|
|
 |
|
|
|
#1
09-26-2012, 05:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
The deficit was 10.6 Trillion the day Bush left office.
Again, simple mathematics seems to complicate your argument. Obama inherited a deficit of 10.6 T, only spent 1.4T (your data) and somehow the deficit is now 16 Trillion. How do you explain the 4 Trillion dollars added over the past 3 years? Is that all service on the debt? 25% interest? Did Obama accidentally put the 1.4 Trillion on his American Express? Your phony charts aren't fooling anyone. He is responsible for a 5 Trillion dollars increase to the National debt in 3 years. Period. Fact. 
|
|
#2
09-27-2012, 08:22 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
don't run out of ammo.
|
|
#3
09-27-2012, 06:00 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
The right kind of math is welcome, and you trying to deny that the debt Bush left us is not still costing us daily is beyond absurd. Bush didn't wipe out his debt the day he left office, did he? No matter who was president, the Bush debt present on 1/20/2008 continues until about 2020.
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts
|
|
#4
09-27-2012, 03:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Its called "obamanomics". blame the guy before you eventhough you continued to govern the EXACT same way as the guy before you.
__________________
Quote:
|
|
#5
09-27-2012, 06:05 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
That is, that's the answer of people who actually care to be discerning and serious and truthful about the causes of our debt, that is. Quote:
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts
|
|
#6
09-27-2012, 06:56 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Naw, you're wrong on the "simple mathematics" part, you can't do that - your assumption of how that works is wrong. First, should mention that we are both using deficit and debt interchangeably, and we are both wrong to do that - the deficit is the difference between what we take and in and what we spend annually, then the accumulation of that (which Obama has decreased a bit, his federal spending is indeed the lowest since Reagan); and the debt is what we owe. But we are talking about the same thing - what the country owes in total, right? Back to the "simple assumption" thing, your math is way off, you are trying to simplistically compare entirely different things. The debt was 10.6 trillion at end of Bush, is now 16 trillion. Yes, it is. 5.6 trillion of that was added during the past 4 years. Yes, it was. BTW - if Bushes policies only cost us a little over $5 trillion, why was the debt 10.6 trillion at the end of his term? If you can answer that, you'll know why you can't blame Obama for 100% of the debt that has added on during his term. BUT - to get back, the question is where did that 5.6 trillion come from? You say it is all due to Obama. No, it is not. First, much of that is continued ongoing costs from Bush unpaid-for wars, unpaid-for drug giveaway, and the ongoing cost of Bush massively cutting our income via the tax cuts, while continuing to spend the same amount of money. And yes, when we loan ourselves money, there is tremendous debt service on that, and it compounds exponentially. So even though Bush left office 1/20/2008, the cost of his policies, the debt we pay on that, continues to rise - the Iran war got more expensive over the past 10 years, Afghanistan, etc (and yes, Obama gets credit for the cost of the surge, etc) But look again at the orange-red-blue Debt Chart graph in the post above - see the dates? Obama's policy costs do not even kick in until his first budget in 2009, the cost of that coming afterwards - see all the rise in Bush polices from 2008 to 2009-2010? Obama isn't responsible for that portion of the debt rising even though his term started - and a lot of that old stuff is ongoing even past Obama's term (if it ends in November) and it's still Bush's stuff, left for the next president. Obama's policies over the past cost 1.4 Trillion, but much of that was paid for (the ACA is virtually "deficit neutral" as scored by CBO), some of course was not - so you can't simply add cost of policies together. to get debt. So, to attribute the portion of our debt that is due to Obama, due to his policies, you must be able to list the portion of Obama policies (and that includes a portion of the cost of expansion of Bush tax cuts, of course - but NOT all of that, of course) and (Obama's cost of surge in Afghanistan). Right? We should be able to list the exact Obama policies (all together of which cost $1.4 trillion until 2017) that were put on a charge card, and not self-funded, that will cost us increased debt service in the last two years of his term and ongoing until it's paid for. And that is clearly NOT $5.7 trillion. Obama has only "cost" us $1.4 trillion, that's absurd, and much of Obama's costs haven't even kicked in yet (and the vast majority are paid for, not put on a charge card) To attribute that $5.7 trillion all to Obama is simple, factually, obviously false and simplistic. Quote:
The charts are from figures supplied by the well-respected and non-partisan Congressional Budget office, no, they are not in any way whatsoever "phoney", that's an absurd charge. Here's fact on what each of the last two presidents policies have cost - some was paid for, much for Bush, noticeably and regrettably, was NOT. 
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts
|
Hybrid Mode
