 

[rightwinger]

Debt happens when you spend more than you take in and more than you have.

Libs hear the news about that and think, "No problem! Easily solved. Just 'take in' MORE money." As this pertains to GOVERNMENT spending and "revenue," however, "take in more money" translates into TAX the people MORE and MORE and MORE! Yeehaw.

It never EVER dawns on the nitwit spend-aholic liberals that POSSIBLY (just maybe) it might make sense, instead, to STOP SPENDING so fucking much.

Or you could just do both

Won't need to if you cut enough....

Cuts hurt people. They are not frivolous expenditures, they are programs that people need
Our upper tax rates are the lowest in history. We offered tax cut after tax cut to boost the economy....it hasn't worked

Time for everyone to sacrifice

 

[rdean]

What caused the national debt?

Our elected leaders spent too much.

And what political party was the majority of those leaders from?