Americans Favor Bush Over Obama

Dr. Jon

Well-Known Member
you're right, obama did inherit the largest deficit of all time, and has cut the deficit more than any president, ever.

thanks, obama!

this is why obama's legacy will be much greater than shrub's.
What is it that we mean by "cut the deficit"? If you mean to imply that he has somehow reduced the national debt, that is simply a false statement, as even a modest effort at research will show. If what you mean is that he has cut the GROWTH RATE of the debt, or the organic deficit contained in the current annual budget, there is some truth to that, but not a lot. Keep in mind that current deficit spending eventually runs into the legal cap of the debt ceiling. You may recall the federal government shut down some time ago as a result of this. If you are meaning to compliment the Obama administration for reducing deficit spending to ONLY $492 Billion in 2014, then I suppose you may have a point. Personally, I don't find that worthy of much in the way of compliments, but that's just me. Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I still think a Billion dollars is a lot of money, let alone $492 of them.

It is true that the Obama administration has significantly reduced the annual deficit - partially due to legal caps on deficit spending. However, the number you are citing - "cut the deficit more than any president, ever" - is not a comparison between Obama and previous presidents, but Obama and HIMSELF. The largest annual budget deficits were in the early years of the Obama administration. In 2009, for example, the budget deficit was $1.4 Trillion. Nearly $1.3 Trillion in 2010 and in 2011. If you mean to say that the Obama administration has reduced the amount they are running us into the hole by the largest amount ever, that's true - but only when compared to the first years under Obama.

If I spend $1,000 more this year then I earn, and do the same next year, and in the 3rd year I only spend $330 more than I earn, I hardly think I'm entitled to a pat on the back, even though I cut my budget deficit by 67%. I still spent more than I earned, and the 67% reduction is only a valid figure because of the massive deficit spending in the earlier years. Again, figures and statistics can be misleading.
 

Dr. Jon

Well-Known Member
you're right, obama did inherit the largest deficit of all time, and has cut the deficit more than any president, ever.

thanks, obama!

this is why obama's legacy will be much greater than shrub's.
It's also worth pointing out that if Obama inherited the largest national debt of all time (which is true), he will only have that distinction until the next election. The president who follows Obama will inherit a MUCH larger debt, since it has increased every year under Obama.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
I have lost any faith that Republicans are any better than Democrats, and vice versa, but the comment that "it" is better than it has been in decades troubles me. Unemployment and underemployment remain huge problems. The Social Security Disability trust fund is scheduled to go bankrupt in October, resulting in major financial burdens for tens of thousands of Americans. The Social Security "Old Age and Retirement" trust fund is projected to be bankrupt in barely a decade, and that is under the chronically optimistic viewpoint of the Government Accounting Office. The GAO, itself, acknowledges the bankruptcy - pardon me, "income shortfall" in modern political parlance - may occur sooner. We cannot even imagine the financial crisis that will cause. The national debt is a staggering $18.2 TRILLION. That works out to nearly $60,000 for every man, woman and newborn child in the country. National debt as a share of Gross Domestic Product has reached levels never previously seen, or even approached, in peacetime. The government has chosen to keep interest rates artificially depressed by using "quantitative easing" - which, to us laymen, means they just crank up the presses and print more money. Experts from both sides of the political aisle agree that a likely outcome of "quantitative easing" will eventually have to be a massive increase in the inflation rate. The government is just hoping the economy boosts high enough soon enough that none of us notice when interest rates hit levels like those in some 3rd world dictatorship. The part that staggers me is that all this information is well known to anyone in government, and in 8 years of Obama, no one has even discussed it, let alone done anything about it.

I am just as disgusted that nothing was done about these issues under previous administrations, too, I am simply pointing out that a statement like "better than it has been in decades" is an oversimplification, and neglects to consider some very serious problems still facing our country.
An excellent summary of our current politico-economic crisis, and the willful negligence exhibited by our political class- because they know which side their campaign funding bread is buttered on.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
What is it that we mean by "cut the deficit"? If you mean to imply that he has somehow reduced the national debt, that is simply a false statement
are you fucking retarded?

the debt and the deficit are two different things.

by "cut the deficit", i mean to say obama has cut the deficit.

"cut the deficit more than any president, ever" - is not a comparison between Obama and previous presidents
yes it is.

can you name any other president who has cut the deficit by over a trillion dollars, like obama has?

The largest annual budget deficits were in the early years of the Obama administration. In 2009, for example, the budget deficit was $1.4 Trillion. Nearly $1.3 Trillion in 2010 and in 2011.
would you have preferred a policy so contractionary that it sent us back into recession instead?

to cut the deficit like that while getting us out of a major recession is quite an accomplishment. all previous presidents (especially reagan) got us out of recessions through increased deficit spending and hiring more government employees. obama did the opposite.

that's fucking impressive if you have a working mass of gray matter up above.

not everyone in this exchange has that though, apparently.

:lol:




Again, figures and statistics can be misleading.
no, they can't.

but the person who presents them, and how they choose to present them may be.

for the record, i think you are a long winded dumbass.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
It's also worth pointing out that if Obama inherited the largest national debt of all time (which is true), he will only have that distinction until the next election. The president who follows Obama will inherit a MUCH larger debt, since it has increased every year under Obama.
again, i have to ask, which other president in the history of the united states has gotten us out of a recession while decreasing deficit spending and reducing the number of government jobs?

furthermore, would you have preferred to see a fiscal policy so short-sightedly focused on eliminating the deficit that the contractionary nature of such a policy would have sent our economy back into a recession?

also, how fucking dumb are you? you seem pretty dumb to me.
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
i would never want go back to that time..i shudder to think.
Me too. I used to put NPR on in the morning to listen to news while getting ready for work. I stopped doing this during when Abu Ghraib hit the news, it was just too dismal.
 

Darth Vapour

Well-Known Member
Reality television has ruined our minds.
it sure has infomercials lol clap on clap off haha
As far as i am concerned you are all being led to believe its better when its as far from the truth. how many more people are living paycheck to paycheck and running up there debt are your debts increasing or decreasing ??? Do you feel more secure now or back 20 years ago when people were actually living the american dream
 

Darth Vapour

Well-Known Member
again, i have to ask, which other president in the history of the united states has gotten us out of a recession while decreasing deficit spending and reducing the number of government jobs?

furthermore, would you have preferred to see a fiscal policy so short-sightedly focused on eliminating the deficit that the contractionary nature of such a policy would have sent our economy back into a recession?

also, how fucking dumb are you? you seem pretty dumb to me.
i can think of one that was going to but the FBI turned there assassins from shooting Castro to shooting KENNEDY
 

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
And all BS lets not forget how the government admits to manipulating stock markets ..
Is it really better ???
The federal government hit a new milestone Friday: The total federal debt now tallies more than $18 trillion.

Just six years ago when President Obama took office, total debt stood at $10.6 trillion, which means it now has increased by almost $8 trillion—roughly 70 percent—during his tenure as president.

The surge in total debt, which has hit 103 percent of gross domestic product, comes at a time when politicians are championing falling deficits and claiming them as evidence that government spending is under control.

Although deficits have been falling since 2009—when they were at record levels with a dearth of revenue to offset massive spending—they don’t tell the full story. This past year the government still spent $486 billion more than it took in. And the annual deficit is expected to reach trillion-dollar levels again within 10 years, further accelerating the growth of the national debt and interest payments required to service it.

But hey lets not stop here how is USA road infrastructure doing ?? health care change ??? at all or is it more people not on health care anymore ,, what about actual GDP what is USA making other then worthless money ??? what
where are the jobs opening up in the US ??? construction ?? or fast food ??? whats the time line from a person losing a job to getting another ???
and most importantly whats the education system doing ??? is it much better then 10 years ago ?? are them grds getting work right out of school ??
When you copy and paste something that someone else has written, you should link the article or give credit to the author.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
it sure has infomercials lol clap on clap off haha
As far as i am concerned you are all being led to believe its better when its as far from the truth. how many more people are living paycheck to paycheck and running up there debt are your debts increasing or decreasing ??? Do you feel more secure now or back 20 years ago when people were actually living the american dream
I certainly did not feel more secure- fiscally or otherwise- when either Bush was in orifice.
 

see4

Well-Known Member
And all BS lets not forget how the government admits to manipulating stock markets ..
Is it really better ???
The federal government hit a new milestone Friday: The total federal debt now tallies more than $18 trillion.

Just six years ago when President Obama took office, total debt stood at $10.6 trillion, which means it now has increased by almost $8 trillion—roughly 70 percent—during his tenure as president.

The surge in total debt, which has hit 103 percent of gross domestic product, comes at a time when politicians are championing falling deficits and claiming them as evidence that government spending is under control.

Although deficits have been falling since 2009—when they were at record levels with a dearth of revenue to offset massive spending—they don’t tell the full story. This past year the government still spent $486 billion more than it took in. And the annual deficit is expected to reach trillion-dollar levels again within 10 years, further accelerating the growth of the national debt and interest payments required to service it.

But hey lets not stop here how is USA road infrastructure doing ?? health care change ??? at all or is it more people not on health care anymore ,, what about actual GDP what is USA making other then worthless money ??? what
where are the jobs opening up in the US ??? construction ?? or fast food ??? whats the time line from a person losing a job to getting another ???
and most importantly whats the education system doing ??? is it much better then 10 years ago ?? are them grds getting work right out of school ??
It's a wonderful thing that you're in no position to make critical decisions.

Ted Cruz 2016!!!
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
it sure has infomercials lol clap on clap off haha
As far as i am concerned you are all being led to believe its better when its as far from the truth. how many more people are living paycheck to paycheck and running up there debt are your debts increasing or decreasing ??? Do you feel more secure now or back 20 years ago when people were actually living the american dream
I don't think you will get much disagreement if you are saying that the middle class and working poor are worse off today than 20 years ago.
 

Dr. Jon

Well-Known Member
Uncle Buck, are you always this hostile and insulting with people who don't agree with your viewpoint? That must make it a very unpleasant world to live in.

And here I thought we could have an intelligent, adult discussion involving different views. Silly me.
 

Darth Vapour

Well-Known Member
A dangerous new trend is the successful manipulation of the financial markets by the Federal Reserve, other central banks, private banks, and the US Treasury. The Federal Reserve reduced real interest rates on US government debt obligations first to zero and then pushed real interest rates into negative territory. Today the government charges you for the privilege of purchasing its bonds.

People pay to park their money in Treasury debt obligations, because they do not trust the banks and they know that the government can print the money to pay off the bonds. Today Treasury bond investors pay a fee in order to guarantee that they will receive the nominal face value (minus the fee) of their investment in government debt instruments.

The fee is paid in a premium, which raises the cost of the debt instrument above its face value and is paid again in accepting a negative rate of return, as the interest rate is less than the inflation rate.

Think about this for a minute. Allegedly the US is experiencing economic recovery. Normally with rising economic activity interest rates rise as consumers and investors bid for credit. But not in this “recovery.”

Normally an economic recovery produces rising consumer spending, rising profits, and more investment. But what we experience is flat and declining consumer spending as jobs are offshored and retail stores close. Profits result from labor cost savings from employee layoffs.

The stock market is high because corporations are the biggest purchases of stock. Buying back their own stock supports or raises the share price, enabling executives and boards to sell their shares or cash in their options at a profitable price. The cash that Quantitative Easing has given to the mega-banks leaves ample room for speculating in stocks, thus pushing up the price despite the absence of fundamentals that would support a rising stock market.

In other words, in America today there are no free financial markets. The markets are rigged by the Federal Reserve’s Quantitative Easing, by gold price manipulation, by the Treasury’s Plunge Protection Team and Exchange Stabilization Fund, and by the big private banks.

Allegedly, QE is over, but it is not. The Fed intends to roll over the interest and principle from its bloated $4.5 trillion bond portfolio into purchases of more bonds, and the banks intend to fill in the gaps by using the $2.6 trillion in their cash on deposit with the Fed to purchase bonds. QE has morphed, not ended. The money the Fed paid the banks for bonds will now be used by the banks to support the bond price by purchasing bonds.

Normally when massive amounts of debt and money are created the currency collapses, but the dollar has been strengthening. The dollar gains strength from the
rigging of the gold price in the futures market. The Federal Reserve’s agents, the bullion banks, print paper futures contracts representing many tonnes of gold and dump them them into the market during periods of light or nonexistent trading. This drives down the gold price despite rising demand for the physical metal. This manipulation is done in order to counteract the effect of the expansion of money and debt on the dollar’s exchange value. A declining dollar price of gold makes the dollar look strong.

The dollar also gains the appearance of strength from debt monetization by the Bank of Japan and the European Central Bank. The Bank of Japan’s Quantitative Easing program is even larger than the Fed’s. Even Switzerland is rigging the price of the Swiss franc. Since all currencies are inflating, the dollar does not decline in exchange value.

As Japan is Washington’s vassal, it is conceivable that some of the money being printed by the Bank of Japan will be used to purchase US Treasuries, thus taking the place along with purchases by the large US banks of the Fed’s QE.

The large private US and UK banks are also manipulating markets hand over fist. Remember the scandal over the banks fixing the LIBOR rate (the London Interbank Borrowing Rate) and the opening gold price on the London exchange. Now the banks have been caught rigging currency markets with algorithms developed to manipulate foreign exchange markets.

When the banks get caught in felonies, they avoid prosecution by paying a fine. You try doing that.

The government even manipulates economic statistics in order to paint a rosy economic picture that sustains economic confidence. GDP growth is exaggerated by understating inflation. High unemployment is swept under the table by not counting discouraged workers as unemployed. We are told we are enjoying economic recovery and have an improving housing market. Yet the facts are that almost half of 25 year old Americans have been forced to return to live with their parents, and 30% of 30 year olds are back with their parents. Since 2006 the home ownership rate of 30 year old Americans has collapsed.
.
The repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act during the Clinton regime allowed the big banks to gamble with their depositors’ money. The Dodd-Frank Act tried to stop some of this by requiring the banks-turned-gambling-casinos to carry on their gambling in subsidiaries with no access to deposits in the depository institution. If the banks gamble with depositors money, the banks’ losses are covered by FDIC, and in the case of bank failure, bail-in provisions could give the banks access to depositors’ funds. With the banks still protected by being “too big to fail,” whether Dodd-Frank would succeed in protecting depositors when a subsidiary’s failure pulls down the entire bank is unclear.

The sharp practices in which banks engage today are risky. Why gamble with their own money if they can gamble with depositors’ money. The banks led by Citigroup have lobbied hard to overturn the provision in Dodd-Frank that puts depositors’ money out of their reach as backup for certain types of troubled financial instruments, with apparently only Senator Elizabeth Warren and a few others opposing them. Senator Warren is outgunned as Citigroup controls the US Treasury and the Federal Reserve.

The falling oil price has brought concern that oil derivatives are in jeopardy. Citigroup has a provision in the omnibus appropriations bill that shifts the liability for Citigroup’s credit default swaps to depositors and taxpayers. It was only six years ago that Citigroup was bailed out to the tune of a half trillion dollars. Already Citigroup is back for more while nothing whatsoever is done to bail the American people out of their hardships caused by Citigroup and the other financial gangsters.

What we are experiencing is not a repeat of the past. The ability or, rather, the audacity of the US government itself to manipulate the major financial markets is new. Can this new trend continue? The government is supposed to be the enforcer of laws against market manipulation but is itself manipulating the markets.

Governments and economists take their hats off to free markets. Yet, the markets are rigged, not free. How long can stocks stay up in a lackluster or declining economy? How long can bonds pay negative real interest rates when debt and money are rising. How long can bullion prices be manipulated down when the world’s demand for gold exceeds the annual production?

For as long as governments and banks can rig the markets.

The manipulations are dangerous. Manipulations blow a bigger bubble economy, and manipulations are now being used by Washington as an act of war by driving down the exchange value of the Russian ruble.

If every time the stock market tries to correct and adjust to the real economic situation, the plunge protection team or some government “stabilization” entity stops the correction by purchasing S&P futures, unrealistic values are perpetuated.

The price of gold is not determined in the physical market but in the futures market where contracts are settled in cash. If every time the demand for gold pushes up the price, the Federal Reserve or its bullion bank agents dump massive amounts of uncovered futures contracts in the futures market and drive down the price of gold, the result is to subsidize the gold purchases of Russia, China, and India. The artificially low gold price also artificially inflates the value of the US dollar.

The Federal Reserve’s manipulation of the bond market has driven bond prices so high that purchasers receive a zero or negative return on their investment. At the present time fear of the safety of bank deposits makes people willing to pay a fee in order to have the protection of the government’s ability to print money in order to redeem its bonds. A number of events could end the tolerance of zero or negative real interest rates. The Federal Reserve’s policy has the bond market positioned for collapse.

The US government, perhaps surprised at the ease at which all financial markets can be rigged, is now rigging, or permitting large hedge funds and perhaps George Soros, to drive down the exchange value of the Russian ruble by massive short-selling in the currency market. On December 15 the ruble was driven down 19%.

Just as there is no economic reason for the price of gold to decline in the futures market when the demand for physical gold is rising, there is no economic reason for the ruble to suddenly loose much of its exchange value. Unlike the US, which has a massive trade deficit, Russia has a trade surplus. Unlike the US economy, the Russian economy has not been offshored. Russia has just completed large energy and trade deals with China, Turkey, and India.

If economic forces were determining outcomes, it would be the dollar that is losing exchange value, not the ruble.

The illegal economic sanctions that Washington has decreed on Russia appear to be doing more harm to Europe and US energy companies than to Russia. The impact on
Russia of the American attack on the ruble is unclear, as the suppression of the ruble’s value is artificial.
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
The turning point for Americans dam who could not see that coming lol

Actually, a lot of people didn't like Reagan. He garnered 50.75% of the vote to win his first term and 59% - a landslide by US standards for his second term. Still, I would say that at least 40% of this nation saw what was coming. We lost the elections. Elections matter.
 
Top