Deficit vs. Deficit

[stealth_swimmer]

If Bush/conservatives DID NOT allow the Financial Crisis to unravel, DID NOT tout the bubble as economic prosperity, then MAYBE just MAYBE we wouldn't have to spend such ridiculous amounts to get out of recession.

Parents can really mess up a kids life. When those kids grow up to be nobody, people usually blame the kids. It is common thinking. Common thinking is not always the right one.

When has increased government spending ever lifted a nation out of recession? They say that it usually isn't big enough...well, when has it ever been big enough? Keynesian theory says it's possible, but again, I don't think it's happened before. I'd be glad to hear someone out to give an example cus I've honestly never been given a real-life example of when it worked.

[US_Ranger]

If Bush/conservatives DID NOT allow the Financial Crisis to unravel, DID NOT tout the bubble as economic prosperity, then MAYBE just MAYBE we wouldn't have to spend such ridiculous amounts to get out of recession.

Parents can really mess up a kids life. When those kids grow up to be nobody, people usually blame the kids. It is common thinking. Common thinking is not always the right one.

Troll.

[tnt440]

no, its true.
(we affect the economy, it dont affect us. ya see, if ppl stopped watching the news (or even tv altogether) ya'd understand)

like i said... buy what you NEED... dont - what you dont!

whats wrong with my idea,, im basically saying we should tell the gov/"economy" to go screw themselves and set up our (we, the people) OWN separate banking systems and currencies. WITHOUT any interest! then there wont be debts.

(yes, Fed. Reserve cash is printed ONLY with the promise that it be payed back PLUS interest. why? because they have enough money, which we as a society have given value to, to make sure the gov. supports them -- fed. reserve is privately owned. not a part of US gov.)

Your 16 and we can tell

[tnt440]

bump this ****

[NJlifter88]

Yes. But the job of the President is to lead the country out of this mess as painlessly as possible. U think sudden financial system halt would be pain-free? Either way is painful.

no, its not.

[gjohnson5]

no, its not.

Clearly the President is the commander in chief who runs the Military.
However generally the President gets blame for lack of leadership just like any quarterback or point guard.
I will agree in part that he SHOULD involve himself in the solutions process and should get some of the blame for failures

He signs all the legislation, and his office makes the original budget proposal. Also his office runs the Treasury. So yes the President should be part of the economic revitalization of the economy.

However it's interesting , I seem to remember Nutsy denying the presidents role in making the original budget proposal when Bush was in office. But now that Obama has introduced his budget, he has seemingly forgotten that Congress creates a new budget proposal or amends the Presidents proposal and send that back to President to sign.

[nutsy54]

However it's interesting , I seem to remember Nutsy denying the presidents role in making the original budget proposal when Bush was in office. But now that Obama has introduced his budget, he has seemingly forgotten that Congress creates a new budget proposal or amends the Presidents proposal and send that back to President to sign.

You remember wrong, as usual - because you're unable to comprehend anything other than partisan hatred for one side and love for another.

President Bush is absolutely at fault for allowing excessive deficits under Republican leadership in Congress, followed by insane deficits when the Democrats took over. I've never "denied the President's role", but I have clearly pointed out that BOTH share blame and responsibility. Bush shouldn't have signed those budgets - but the Democrats sure as hell shouldn't have written them in the first place.

And now we have a fiasco of utterly ludicrous spending, deficits, and massive debt being railroaded through by a spend-happy Congress and President who are trying to determine exactly how fast they can fiscally destroy this country.

I realize you simply can't comprehend someone placing blame on Bush and Obama and Democrats and Republicans for doing the same damn things, but that's really how it works. And now that Obama and the Democrats are intentionally planning deficits several times larger than anything seen under Republicans, Yes, they deserve several times more blame and spotlighting.

PS: What does my personal opinion and alleged posting history have to do with the actions and policies of this administration, and their goal to drive us further into debt than every thought possible? Why can't you defend President Obama's actions without attacking someone else who's totally unrelated to the budget process?

[gjohnson5]

You remember wrong, as usual - because you're unable to comprehend anything other than partisan hatred for one side and love for another.

President Bush is absolutely at fault for allowing excessive deficits under Republican leadership in Congress, followed by insane deficits when the Democrats took over. I've never "denied the President's role", but I have clearly pointed out that BOTH share blame and responsibility. Bush shouldn't have signed those budgets - but the Democrats sure as hell shouldn't have written them in the first place.

And now we have a fiasco of utterly ludicrous spending, deficits, and massive debt being railroaded through by a spend-happy Congress and President who are trying to determine exactly how fast they can fiscally destroy this country.

I realize you simply can't comprehend someone placing blame on Bush and Obama and Democrats and Republicans for doing the same damn things, but that's really how it works. And now that Obama and the Democrats are intentionally planning deficits several times larger than anything seen under Republicans, Yes, they deserve several times more blame and spotlighting.

PS: What does my personal opinion and alleged posting history have to do with the actions and policies of this administration, and their goal to drive us further into debt than every thought possible? Why can't you defend President Obama's actions without attacking someone else who's totally unrelated to the budget process?

Wait-a-minute. You're the one attacking the budget. Personally I haven't read his budget and as YOU pointed out to me a few months ago , it's just a proposal anyway....

So how is it that the above fact is lost now that Obama is in office? There are conservatives in the Senate that will have things stricken from the final budget spending wise and hopefully those things which are to be stricken are bipartisan. I do want a bipartisan solution unlike what your post states however it's partisanship about the current budget proposal that I am speaking to.

Unfortunately tax hikes are in the foreseeable future so I personally don't see the debt rising as much as you are saying. IMHO it is partisanship that is talking with the above post, not the notion that costs need to be controlled. I believe the current administration does understand this

[nutsy54]

Wait-a-minute. You're the one attacking the budget. Personally I haven't read his budget and as YOU pointed out to me a few months ago , it's just a proposal anyway....

So how is it that the above fact is lost now that Obama is in office?

Because it IS the President's proposal, that's the whole point!

The man who endlessly lies about "fiscal responsibility" has laid out the most irresponsible decade-long spending plan in this nation's history - And the House and Senate have now voiced their general agreement with its overall concept. "Minor changed" will not fix the massive new debt this budget proposes.

Not a single balanced or surplus budget year in the next decade, not even close. Why not? Next Year could be a balanced budget if he really wanted to. Debt is inherited, Deficits are created.

[gjohnson5]

Because it IS the President's proposal, that's the whole point!

The man who endlessly lies about "fiscal responsibility" has laid out the most irresponsible decade-long spending plan in this nation's history - And the House and Senate have now voiced their general agreement with its overall concept. "Minor changed" will not fix the massive new debt this budget proposes.

Not a single balanced or surplus budget year in the next decade, not even close. Why not? Next Year could be a balanced budget if he really wanted to. Debt is inherited, Deficits are created.

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showpo...1&postcount=35

Just a memory refresher.
I was in an argument w/Frankenstein before the shadow banking system failed for some reason.
Personally I didn't see any vast economic problems at the time. All I knew is that my job was working well and I was making more money then before. So I didn't see any issues.

I thought that Congress did use most of the president proposal. But then I was informed that Congress has no obligation to use any of it. If this is true, then his proposal really is nothing more then a dog and pony show. The exception would be if the majority in Congress and the president are in the same party. Then I think it is plausible that there would be some dialog between those parties before that proposal is submitted. So I guess you have a bone to pick in this case if you think that budget is filled with pork

[nutsy54]

gjohnson, I honestly cannot comprehend your mindset.

Next year, the president wants to spend nearly $2 TRILLION more than the federal government will see in revenue. If you don't see that as a massive economic, fiscal, and leadership failure on his part, then we will never agree on this topic.

It's called planning & prioritizing - the things he said he would do. But as usual, Actions speak far louder than Words from this president.

[gjohnson5]

gjohnson, I honestly cannot comprehend your mindset.

Next year, the president wants to spend nearly $2 TRILLION more than the federal government will see in revenue. If you don't see that as a massive economic, fiscal, and leadership failure on his part, then we will never agree on this topic.

It's called planning & prioritizing - the things he said he would do. But as usual, Actions speak far louder than Words from this president.

I haven't read it yet. I probably should do that
LOLOL

[gjohnson5]

Apparantly that 3.55 trillion dollar budget just passed the house

[Morbid_Mind]

The CBO deficit projects were very gloomy.
Myself and Morbid_mind had this same discussion and I did the exact same thing.

Ruh roh

The Obama administration will raise its 10-year budget deficit projection to approximately $9 trillion from $7.108 trillion in a report next week, a senior administration official told Reuters on Friday.

The higher deficit figure, based on updated economic data, brings the White House budget office into line with outside estimates and gives further fuel to President Barack Obama's opponents, who say his spending plans are too expensive in light of budget shortfalls.

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsO...57K4XE20090821

[gjohnson5]

Ruh roh





http://www.reuters.com/article/newsO...57K4XE20090821

Well I disagree.
If the GDP grows , then the government spending can stop.
GDP will pay for costs in stead of deficit spending...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32506152...s_and_economy/

Bernanke: Economy is on cusp of recovery
Economic activity in U.S. and around the world appears to be ?leveling out?
Image: U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke arrives to address the Jackson Hole Economic Symposium in Jackson Hole, Wyoming
Reuters
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke says prospects for a return to global economic growth looked good "in the near term," the clearest signal yet the world's most powerful central banker thinks a recovery is at hand.


Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke on Friday offered his most optimistic outlook since the financial crisis struck, saying the economy is on the verge of growing again.

Speaking at an annual Fed conference, Bernanke acknowledged no missteps by the central bank in managing the worst crisis since the Great Depression. But he conceded that consumers and businesses are still having trouble getting loans, even though the financial system is gradually stabilizing.

Economic activity in both the U.S. and around the world seems to be leveling out, and the economy is likely to start growing again soon, Bernanke said in a speech at an annual Fed conference in Jackson.

[nutsy54]

And people asked why I've consistently said $20 Trillion National Debt after a decade of President Obama's spending plans...

[Morbid_Mind]

Well I disagree.
If the GDP grows , then the government spending can stop.
GDP will pay for costs in stead of deficit spending...

So now it's basically you all by your lonesome saying that deficit won't be as bad as everyone, even the White House, is projecting? Just admit you were wrong.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32506152...s_and_economy/

Bernanke: Economy is on cusp of recovery
Economic activity in U.S. and around the world appears to be ?leveling out?
Image: U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke arrives to address the Jackson Hole Economic Symposium in Jackson Hole, Wyoming
Reuters
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke says prospects for a return to global economic growth looked good "in the near term," the clearest signal yet the world's most powerful central banker thinks a recovery is at hand.


Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke on Friday offered his most optimistic outlook since the financial crisis struck, saying the economy is on the verge of growing again.

Speaking at an annual Fed conference, Bernanke acknowledged no missteps by the central bank in managing the worst crisis since the Great Depression. But he conceded that consumers and businesses are still having trouble getting loans, even though the financial system is gradually stabilizing.

Economic activity in both the U.S. and around the world seems to be leveling out, and the economy is likely to start growing again soon, Bernanke said in a speech at an annual Fed conference in Jackson.

Are you serious? Bernanke has been a moron since he was nominated. First he said they had "contained" the housing situation, then he claims there was going to be "no recession." Now all of a sudden we're supposed to believe him? Why, because he has a rosy outlook?

Get real, you're delusional.

[nutsy54]

Well I disagree.
If the GDP grows , then the government spending can stop.
GDP will pay for costs in stead of deficit spending...

You can pretend that all you want - But even the White House has to admit the truth: Massive government spending will outpace revenue... forever, under this President's plans.

Why are you calling President Obama a liar on this topic?

[gjohnson5]

So now it's basically you all by your lonesome saying that deficit won't be as bad as everyone, even the White House, is projecting? Just admit you were wrong.



Are you serious? Bernanke has been a moron since he was nominated. First he said they had "contained" the housing situation, then he claims there was going to be "no recession." Now all of a sudden we're supposed to believe him? Why, because he has a rosy outlook?

Get real, you're delusional.

Since when was Barack Obama an economist?
Since when have yourself or nusty believed any economic projections he had?

You guys contradict yourselves time and time again....
Bernanke is the chairman of the fed and IMHO has done a much better then expected job managing this crisis....

You can choose to believe what you but numbers back his words
1. unemployment Is dropping
2. stocks are rising
3. bank are recording profits
4. The auto industry is showing signs of recovery
*edit*
5. foreclosure rates are falling
*edit*
Not sure what else to tell you.

[nutsy54]

Since when was Barack Obama an economist?
Since when have yourself or nusty believed any economic projections he had?

Gotta admit, you are one hell of an apologist. You'll flat-out call the President and HIS Office of Management & Budget a bunch of liars, before admitting that his long-term policies are horrible.

Simply Amazing.


PS: I've always believed, and been disgusted with, his spending promises/projections. He's never made those a secret, and now that he's in office, they just continue exploding out of control.

[nutsy54]

Not sure what else to tell you.

You could tell us why you trust and blindly support a man to lead this country - When you don't believe he or anyone he's hired/appointed has any clue at all about the economy.

[gjohnson5]

Gotta admit, you are one hell of an apologist. You'll flat-out call the President and HIS Office of Management & Budget a bunch of liars, before admitting that his long-term policies are horrible.

Simply Amazing.


PS: I've always believed, and been disgusted with, his spending promises/projections. He's never made those a secret, and now that he's in office, they just continue exploding out of control.

I'm not sure how you misread my post or perverted it into the above
But My issues are with 'internet conservatives' on this board, not the President plans

Secondly I have no idea how you can actually think the President doesn't want the economy to recover as fast as possible.
This has got to be the more twisted points of view ever....
The President nor his Treasury's goals or wishes have been geared away from this angle.
Third, I have to LOL at this post because you and Morbid Mind have spent so much time copying and pasting Ross Perot charts....
These projections show deficit spending to unforeseen levels.... Post after Post.
Now that the Chairman of the Fed disagrees with those projections , then we have to endure posts like the above.

IMHO everyone (atleast non partisan Americans) are hopeful of recovery.
Personally trying to twist a projection into a promise is alot of the problem here.
As soon as Morbid Mind posted the projection what did gjohnson5 do????
Compare the projections with HISTORICAL spending.
What was the comparison of the 2 sets of numbers????
The projections were WAYYYY off.

Whatever , this was expected if you had actually spend time looking at the historical spending and then looking at the projections.
Anyway
As I said previously.
1. unemployment Is dropping
2. stocks are rising
3. bank are recording profits
4. The auto industry is showing signs of recovery
5. foreclosure rates are falling

The 5 statements are facts , not projections or estimates

[Morbid_Mind]

You can choose to believe what you but numbers back his words
1. unemployment Is dropping

No it's not. U3 went down simply because people have been unemployed so long they no longer qualify for benifits. U6 unemployment went up. Check the BLS' stats, not just a headline on MSNBC.

2. stocks are rising

This is a measure of the strength of the real economy, how? You do realize it's possible for stocks to go up despite the economy being bad, don't you? Look at the stock market during the great depression or look at the nikkei during Japan's lost decade.

3. bank are recording profits

From trading operations, not from loan based operations. They're also hoarding cash for the inevitable collapse of commercial real estate.

4. The auto industry is showing signs of recovery

In what capacity?

5. foreclosure rates are falling

No they're not

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...,4202530.story

[Dertygen]

If Bush/conservatives DID NOT allow the Financial Crisis to unravel, DID NOT tout the bubble as economic prosperity, then MAYBE just MAYBE we wouldn't have to spend such ridiculous amounts to get out of recession.

Bubbles are always a surpise-> 90's tech bubble anyone?
Which of course Bush II inherited and no one blamed Clinton, and rightly so.

Ah but for the Housing Crisis, Bush II backed the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulator Act of 2005.

Tried & failed: with weaking public support of the Republicans beginning, the opposition Democrats in the Senate Finance Committee and Katrina (again, mis-information with THAT one wrongly against Bush II) the bill... and issue... wasn't pressed further.

Looking back it's all easy to 'blame' people.

Parents can really mess up a kids life. When those kids grow up to be nobody, people usually blame the kids. It is common thinking. Common thinking is not always the right one.

I make use of my upbringing; regardless of how my parents did, I make use. The blame of my success/failures is mine alone.

Blame is for the weak.

[Dertygen]

1. unemployment Is dropping

Let me look locally here ->my state's went up.

2. stocks are rising

Stocks =/= economy.

3. bank are recording profits

LOL, Ford alone (USA! USA!)

4. The auto industry is showing signs of recovery

Toyota is losing more money than GM...

5. foreclosure rates are falling

Locally. Falling in some, higher in others, no clear general trend of falling.

The 5 statements are facts , not projections or estimates

A "fact" is 2+2=4.

You're speaking of 'truths', which have many facets.

OH CRAP, I just wasted time on you again...

[nutsy54]

I'm not sure how you misread my post or perverted it into the above
But My issues are with 'internet conservatives' on this board, not the President plans

What do "internet conservatives" have to do with the President's plans? Massive spending and endlessly increasing debt is BAD, regardless of who's in office or what a poster's political preferences are - expect that people in "your" category want to start pretending that, ever since January 21st, huge deficits and ballooning debt are somehow a Good thing

True "conservatives" have maintained the same policy and position, but your position changed when the Oval Office occupant switched from (R) to (D). Why is that? (Or do you have a multi-year history of supporting deficit spending while Bush was in office?)

Secondly I have no idea how you can actually think the President doesn't want the economy to recover as fast as possible.

I never said he doesn't "want" the economy to recover. I said that his own projections clearly show that whatever he/CBO believes will happen with the economy, Government spending will still far outpace revenue... forever.

The President, OMB, and CBO have all presented a unanimous position: Spending under the President's plans will only lead to endless deficits and ever-increasing national debt. If they truly believed or could prove that the economy would pick up to increase revenue and cause a reduction in government spending, then their long-term budget predictions would show that.

[gjohnson5]

What do "internet conservatives" have to do with the President's plans? Massive spending and endlessly increasing debt is BAD, regardless of who's in office or what a poster's political preferences are - expect that people in "your" category want to start pretending that, ever since January 21st, huge deficits and ballooning debt are somehow a Good thing

That would be with the exception of those who believed that deficit spending was NECESSARY for us to recover from the current economic situation.
The President's plan (Not sure how Congress's expenditure measure equate to the President's plan) but IMHO the so called endless increasing debt are
1. overstated and overplayed by conservatives (simply because they are running out of polarizing cards to play)
2. a projection that was vastly out of sync with historical data

Once again any 'endless increasing debt would have been a projection... It's not a promise

True "conservatives" have maintained the same policy and position, but your position changed when the Oval Office occupant switched from (R) to (D). Why is that? (Or do you have a multi-year history of supporting deficit spending while Bush was in office?)

What position would that be?
That I think pumping money into the economy can be used in a good way and this can help stimulate the economy??
I'm sorry but my position on that has NOT changed

I never said he doesn't "want" the economy to recover. I said that his own projections clearly show that whatever he/CBO believes will happen with the economy, Government spending will still far outpace revenue... forever.

Also you should confuse CBO projections with the Treasury's figures. They are completely separate entities.
AND LOL @ spending outpacing revenue. You have been posting on this point for months.
Unfortunately , I have never agreed with that point and IMHO it just partisanship...

The President, OMB, and CBO have all presented a unanimous position: Spending under the President's plans will only lead to endless deficits and ever-increasing national debt. If they truly believed or could prove that the economy would pick up to increase revenue and cause a reduction in government spending, then their long-term budget predictions would show that.

Once again , go to perotcharts.com and look at comparisons between the future projections and historical spending....
You will see in clear detail the problem with your argument that projections should be taken literally.

[nutsy54]

AND LOL @ spending outpacing revenue. You have been posting on this point for months.
Unfortunately , I have never agreed with that point and IMHO it just partisanship...

Once again: Why are you calling President Obama, his OMB Staff, and the CBO a bunch of liars? And how does your personal opinion trump their official statements on the topic? (Have you even read the White House 2010 Budget Proposal - especially the charts in the back?)

Like I said above: The apologist mentality is incredible. You'll call him a liar, rather than admit his plans totally suck and are horrible for this country. $2 Trillion deficit, next year alone, but that's OK

This graph was before the latest updates. We can claim "wiggle-room" for years down the road, but not for the near term.

[NJlifter88]

whitehouse confirmed today that the 10 year estimate for deficits is actually 9 trillion, not the 7 trillion put out. and thats just a few months later! i wonder what the deficits will actually be, 20 trillion maybe?

when we are having all these debates on this site, i actually think that liberals tend to take for granted the fact that the white house sugarcoats all these estimates, projections, etc. figures like GDP are skewed toward big government hacks. and they still can't cover their asses, thats how bad they are at what they do.

[gjohnson5]

Once again: Why are you calling President Obama, his OMB Staff, and the OMB a bunch of liars?

LOL...

http://www.heritage.org/about/

Our Mission
To formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.

Anything else you'd like to discuss