Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Barack Obama: 'We don't have a spending problem'

page: 5
36
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 02:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by gorgi
 





WOW! The denial runs deep with this one. Isnt the ATS motto, deny ignorance ?


Yeah it does considering the national deficit was 5.6 trillion when Clinton left meaning this country was still in debt meaning

NO SURPLUS

Or anyone can "claim" a surplus when they steal cash from SS and left it with IOU's either way total fabrication.
[
edit on 8-1-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)


I really dont think you understand. Clinton left us with a BUDGET SURPLUS. We still have a national debt which Clinton actually made the first payment to actually reduce it. Then Bush and the right wingers killed it.




posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 05:27 AM
link   
We have a voting problem. Its called fraud. If it wasn't real then Obama would not have been re elected. If he was properly vetted and exposed then he would never been elected in the first place.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 09:17 AM
link   
reply to post by gorgi
 



A Federal Budget Surplus means that the federal Government TOOK too much money from the citizen, and did not return it.

Yeah, that is a great thing.


The Govt should be running at a flat level. No excess and no deficit.

But, because lord 0bama is doing it, it is all good.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 10:21 AM
link   
reply to post by gorgi
 


It is a real reach to expect people that spent years claiming that the President was secret terrorist born in Kenya to actually be honest about economics or finance.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 10:59 AM
link   
why is the solution to our deficit problem only couched in the terms of cutting social security and medicare, of which the effects would fall on the poorest and most vulnerable. isn't there a reasonable way to slightly raise the rates of what is paid into these social programs by higher income people?.... a few percentage points increase would make these programs viable for a long time, at the same time curve the deficit borrowing. the wealthy in this country are the ones that have seen their incomes rise dramatically over the past few decades, while the incomes of the middle class and poor have stagnated or decreased. this has been verified by simple arithmetic on several government sites that collect and monitor thisw type of data. the argument seems to revolve around, protecting the wealthy, by extermination of the poor.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 11:11 AM
link   
reply to post by jimmyx
 


So social justice and redistribution of wealth is fine with you?

Govt spending needs to be cut, as taxing even the wealthiest of people would only fund the Govt about a week and a half.

The Govt is out of control with their pocket book, on ALL fronts.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 01:49 PM
link   
What spending problem?

The government does not have a spending problem. sarcasm off.

edit on 9-1-2013 by WhereIsTheBatman because: (corrections)
edit on 9-1-2013 by WhereIsTheBatman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 06:59 PM
link   
Depends on your perspective.

For example, the Chinese don't see any problem with our spending whatsoever. They'd be happy to lend us more trillions, at exorbitant rates, so we can buy more cargo shiploads of cheap plastic junk at Walmart for every ridiculous socio-holiday to fill our trash dumps with and then repeat again each year...

More, more, more! Spend more! Borrow more!

Oh yeah, the Chinese love us as they hate us...



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 07:06 PM
link   
I think what we have is an out of touch with reality political class that work for the special interest which is just code for the big corporations and monies interests. They make calculations about the impact of what they say based on focus groups and think tanks.



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 09:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by gorgi
 



A Federal Budget Surplus means that the federal Government TOOK too much money from the citizen, and did not return it.

Yeah, that is a great thing.


The Govt should be running at a flat level. No excess and no deficit.

But, because lord 0bama is doing it, it is all good.



No it means that the government now has extra money to either pay down existing debt or to spend it. There are times when the government need to spend more than its taking in, how do you think WW2 was paid?



posted on Jan, 9 2013 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by gorgi

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by gorgi
 





WOW! The denial runs deep with this one. Isnt the ATS motto, deny ignorance ?


Yeah it does considering the national deficit was 5.6 trillion when Clinton left meaning this country was still in debt meaning

NO SURPLUS

Or anyone can "claim" a surplus when they steal cash from SS and left it with IOU's either way total fabrication.
[
edit on 8-1-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)


I really dont think you understand. Clinton left us with a BUDGET SURPLUS. We still have a national debt which Clinton actually made the first payment to actually reduce it. Then Bush and the right wingers killed it.


I can't believe people still use this talking point.

Clinton was able to do that with the tech boom. Guess what? That was a bubble too!

I feel sad when people don't understand economics and the business cycle.





new topics

top topics



 
36
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join