It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump trillion-dollar-plus deficits are putting America on a path to fiscal ruin

page: 7
33
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 20 2018 @ 09:16 PM
link   


It's the bankers, corporations, and military industrial complex that are the real culprits responsible for the socioeconomic crisis and financial meltdown on the horizon


Hm, yet when there are parties and candidates that want to cut their spending, Like Bernie and the democrats, people refuse to support them for some reason.

The plan is to make things so bad, that everyone will give up the rest of our freedoms and allow America to become an Aristocracy. We're practically one now.




posted on Aug, 20 2018 @ 09:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: CB328



It's the bankers, corporations, and military industrial complex that are the real culprits responsible for the socioeconomic crisis and financial meltdown on the horizon


Hm, yet when there are parties and candidates that want to cut their spending, Like Bernie and the democrats, people refuse to support them for some reason.

The plan is to make things so bad, that everyone will give up the rest of our freedoms and allow America to become an Aristocracy. We're practically one now.
...the Dims cannabalized their own, sabotaging Bernie, if anything, you should be pissed at the Dims, not repubs 😎

The rest of your post, hogwash.



posted on Aug, 20 2018 @ 09:27 PM
link   
a reply to: toysforadults

To be honest it's kind of hard to remember these days.


No matter what or who is POTUS, the gooberment always wins because "They" always get voted back in.



posted on Aug, 20 2018 @ 09:35 PM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

Hope is just poking fun/making reference to a previous, asinine thread..
www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 20-8-2018 by vonclod because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 20 2018 @ 10:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96


I guess deficits don't matter anymore?


They sure didn't matter when Obama spent more than all his predecessors combined.

Now suddenly they do.



you know who else spent more than all his predecessors combined? ronny raygun, fiscal conservative god, increased the debt 186%. know who else? bush the second with a 100% increase in debt. obama's measly 80% increase doesnt seem so bad now, does it?



posted on Aug, 20 2018 @ 10:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Southern Guardian

isnt it weird how every time a big spending dem is in office, the deficit goes down, yet when a fiscal conservative republican is in office the deficit goes up?



posted on Aug, 20 2018 @ 10:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: mzinga
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

Did you see my post regarding the annual budget? SNAP is about 1.75 % of the annual 4.xxx Trillion dollar budget. Again mice nuts. Even if trump were to completely remove it, it wouldn’t make a dent in how much he has increased spending.

Keep trying. You can blame this on Obama, Kennedy, Clinton or someone. Fact is everyone is to blame.


Yah you might find this interesting too

To better understand why there is a gap between the increase in the deficit with the change in gross federal debt, we examine a recently available breakdown and analysis of data on the federal budget deficit from Louis Crandall of Wrightson ICAP, which consists of the year- over-year change ending June 30, 2016. The increase in debt for that period was over $1.2 trillion while the deficit was $524 billion, a near $700 billion difference. The discrepancy between these two can be broken down as follows (Table 1): (a) $109 billion (line 2) was due to the change in the treasury cash balance, a common and well understood variable item; (b) $270 billion (line 3) reflects various accounting gimmicks used in fiscal 2015 to limit the size of debt in order to postpone hitting the Debt Limit. Thus, debt was artificially suppressed relative to the deficit in 2015, and the $270 billion in line 3 is merely a reversal of those transactions, a one-off, non-recurring event; (c) $93 billion (line 4) was borrowed by the treasury to make student loans, and this is where it gets interesting. Student loans are considered an investment and therefore are not included in the deficit calculation. Nevertheless, money has to be borrowed to fund the loans, and total debt rises; (d) In the same vein, $70 billion (line 5) was money borrowed by the treasury to increase spending on highways and mass transit. It is not included in the deficit calculation even though the debt increases; (e) $75 billion (line 6) was borrowed because payments to Social Security, Medicare and Affordable Care Act recipients along with the government’s civilian and military retirees were greater during this time frame than the FICA and other tax collections, a demographic development destined to get worse; (f) Finally, the residual $82 billion (line 9) is made up of various unidentifiable expenditures including “funny money securities stuffed in various trust funds”.
www.forbes.com...

Can we blame it on Obama? Well we can blame Progressives in general for the ACA monstrosity that it is, and for all this cookbooking they did.
Then there's the HITECH Act which was enacted during the Obama era

After spending $28 billion so far of the $35 billion total taxpayer investment, significant progress toward interoperability has been elusive. Stage 1 of the meaningful use program failed to include any meaningful health information exchange requirements, and lacked a vision to achieve interoperability. Instead, Stage 1 incentivized the widespread adoption of EHR systems that providers now say are difficult to use and lack the ability to exchange information without costly upgrades.
www.healthaffairs.org...

Then there's this(relating to the HITECH Act) www.forbes.com...

How about this? www.bizpacreview.com...

And then there's this little tidbit....regulations...from the Obama era

Regulations issued under the Obama administration could cost taxpayers roughly $350 billion, according to a new report released by Sen. John McCain (R., Ariz.).
McCain highlighted 25 major final and pending regulatory actions, including the president’s health care law and numerous new rules from the Environmental Protection Agency, and noted how they affect the state he represents.
freebeacon.com...

And liberals are groaning and moaning about how Trump was rolling back EPA costs..... I mean really you guys cant have it both ways. Maybe you just didn't know how much all this stuff cost.



posted on Aug, 20 2018 @ 11:14 PM
link   
Democrats are focusing on Trump spending without looking at the overall issue of spending over the decades. A graph shows how government spending rises no matter who is President. This is because we have entitlement programs and spending instituted.
www.washingtonpost.com... noredirect=on&utm_term=.ce5d545c48b1

If you can just be honest.... this isn't about Trump. But Democrats will find fault with him no matter what, even if most of it is the socialist programs and entitlement spending they love and set up themselves.

oops post was reply to Mzinga
edit on 20-8-2018 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2018 @ 12:22 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

I'm not sure for what , I just feel the need to ask after one of our esteemed members authored a thread explaining why we all should thank a rich person.



posted on Aug, 21 2018 @ 04:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Star Grambler.




posted on Aug, 21 2018 @ 04:13 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

So the answer is, no, you cannot show that Obamas temporary debt has done the same or greater damage than Trumps assault on the permanent elements of the deficit. Well done, thanks for playing.



posted on Aug, 21 2018 @ 04:43 AM
link   
a reply to: stormson

Actually that's objectively false. When Republicans are in control spending is less.

Here’s the average percentage increase in welfare spending when either party had control of Congress:

Democrats in control: (1961-80; 1987-94; 2009) 13.7%

Republicans in control: (1995-2006) 3.5%

From the data it would seem that when Democrats controlled Congress, spending was higher. This may be why many prefer a balance, where one party controls the presidency and the other controls Congress.

After a thorough analysis, it appears the Democrats are the biggest spenders.

www.forbes.com...



posted on Aug, 21 2018 @ 05:25 AM
link   
No link to the Trump discussion in the Hamptons?
I didn't check the 'Q' thread either, too much to wade through.


“‘I’m depending on [Powell] and I hope he listens,’ that was the tenor. Overall, the discussion was that [Trump] doesn’t like higher interest rates,” a source told the Journal.


nypost.com...

Long history of the private Jekyll island bankers club controlling our economy.

View from the Turret



posted on Aug, 21 2018 @ 06:52 AM
link   
Well people YOU CAN'T give Obama credit for the economy and blame Trump for the deficit.

Your not going to get have it both ways.



posted on Aug, 21 2018 @ 07:18 AM
link   
If there is a conspiracy, this is the center of it.

Nothing can justify this sort of spending.

That is a lot of money being paid out as interest to private hands.



posted on Aug, 21 2018 @ 07:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
Well people YOU CAN'T give Obama credit for the economy and blame Trump for the deficit.

Your not going to get have it both ways.


From your mouth to god's ear?



posted on Aug, 21 2018 @ 08:02 AM
link   
a reply to: mzinga

False. False and False.
Do a bit of reading outside the propaganda you are fed and told to repeat.



posted on Aug, 21 2018 @ 08:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: stormson

Actually that's objectively false. When Republicans are in control spending is less.

Here’s the average percentage increase in welfare spending when either party had control of Congress:

Democrats in control: (1961-80; 1987-94; 2009) 13.7%

Republicans in control: (1995-2006) 3.5%

From the data it would seem that when Democrats controlled Congress, spending was higher. This may be why many prefer a balance, where one party controls the presidency and the other controls Congress.

After a thorough analysis, it appears the Democrats are the biggest spenders.

www.forbes.com...


Your response and linked article are for welfare spending, when I’m talking about actual debt/deficit.
From 1946-2015 the increase in debt rose just 4.7% under democrat presidents compared to 7.9% increase under republican presidents.

Some more numbers for you:

Raygun (R): 1982 deficit -$128 b
1989 deficit -$153 b
High deficit 1986 -$221 b
Low deficit 1982 -$128 b

Bush I (R): 1990 deficit -$221 b
1993 deficit -$255 b
High deficit 1992 -$290 b
Low deficit 1990 -$221 b

Clinton (D): 1994 deficit -$203 b
2001 deficit +128 b
High deficit 1994 -$203 b
Low deficit 2000 +236 b

Bush II (R): 2002 deficit -$158 b
2009 deficit -$1.16 t
High deficit 2009 -$1.16 t
Low deficit 2002 -$158 b

Obama (D): 2010 deficit -$1.54 t
2017deficit -$666 b
High deficit 2010 -$1.5 t
Low deficit 2015 -$438 b

Trump (R): 2018 deficit -$833 b
2021 (projected) deficit -$916 b
High deficit 2020 (projected) -$987 b
Low deficit 2018 -$833 b

Numbers don’t lie. Under democrat presidents the deficit goes down. Republicans spend us into debt.

edit on 21-8-2018 by stormson because: tried to make it easier to read



posted on Aug, 21 2018 @ 08:49 AM
link   
a reply to: stormson

Adjust for inflation.

Adjust for population increases to welfare programs.

Numbers don't lie.

Only the people omitting a hell of a lot.



posted on Aug, 21 2018 @ 09:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: stormson

Adjust for inflation.

Adjust for population increases to welfare programs.

Numbers don't lie.

Only the people omitting a hell of a lot.




I don't see how any of those adjustments would change the fact that reps increase the deficit and Dems decrease it.



new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join