GayPatriot

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://www.gaypatriot.net/2013/01/03/the-spending-problem-obama-inherited-from-a-democratic-congress-and-exacerbated-once-in-office/trackback/

  1. Irrelevant. The rich are not paying their fair share. That’s all that matter and all that most people will hear. Don’t try to cloud the issue with facts. :)

    Comment by Hunter — January 3, 2013 @ 5:28 pm - January 3, 2013

  2. Democrats aren’t impressed with facts, and they don’t understand math.

    “A human group transforms itself into a mob when it suddenly responds to a suggestion rather than to reasoning, to an image rather than to an idea, to an affirmation rather than to proof, to the repetition of a phrase rather than to arguments, to prestige rather than to competence.” — Jean-Francois Revel

    Comment by V the K — January 3, 2013 @ 5:48 pm - January 3, 2013

  3. I just wish someone in the corrupt media would ask why the Senate hasn’t passed a single budget since President Thin-Skin took office. Hell, I wonder how many people even KNOW about that.

    But don’t worry, it’s always someone else’s fault with President Thin-Skin, dontchaknow. Tsunamis, ATMs, Bush. Life’s tough when you’re King, after all.

    As always, thanks for posting!

    Comment by Acethepug — January 3, 2013 @ 6:16 pm - January 3, 2013

  4. I’m going to play contrarian… the problem is not that the Dems can’t do arithmetic. They’re pretty darn good at electoral arithmetic. The more damage they do, the more power they accrue. They’re brilliant at nation-wrecking and convincing the sheeple that the wrecking is in their best interests.

    The problem is that voters can’t do arithmetic. They like to be told how bloody hard-working and virtuous they are and how they deserved to be given stuff. They like to believe that other people are the problem and that any bad thing can be fixed with more laws and by curtailing someone else’s liberty.

    A majority of voters are morally blind: they actually don’t give a damn about The Children. I think it was Milton Freidman who defined government debt as taxes not yet collected. People seem to be happy to leave The Children a second-rate country with few of the features that made the adults comfortable and a lot of these future taxes.

    I think I’ve said this before but the conservative challenge is to explain to the average voter exactly how all this comes out of their pockets whether it’s direct taxation or increased prices, reduced opportunity, and reduced liberty. Given that people don’t seem to think too deepl, I don’t know if that’s possible.

    The latest outbursts from Peter King and Christ Christie (whom I’m liking less and less) over the so-called “emergency” Sandy aid is a good example. Instead of shelving the bill, only to be badgered to bring it back out, the conservatives (at least the non-pork-spending ones) should have railed, load and clear, about all the crap in a bill so important… shaming the big spenders.

    Comment by SoCalRobert — January 3, 2013 @ 6:49 pm - January 3, 2013

  5. Obama loves to blame his predecessor for the problems he “inherited,” even as most of his other predecessors merely acknowledged the problems they inherited and set about solving them.

    As he should. There are two things to consider here.

    First; in a general sense, when you’re solving big problems, it’s important to understand what mistakes were made and who was making them. This is especially so when the people who caused the problem are still hanging around, making their own recommendations about how to fix things, and undermining your ability to do what needs to get done. In the corporate world, a crappy CEO will leave a company and never come back. They have no input, they have no control, and they’re made completely irrelevant. That doesn’t happen in politics – the party that’s responsible for digging the hole sticks around even when they get chased out of office, and they get to make recommendations for how to fix the problem that they created, regardless of how much they’ve tarnished their credibility. Assigning blame to people who create disasters is never a bad idea, and your complaining about it is yet another attempt to run cover for your party.

    Second; Republicans refuse to take primary responsibility for the deficit, the state of the economy, and any of the other extremely negative consequences of their governance. The purpose of your post is to lay the blame for all of this on the Democrats! Even today, most conservatives will tell you that they think the war and the tax cuts were a great idea. They’ll further suggest that the Republicans tried to prevent the housing crisis and were stymied by the Democrats. It would be one thing if the Republicans said, “Yeah, okay. We messed up, and we messed up bad. We had some bad ideas, we made some big mistakes, we’re willing to admit we were wrong and want to help the Democrats get the country back on track.” Instead, we get excuses and conspiracy theories.

    For example, Republicans love to blame too much regulation for the financial crisis. In actuality, there was not nearly enough regulation of the financial industry, and there needs to be in order to prevent something like this from happening again. This means that the Republican Party that created the problem in the first place is refusing to take responsibility and vehemently arguing against the very thing that would fix the issue. And you’re going to complain about Obama blaming them for the disaster he inherited? You should be complaining about the Republican policies that lead us here in the first place.

    Earlier today, Glenn Reynolds linked this chart illustrating “that things were actually improving until we got a Democratic Congress in 2007, and got worse when we elected Obama.” When will Obama start taking ownership for his record? Will when the media hold him to account for his failure to contain the growth of spending?

    Spending is not the problem. The economy not growing quickly enough is the problem, and government spending is one of the few remedies we have for a sluggish economy. It would be great if there were a way to have our cake and eat it, too, but it’s plain unrealistic to expect that we can get the economy growing again by slashing government spending and giving rich people tax cuts. That course of action benefits the rich at the expense of everyone else.

    Obama’s job right now is to fix the economy, would you disagree with that? I know you people think that slashing spending is the way to fix the economy, but that goes back to my above points – Republicans simply have no credibility to diagnose what ails the economy or how to fix it, given that they blew it up in the first place.

    Yes, George W. Bush and the Republican 108th and 109th could have done more to contain federal spending.

    Contain it? As if deficit spending was some inherent feature of the government? That’s bullshit. Republicans embarked upon a quest to drive up the deficit, and here again, your phrasing demonstrates how willing you are to give them a free pass. This is why they need to be repeatedly blamed, because somehow there are still people like you are giving them the benefit of the doubt and looking back with rose-colored glasses.

    W and the divided 107th Congress did see an acceleration of federal spending, but next Republican Congress did get the message and started to rein in federal spending. As Jim Hoft reminded us last November:

    In 2004 the federal budget deficit was 412 billion dollars. In 2005 it dropped to 318 billion dollars. In 2006 the deficit dipped to 248 billion dollars. And, in 2007 it fell below 200 billion to 162 billion dollars.

    Under back-to-back Republican Congresses, we had three successive years of declining deficits. That represents, as Jim reports, a “sixty percent drop” whereas the Politico article that Glenn links reports that the national debt has grown by the same amount since Obama took office. And he’s only been in office for four years.

    And he’s still pretending Republicans were responsible for the increase in debt when Democrat Congresses stopped the progress being made by the GOP. And it doesn’t seem our friends in the legacy media are “fact-checking” their deceptive claims.

    The thing is, not all deficit spending is created equal. Let me put it this way:

    Would you rather be $20,000 in debt, or $80,000 in debt?

    If you’re just looking at those figures, there’s no choice. You’d rather be $20,000 in debt, wouldn’t you?

    But it really matters what this debt is paying for, doesn’t it? So let’s say that the $20,000 of debt bought you an extended warranty on a toothpick, and the $80,000 bought you a law degree. That’s an easy decision, since a toothpick warranty is worth nothing and a law degree will pay for itself many times over. Make sense?

    Back to real life – Bush ran deficits to pay for stupid policies that are still contributing to the deficit ten years later. Obama is tasked with cleaning up after him, and guess what? He needs money to do that. We not only have to get the economy moving again, we need to modernize it, since we lost a decade when Bush was in office and he was pissing away our money nation-building in Iraq when we needed nation-building here. You have to spend money to make money, have you never heard that expression before?

    Republicans, when it was completely in their power to do so, could have run the government with balanced budgets. There was nothing stopping them, but they decided to spend lots of government money on very stupid policies. So for them to turn around and expect the opposition party to do what they deliberately chose not do is the height of hypocrisy, especially when you consider the state of things when they handed over the baton. Conservatives expect liberals to confront the biggest economic crisis in a century while slashing government spending after they themselves pushed the country into debt to pay for things that don’t make sense.

    Is it too much to ask conservatives to abide by the principles they espouse? Is it really hard to understand why people like me have a hard time taking your complaints and proposals seriously?

    Comment by Levi — January 4, 2013 @ 10:08 am - January 4, 2013

  6. Ah, it’s another day ending in Y, so Levi has to post his lies and bile.

    Note again, how the little fascist likes to pretend no one complained about spending prior to Obama’s election.

    Facts, those things Levi can’t understand.

    Comment by The_Livewire — January 4, 2013 @ 10:27 am - January 4, 2013

  7. Levi you have to remember that Bush had the best intentions, so it’s OK to run unecessary deficits. But Obama is evil and trying to turn us all into socialists, so it’s not OK. They tell me so on Fox news so it must be true.

    Comment by Aaron — January 4, 2013 @ 12:15 pm - January 4, 2013

  8. I’m sorry, I shouldn’t make posts like that. They contribute nothing to the thread. Much like 100% of what The_Livewire posts.

    Comment by Aaron — January 4, 2013 @ 12:24 pm - January 4, 2013

  9. THank you aaron for conceeding that facts don’t matter to you either.

    “Look, The_Livewire’s bringing facts! How dare he!”

    Comment by The_Livewire — January 4, 2013 @ 1:12 pm - January 4, 2013

  10. Levi you have to remember that Bush had the best intentions, so it’s OK to run unecessary deficits.

    No, it never is. As The Livewire said, many people were vocal in their opposition to Bush’s deficits, both while he was still in office and now.

    Comment by Rattlesnake — January 4, 2013 @ 1:54 pm - January 4, 2013

  11. You can show a douche reality, but you can’t make him see it. (Because only he can make him stop being a douche.)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 4, 2013 @ 2:07 pm - January 4, 2013

  12. the little fascist proclaims:

    Second; Republicans refuse to take primary responsibility for the deficit, the state of the economy, and any of the other extremely negative consequences of their governance.

    Whew!

    1.) Take primary responsibility for the deficit.

    How in the blazes can any economist who has ever lived or will ever live pinpoint the primary reason for a national deficit?

    2.) Take primary responsibility for the state of the economy.

    See answer in #1. above.

    3.) Take primary responsibility for any of the other extremely negative consequences of their governance.

    Since the little fascist can not identify the other “extremely negative consequences of governance” it would be absurd to think that anyone could take or even ascribe “primary responsibility” for what is unstated and unknown.

    Anybody, that is, except the little fascist simpleton spouting idiocy.

    Comment by heliotrope — January 4, 2013 @ 2:10 pm - January 4, 2013

  13. heliotrope.

    That President Bush’s actions in Iraq did more for the environment than any Democrat president is an “extremely negative consequence” to Levi.

    Comment by The_Livewire — January 4, 2013 @ 2:17 pm - January 4, 2013

  14. Levi you have to remember that Bush had the best intentions, so it’s OK to run unecessary deficits. But Obama is evil and trying to turn us all into socialists, so it’s not OK. They tell me so on Fox news so it must be true.

    Comment by Aaron — January 4, 2013 @ 12:15 pm – January 4, 2013

    Aaron, unfortunately, you already tried these lies, and got spanked and humiliated for doing so.

    Meanwhile, the funny part is that you and your screaming idiot Levi, along with the rest of your Obama Party, ranted and raved for a decade that tax cuts did nothing but hurt the economy and should be eliminated — but now are ranting and screaming that tax cuts are necessary to increase demand and IMPROVE the economy.

    Fortunately for us, you and Levi are imbeciles in addition to being malicious liars. You never have been held accountable for anything, so you practice the typical liberal deception of saying one thing in one place and completely contradicting yourself in another — and we are able to easily catch you doing it and show everyone how irrational, bigoted, and hypocritical your statements are.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — January 4, 2013 @ 2:36 pm - January 4, 2013

  15. Whew!

    1.) Take primary responsibility for the deficit.

    How in the blazes can any economist who has ever lived or will ever live pinpoint the primary reason for a national deficit?

    ????

    Do you realize you are posting this in a thread in which the author is accusing Obama of primary responsibility for the deficit?

    What are you saying here, that the origin of the deficit is some unknowable mystery?

    The things that are driving the deficit are the tax cuts, the war, and the recession. The recession occurred because a housing bubble burst, the housing bubble was inflated by a group of financial wizards, and they got away with it because there was insufficient regulation of the financial industry. All of these things took place when Republicans controlled both Houses and the executive. They are primarily responsible for the deficit, regardless of whatever tortured, 80-years-in-the-making conspiracy theory you can come up with to lay it all at the feet of Barney Frank.

    2.) Take primary responsibility for the state of the economy.

    See answer in #1. above.

    3.) Take primary responsibility for any of the other extremely negative consequences of their governance.

    Since the little fascist can not identify the other “extremely negative consequences of governance” it would be absurd to think that anyone could take or even ascribe “primary responsibility” for what is unstated and unknown.

    Anybody, that is, except the little fascist simpleton spouting idiocy.

    Wars, tax cuts, and the recession. Oh there’s others, and I could go on about those for days. But when you get down to what was really destructive, what was really counter-productive, and what continues to hold us back years after he left office, the wars, tax cuts, and the recession should be enough.

    Comment by Levi — January 4, 2013 @ 2:40 pm - January 4, 2013

  16. Moreover, what we have to remember is this: Levi is an irrational nutjob who screams and pisses himself that everything bad that has ever happened anywhere is Bush’s fault, and that Barack Obama is the perfect godlike Messiah who has never done anything wrong ever.

    This is one weakness of conservatives. We are rational and objective folk, so as Rattlesnake and Livewire point out, we can and do criticize the GOP, Bush, and current leadership for bad decisions.

    The problem is that we’re dealing with messianic and irrational cultists like Levi and Aaron. Neither has the mental capacity to deal with objective facts because objective facts contradict their narrative that Bush was the Antichrist and that Obama is the Lord and Messiah of humanity. Hence, they demand that we criticize Bush even as they brook no criticism whatsoever of Obama.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — January 4, 2013 @ 2:44 pm - January 4, 2013

  17. Do you realize you are posting this in a thread in which the author is accusing Obama of primary responsibility for the deficit?

    What are you saying here, that the origin of the deficit is some unknowable mystery?

    Yup.

    Because, Levi, you are contradicting yourself.

    You scream that all Republicans are responsible for any deficit that occurs anytime, but that Obama Party leaders are never responsible for any deficit that ever occurs.

    That is not mathematically, logically, spatially, or temporally rational. Your insistence is that Obama Party decisions, Obama Party policies, Obama Party anything have no effect whatsoever on anything at any point in time, whereas Republican Party decisions, Republican Party policies, and Republican Party anything have absolute control of and determination of events before, during, AND after any given point in time.

    So you have to define the Levi universe. And that is an unknowable mystery, because it’s completely and totally unhinged, irrational, and separated from known facts.

    The things that are driving the deficit are the tax cuts, the war, and the recession. The recession occurred because a housing bubble burst, the housing bubble was inflated by a group of financial wizards, and they got away with it because there was insufficient regulation of the financial industry. All of these things took place when Republicans controlled both Houses and the executive. They are primarily responsible for the deficit, regardless of whatever tortured, 80-years-in-the-making conspiracy theory you can come up with to lay it all at the feet of Barney Frank.

    Actually, Levi, <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122290574391296381.html&#039;.it doesn't even take that.

    See that? Clear, linkable facts. References. Distinct statements made at distinct points in time.

    You have none of that, only your spittle-flecked rants that you can’t reference, you can’t document, you can’t support, and from which you run away.

    Poor pissing stupid boy. Your ranting of “Bush did it, Bush did it, Bush did it” is becoming more and more unhinged and showing everyone here just how delusional and sick your mind is.

    One more thing, Levi: your screaming and crying about the tax cuts is now null, given that your Obama Party just screamed, cried, and pissed itself that tax cuts create jobs, increase demand, and produce economic growth.

    No wonder you’re becoming so hateful and irrational. Your mind is completely unhinged at the fact that what you’ve been screaming for ten years is a complete and total LIE, and everyone knows it.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — January 4, 2013 @ 2:52 pm - January 4, 2013

  18. NDT,

    You’re also forgetting that Levi’s a truther who blames Bush for 9/11 happening.

    I’m looking at it like this; if you could excise the Bush administration from recorded history, there would have been no 9-11…

    Son in Levi’s delusions, that Al’Q (and Iraq) were attacking Americans in the 90′s is purely the fault of PResident Bush, even before he was elected.

    Comment by The_Livewire — January 4, 2013 @ 2:52 pm - January 4, 2013

  19. Here’s a good one; Lying Lizzie Warren’s use of taxpayer dollars to dig up more welfare votes instead revealed that the Obama Party is sending EBT card money to 19,000 people who apparently don’t exist.

    THAT is what is “driving the deficit” — the fact that corrupt, malicious liars like Barack Obama manipulate corrupt, malicious liars like Levi, Aaron, and concern-troll mike using STOLEN taxpayer dollars.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — January 4, 2013 @ 5:21 pm - January 4, 2013

  20. Hey, little fascist, what is the primary cause of the War in Vietnam or the fall of the USSR or the dot com bubble bursting or 9/11 or Obama’s Stimulus Package failure or the outbreak of WW I or climate change or evolution or the Renaissance or the collapse of the Great State of California?

    And, when your mental midget mind has come up with those answers, be sure to name the person or party to pin it on.

    Comment by heliotrope — January 4, 2013 @ 5:36 pm - January 4, 2013

  21. Hey, little fascist, what is the primary cause of the War in Vietnam or the fall of the USSR or the dot com bubble bursting or 9/11 or Obama’s Stimulus Package failure or the outbreak of WW I or climate change or evolution or the Renaissance or the collapse of the Great State of California?

    And, when your mental midget mind has come up with those answers, be sure to name the person or party to pin it on.

    Just because some events might have numerous, complex causes doesn’t mean that all events do. Actually, many events have simple explanations. I ate a sandwich last night, and I took a dump this morning. Simple. Bush entered office with a surplus, left office with a deficit. Simple. That should matter, should it not? Bush was doing things that directly affect the deficit, like cutting taxes. Cutting taxes, all on its own with no corresponding spending cuts, increases the deficit. Additionally, deciding to invade a country and occupy it for a decade costs money, and if there’s no corresponding tax increase or re-allocation of funds, that decision increases the deficit, too. Is there anything even remotely complex about these straightforward series of cause-and-effect policies and results?

    What are you even thinking with this? Everything has a primary cause (don’t get too excited, you creationist, you), even if there are many, complex causes. Someone could be 15% responsible for an event, they could still be the primary cause if there were 6 other factors that were 14% responsible. And it’s silly to pretend like assigning blame for the current deficits is even that hard – it was obviously Bush! Bush was clearly primarily responsible for the tax cuts and the invasion of Iraq, was he not? I mean, they’re called the Bush tax cuts. Wouldn’t you agree that generally, if a policy or law is named after somebody, it’s because that person was primarily responsible for its enactment or passage? Who else would be the primary cause of the Iraq War, Al Gore?

    Comment by Levi — January 5, 2013 @ 12:33 am - January 5, 2013

  22. Cutting taxes, all on its own with no corresponding spending cuts, increases the deficit. Additionally, deciding to invade a country and occupy it for a decade costs money, and if there’s no corresponding tax increase or re-allocation of funds, that decision increases the deficit, too. Is there anything even remotely complex about these straightforward series of cause-and-effect policies and results?

    Comment by Levi — January 5, 2013 @ 12:33 am – January 5, 2013

    Yup.

    The facts.

    On Tuesday, White House officials are expected to announce that the tax receipts will be about $250 billion above last year’s levels and that the deficit will be about $100 billion less than what they projected six months ago. The rising tide in tax payments has been building for months, but the increased scale is surprising even seasoned budget analysts and making it easier for both the administration and Congress to finesse the big run-up in spending over the past year.

    Tax revenues are climbing twice as fast as the administration predicted in February, so fast that the budget deficit could actually decline this year.

    The main reason is a big spike in corporate tax receipts, which have nearly tripled since 2003, as well as what appears to be a big increase in individual taxes on stock market profits and executive bonuses.

    On Friday, the Congressional Budget Office reported that corporate tax receipts for the nine months ending in June hit $250 billion — nearly 26 percent higher than the same time last year — and that overall revenues were $206 billion higher than at this point in 2005.

    Congressional analysts say the surprise windfall could shrink the deficit this year to $300 billion, from $318 billion in 2005 and an all-time high of $412 billion in 2004.

    And now let’s contrast that with Obama, who according to the screaming Levi, has done the exact opposite of Bush in every single respect and is the all-perfect Messiah.

    The federal deficit fell to $1.1 trillion in the 2012 fiscal year, down from about $1.3 trillion a year earlier, the Obama administration said on Friday.

    That is the smallest deficit since 2008 but represents the fourth year in a row that the deficit has exceeded $1 trillion.

    And the inevitable results:

    The Debt rose $4.899 trillion during the two terms of the Bush presidency. It has now gone up $4.939 trillion since President Obama took office.

    The latest posting from the Bureau of Public Debt at the Treasury Department shows the National Debt now stands at $15.566 trillion. It was $10.626 trillion on President Bush’s last day in office, which coincided with President Obama’s first day.

    The National Debt also now exceeds 100% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product, the total value of goods and services.

    In short, Levi is ranting about Bush’s deficits when his Obama’s deficits are four times as large.

    Furthermore, the ranting fool Levi screams that Obama’s spending is necessary to “stimulate” the economy — which has nearly double the unemployment and half the GDP growth of the Bush economy four years after Bush took office, despite four consecutive years of trillion-dollar “stimulus”.

    The reason is actually very simple, Levi. Tax cuts return money to those who are actually earning and paying taxes. The Obama Party “stimulus” wastes money and makes the problems worse by rewarding lazy, unproductive, and irresponsible Obama Party supporters.

    The Obama Party does one thing and one thing only: take money from people who those who are earning, creating value, and paying taxes, and give it to those like Levi who will do none of these.

    The end result is a fait accompli.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — January 5, 2013 @ 1:17 am - January 5, 2013

  23. This chart, a product of the White House OMB, is a snapshot in time without any reference whatsoever to the embedded lies.

    Daily Social Security and Medicare tax payments are tossed into the “receipts” category and the “outlays” cover the daily payouts to Social Security and Medicare. The lie is one of omission. The excess Social Security and Medicare receipts are spent on general government trivia, but they are “backed” by interest bearing government bonds.

    Unfunded liabilities are those “guaranteed” entitlements which are paid out in the near and distant future which will will have to find a source of funding at the time of payout. This is the truth about “trust” funds.

    Clintoon “balanced” the budget and created a “surplus” on Social Security and Medicare receipts. It is, after all, an actual tax on the people which rose from 2.25% in 1953 to 15.3% today.

    If you were to take that tax out of the chart, the gap between receipts and outlays would be far greater than what is shown.

    And, of course, the chart shows nothing of the Obamacare costs to come. You may rest assured that Obamacare receipts will be sucked up for general outlays and replaced with more interest bearing government bonds. Can you say “Ponzi Scheme?”

    Comment by heliotrope — January 6, 2013 @ 11:14 am - January 6, 2013

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

**Note: Your first comment is held for moderation. Avoid profanity, avoid personal attacks on fellow commenters, and avoid complaining about personal attacks (even on you). Feel free to disagree with anyone, but focus on their ideas; give us the information that you think they overlooked.**


Live preview of comment

Close this window.

0.452 Powered by Wordpress