Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Woo Hoo!!! Obama Will Become First President to Spend $4T in One Year

page: 3
19
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by xedocodex
reply to post by beezzer
 



Nope. Return DoD budgets to 1985 levels.

Return domestic spending to 985 levels.


I'm fine with reducing the DoD budget to 1885 levels if needed.

But you can't cut domestic spending at the same rate...people will starve and die on the streets. This isn't Sim City...this is the real world.


You have to realize that a lot of government spending actually plays a role in starving people.

For example, the government spends tons of money to subsidize farmland, grazing lots, crops...etc. That does not necessarily mean that the product will be cheaper, in fact we have seen the opposite. Many subsidized farmers are only able to accept the money if they DO NOT grow a crop or produce a product.

This eventually screws up the natural supply-demand of the free market and prices become artificial....only serving to increase profit for the company, not providing the market with cheap and plentiful food.
edit on 10-4-2013 by sheepslayer247 because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by xedocodex

Originally posted by camaro68ss

Originally posted by xedocodex
reply to post by camaro68ss
 



Even though true, your statement is a play on words. Obamas year after year deficit growth is small but in his first term debt added to the yearly defect grew by 1 trillion dollars. So let’s look at averages


His first year wasn't his budget or policies.

Please tell me you know how budgets and government spending work.


O so its bushes fault. I seeeeeeeeee


Who's operating budget was responsible for most of 2009 spending???

And then there is that whole recession thing we had to fix.

But why not just look at the deficit the past few years...contradictory to your rhetoric...it is decreasing.

Here..check the numbers.

www.usgovernmentspending.com...

See any trends??? Bush last three years went from 295 billion to 1.972 Trillion. Obama started with 1.322 Trillion and the 2013 estimate is 973 billion. Like it or not...Obama is bringing the deficit down...and Bush is responsible for it's dramatic increase at the end of his term.

These are called FACTS...unlike rhetoric and propaganda that is the basis of this thread.

edit on 10-4-2013 by xedocodex because: (no reason given)


Sorry buddy, the Dems owned the house, Senate and White House in 09. At any point they could have passed a bill to lower spending but didnt. stop with your propaganda and own it.
edit on 10-4-2013 by camaro68ss because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by xedocodex
reply to post by sheepslayer247
 


I agree, the government spends too much...always has and always will. The Defense budget is the biggest waste of money that we have right now.

But you won't find any of these Obama haters admitting that Obama is lowering the deficit. That goes against every single thing they have been told to believe.


In order to lower the debt..it requires he stop increasing spending. How do you not get this.....


Des



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 05:07 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 



No. People won't die. Nice knee-jerk.

People will just have to relearn how to live without government.

Government isn't the solution to the problem, government is the cause of the problem!


So you are going to cut millions off food assistance and millions off of medicare/medicaid...but no one is going to die???

Your "learning" means people who need help the most will just have to learn to not eat and simply be happy with dying.



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by xedocodex
reply to post by beezzer
 



No. People won't die. Nice knee-jerk.

People will just have to relearn how to live without government.

Government isn't the solution to the problem, government is the cause of the problem!


So you are going to cut millions off food assistance and millions off of medicare/medicaid...but no one is going to die???

Your "learning" means people who need help the most will just have to learn to not eat and simply be happy with dying.


Im sorry, im a little lost. sounds like your describing obamacare right now. Take 500 billion from medicare and let the old people get rejected at the hospital because there not covered anymore.

Cant wait for the rationing when the elderly will be given pain meds and left to die just because there to old and will cost to much to save there lives. but everyone is covered now right! O JOY!
edit on 10-4-2013 by camaro68ss because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by xedocodex
reply to post by beezzer
 



No. People won't die. Nice knee-jerk.

People will just have to relearn how to live without government.

Government isn't the solution to the problem, government is the cause of the problem!


So you are going to cut millions off food assistance and millions off of medicare/medicaid...but no one is going to die???

Your "learning" means people who need help the most will just have to learn to not eat and simply be happy with dying.


*whaaaa*

Nice straw man.

Justify spending, at any cost, won't you.

Grow the frack up. Either openly admit you hate America and want to fundimentally change it, or continue your progresive-stain lies.



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by xedocodex
reply to post by beezzer
 



No. People won't die. Nice knee-jerk.

People will just have to relearn how to live without government.

Government isn't the solution to the problem, government is the cause of the problem!


So you are going to cut millions off food assistance and millions off of medicare/medicaid...but no one is going to die???

Your "learning" means people who need help the most will just have to learn to not eat and simply be happy with dying.


I think you forget...there are a mighty number of those millions, who had jobs before this Administration...think on that for a moment. They were able to support themselves.

Des



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by camaro68ss
 



Sorry buddy, the Dems owned the house, Senate and White House in 09. At any point they could have passed a bill to lower spending but didnt. stop with your propaganda and own it.


They did...that is why the deficit decreased in 2010.

It is plainly clear you have no idea how budgets and spending works.


Question....will you admit that since 2010 that the deficit has decreased each year and is projected to continue to decrease?



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 05:15 PM
link   
DP

SORRY**
edit on 10-4-2013 by camaro68ss because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by xedocodex
reply to post by camaro68ss
 



Sorry buddy, the Dems owned the house, Senate and White House in 09. At any point they could have passed a bill to lower spending but didnt. stop with your propaganda and own it.


They did...that is why the deficit decreased in 2010.

It is plainly clear you have no idea how budgets and spending works.


Question....will you admit that since 2010 that the deficit has decreased each year and is projected to continue to decrease?


yes there has been. its the equivalent of taking a grain of sand off the beach but by god there is one less grain there, can’t you tell? O JOY!
edit on 10-4-2013 by camaro68ss because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 




want to fundimentally change it


All due respect but isn't that what we all really want?

The system is broken and we are going to be forced, eventually, to find the "sweet spot" between the hard Right ideology and the hard Left ideology.

So I'm all for some change.



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Destinyone
 



In order to lower the debt..it requires he stop increasing spending. How do you not get this


Same question to you, do you admit that Obama HAS decreased the deficit every year since 2010 and that it is projected to continue to decrease???

We are a long ways off from ever operating in a surplus..there is no quick fix...but you are criticizing Obama for actually moving in the right direction.



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by xedocodex
reply to post by camaro68ss
 



Even though true, your statement is a play on words. Obamas year after year deficit growth is small but in his first term debt added to the yearly defect grew by 1 trillion dollars. So let’s look at averages


His first year wasn't his budget or policies.

Please tell me you know how budgets and government spending work.


Were talking the fiscal calendar here. During his first few months (the waning fiscal 2009) he spent $788 billion on stimulus. That's a considerable chunk of the 2009 deficit of 1.3 Trillion which includes the $700 billion bank bailout brought on by Bush.

Obama kept promising to cut the deficits in half an never came close not will he ever come close in the remainder of his lame duck spending spree term.



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
reply to post by beezzer
 




want to fundimentally change it


All due respect but isn't that what we all really want?

The system is broken and we are going to be forced, eventually, to find the "sweet spot" between the hard Right ideology and the hard Left ideology.

So I'm all for some change.


I can agree with that..But, you do realize it won't be a shuffling of the deck that makes that change happen. It will require tossing out the whole deck, save one or two cards.

That deck is sitting in power, they won't toss themselves out, that's for sure.

Des



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 05:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
reply to post by beezzer
 




want to fundimentally change it


All due respect but isn't that what we all really want?

The system is broken and we are going to be forced, eventually, to find the "sweet spot" between the hard Right ideology and the hard Left ideology.

So I'm all for some change.


I'm all for change as well.

But when we hire a plumber, we don't anticipate him to break the tv in order to replace a leaking gasket on the sink!
edit on 10-4-2013 by beezzer because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by xedocodex
reply to post by Destinyone
 



In order to lower the debt..it requires he stop increasing spending. How do you not get this


Same question to you, do you admit that Obama HAS decreased the deficit every year since 2010 and that it is projected to continue to decrease???

We are a long ways off from ever operating in a surplus..there is no quick fix...but you are criticizing Obama for actually moving in the right direction.


Others have already answered your question, so I won't be redundant.

But, I will admit, you sure like him a lot......


Des



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Destinyone
 


I can agree with that as well.

Eventually a solution will come around. I just fear it may be painful for all of us to go through the transition.



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by xedocodex
reply to post by Destinyone
 



In order to lower the debt..it requires he stop increasing spending. How do you not get this


Same question to you, do you admit that Obama HAS decreased the deficit every year since 2010 and that it is projected to continue to decrease???

We are a long ways off from ever operating in a surplus..there is no quick fix...but you are criticizing Obama for actually moving in the right direction.


What?

The Debt rose $4.899 trillion during the two terms (8 years) of the Bush presidency. It had already gone up $4.939 trillion by this exact time LAST year.

The national debt is expected to top $20 trillion in 2016, the final year of his second term. That would mean the Debt increased by 87 percent, or $9.34 trillion, during his two terms. How is that for success?
edit on 10-4-2013 by jibeho because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by xedocodex

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
Believe me, I can't stand how much the government spends and how much we have to put into the system just to sustain it......but you have to look at the entire picture before we jump too fast into the smear campaign.

Take a look at the OMB chart at this link.

While spending does increase, so does receipts. Over the term of the budget, the deficit actually lowers considerably from 2012 to 2017.

Realistically, we should expect the numbers to become larger and larger as we factor in inflation and the devaluation of the dollar. But they still manage to bring the deficit numbers down.

So if you guys want to have a "bash Obama circle-jerk"....be my guest. But at least look at the numbers and put it in to proper perspective before you get too far.


Don't interrupt their two minutes of hate with facts...they psychologicall NEED this hate time.

Facts don't matter to a certain crowd...doesn't matter that his budget decreases the deficit...they will find one number that increases and they will stare at it and HATE IT.

It's sad...but also funny. So just sit back and enjoy the show.
edit on 10-4-2013 by xedocodex because: (no reason given)


I wouldn't put too much stock in the US gov summary tables.

They are basing their assumptions on a sustained 4+% GDP growth.

That is highly unlikely.



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by xedocodex

So you are going to cut millions off food assistance and millions off of medicare/medicaid...but no one is going to die???


So, then why is Medicare already turning away many of those with Cancer,
due to Obamacare? It was his baby, he owns it now.

How many people are going to die, while Obama spends more than any other POTUS?

Sitting on the dock of the bay, watching the time go buy indeed!
edit on 10-4-2013 by burntheships because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join