Expectations for President Obama
- Thread starter Prime Junta
- Start date
- Status
dteowner
Shoegazer
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090713/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/us_economy_deficit_6
Let's hear it for the first president to preside over a $1TTTTTrillion budget deficit and the lefty congress that created and approved it. Way to go, boys! I'd love to run my household by the same financial rules.
Let's hear it for the first president to preside over a $1TTTTTrillion budget deficit and the lefty congress that created and approved it. Way to go, boys! I'd love to run my household by the same financial rules.
Rithrandil
SasqWatch
Give him some credit, dte. The fiscal year still has three months left, doesn't it?
He can make 1.5 trillion yet!
dteowner
Shoegazer
Ultimately, congress deserves the beating for this timebomb, but Barack did (and continues to do) a lot of cheerleading in the wrong direction.
edit- you know, I've read here and elsewhere that it appears Obama's rush to drive all this big government stuff thru is to get it done before the backlash comes. At first I didn't really buy that, but it's starting to make more sense. If he can get some of this stuff in place before people notice the hangover from the free beer, it will never go away.
edit- you know, I've read here and elsewhere that it appears Obama's rush to drive all this big government stuff thru is to get it done before the backlash comes. At first I didn't really buy that, but it's starting to make more sense. If he can get some of this stuff in place before people notice the hangover from the free beer, it will never go away.
txa1265
SasqWatch
- Joined
- October 18, 2006
- Messages
- 14,969
Oh - not that I am downplaying the awful mess the whole thing is now or the hand of Obama and mostly *both* sides of the 'gimme' Congress ...
Because while Dems have always been spenders, it is only more recently that Conservative has been redefined as 'reckless spending'.
Because while Dems have always been spenders, it is only more recently that Conservative has been redefined as 'reckless spending'.
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2006
- Messages
- 14,969
dteowner
Shoegazer
That chart is going to exaggerate swings, though. When the economy takes a poo, you get a double whammy from reduced GDP growth plus reduced tax receipts. Regardless of whom you blame for the dot-com bubble and the current housing bubble, getting hit with both of those meltdowns is going to make Dubya look even worse than he was (which, admittedly, is saying something). Not to mention that little 9-11 thing...
As you say, though, the republicans have lost their way on fiscal responsibility in the past few years. I expect that, once you accept spending a whole lot more than you make due to Iraq, it becomes harder to hold the line on everything else.
As you say, though, the republicans have lost their way on fiscal responsibility in the past few years. I expect that, once you accept spending a whole lot more than you make due to Iraq, it becomes harder to hold the line on everything else.
txa1265
SasqWatch
- Joined
- October 18, 2006
- Messages
- 14,969
The whole 'pork exchange' system has always bothered me ... and since it ends up hurting real stuff like education for the benefit of pet 'bridge to nowhere' crap it is even worse.
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2006
- Messages
- 14,969
magerette
Hedgewitch
- Joined
- October 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,834
The double whammy isn't just the spending on the Iraq war, it was the combination of a war paid for "off the books," plus the Bush tax cuts, plus the falling revenues, plus the Bush tax rebate stimulus payments x 2, which took away the revenue to pay for that war and for everything else, and which Bush pushed through exactly the way Obama is trying to get his agenda through right now.
The only difference I can see is so-called conservatives approved of Bush's spending and disapprove of Obama's.
So, pot,kettle ,black.
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,834
dteowner
Shoegazer
So then, you're against tax cuts (the rebate was simply a prepaid tax cut, mind you) for everyone that pays taxes and no small few that didn't (which covers the middle class and poor)? Strange, I thought that was the central pillar of Barack Beer, and you strenuously claimed such progressive policy was nothing less than fair and just.
Back atcha, me thinks!So, pot,kettle ,black.
vanedor
Keeper of the Watch
In my book, when you raise the spendings, you don't cut the revenues. Anyone doing that would go bankrupt in no time... but that's what Bush has pretty much done for 8 years. That's just irresponsable... but I guess it's politically very popular. Leave it to the democrate to try balancing back the budget so they can look like the evil pro big-governement party. That's what the graphic tend to demonstrate pretty well.
magerette
Hedgewitch
- Joined
- October 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,834
So then, you're against tax cuts (the rebate was simply a prepaid tax cut, mind you) for everyone that pays taxes and no small few that didn't (which covers the middle class and poor)? Strange, I thought that was the central pillar of Barack Beer, and you strenuously claimed such progressive policy was nothing less than fair and just.
Back atcha, me thinks!
???Calling the rebates prepaid tax cuts is one of those baffling sojourns you make into conservative thought processes that sometimes leave me behind, dte. As here.
Not that it matters in effect. To my admittedly simple mind, it was Bush sending me some chump change from our friends in China to 'revive the economy', and whether he was marking it off taxes to come or pulling it out of his rear, it still amounts to phantom money.On the other point, as vanedor says, unlike Bush's Tax Less/Spend More plan that worked out so well, Obama's tax cuts for the under $250,000. crowd were presented as being paid for by removing the Bush revenue cuts for the wealthy by that outrageous 3% figure, which is a slightly different scenario. Just as he's tried to present plans to pay for his health care, etc.
I say 'presented' and 'tried', because it hasn't really worked out that way yet, what with the recession, the stim, and Congress and all. But every so-called liberal program Obama brought up on the campaign trail has included a plan to pay for it--I don't say a realistic plan, necessarily,
but at least he's made some effort in that direction.However, I think at this point in time, *nobody* needs a tax cut;--tax reform, a fair tax code, some sort of realistic financial plan for running the government and fixing entitlement, yes. Tax cut, not so much.
The main point I'm trying to get at is that Bush had free beer going too, just to a different demographic. Personally, I'd far rather my free beer went to me and the rest of the downtrodden peasantry than Wall Street, Halliburton, KBR, and Blackwater.
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,834
dteowner
Shoegazer
If you check your tax return for that year, you will see that they knocked $600 off your taxes owed and then reduced your refund by that same $600. So, in essence, you got a tax cut but you didn't have to wait until filing to get the loot from it. Thus, a pre-paid tax cut. Perhaps you're thinking that I'm saying "pre-paid" refers to Uncle Sam's coffers????Calling the rebates prepaid tax cuts is one of those baffling sojourns you make into conservative thought processes that sometimes leave me behind, dte. As here.
I've said before, but this seems a good time to repeat it, that I would even go so far as to support an across the board tax increase if, and only if, it was 100% guaranteed --no take-backs, no borrowing, no political horse trading, no yeah buts, no typical Washington BS-- to go penny for penny toward the national debt.
Thrasher
Wheeee!
I'd like to see a chart that was the budget rather than deficit as a percentage of GDP. I am certain you will so the majority of the increases during so-called "fiscally responsible" Republican administrations.... It's a myth.
Rithrandil
SasqWatch
Well, we've never instituted any programs that are going to bankrupt the country. I'd consider that far more fiscally responsible than the other party.
Thrasher
Wheeee!
Republicans dropping taxes to bankrupt the government while increasing spending is not fiscally responsible.
Rithrandil
SasqWatch
Lowering taxes isn't going to bankrupt the government, the massive entitlement programs enacted by the Democrats are going to. Increased defense spending is a drop in the bucket compared to those programs. But hey, wait a minute, didn't Obama just lower taxes while increasing spending? HMMM! SOUNDS A BIT FISHY THERE, MATE!
dteowner
Shoegazer
How dare you point out truths, Rith? You're going to get our friend a brain freeze if you keep presenting facts and figures.
- Status