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

page: 5
19
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by muse7
Massive military cuts, along with withdrawing from every country that our military is occupying along with a tax on wall-street would go a long way in reducing a deficit.

Why do some people want to punish the poor for the debt that was primarily caused by unnecessary wars and irresponsible bankers?


I think doing those things would create a fairly large surplus.

But don't hold your breath for any of the people in this thread to support it...they desperately want to cut welfare and social security because they have been brainwashed that these evil lazy people are the problem.




posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by peck420

Originally posted by xedocodex
reply to post by Destinyone
 



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.


Sorry, but once again you have your facts wrong.

Unemplyment today (7.6%) is lower than when Obama took office (7.8%).

Any more false talking points you would like to try?


It's not false.

Unemployment numbers in percentage can be highly deceiving.

Labour Participation Rate

Even if the advertised unemployment rate falls, so many people have left the labour force, that it will be a while before the US hits or breaks their peak levels.


The labor force participaton rate has been declining for over a decade and will continue to decline. We have an old population, baby boomers are retiring in mass numbers and people aren't having as many kids as they used to.

We will never match the labor rate of the 90s...we don't have the correct demographics for it.

None of this changes the fact that unemployment is still lower than when Obama took office and that the other members argument was a load of crap (as is yours with your participation rate....the newest right wing talking point).



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by seeker1963
 



The fact is, your question has been answered and it wasn't suitable to your argument, so thus you are trying to use your truth squad training to single out someone whom you perceive as weak and thus a good target for you to win your argument!!!!


Maybe you can answer the question then.

Has the deficit decreased every year since 2010???

Simple question...let's see if you will answer. Only one person did so far, but they still tried to dismiss the answer as meaningless.


You have failed in all accounts to argue in saving face of your savior, while denying every bit of truth that has been thrown in your face! Have you ever thought for just a second that no matter what political party you might believe in that they are ALL full of snip???


I would LOVE for you to list out all accounts I have failed in. Please...it should be entertaining. There has been little truth from the opposition here...just right wing talking points and being willfully ignorant.



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by xedocodex

Originally posted by peck420

Originally posted by xedocodex
reply to post by Destinyone
 



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.


Sorry, but once again you have your facts wrong.

Unemplyment today (7.6%) is lower than when Obama took office (7.8%).

Any more false talking points you would like to try?


It's not false.

Unemployment numbers in percentage can be highly deceiving.

Labour Participation Rate

Even if the advertised unemployment rate falls, so many people have left the labour force, that it will be a while before the US hits or breaks their peak levels.


The labor force participaton rate has been declining for over a decade and will continue to decline. We have an old population, baby boomers are retiring in mass numbers and people aren't having as many kids as they used to.

We will never match the labor rate of the 90s...we don't have the correct demographics for it.

None of this changes the fact that unemployment is still lower than when Obama took office and that the other members argument was a load of crap (as is yours with your participation rate....the newest right wing talking point).


So...long story short, you have no idea what the labour participation rate is, or what it means.

And, no, the labour participation rate has not been declining for over a decade.

Here is the same chart from 1998-2012 instead of 2008-2012. Chart

Notice where the deviation from the norm occurs...I'll give you a hint, it coincides with a very specific, and recent, turn of economic events.



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by peck420
 



So...long story short, you have no idea what the labour participation rate is, or what it means.

And, no, the labour participation rate has not been declining for over a decade.

Here is the same chart from 1998-2012 instead of 2008-2012. Chart

Notice where the deviation from the norm occurs...I'll give you a hint, it coincides with a very specific, and recent, turn of economic events.


Your link doesn't go back to 1998...you need a subscription for that.

Go to this link and enter from 2000 to 2013...you will see an overall downward trend. Yes, the recession increased that downward trend, but that doesn't change the fact that it is there.

data.bls.gov...

Bottom line, unemployment is better than when he took office. Stop attempting to move the goal posts and just accept FACTS.



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 07:47 PM
link   

he first president in the nation's history to preside over a federal government that spends more than $4 trillion in one year.


In case some people missed it:

4 TRILLION IN 1 YEAR

Hooorah for taxing and spending us in to oblivion


Aren't just glad he's so dreamy and our Potus?

I know I am I mean really He is really good with money ain't he?



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 07:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
reply to post by beezzer
 


Correct.

From what I understand, most of the debt is owed to the American people in the form of bonds and such.

Very little of our debt is owned by foreign entities.
edit on 10-4-2013 by sheepslayer247 because: (no reason given)


The majority of debt is what they call intra government debt not so much as bonds, as there is some assets tied up in them, but the bulk of intra government debt is social programs SS,medicare. pensions,etc.
edit on 10-4-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 07:56 PM
link   
reply to post by xedocodex
 





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.


No its not:


In 2010 alone, government at all levels oversaw a transfer of over $2.2 trillion in money, goods and services. The burden of these entitlements came to slightly more than $7,200 for every person in America. Scaled against a notional family of four, the average entitlements burden for that year alone approached $29,000.


online.wsj.com...

The biggest waste we have right now are those who champion the nanny state, social engineering, you know those people who love to rob from the rich so the less fortunate can go out and buy more corporate products.

Healthcare,education,free homes,cell phones,food stamps -ALL CORPORATE PRODUCTS.



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Tis true.

Bonds do not make up the bulk of the debt. Most of it seems to come from the politicians raiding funds that were set aside for a specific reason. (IE: SS, Medicare)

That's why I don't see those programs as being a problem. They were funded without a problem but the greasers in DC got their hands on it.



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 08:03 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Interestingly. SS didn't used to be counted as part of the debt. Until Government raided it for other programs. Once that door was opened...it became part of the norm.

What I've paid into SS my whole life, has already been spent. I just have to hope enough people stay in the employed market, to get my reimbursement when I hit 65. Or, if the new push to make SS retirement hits first, for the age of 70.5.

Des



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 08:04 PM
link   
reply to post by sheepslayer247
 





That's why I don't see those programs as being a problem. They were funded without a problem but the greasers in DC got their hands on it.


I do agree with raiding those funds however those programs can never be funded the way they are presently set up.

Think about that if those programs were self funding there would be no reason to raise taxes on anyone.

S



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 08:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Destinyone
 


Yeah well you paid 6% your working life for 30 or 40 years the employer matched that and the difference is made up by the rest of us.

SS is a scam worthy of Wall Street.
edit on 10-4-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Destinyone
 


Yeah well you paid 6% your working life for 30 or 40 years the employer matched that and the difference is made up by the rest of us.

SS is a scam worthy of Wall Street.
edit on 10-4-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)


Yes, I did get scammed out of a lot of money. I'm 62 now...so, a lot of money. Here's an interesting article, 3 hours old...


Seniors would see smaller Social Security checks under Obama budget



NEW YORK (CNNMoney)
Senior citizens would see their Social Security checks shrink under President Obama's latest budget proposal.

The budget plan, released Wednesday, calls for changing the way the annual cost of living adjustments for Social Security and other federal programs are calculated. Shifting to "chained CPI" from the current inflation measure could reduce the federal debt by $230 billion, but it would also mean that seniors would get smaller increases in their Social Security payments each year.

money.cnn.com...


Des



posted on Apr, 10 2013 @ 11:27 PM
link   
The US government needs to start shopping at the shrift shop more...



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 01:49 AM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 


sorry I don't have all the accurate records,but what did 2 wars,the cost of the injured vets,and hi fuel costs,4T is a drop in the bucket.Remember the B1 bomber? the f117? so many wastes of money,aside from the deaths of military personnel.look up the f22,the f35.......yawn



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 01:58 AM
link   
Police states are expensive, what do you expect?



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 03:22 AM
link   
I notice no one seems to be counting the 85 billion PER MONTH currently rolling off the printing presses in U.S. Dollars between QE-3 and Operation Twist funding. Benanke has stated multiple times now that it will continue indefinitely at this point until some rather vague time of his perception of economic recovery.

Thats over 1 TRILLION a year in JUST that......and spending it until our economy recovers.


This is the thinking of a young child. Fix everything by having more of it and always what feels good. Never what is necessary but hard. Eat the steak and leave the veggies. That's our current leadership.

....and leadership includes that spineless jellyfish Boehner. The House is the Budget maker by Constitutional directive. Outright. Obama's is merely a suggestion and based on assumptions that aren't even realistic. Look at his last 4 budget proposals and see how well THOSE assumptions worked out. Every budget has a sheet of them, by the way. Just like the projected revenue and debt. There is a sheet showing anticipated unemployment, tax revenue and so on.....and they've never come close yet.

Who actually reads it beyond soundbites and summary pages though? (sigh) That would be work. ewwwwww.



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 03:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Destinyone
 


Des, old people don't need as much money as they used to. Obama-land will pay for just about anything and Obama-care will just kill them off earlier!

See?

Easy-peasy!



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 03:53 AM
link   
My my, how ATS has fallen into the game set forth for us to play. All I see in this thread is many prescient points that are left in the background of infighting and diatribe.

Yes, the POTUS has cut levels from 2009. There are you happy?

Yes, the government is on a spending rampage to that which the world has never seen. There are you happy?

Please stop arguing so, and discuss the actual topic without such partisian rhetoric. The country is falling apart from the inside out. All of the great minds discussing this thread should be building upon, and then acting on, not only their beliefs, but the beliefs and understandings that are being dissected here.

John Locke stated that if I have a right to my opinion, then so does the next. It is incumbent upon me to never impose myself on the next in understanding that my right equals his right.

The U.S. Government is out of control. And to the person that said "it doesn't matter the overall spending, as long as tax receipts keep up, it doesn't matter"... Simply put: It does matter. It matters that the U.S, has become the most centrally controlled nation on the face of the earth. It does matter that the United States Government is the largest organism on the face of the planet. This is the road to tyranny.

The road to hell is paved in good intentions.
edit on 11-4-2013 by IsntLifeFunny because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 04:26 AM
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.

I love how spending more than you take in when you are in a financial crisis is .... 'moving in the right direction'.

This poster accuses others of not understanding how things work.





top topics
 
19
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join