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.

 

Are Democrats really better at reducing the deficit?

page: 4
5
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 02:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: JAGStorm

I think both parties are great at adding to the deficit... It pretty much trends up equally no matter which party holds office.


Trump doesn't look to be helping it.


The national debt will trend up- exponentially.
In 2008 we had a chance to at least slow the rate- but now we're right back on track.

If we were still printing our money, in ten years it would be cheaper to burn it for fuel than to buy fuel to burn with it.
The rate of inflation will have to catch up- and soon enough that $10k you've busted ass for 10 years to put in the bank wouldn't buy you a loaf of bread... IF you could get that 10k out of the bank- and IF there was bread left to buy.

Nope- we're in for a hell of a ride over the next 30 years.
The currency itself has been rigged from the start- and it did exactly what it was intended to do. Nobody owns anything anymore- soon the system will reach its breaking point and the government will take ownership of the banks... and they will own the land, the buildings, the rivers, mountains and sky.




posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 04:29 PM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

But didn't Clinton raid the Social Security coffers to balance the deficit with the promise of paying the money back once we were at a surplus- and never paid it back? And both sides of the aisle supported it?

So now everybody wants to call Social Security an "entitlement" that is wrecking the deficit but if our own government hadn't robbed it blind it wouldn't even be an issue! Why the hell are we paying for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid when with the stroke of a pen it can be taken away- or given to people who haven't paid into it for 30-40+ years?

Neither side has any interest in reducing the deficit, and that is plain for anyone to see!



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 07:20 PM
link   
QE is not without consequences.

Every year under Obama, the market was accommodated over a TRILLION dollars.

Billions and trillions are thrown around so much, its widely overlooked just how much money that actually is.

How do you pay back 22 trillion if that's even accurate???? (Add the 21 trillion missing from the Pentagon and HUD, and we're into the 40ish range..)

You can't. Not even in 50 generations could you pull it off.

Political parties are merely conduits for FED monetary policy. Commending one or vilifying another doesn't mean snip. That's the distraction everyone seems to gobble up and ask for seconds no less. 🙄



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 07:26 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

Yes, no argument there about many wanting him out.

My point was that the time/social standards of the era's when Clinton and Trump's presidencies are totally different due to the societal breakdown we are currently experiencing.

I wish there was someone better, but currently our president is at least supportive of our constitution.

The other candidate that ran against him was not so much in favor of anyone's rights.

This coming from a registered republican since I was of legal voting age, a little over 20 years.



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 07:29 PM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

Isn't that Question just a Oximoron ? ....When Have The Dems EVER Even Attempted to Lower the Country's National Debt > ?



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 07:36 PM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm


Are you talking about the Debt?

From google:


def·i·cit /ˈdefəsət/ Learn to pronounce noun the amount by which something, especially a sum of money, is too small.

synonyms: shortfall, deficiency, shortage, undersupply, slippage; More an excess of expenditure or liabilities over income or assets in a given period. "an annual operating deficit" (in sports) the amount or score by which a team or individual is losing. "came back from a 3–0 deficit"


The deficit refers to shortfalls in the budget.

The Debt continues to rise - that includes off-budget spending as well as 'deficit amounts'.

The actual debt in 2019 estimated is

$1.068 Trillion according to the OBM (the Office of Budget and Management).

www.thebalance.com...



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 08:48 PM
link   
a reply to: GeauxHomeYoureDrunk




But didn't Clinton raid the Social Security coffers to balance the deficit with the promise of paying the money back once we were at a surplus

You are correct.
Long winded , but correct
That would have been Congress doing such
You know , the ones fiscally responsible for the budget ?
Presidents merely sign off on the budget.
Or , had you forgotten ?



posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 08:55 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryMcGuire



But doesn't their voting base want Trump out of office? Seems to me to be the case. I sure do

And therein lies your issue.
You are not a majority.




posted on Sep, 9 2019 @ 11:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: chr0naut

You said it yourself, you don't want us to help you. So good on you for doing it all alone. As you said, anything we sent would only screw you up.


Did I say that?


edit on 9/9/2019 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
5
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join