(01-14-2018 10:41 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(01-14-2018 10:00 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  remember all the rage from Mach when oblunder doubled our debt.... yeah, neither do I.

Probably the same place your rage was when Bush did it.

Yeah, not the case here. Fiscal conservatives have always complained about spending beyond revenue.

That's why we've been saying NO TAX INCREASES UNTIL YOU CUT SPENDING.

That also why we've supported the TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Party and tried to replace establishment RINOs.

C'mon, this isn't new to anybody. You're not hearing anything new with this post. You know it to be true.

But please continue to believe we're ok with deficit spending when the GOP is in office.

(01-15-2018 11:00 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(01-14-2018 10:41 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(01-14-2018 10:00 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  remember all the rage from Mach when oblunder doubled our debt.... yeah, neither do I.

Probably the same place your rage was when Bush did it.

Yeah, not the case here. Fiscal conservatives have always complained about spending beyond revenue.

That's why we've been saying NO TAX INCREASES UNTIL YOU CUT SPENDING.

That also why we've supported the TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Party and tried to replace establishment RINOs.

C'mon, this isn't new to anybody. You're not hearing anything new with this post. You know it to be true.

But please continue to believe we're ok with deficit spending when the GOP is in office.

And the only President to balance the budget is the one you despise the most. Thanks Bill.

(01-15-2018 11:32 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 11:00 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(01-14-2018 10:41 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(01-14-2018 10:00 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  remember all the rage from Mach when oblunder doubled our debt.... yeah, neither do I.

Probably the same place your rage was when Bush did it.

Yeah, not the case here. Fiscal conservatives have always complained about spending beyond revenue.
That's why we've been saying NO TAX INCREASES UNTIL YOU CUT SPENDING.
That also why we've supported the TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Party and tried to replace establishment RINOs.
C'mon, this isn't new to anybody. You're not hearing anything new with this post. You know it to be true.
But please continue to believe we're ok with deficit spending when the GOP is in office.

And the only President to balance the budget is the one you despise the most. Thanks Bill.

Well, I've said repeatedly that I wish Bill were still president, at least as long as he remained the Bill who was president. This recent version, who seems to have bought into the collectivist/redistributionist class warfare rhetoric, is less to my liking, but I would guess that if he were still in the White House he would still see things form a more center-left point of view.

And I've pretty consistently decried unbalanced budgets, no matter who was president or who controlled congress. And I've called out republicans more than once for not balancing it.

Remember what I said republicans should have done early in 2011, immediately upon retaking the house--pass Bismarck health care and either Bowles-Simpson or Domenici-Rivlin, or some combination of the best of both. I would still lean that way today. First party to go there gets my vote. So far, nothing from either one in that direction.

(01-15-2018 11:32 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 11:00 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(01-14-2018 10:41 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(01-14-2018 10:00 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  remember all the rage from Mach when oblunder doubled our debt.... yeah, neither do I.

Probably the same place your rage was when Bush did it.

Yeah, not the case here. Fiscal conservatives have always complained about spending beyond revenue.

That's why we've been saying NO TAX INCREASES UNTIL YOU CUT SPENDING.

That also why we've supported the TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Party and tried to replace establishment RINOs.

C'mon, this isn't new to anybody. You're not hearing anything new with this post. You know it to be true.

But please continue to believe we're ok with deficit spending when the GOP is in office.

And the only President to balance the budget is the one you despise the most. Thanks Bill.

Clinton was able to work with a Republican Congress, triangulation was one of his strengths and I'd say he was the best president of the last four in most areas.

But keep in mind that it's *congress* that generally takes care of the budget and until 2012 Obama had at least one of the chambers in his control, that's when most of the debt damage of O was done.

(01-15-2018 12:20 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 11:32 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 11:00 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(01-14-2018 10:41 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(01-14-2018 10:00 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  remember all the rage from Mach when oblunder doubled our debt.... yeah, neither do I.

Probably the same place your rage was when Bush did it.

Yeah, not the case here. Fiscal conservatives have always complained about spending beyond revenue.

That's why we've been saying NO TAX INCREASES UNTIL YOU CUT SPENDING.

That also why we've supported the TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Party and tried to replace establishment RINOs.

C'mon, this isn't new to anybody. You're not hearing anything new with this post. You know it to be true.

But please continue to believe we're ok with deficit spending when the GOP is in office.

And the only President to balance the budget is the one you despise the most. Thanks Bill.

Clinton was able to work with a Republican Congress, triangulation was one of his strengths and I'd say he was the best president of the last four in most areas.

But keep in mind that it's *congress* that generally takes care of the budget and until 2012 Obama had at least one of the chambers in his control, that's when most of the debt damage of O was done.

anyone in office would have amassed massive deficits from 2008-2012.

(01-15-2018 01:29 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 12:20 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 11:32 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 11:00 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(01-14-2018 10:41 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  Probably the same place your rage was when Bush did it.

Yeah, not the case here. Fiscal conservatives have always complained about spending beyond revenue.

That's why we've been saying NO TAX INCREASES UNTIL YOU CUT SPENDING.

That also why we've supported the TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Party and tried to replace establishment RINOs.

C'mon, this isn't new to anybody. You're not hearing anything new with this post. You know it to be true.

But please continue to believe we're ok with deficit spending when the GOP is in office.

And the only President to balance the budget is the one you despise the most. Thanks Bill.

Clinton was able to work with a Republican Congress, triangulation was one of his strengths and I'd say he was the best president of the last four in most areas.

But keep in mind that it's *congress* that generally takes care of the budget and until 2012 Obama had at least one of the chambers in his control, that's when most of the debt damage of O was done.

anyone in office would have amassed massive deficits from 2008-2012.

He screwed up the stimulus... He poured it into propping up state bureaucracies and as a result the growth during that period was *pathetic*. He had high debt and low growth, no excuse for both.

(01-15-2018 01:33 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 01:29 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 12:20 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 11:32 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 11:00 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  Yeah, not the case here. Fiscal conservatives have always complained about spending beyond revenue.
That's why we've been saying NO TAX INCREASES UNTIL YOU CUT SPENDING.
That also why we've supported the TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Party and tried to replace establishment RINOs.
C'mon, this isn't new to anybody. You're not hearing anything new with this post. You know it to be true.
But please continue to believe we're ok with deficit spending when the GOP is in office.

And the only President to balance the budget is the one you despise the most. Thanks Bill.

Clinton was able to work with a Republican Congress, triangulation was one of his strengths and I'd say he was the best president of the last four in most areas.
But keep in mind that it's *congress* that generally takes care of the budget and until 2012 Obama had at least one of the chambers in his control, that's when most of the debt damage of O was done.

anyone in office would have amassed massive deficits from 2008-2012.

He screwed up the stimulus... He poured it into propping up state bureaucracies and as a result the growth during that period was *pathetic*. He had high debt and low growth, no excuse for both.

We injected 5% of GDP into the economy annually for 8 years, between "stimulus" spending and "quantitative easing," and got 2% growth. WTF is wrong with that picture.

My own belief--The Keynesian multiplier no longer works, because just as the old man himself predicted, when you stimulate demand over and over, without bringing supply back into equilibrium, eventually demand "stimulus" no longer works. Neo-Keynesianism is basically a political mechanism designed to present buying votes as an economic theory.

(01-15-2018 01:33 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 01:29 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 12:20 PM)Bull_Is_Back Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 11:32 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 11:00 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  Yeah, not the case here. Fiscal conservatives have always complained about spending beyond revenue.

That's why we've been saying NO TAX INCREASES UNTIL YOU CUT SPENDING.

That also why we've supported the TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Party and tried to replace establishment RINOs.

C'mon, this isn't new to anybody. You're not hearing anything new with this post. You know it to be true.

But please continue to believe we're ok with deficit spending when the GOP is in office.

And the only President to balance the budget is the one you despise the most. Thanks Bill.

Clinton was able to work with a Republican Congress, triangulation was one of his strengths and I'd say he was the best president of the last four in most areas.

But keep in mind that it's *congress* that generally takes care of the budget and until 2012 Obama had at least one of the chambers in his control, that's when most of the debt damage of O was done.

anyone in office would have amassed massive deficits from 2008-2012.

He screwed up the stimulus... He poured it into propping up state bureaucracies and as a result the growth during that period was *pathetic*. He had high debt and low growth, no excuse for both.

1/3 of the stimulus went to tax cuts... 1/3 of the stimulus went to small business... and the remainder went to projects.

the deficit was not a singular result of the stimulus in as much as it was combination of the necessary increases in spending that occur as a result of a massive economic event, as well as the decrease in revenue. Revenues dropped 20% during those years.

Since we are a global economy and dependent upon the EU, China, SE Asia and South America...how were the world economies fairing during those years?

(01-15-2018 11:32 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 11:00 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(01-14-2018 10:41 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(01-14-2018 10:00 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  remember all the rage from Mach when oblunder doubled our debt.... yeah, neither do I.

Probably the same place your rage was when Bush did it.

Yeah, not the case here. Fiscal conservatives have always complained about spending beyond revenue.

That's why we've been saying NO TAX INCREASES UNTIL YOU CUT SPENDING.

That also why we've supported the TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Party and tried to replace establishment RINOs.

C'mon, this isn't new to anybody. You're not hearing anything new with this post. You know it to be true.

But please continue to believe we're ok with deficit spending when the GOP is in office.

And the only President to balance the budget is the one you despise the most. Thanks Bill.

lol... just curious how you know that I despise Clinton the most?

The problem is that we are spending too much money defending other countries, but not spend that money wisely by putting troops on the border to defend this country against the corrupt Mexican military and police officers who are bought and paid for by the drug lords who fire shots at our citizens, police officers and border patrol agents. This could scare away illegals and make Mexico think twice about cleaning up their military and police force, and target the drug cartels like they are ISIS.

(01-15-2018 09:43 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(01-15-2018 12:21 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(01-14-2018 11:41 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(01-14-2018 11:38 AM)usmbacker Wrote:  

Quote:As part of the broader economic legacy of President Barack Obama, from jobs to the stock market, one of the most notable changes has been the increase in the national debt.
Based on quarterly data released by the US Treasury, the debt at the end of 2008 — just before Obama took office — stood at roughly $10,699,805,000,000.
As of the third quarter of 2016, the most recent data available, the debt as Obama is set to leave office stood at $19,573,445,000,000.
Based on the website USdebtclock.com, which extrapolates the US national debt in real time based on committed government spending, the debt will be roughly $19.97 trillion when President-elect Donald Trump takes office on Friday.
Thus, the national debt under Obama will have grown by about $9 trillion, or an increase of 86%.

http://www.businessinsider.com/national-...ama-2017-1

Why do y’all continue to pretend the collapse of our financial system did not occur in 2008?

And your point is?

And BTW, who is pretending that the 2008 recession did not occur in 2008? Collapse of our financial system may be bit hyperbolic, and what happened was avoidable.

Because the revenue shortfalls in the years after the cratering of the economy played as much a role in creating the "Obama" debt as the money spent trying to keep the boat afloat after the collapse. Whethter the collapse was avoidable or not is not the point. We have the luxury now of debating whether the situation was as bad as it was projected because the country did manage to pull out of it.

If the deficit explodes as a result of the latest tax cut... and it will; and we have a similar financial collapse, which is possible, what happens then?

it's all due to interest and ZERO spending....

here's today's clocking site.....

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

it's nothing more than a variable at this point.....the fear is when does the law of diminishing completely take over....

the key is retaining value relative to housing, infrastructure, goods, etc.....

everything else is semantics.....

(01-15-2018 03:08 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  The problem is that we are spending too much money defending other countries, but not spend that money wisely by putting troops on the border to defend this country against the corrupt Mexican military and police officers who are bought and paid for by the drug lords who fire shots at our citizens, police officers and border patrol agents. This could scare away illegals and make Mexico think twice about cleaning up their military and police force, and target the drug cartels like they are ISIS.

I like the way you think. Last time I went to Mexico, about 3 months ago. I had just bought a new car. Well the Mexican BP was telling me that my vin number did not my license and registration sticker. I was trying to ask him how that could be if I just got them a week ago from the state. He was asking if I had anything else that could help with the problem, and kept insinuated like he wanted money. Not until my family started to speak up, that he backed away and let us go through. Its not the first time this has happen to me. I am just glad that I dont live in that shithole country anymore.