Lucky... 0 #26 July 21, 2010 QuoteQuote In the present, Siena has Obama ranked as #15, your fascist leader at #18 and falling. As the debt becomes more of an issue, your hero will fall more and more. http://www.upi.com/Top_News/International/2010/07/01/Obama-No-15-in-presidential-rankings/UPI-29711278023634/ Ranking Obama with others in history, 18 months into office, makes as much sense as giving him a Nobel Prize before he took a single action....oh right. The NPP was for us, well, not you. It was for finally not electing a fascist, imperialistic POS. BTW, presidents are ranked and revised as soon as they become pres and for the rest of history, sorry you don't like it. Furthermore, look at teh unemp rate, market and GDP and you'll understand why he has a fairly high ranking. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #27 July 21, 2010 QuoteQuote The two president's popularity comparisons are the only thing that can be paired. Reagan inherited a flat but stable economy and everyone stops reading at this point... And this is where everyone sees you have nothign to add, as usual. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
winsor 236 #28 July 21, 2010 QuoteQuote The two president's popularity comparisons are the only thing that can be paired. Reagan inherited a flat but stable economy and everyone stops reading at this point... Who started? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #29 July 21, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote In the present, Siena has Obama ranked as #15, your fascist leader at #18 and falling. As the debt becomes more of an issue, your hero will fall more and more. http://www.upi.com/Top_News/International/2010/07/01/Obama-No-15-in-presidential-rankings/UPI-29711278023634/ Ranking Obama with others in history, 18 months into office, makes as much sense as giving him a Nobel Prize before he took a single action....oh right. The NPP was for us, well, not you. It was for finally not electing a fascist, imperialistic POS. BTW, presidents are ranked and revised as soon as they become pres and for the rest of history, sorry you don't like it. Furthermore, look at teh unemp rate, market and GDP and you'll understand why he has a fairly high ranking. I would? Those metrics aren't great, and the deficit is in another world. Again, no actual historian would rank Obama. Most wouldn't rank Bush either, and Clinton remains in the realm of current events. You can't measure Obama on health care reform that has yet to take effect, or on the economy which could slide right back down in the debt. Or wall street reform that could be just as ineffective as SOX was. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #30 July 23, 2010 QuoteFor reasons which defy logic, many on the right consider Reagan one of the greatest presidents. I thought this was interesting. For what he did and what he stood for, not for winning a popularity contest. "Reagan had one advantage in that he had a clear ideology, so his supporters would vote for him because he represented their values," "There is no similarity between what Reagan did to help the ailing economy in the early 1980s versus what Obama did between 2008 and 2010. Reagan cut taxes. Obama spent nearly a trillion dollars to kick start the economy." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #31 July 23, 2010 QuoteAs the debt becomes more of an issue, your hero will fall more and more Obama is doing more to add to the debt than anyone ever. So I disagree with your "theory". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #32 July 23, 2010 Quote Obama spent nearly a trillion dollars to kick start the economy There's no gas in the motor. Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #33 July 23, 2010 I just shake my head when you try to compare the two. There is so much more under the surface than the economy. Many have forgotten what it was like to be an american citizen in the late 70's and early 80's. It wasn't good. You've forgotten interest rates... You forgot the unemployment You forgot the hostages You forgot the bungled attempt to free them You forgot the gas lines You forgot 3 mile island and Love Canal Compare Reagan and Obama...that's a long ways off. You've obviously forgotten.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #34 July 23, 2010 You've forgotten TRIPLING the national debt.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #35 July 23, 2010 Quote You've forgotten TRIPLING the national debt. Reagain increase in debt, roughly 1.7T in 8 years. Obama increase in debt, 2.6T in 18 months. 156% in 18% of the time. Given no change in Obama's current rate of spending (fat chance), in 4 years he'll raise the deficity by 7T. In 8 years, 14T. Then there's the TRIPLING of the deficit...and no relief in sight.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #36 July 23, 2010 QuoteQuote You've forgotten TRIPLING the national debt. Reagain increase in debt, roughly 1.7T in 8 years. Obama increase in debt, 2.6T in 18 months. 156% in 18% of the time. Given no change in Obama's current rate of spending (fat chance), in 4 years he'll raise the deficity by 7T. In 8 years, 14T. You need to account for inflation, so that 1.7T needs to be doubled (110% from 1984 midpoint to 2010) to ~3.6T. 2009 was 1.42T, so it seems unlikely to be 7T in 4 years. Closer to 5, which is still rather tragic, but 28% less than your projection. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #37 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuote You've forgotten TRIPLING the national debt. Reagain increase in debt, roughly 1.7T in 8 years. Obama increase in debt, 2.6T in 18 months. . As is usual with your calculations you completely ignore inflation. a 1988 $US is NOT the same as a 2010 $US. Since you are concerned with rapidity, the most rapid increase was under GWB, $1T in a 4 month period.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #38 July 24, 2010 QuoteUsing 2010 dollars, the debt in 1981 was 2394B. In 1989, it was 5029B. The difference is 2634B. Slightly more than doubling the debt, not the tripling that kallend claims. Quote2009 was 1.42T, so it seems unlikely to be 7T in 4 years. Closer to 5, which is still rather tragic, but 28% less than your projection. Actually, Obama's debt increase to date (as of 7/20) is 2.6T - a rate of 4.8B/day. I'm sure you can do the rest of the math. Reagan doubled the debt in 8 years, Obama will double the debt (given current spending) in 8 years - guess they really ARE alike. Sucks for the usual kallend/lucky arguments, though.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #39 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote You've forgotten TRIPLING the national debt. Reagain increase in debt, roughly 1.7T in 8 years. Obama increase in debt, 2.6T in 18 months. . As is usual with your calculations you completely ignore inflation. a 1988 $US is NOT the same as a 2010 $US. Since you are concerned with rapidity, the most rapid increase was under GWB, $1T in a 4 month period. Funny how you never have a problem quoting raw numbers when they go YOUR way, perfesser - I wonder why that is?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #40 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteAs the debt becomes more of an issue, your hero will fall more and more Obama is doing more to add to the debt than anyone ever. So I disagree with your "theory". The theory is appearing today as we write. Obama inherited an economy on the verge of collapse, an economy that ran the unemp rate up 3.4% in THE ONE SINGLE YEAR BEFORE HE TOOK IT, an economy that had a GDP that was negative 4 of the last 5 Q's before he received it, an economy that had a massive mounting deficit of > 1T just the previous year. And you want to blame Obama for it? We get it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #41 July 24, 2010 Quote Quote Obama spent nearly a trillion dollars to kick start the economy There's no gas in the motor. NO? http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdp_glance.htm http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?data_tool=latest_numbers&series_id=LNS14000000 http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=^DJI WOW, you're really smart. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #42 July 24, 2010 QuoteI just shake my head when you try to compare the two. There is so much more under the surface than the economy. QuoteMany have forgotten what it was like to be an american citizen in the late 70's and early 80's. It wasn't good. WHY? QuoteYou've forgotten interest rates... Yep, Reagan/Volkers contracted the money supply to fix that driving the unemp rate from 7/5% to 10.8%, the highest then or since the Great Depression. QuoteYou forgot the unemployment Inherited a fairly stable 7.5%, drove it to 10.8%. QuoteYou forgot the hostages The Algiers Accord were brokered the day before Reagan's inauguration, so the deal was made before your favorite diaper-wearing guy took office: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algiers_Accords QuoteYou forgot the bungled attempt to free them That compared to the Beirut barracks bombings and Reagan's reaction exactly how???? QuoteYou forgot the gas lines OPEC had been squeezing us before Carter. I haven't forgotten the 4.25/gal gas prices, have you? QuoteYou forgot 3 mile island and Love Canal 3 mile island is who's fault and why? This wasn't Chernobil; what's your point? QuoteCompare Reagan and Obama...that's a long ways off. True, Reagan took a stable debt and tripled it, Obama inherited a COMPLETE MESS and has done some good toward it. QuoteYou've obviously forgotten. You've obviously never known. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #43 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuote You've forgotten TRIPLING the national debt. QuoteReagain increase in debt, roughly 1.7T in 8 years. Is that a typo or a play on the debt gain? According to the chart the debt was: 09/29/1989 2,857,430,960,187.32 09/30/1988 2,602,337,712,041.16 09/30/1987 2,350,276,890,953.00 09/30/1986 2,125,302,616,658.42 09/30/1985 * 1,823,103,000,000.00 09/30/1984 * 1,572,266,000,000.00 09/30/1983 * 1,377,210,000,000.00 09/30/1982 * 1,142,034,000,000.00 09/30/1981 * 997,855,000,000.00 09/30/1980 * 907,701,000,000.00 http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo4.htm Since they use gov fiscal years, we can split the diff as an average. Reagan inherited - 952 B Reagan left - 2.7T So actually it was closer to 1.8T As Kallend said, 1980's dollars vs 2010 dollars. Now, let's look at trends, if a truck is coming at you at 80MPH (high debt accrual already established) it is impossible to stop it in a short time and the momentum will carry it. If a truck is coming at 5 mPH (slow debt accrual) you can shut it off quickly. You act as tho Reagan's inherited economy was the same as Obama's. QuoteObama increase in debt, 2.6T in 18 months. Yea and GWB's fiscal year Sep 30, 07 to 08 = over 1 trillion dollars added to the debt AND THAT DIDN'T EVEN INCLUDE THE TARP MONEY FOR FUCK'S SAKE. Even worse than the spending are the receipts that are so hammered that that's the biggest cause of the debt/deficit accrual. Quote156% in 18% of the time. The debt increased 300B under Carter, fasist pig Ronnies predecessor. The first 18 months of your fascist pig's office the debt increased 190B, > 60% of CARTER'S ENTIRE GAIN USING LIKE DOLLARS, not dishonestly using dollars 30 years apart as you and trying to make a point. And rememebr, since Carter left a very civil debt picture with very modest gain, it ook your fascist leader a but to get the debt machine going; THE FOLLOWING 12 MONTHS SHOWED A 235B INCREASE IN THE DEBT. Again, 1980 dollars. Your point is ridiculous. QuoteGiven no change in Obama's current rate of spending (fat chance), in 4 years he'll raise the deficity by 7T. In 8 years, 14T. What has he done with spending? Remember, it's the receipts that are the killer, with your boy leaving them in the toilet the way he did, recovery centers around increasing receipts which is why tax increases are needed. QuoteThen there's the TRIPLING of the deficit...and no relief in sight. Right, he has what he inherited; any argument? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #44 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote You've forgotten TRIPLING the national debt. Reagain increase in debt, roughly 1.7T in 8 years. Obama increase in debt, 2.6T in 18 months. . As is usual with your calculations you completely ignore inflation. a 1988 $US is NOT the same as a 2010 $US. Since you are concerned with rapidity, the most rapid increase was under GWB, $1T in a 4 month period. Funny how you never have a problem quoting raw numbers when they go YOUR way, perfesser - I wonder why that is? Yea, whatever; hardly. Are you so dishonest to think we can use 1980's dollars = 2010 dollars? Are you honest enough to admit Obama inherited a total POS? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #45 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteUsing 2010 dollars, the debt in 1981 was 2394B. In 1989, it was 5029B. The difference is 2634B. Slightly more than doubling the debt, not the tripling that kallend claims. Quote2009 was 1.42T, so it seems unlikely to be 7T in 4 years. Closer to 5, which is still rather tragic, but 28% less than your projection. Actually, Obama's debt increase to date (as of 7/20) is 2.6T - a rate of 4.8B/day. I'm sure you can do the rest of the math. QuoteReagan doubled the debt in 8 years, No, Reagan virtually tripled the bebt, seee if you can follow along. 952B to 2.7T = 1.8T additon = 1.89% addition, or he left 289% of what he inherited. Now if you say he added double to the existing debt, I'll agree. QuoteObama will double the debt (given current spending) in 8 years - guess they really ARE alike. Obama hasn't changed spending, he will let the tax cuts expire and taxes will increase, hence receipts will increase and the deficit will fall and rich tears will also fall. QuoteSucks for the usual kallend/lucky arguments, though. No, you're just being simply dishonest. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #46 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote You've forgotten TRIPLING the national debt. Reagain increase in debt, roughly 1.7T in 8 years. Obama increase in debt, 2.6T in 18 months. 156% in 18% of the time. Given no change in Obama's current rate of spending (fat chance), in 4 years he'll raise the deficity by 7T. In 8 years, 14T. You need to account for inflation, so that 1.7T needs to be doubled (110% from 1984 midpoint to 2010) to ~3.6T. 2009 was 1.42T, so it seems unlikely to be 7T in 4 years. Closer to 5, which is still rather tragic, but 28% less than your projection. Not counting for a massive debt flurry Obama inherited vs Reagan's stable debt picture and already high tax system rendering descent receipts. Obama has to fix the economic situation and then raise taxes to increase receipts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #47 July 24, 2010 QuoteNo, Reagan virtually tripled the bebt, seee if you can follow along. 952B to 2.7T = 1.8T additon = 1.89% addition, or he left 289% of what he inherited. Now if you say he added double to the existing debt, I'll agree. And what year are THOSE dollar amounts based on, Lucky? I'm sure you have that answer at your fingers since it was SO important to you, above. QuoteQuoteObama will double the debt (given current spending) in 8 years - guess they really ARE alike. Obama hasn't changed spending, he will let the tax cuts expire So much for that "your taxes will not increase one dime" promise, huh? Quoteand taxes will increase, hence receipts will increase and the deficit will fall and rich tears will also fall. And businesses and the rich will move overseas, lessening the take. And the people that actually BELIEVED Barry's promises will be fucked.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Coreece 190 #48 July 24, 2010 QuoteObama v Reagan really?Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DaVinci 0 #49 July 24, 2010 QuoteThe theory is appearing today as we write Saying it != proving it. Quote Obama inherited an economy on the verge of collapse Bush inherited a recession from Clinton and a security threat in the form of 911. Unless you want to claim that the 911 attacks were planned in less than 9 mths? http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2003-07-17-recession_x.htm Once again... Big on 'theory' short on data. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,147 #50 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteThe theory is appearing today as we write Saying it != proving it. Quote Obama inherited an economy on the verge of collapse Bush inherited a recession from Clinton. INCORRECT. There was no recession during the Clinton administration, only expansion. Source: www.nber.org/cycles/november2001/ From your own link: "The 2001 recession began in March that year, so today's announcement makes it an eight-month downturn." Clinton was not President in March 2001. Quote Once again... Big on 'theory' short on data. Irony score 10/10... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next Page 2 of 8 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
mnealtx 0 #39 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote You've forgotten TRIPLING the national debt. Reagain increase in debt, roughly 1.7T in 8 years. Obama increase in debt, 2.6T in 18 months. . As is usual with your calculations you completely ignore inflation. a 1988 $US is NOT the same as a 2010 $US. Since you are concerned with rapidity, the most rapid increase was under GWB, $1T in a 4 month period. Funny how you never have a problem quoting raw numbers when they go YOUR way, perfesser - I wonder why that is?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #40 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteAs the debt becomes more of an issue, your hero will fall more and more Obama is doing more to add to the debt than anyone ever. So I disagree with your "theory". The theory is appearing today as we write. Obama inherited an economy on the verge of collapse, an economy that ran the unemp rate up 3.4% in THE ONE SINGLE YEAR BEFORE HE TOOK IT, an economy that had a GDP that was negative 4 of the last 5 Q's before he received it, an economy that had a massive mounting deficit of > 1T just the previous year. And you want to blame Obama for it? We get it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #41 July 24, 2010 Quote Quote Obama spent nearly a trillion dollars to kick start the economy There's no gas in the motor. NO? http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdp_glance.htm http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?data_tool=latest_numbers&series_id=LNS14000000 http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=^DJI WOW, you're really smart. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #42 July 24, 2010 QuoteI just shake my head when you try to compare the two. There is so much more under the surface than the economy. QuoteMany have forgotten what it was like to be an american citizen in the late 70's and early 80's. It wasn't good. WHY? QuoteYou've forgotten interest rates... Yep, Reagan/Volkers contracted the money supply to fix that driving the unemp rate from 7/5% to 10.8%, the highest then or since the Great Depression. QuoteYou forgot the unemployment Inherited a fairly stable 7.5%, drove it to 10.8%. QuoteYou forgot the hostages The Algiers Accord were brokered the day before Reagan's inauguration, so the deal was made before your favorite diaper-wearing guy took office: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algiers_Accords QuoteYou forgot the bungled attempt to free them That compared to the Beirut barracks bombings and Reagan's reaction exactly how???? QuoteYou forgot the gas lines OPEC had been squeezing us before Carter. I haven't forgotten the 4.25/gal gas prices, have you? QuoteYou forgot 3 mile island and Love Canal 3 mile island is who's fault and why? This wasn't Chernobil; what's your point? QuoteCompare Reagan and Obama...that's a long ways off. True, Reagan took a stable debt and tripled it, Obama inherited a COMPLETE MESS and has done some good toward it. QuoteYou've obviously forgotten. You've obviously never known. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #43 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuote You've forgotten TRIPLING the national debt. QuoteReagain increase in debt, roughly 1.7T in 8 years. Is that a typo or a play on the debt gain? According to the chart the debt was: 09/29/1989 2,857,430,960,187.32 09/30/1988 2,602,337,712,041.16 09/30/1987 2,350,276,890,953.00 09/30/1986 2,125,302,616,658.42 09/30/1985 * 1,823,103,000,000.00 09/30/1984 * 1,572,266,000,000.00 09/30/1983 * 1,377,210,000,000.00 09/30/1982 * 1,142,034,000,000.00 09/30/1981 * 997,855,000,000.00 09/30/1980 * 907,701,000,000.00 http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo4.htm Since they use gov fiscal years, we can split the diff as an average. Reagan inherited - 952 B Reagan left - 2.7T So actually it was closer to 1.8T As Kallend said, 1980's dollars vs 2010 dollars. Now, let's look at trends, if a truck is coming at you at 80MPH (high debt accrual already established) it is impossible to stop it in a short time and the momentum will carry it. If a truck is coming at 5 mPH (slow debt accrual) you can shut it off quickly. You act as tho Reagan's inherited economy was the same as Obama's. QuoteObama increase in debt, 2.6T in 18 months. Yea and GWB's fiscal year Sep 30, 07 to 08 = over 1 trillion dollars added to the debt AND THAT DIDN'T EVEN INCLUDE THE TARP MONEY FOR FUCK'S SAKE. Even worse than the spending are the receipts that are so hammered that that's the biggest cause of the debt/deficit accrual. Quote156% in 18% of the time. The debt increased 300B under Carter, fasist pig Ronnies predecessor. The first 18 months of your fascist pig's office the debt increased 190B, > 60% of CARTER'S ENTIRE GAIN USING LIKE DOLLARS, not dishonestly using dollars 30 years apart as you and trying to make a point. And rememebr, since Carter left a very civil debt picture with very modest gain, it ook your fascist leader a but to get the debt machine going; THE FOLLOWING 12 MONTHS SHOWED A 235B INCREASE IN THE DEBT. Again, 1980 dollars. Your point is ridiculous. QuoteGiven no change in Obama's current rate of spending (fat chance), in 4 years he'll raise the deficity by 7T. In 8 years, 14T. What has he done with spending? Remember, it's the receipts that are the killer, with your boy leaving them in the toilet the way he did, recovery centers around increasing receipts which is why tax increases are needed. QuoteThen there's the TRIPLING of the deficit...and no relief in sight. Right, he has what he inherited; any argument? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #44 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote You've forgotten TRIPLING the national debt. Reagain increase in debt, roughly 1.7T in 8 years. Obama increase in debt, 2.6T in 18 months. . As is usual with your calculations you completely ignore inflation. a 1988 $US is NOT the same as a 2010 $US. Since you are concerned with rapidity, the most rapid increase was under GWB, $1T in a 4 month period. Funny how you never have a problem quoting raw numbers when they go YOUR way, perfesser - I wonder why that is? Yea, whatever; hardly. Are you so dishonest to think we can use 1980's dollars = 2010 dollars? Are you honest enough to admit Obama inherited a total POS? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #45 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteUsing 2010 dollars, the debt in 1981 was 2394B. In 1989, it was 5029B. The difference is 2634B. Slightly more than doubling the debt, not the tripling that kallend claims. Quote2009 was 1.42T, so it seems unlikely to be 7T in 4 years. Closer to 5, which is still rather tragic, but 28% less than your projection. Actually, Obama's debt increase to date (as of 7/20) is 2.6T - a rate of 4.8B/day. I'm sure you can do the rest of the math. QuoteReagan doubled the debt in 8 years, No, Reagan virtually tripled the bebt, seee if you can follow along. 952B to 2.7T = 1.8T additon = 1.89% addition, or he left 289% of what he inherited. Now if you say he added double to the existing debt, I'll agree. QuoteObama will double the debt (given current spending) in 8 years - guess they really ARE alike. Obama hasn't changed spending, he will let the tax cuts expire and taxes will increase, hence receipts will increase and the deficit will fall and rich tears will also fall. QuoteSucks for the usual kallend/lucky arguments, though. No, you're just being simply dishonest. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #46 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote You've forgotten TRIPLING the national debt. Reagain increase in debt, roughly 1.7T in 8 years. Obama increase in debt, 2.6T in 18 months. 156% in 18% of the time. Given no change in Obama's current rate of spending (fat chance), in 4 years he'll raise the deficity by 7T. In 8 years, 14T. You need to account for inflation, so that 1.7T needs to be doubled (110% from 1984 midpoint to 2010) to ~3.6T. 2009 was 1.42T, so it seems unlikely to be 7T in 4 years. Closer to 5, which is still rather tragic, but 28% less than your projection. Not counting for a massive debt flurry Obama inherited vs Reagan's stable debt picture and already high tax system rendering descent receipts. Obama has to fix the economic situation and then raise taxes to increase receipts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #47 July 24, 2010 QuoteNo, Reagan virtually tripled the bebt, seee if you can follow along. 952B to 2.7T = 1.8T additon = 1.89% addition, or he left 289% of what he inherited. Now if you say he added double to the existing debt, I'll agree. And what year are THOSE dollar amounts based on, Lucky? I'm sure you have that answer at your fingers since it was SO important to you, above. QuoteQuoteObama will double the debt (given current spending) in 8 years - guess they really ARE alike. Obama hasn't changed spending, he will let the tax cuts expire So much for that "your taxes will not increase one dime" promise, huh? Quoteand taxes will increase, hence receipts will increase and the deficit will fall and rich tears will also fall. And businesses and the rich will move overseas, lessening the take. And the people that actually BELIEVED Barry's promises will be fucked.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Coreece 190 #48 July 24, 2010 QuoteObama v Reagan really?Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DaVinci 0 #49 July 24, 2010 QuoteThe theory is appearing today as we write Saying it != proving it. Quote Obama inherited an economy on the verge of collapse Bush inherited a recession from Clinton and a security threat in the form of 911. Unless you want to claim that the 911 attacks were planned in less than 9 mths? http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2003-07-17-recession_x.htm Once again... Big on 'theory' short on data. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,147 #50 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteThe theory is appearing today as we write Saying it != proving it. Quote Obama inherited an economy on the verge of collapse Bush inherited a recession from Clinton. INCORRECT. There was no recession during the Clinton administration, only expansion. Source: www.nber.org/cycles/november2001/ From your own link: "The 2001 recession began in March that year, so today's announcement makes it an eight-month downturn." Clinton was not President in March 2001. Quote Once again... Big on 'theory' short on data. Irony score 10/10... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next Page 2 of 8 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
Lucky... 0 #43 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuote You've forgotten TRIPLING the national debt. QuoteReagain increase in debt, roughly 1.7T in 8 years. Is that a typo or a play on the debt gain? According to the chart the debt was: 09/29/1989 2,857,430,960,187.32 09/30/1988 2,602,337,712,041.16 09/30/1987 2,350,276,890,953.00 09/30/1986 2,125,302,616,658.42 09/30/1985 * 1,823,103,000,000.00 09/30/1984 * 1,572,266,000,000.00 09/30/1983 * 1,377,210,000,000.00 09/30/1982 * 1,142,034,000,000.00 09/30/1981 * 997,855,000,000.00 09/30/1980 * 907,701,000,000.00 http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo4.htm Since they use gov fiscal years, we can split the diff as an average. Reagan inherited - 952 B Reagan left - 2.7T So actually it was closer to 1.8T As Kallend said, 1980's dollars vs 2010 dollars. Now, let's look at trends, if a truck is coming at you at 80MPH (high debt accrual already established) it is impossible to stop it in a short time and the momentum will carry it. If a truck is coming at 5 mPH (slow debt accrual) you can shut it off quickly. You act as tho Reagan's inherited economy was the same as Obama's. QuoteObama increase in debt, 2.6T in 18 months. Yea and GWB's fiscal year Sep 30, 07 to 08 = over 1 trillion dollars added to the debt AND THAT DIDN'T EVEN INCLUDE THE TARP MONEY FOR FUCK'S SAKE. Even worse than the spending are the receipts that are so hammered that that's the biggest cause of the debt/deficit accrual. Quote156% in 18% of the time. The debt increased 300B under Carter, fasist pig Ronnies predecessor. The first 18 months of your fascist pig's office the debt increased 190B, > 60% of CARTER'S ENTIRE GAIN USING LIKE DOLLARS, not dishonestly using dollars 30 years apart as you and trying to make a point. And rememebr, since Carter left a very civil debt picture with very modest gain, it ook your fascist leader a but to get the debt machine going; THE FOLLOWING 12 MONTHS SHOWED A 235B INCREASE IN THE DEBT. Again, 1980 dollars. Your point is ridiculous. QuoteGiven no change in Obama's current rate of spending (fat chance), in 4 years he'll raise the deficity by 7T. In 8 years, 14T. What has he done with spending? Remember, it's the receipts that are the killer, with your boy leaving them in the toilet the way he did, recovery centers around increasing receipts which is why tax increases are needed. QuoteThen there's the TRIPLING of the deficit...and no relief in sight. Right, he has what he inherited; any argument? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #44 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote You've forgotten TRIPLING the national debt. Reagain increase in debt, roughly 1.7T in 8 years. Obama increase in debt, 2.6T in 18 months. . As is usual with your calculations you completely ignore inflation. a 1988 $US is NOT the same as a 2010 $US. Since you are concerned with rapidity, the most rapid increase was under GWB, $1T in a 4 month period. Funny how you never have a problem quoting raw numbers when they go YOUR way, perfesser - I wonder why that is? Yea, whatever; hardly. Are you so dishonest to think we can use 1980's dollars = 2010 dollars? Are you honest enough to admit Obama inherited a total POS? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #45 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteUsing 2010 dollars, the debt in 1981 was 2394B. In 1989, it was 5029B. The difference is 2634B. Slightly more than doubling the debt, not the tripling that kallend claims. Quote2009 was 1.42T, so it seems unlikely to be 7T in 4 years. Closer to 5, which is still rather tragic, but 28% less than your projection. Actually, Obama's debt increase to date (as of 7/20) is 2.6T - a rate of 4.8B/day. I'm sure you can do the rest of the math. QuoteReagan doubled the debt in 8 years, No, Reagan virtually tripled the bebt, seee if you can follow along. 952B to 2.7T = 1.8T additon = 1.89% addition, or he left 289% of what he inherited. Now if you say he added double to the existing debt, I'll agree. QuoteObama will double the debt (given current spending) in 8 years - guess they really ARE alike. Obama hasn't changed spending, he will let the tax cuts expire and taxes will increase, hence receipts will increase and the deficit will fall and rich tears will also fall. QuoteSucks for the usual kallend/lucky arguments, though. No, you're just being simply dishonest. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #46 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote You've forgotten TRIPLING the national debt. Reagain increase in debt, roughly 1.7T in 8 years. Obama increase in debt, 2.6T in 18 months. 156% in 18% of the time. Given no change in Obama's current rate of spending (fat chance), in 4 years he'll raise the deficity by 7T. In 8 years, 14T. You need to account for inflation, so that 1.7T needs to be doubled (110% from 1984 midpoint to 2010) to ~3.6T. 2009 was 1.42T, so it seems unlikely to be 7T in 4 years. Closer to 5, which is still rather tragic, but 28% less than your projection. Not counting for a massive debt flurry Obama inherited vs Reagan's stable debt picture and already high tax system rendering descent receipts. Obama has to fix the economic situation and then raise taxes to increase receipts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #47 July 24, 2010 QuoteNo, Reagan virtually tripled the bebt, seee if you can follow along. 952B to 2.7T = 1.8T additon = 1.89% addition, or he left 289% of what he inherited. Now if you say he added double to the existing debt, I'll agree. And what year are THOSE dollar amounts based on, Lucky? I'm sure you have that answer at your fingers since it was SO important to you, above. QuoteQuoteObama will double the debt (given current spending) in 8 years - guess they really ARE alike. Obama hasn't changed spending, he will let the tax cuts expire So much for that "your taxes will not increase one dime" promise, huh? Quoteand taxes will increase, hence receipts will increase and the deficit will fall and rich tears will also fall. And businesses and the rich will move overseas, lessening the take. And the people that actually BELIEVED Barry's promises will be fucked.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Coreece 190 #48 July 24, 2010 QuoteObama v Reagan really?Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DaVinci 0 #49 July 24, 2010 QuoteThe theory is appearing today as we write Saying it != proving it. Quote Obama inherited an economy on the verge of collapse Bush inherited a recession from Clinton and a security threat in the form of 911. Unless you want to claim that the 911 attacks were planned in less than 9 mths? http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2003-07-17-recession_x.htm Once again... Big on 'theory' short on data. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,147 #50 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteThe theory is appearing today as we write Saying it != proving it. Quote Obama inherited an economy on the verge of collapse Bush inherited a recession from Clinton. INCORRECT. There was no recession during the Clinton administration, only expansion. Source: www.nber.org/cycles/november2001/ From your own link: "The 2001 recession began in March that year, so today's announcement makes it an eight-month downturn." Clinton was not President in March 2001. Quote Once again... Big on 'theory' short on data. Irony score 10/10... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next Page 2 of 8 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
Lucky... 0 #44 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote You've forgotten TRIPLING the national debt. Reagain increase in debt, roughly 1.7T in 8 years. Obama increase in debt, 2.6T in 18 months. . As is usual with your calculations you completely ignore inflation. a 1988 $US is NOT the same as a 2010 $US. Since you are concerned with rapidity, the most rapid increase was under GWB, $1T in a 4 month period. Funny how you never have a problem quoting raw numbers when they go YOUR way, perfesser - I wonder why that is? Yea, whatever; hardly. Are you so dishonest to think we can use 1980's dollars = 2010 dollars? Are you honest enough to admit Obama inherited a total POS? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #45 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteUsing 2010 dollars, the debt in 1981 was 2394B. In 1989, it was 5029B. The difference is 2634B. Slightly more than doubling the debt, not the tripling that kallend claims. Quote2009 was 1.42T, so it seems unlikely to be 7T in 4 years. Closer to 5, which is still rather tragic, but 28% less than your projection. Actually, Obama's debt increase to date (as of 7/20) is 2.6T - a rate of 4.8B/day. I'm sure you can do the rest of the math. QuoteReagan doubled the debt in 8 years, No, Reagan virtually tripled the bebt, seee if you can follow along. 952B to 2.7T = 1.8T additon = 1.89% addition, or he left 289% of what he inherited. Now if you say he added double to the existing debt, I'll agree. QuoteObama will double the debt (given current spending) in 8 years - guess they really ARE alike. Obama hasn't changed spending, he will let the tax cuts expire and taxes will increase, hence receipts will increase and the deficit will fall and rich tears will also fall. QuoteSucks for the usual kallend/lucky arguments, though. No, you're just being simply dishonest. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #46 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote You've forgotten TRIPLING the national debt. Reagain increase in debt, roughly 1.7T in 8 years. Obama increase in debt, 2.6T in 18 months. 156% in 18% of the time. Given no change in Obama's current rate of spending (fat chance), in 4 years he'll raise the deficity by 7T. In 8 years, 14T. You need to account for inflation, so that 1.7T needs to be doubled (110% from 1984 midpoint to 2010) to ~3.6T. 2009 was 1.42T, so it seems unlikely to be 7T in 4 years. Closer to 5, which is still rather tragic, but 28% less than your projection. Not counting for a massive debt flurry Obama inherited vs Reagan's stable debt picture and already high tax system rendering descent receipts. Obama has to fix the economic situation and then raise taxes to increase receipts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #47 July 24, 2010 QuoteNo, Reagan virtually tripled the bebt, seee if you can follow along. 952B to 2.7T = 1.8T additon = 1.89% addition, or he left 289% of what he inherited. Now if you say he added double to the existing debt, I'll agree. And what year are THOSE dollar amounts based on, Lucky? I'm sure you have that answer at your fingers since it was SO important to you, above. QuoteQuoteObama will double the debt (given current spending) in 8 years - guess they really ARE alike. Obama hasn't changed spending, he will let the tax cuts expire So much for that "your taxes will not increase one dime" promise, huh? Quoteand taxes will increase, hence receipts will increase and the deficit will fall and rich tears will also fall. And businesses and the rich will move overseas, lessening the take. And the people that actually BELIEVED Barry's promises will be fucked.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Coreece 190 #48 July 24, 2010 QuoteObama v Reagan really?Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DaVinci 0 #49 July 24, 2010 QuoteThe theory is appearing today as we write Saying it != proving it. Quote Obama inherited an economy on the verge of collapse Bush inherited a recession from Clinton and a security threat in the form of 911. Unless you want to claim that the 911 attacks were planned in less than 9 mths? http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2003-07-17-recession_x.htm Once again... Big on 'theory' short on data. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,147 #50 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteThe theory is appearing today as we write Saying it != proving it. Quote Obama inherited an economy on the verge of collapse Bush inherited a recession from Clinton. INCORRECT. There was no recession during the Clinton administration, only expansion. Source: www.nber.org/cycles/november2001/ From your own link: "The 2001 recession began in March that year, so today's announcement makes it an eight-month downturn." Clinton was not President in March 2001. Quote Once again... Big on 'theory' short on data. Irony score 10/10... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next Page 2 of 8 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
Lucky... 0 #46 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote You've forgotten TRIPLING the national debt. Reagain increase in debt, roughly 1.7T in 8 years. Obama increase in debt, 2.6T in 18 months. 156% in 18% of the time. Given no change in Obama's current rate of spending (fat chance), in 4 years he'll raise the deficity by 7T. In 8 years, 14T. You need to account for inflation, so that 1.7T needs to be doubled (110% from 1984 midpoint to 2010) to ~3.6T. 2009 was 1.42T, so it seems unlikely to be 7T in 4 years. Closer to 5, which is still rather tragic, but 28% less than your projection. Not counting for a massive debt flurry Obama inherited vs Reagan's stable debt picture and already high tax system rendering descent receipts. Obama has to fix the economic situation and then raise taxes to increase receipts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #47 July 24, 2010 QuoteNo, Reagan virtually tripled the bebt, seee if you can follow along. 952B to 2.7T = 1.8T additon = 1.89% addition, or he left 289% of what he inherited. Now if you say he added double to the existing debt, I'll agree. And what year are THOSE dollar amounts based on, Lucky? I'm sure you have that answer at your fingers since it was SO important to you, above. QuoteQuoteObama will double the debt (given current spending) in 8 years - guess they really ARE alike. Obama hasn't changed spending, he will let the tax cuts expire So much for that "your taxes will not increase one dime" promise, huh? Quoteand taxes will increase, hence receipts will increase and the deficit will fall and rich tears will also fall. And businesses and the rich will move overseas, lessening the take. And the people that actually BELIEVED Barry's promises will be fucked.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #48 July 24, 2010 QuoteObama v Reagan really?Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #49 July 24, 2010 QuoteThe theory is appearing today as we write Saying it != proving it. Quote Obama inherited an economy on the verge of collapse Bush inherited a recession from Clinton and a security threat in the form of 911. Unless you want to claim that the 911 attacks were planned in less than 9 mths? http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2003-07-17-recession_x.htm Once again... Big on 'theory' short on data. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #50 July 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteThe theory is appearing today as we write Saying it != proving it. Quote Obama inherited an economy on the verge of collapse Bush inherited a recession from Clinton. INCORRECT. There was no recession during the Clinton administration, only expansion. Source: www.nber.org/cycles/november2001/ From your own link: "The 2001 recession began in March that year, so today's announcement makes it an eight-month downturn." Clinton was not President in March 2001. Quote Once again... Big on 'theory' short on data. Irony score 10/10... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
