The deficit under Obama may have come down in 2014 due to budget caps and the automatic cuts from sequester ,but it's still hugh.. President Barack Obama has presided over five of the six largest annual budget deficits the U.S. government has ever run..that's what he gets credit for....
It was the tea party movement in the 2010 midterm elections,that radically changed the direction of our fiscal deterioration ( by putting fiscally conservative Republicans in the House)...they changed the path of federal spending...
Obama not only gave us the most expensive new entitlement in 40 years, but he has fought nearly every spending reform of the last three years..and people want to give him credit for being a deficit cutter....LOL
You are correct that Obama has had massive deficits. My statement was still true about them coming down though. His smallest deficit is still larger than Bush's largest deficit. I do not consider the 2009 budget to be Bush's deficit since it included Obama's stimulus plan on it.
Going forward, I cannot see any way the runaway debt is ever brought under control. It will continue to rise every year. I know I said it before but check out the debt closk website just to see how fast the debt is increasing. It won't be too long before spending on Federal pensions surpasses net interest on debt. Also, Medicare/Medicaid is gaining fast on Social Security. What I find really interesting is the amount of personal debt is almost at $17 trillion and growing at a much faster rate than the national debt. Will probably surpass national debt before $20 trillion, maybe 19.
The deficit under Obama may have come down in 2014 due to budget caps and the automatic cuts from sequester ,but it's still hugh.. President Barack Obama has presided over five of the six largest annual budget deficits the U.S. government has ever run..that's what he gets credit for....
It was the tea party movement in the 2010 midterm elections,that radically changed the direction of our fiscal deterioration ( by putting fiscally conservative Republicans in the House)...they changed the path of federal spending...
Obama not only gave us the most expensive new entitlement in 40 years, but he has fought nearly every spending reform of the last three years..and people want to give him credit for being a deficit cutter....LOL
You are correct that Obama has had massive deficits. My statement was still true about them coming down though. His smallest deficit is still larger than Bush's largest deficit. I do not consider the 2009 budget to be Bush's deficit since it included Obama's stimulus plan on it.
Going forward, I cannot see any way the runaway debt is ever brought under control. It will continue to rise every year. I know I said it before but check out the debt closk website just to see how fast the debt is increasing. It won't be too long before spending on Federal pensions surpasses net interest on debt. Also, Medicare/Medicaid is gaining fast on Social Security. What I find really interesting is the amount of personal debt is almost at $17 trillion and growing at a much faster rate than the national debt. Will probably surpass national debt before $20 trillion, maybe 19.
Scatch that last comment about personal debt vs the national debt. I ran the numbers and while personal debt is increasing faster than the national debt, at present rate it wouldn't surpass the national debt for a long time. I'm too embarrassesed to even post how far off I was.
Scatch that last comment about personal debt vs the national debt. I ran the numbers and while personal debt is increasing faster than the national debt, at present rate it wouldn't surpass the national debt for a long time. I'm too embarrassesed to even post how far off I was.
The Clintonites claim there was a surplus because the amount of public debt went down, which it did. However that is only a part of the deficit component. The amount of intragovernmental holdings went up more in each of those years than the public debt went down, thus creating a deficit which added to our national debt. Clinton has made false claims that he paid down the national debt by 360 billion. He paid down the public debt portion but increased the other portion by more than that. That is why the national debt increased each of those supposedly surplus years. Basically the govt borrowed money to create an on paper surplus.
The Clintonites claim there was a surplus because the amount of public debt went down, which it did. However that is only a part of the deficit component. The amount of intragovernmental holdings went up more in each of those years than the public debt went down, thus creating a deficit which added to our national debt. Clinton has made false claims that he paid down the national debt by 360 billion. He paid down the public debt portion but increased the other portion by more than that. That is why the national debt increased each of those supposedly surplus years. Basically the govt borrowed money to create an on paper surplus.
Somebody look up the national debt the day Little Bushie took office, and what it was when he left. And then add the wars that His people left off the books.
And anybody who doesn't think Obama inherited a nation in steep, sudden decline is unable to think for themselves.
Somebody look up the national debt the day Little Bushie took office, and what it was when he left. And then add the wars that His people left off the books.
And anybody who doesn't think Obama inherited a nation in steep, sudden decline is unable to think for themselves.
Trawler, I don't think anyone here has claimed that the debt didn't go up a lot under Bush, it certainly did. I believe it went up over 5 trillion.
And where did anyone on this thread claim that Obama didn't inherit a bad economy? He did but the numbers were getting better between the October fiasco and when Obama took office. Things were still very bad but not at their lowest.
Trawler, I don't think anyone here has claimed that the debt didn't go up a lot under Bush, it certainly did. I believe it went up over 5 trillion.
And where did anyone on this thread claim that Obama didn't inherit a bad economy? He did but the numbers were getting better between the October fiasco and when Obama took office. Things were still very bad but not at their lowest.
Since Obama took office the national debt has increased the by nearly 70% and only took slightly more than a year to go from $17 trillion to $18 trillion.
Furthermore, spending that fuels the debt is not primarily caused by increases in discretionary spending such as defense, education and infrastructure, but rather by growth in mandatory programs such as entitlements.
Since Obama took office the national debt has increased the by nearly 70% and only took slightly more than a year to go from $17 trillion to $18 trillion.
Furthermore, spending that fuels the debt is not primarily caused by increases in discretionary spending such as defense, education and infrastructure, but rather by growth in mandatory programs such as entitlements.
Trawler, I don't think anyone here has claimed that the debt didn't go up a lot under Bush, it certainly did. I believe it went up over 5 trillion.
And where did anyone on this thread claim that Obama didn't inherit a bad economy? He did but the numbers were getting better between the October fiasco and when Obama took office. Things were still very bad but not at their lowest.
That is completely false. I would love to see data driven proof. Don't make up stuff to fit your point of view.
Trawler, I don't think anyone here has claimed that the debt didn't go up a lot under Bush, it certainly did. I believe it went up over 5 trillion.
And where did anyone on this thread claim that Obama didn't inherit a bad economy? He did but the numbers were getting better between the October fiasco and when Obama took office. Things were still very bad but not at their lowest.
That is completely false. I would love to see data driven proof. Don't make up stuff to fit your point of view.
Since Obama took office the national debt has increased the by nearly 70% and only took slightly more than a year to go from $17 trillion to $18 trillion.
Furthermore, spending that fuels the debt is not primarily caused by increases in discretionary spending such as defense, education and infrastructure, but rather by growth in mandatory programs such as entitlements.
yes sir! In less than 21 hours, the amount spent on SS has gone up more than 112 million and 325 million for Medicare/Medicaid. Basically it is going up 500 million a day. Unsustainable. A good chance that both of these are over a trillion a year before Obama leaves office. If not, it'll be close.
Since Obama took office the national debt has increased the by nearly 70% and only took slightly more than a year to go from $17 trillion to $18 trillion.
Furthermore, spending that fuels the debt is not primarily caused by increases in discretionary spending such as defense, education and infrastructure, but rather by growth in mandatory programs such as entitlements.
yes sir! In less than 21 hours, the amount spent on SS has gone up more than 112 million and 325 million for Medicare/Medicaid. Basically it is going up 500 million a day. Unsustainable. A good chance that both of these are over a trillion a year before Obama leaves office. If not, it'll be close.
That is completely false. I would love to see data driven proof. Don't make up stuff to fit your point of view.
you could tell he was in trouble because you had a bunch of the "usual suspects" jumping in on the thread trying to detract from the discussion or bail him out...
I actually thought dan was strong enough that he didn't need others to jump and agree with him or bail him out... but obviously the "usual suspects" got concerned that he needed help...
That is completely false. I would love to see data driven proof. Don't make up stuff to fit your point of view.
you could tell he was in trouble because you had a bunch of the "usual suspects" jumping in on the thread trying to detract from the discussion or bail him out...
I actually thought dan was strong enough that he didn't need others to jump and agree with him or bail him out... but obviously the "usual suspects" got concerned that he needed help...
you could tell he was in trouble because you had a bunch of the "usual suspects" jumping in on the thread trying to detract from the discussion or bail him out...
I actually thought dan was strong enough that he didn't need others to jump and agree with him or bail him out... but obviously the "usual suspects" got concerned that he needed help...
At least that is what it looks like
Not at all. Busy today with end of year work stuff, travel and NYE plans. I'll address this when I have time and can provide some numbers.
you could tell he was in trouble because you had a bunch of the "usual suspects" jumping in on the thread trying to detract from the discussion or bail him out...
I actually thought dan was strong enough that he didn't need others to jump and agree with him or bail him out... but obviously the "usual suspects" got concerned that he needed help...
At least that is what it looks like
Not at all. Busy today with end of year work stuff, travel and NYE plans. I'll address this when I have time and can provide some numbers.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so. It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly. Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality. Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it. As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.