Another Brilliant Plan Out of WI

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by wiphan

How about the Stimulus Package? Did that increase the budget deficit with no real stimulus or benefit?

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) asked the Congressional Budget Office to estimate the impact of permanently extending the 20 most popular provisions of the stimulus bill. What did the CBO find? The true 10 year cost of the stimulus bill $2.527 trillion in in spending with another $744 billion cost in debt servicing. Total bill for the Generational Theft Act: $3.27 trillion

But again Obama is a deficit cutting king and everything is Bush's fault.

amazing that in 8 years, even with 9-11 the debt raised almost $5 trillion under W Bush and with just one misguided program Obama adds $3.27 trillion. And some still bill it as a success.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

amazing that in 8 years, even with 9-11 the debt raised almost $5 trillion under W Bush and with just one misguided program Obama adds $3.27 trillion. And some still bill it as a success.

And some are so blinded to disliking Obama they dismiss the reality of our financial situation and not only what got us here, but what is costing us big in borrowed money and interest payments over now and years to come.

It sure as hell wasn't Obama.

Bush more than doubled our national debt in 6 years. Obama kept us out of a depression, using a necessary stimulus package that most say wasn't even enough as the recession is a slow recovery.

The stimulus packages cost are a tiny part of our national debt obligation - the cost of which most is already gone, and will be even more so within 2 years - while the borrowing with interest to pay for the Bush debaucle of credit card charging and giving away our revenue is more than half, and is with us for years.

Hard to spin reality. Calling Obama the big spender for domestic spending (which he has cut, including Medicare, although discretionary is only like 16% of our budget) and stimulus - both comprising only a tiny portion of our debt obligation - is ludicrous and not supported by any facts.

The below chart clearly shows how tiny the cost of the stimulus and bailouts were, and how terribly expensive and disastrous increasing spending while cutting our revenue was - because we had to borrow that money with interest, and we are paying it back to China and others forever.

It's the dark gold on this chart that is borrowed money, with interest, that is increasing over time. Thank you, George W. Bush. You didn't even give us a kiss. And yes, Obama should have allowed the tax cuts to expire, so we could already be paying this off. That is essential - that we regain that revenue stream.

That is the threat to our grandchildren. Blaming it on "Obama spending!" is simply false.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

And some are so blinded to disliking Obama they dismiss the reality of our financial situation and not only what got us here, but what is costing us big in borrowed money and interest payments over now and years to come.

It sure as hell wasn't Obama.

Bush more than doubled our national debt in 6 years. Obama kept us out of a depression, using a necessary stimulus package that most say wasn't even enough as the recession is a slow recovery.

The stimulus packages cost are a tiny part of our national debt obligation - the cost of which most is already gone, and will be even more so within 2 years - while the borrowing with interest to pay for the Bush debaucle of credit card charging and giving away our revenue is more than half, and is with us for years.

Hard to spin reality. Calling Obama the big spender for domestic spending (which he has cut, including Medicare, although discretionary is only like 16% of our budget) and stimulus - both comprising only a tiny portion of our debt obligation - is ludicrous and not supported by any facts.

The below chart clearly shows how tiny the cost of the stimulus and bailouts were, and how terribly expensive and disastrous increasing spending while cutting our revenue was - because we had to borrow that money with interest, and we are paying it back to China and others forever.

It's the dark gold on this chart that is borrowed money, with interest, that is increasing over time. Thank you, George W. Bush. You didn't even give us a kiss. And yes, Obama should have allowed the tax cuts to expire, so we could already be paying this off. That is essential - that we regain that revenue stream.

That is the threat to our grandchildren. Blaming it on "Obama spending!" is simply false.

again stop with the made up chart and deal with

2012 United States federal budget - $3.7 trillion (submitted 2011 by President Obama)
2011 United States federal budget - $3.8 trillion (submitted 2010 by President Obama)
2010 United States federal budget - $3.6 trillion (submitted 2009 by President Obama)
2009 United States federal budget - $3.1 trillion (submitted 2008 by President Bush)
2008 United States federal budget - $2.9 trillion (submitted 2007 by President Bush)
2007 United States federal budget - $2.8 trillion (submitted 2006 by President Bush) )

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

again stop with the made up chart and deal with

It's simply amazing that you can't understand the concept of borrowing money over time and paying interest on the loan. Here, tell me what's "made up" about this:

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

It's simply amazing that you can't understand the concept of borrowing money over time and paying interest on the loan. Here, tell me what's "made up" about this:

are you trying to say Obama's huge budget raises are a result of having to pay interest?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

are you trying to say Obama's huge budget raises are a result of having to pay interest?

I refer you to the multiple long posts already made on the subject in this thread.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

I refer you to the multiple long posts already made on the subject in this thread.

you mean the propaganda put out by the CBPP? Simply look at how they project Obamacare? Thousands of sources refute their crazy projections and shows who they are and what they stand for loud and clear.

Let's stick to actual CBO numbers.

Now I ask how much of the current $3.7 trillion Obama budget is interest payments on Bush's war and tax cuts? Judging by the budget increase it should in the range of $600-$700 billion and sadly it's not.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

And some are so blinded to disliking Obama they dismiss the reality of our financial situation and not only what got us here, but what is costing us big in borrowed money and interest payments over now and years to come.

It sure as hell wasn't Obama.

Bush more than doubled our national debt in 6 years. Obama kept us out of a depression, using a necessary stimulus package that most say wasn't even enough as the recession is a slow recovery.

The stimulus packages cost are a tiny part of our national debt obligation - the cost of which most is already gone, and will be even more so within 2 years - while the borrowing with interest to pay for the Bush debaucle of credit card charging and giving away our revenue is more than half, and is with us for years.

Hard to spin reality. Calling Obama the big spender for domestic spending (which he has cut, including Medicare, although discretionary is only like 16% of our budget) and stimulus - both comprising only a tiny portion of our debt obligation - is ludicrous and not supported by any facts.

The below chart clearly shows how tiny the cost of the stimulus and bailouts were, and how terribly expensive and disastrous increasing spending while cutting our revenue was - because we had to borrow that money with interest, and we are paying it back to China and others forever.

It's the dark gold on this chart that is borrowed money, with interest, that is increasing over time. Thank you, George W. Bush. You didn't even give us a kiss. And yes, Obama should have allowed the tax cuts to expire, so we could already be paying this off. That is essential - that we regain that revenue stream.

That is the threat to our grandchildren. Blaming it on "Obama spending!" is simply false.

Bush Deficit vs. Obama Deficit in Pictures



UPDATE: Many Obama defenders in the comments are claiming that the numbers above do not include spending on Iraq and Afghanistan during the Bush years. They most certainly do. While Bush did fund the wars through emergency supplementals (not the regular budget process), that spending did not simply vanish. It is included in the numbers above. Also, some Obama defenders are claiming the graphic above represents biased Heritage Foundation numbers. While we stand behind the numbers we put out 100%, the numbers, and the graphic itself, above are from the Washington Post. We originally left out the link to WaPo. It has now been added.

CLARIFICATION: Of course, this Washington Post graphic does not perfectly delineate budget surpluses and deficits by administration. President Bush took office in January 2001, and therefore played a lead role in crafting the FY 2002-2008 budgets. Presidents Bush and Obama share responsibility for the FY 2009 budget deficit that overlaps their administrations, before President Obama assumes full budgetary responsibility beginning in FY 2010. Overall, President Obama’s budget would add twice as much debt as President Bush over the same number of years.


http://blog.heritage.org/?p=4210

[Riot]

You diss the independent CBPP, yet you post from Heritage?

It's good to know that Obama could borrow a trillion dollars over the next five years, have repayment start in six years, have repayment last 10 years with interest, and you will entirely blame whomever is elected in 2016 for that debt

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

You diss the independent CBPP, yet you post from Heritage?

It's good to know that Obama could borrow a trillion dollars over the next five years, have repayment start in six years, have repayment last 10 years with interest, and you will entirely blame whomever is elected in 2016 for that debt

Here we go no CBPP or Heritage just straight numbers, no projections. You'll notice Obama while spending $2.67 trillion more over a 3 year period managed to pay $70.6 billion less on interest.

Bush
Total Spent Interest
2006 $2.655 Tril $226.0 billion
2007 $2.728 Tril $237.1 billion
2008 $2.982 Tril $252.0 billion

Totals $8.365 Tril $715.1 billion

Obama
Total Spent Interest
2010 $3.456 Tril $196.2 Billion
2011 $3.818 Tril $206.7 Billion
2012 $3.728 Tril $241.6 Billion

Totals $11.002 Tril $644.50 Billion


http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/...ate=US#usgs302

[dellinger63]

You'll also notice that Obama's increase in spending over his first three years exceeds what Bush spent for the entire budget year of 2006. And where did that get us?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

You'll also notice that Obama's increase in spending over his first three years exceeds what Bush spent for the entire budget year of 2006. And where did that get us?

We are not in a depression, the auto industry is saved, the 700,000 jobs a month lost in the last months of Bush has been reversed, and the economy is recovering, albeit slowly.

Tell me, Dell - where is the cost that we have to pay back of Bushes wars, and his tax cuts, and his prescription drug program? Oh, yeah, and that stimulus he gave out on his way out the door? When did we borrow that money, and where is it being paid back? If you think that is all listed as ending Jan 2009 - as you are acting as you think - you are wrong.

That's not in the graph you posted. No matter what Heritage says <g>

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

You'll also notice that Obama's increase in spending over his first three years exceeds what Bush spent for the entire budget year of 2006. And where did that get us?

The spending during the first two years of Obama is mostly Bush legacy, and a one-time stimulus (only 2/3 of which was actually spent). There are automatic increases in Medicare, Social Security, etc. You can continue to lay that at Obama's feet, but it doesn't wash.

Bush took a budget surplus, and spent it all. Then, as he increased spending markedly, and cut our revenue at the same time, he had to start borrowing money. Billions and billions.

Billions and billions.

That money is being spent over multiple years, and is to be paid back over multiple years (the future), with interest.

No subsequent President is responsible for the huge portion of the deficit, and thus budget payback, that is Bush legacy. Do you not agree with that? Yes or no?