Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Politics  > Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 StrangerInTheHouse
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 5
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407BPage 1 of 3    (1, 2, 3)


The epitome of ignorance is to support, for ONE MINUTE, voting in another republican administration keeping these numbers in mind.

That's very true. Republican presidents have averaged over 340 billion dollars per year in deficits since Reagan became president.
In many of these years, the US was actually in a recession because the amount of money borrowed was greater than the increase in the GDP from one year to the next. That's how the national debt went up from under 1 trillion dollars in 1980 to somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 trillion today.
People criticize Carter for inflation that peaked at about 19% in 1980... but they don't have a clue what to say when they realize the republicans have made it so 17% of our taxes go toward paying nothing but debt every year now... and it might be 18% soon.
We're borrowing money from China to pay China...
We're making China the wealthiest nation on earth and we're going to be a debtor nation soon... our debt will be greater than our GDP, if we don't stop.
 wvwaterfall
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 6
view profile
History
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 9/9/2008 11:11:52 PM
Pardon me as I let my cynic out for a moment....

I can't believe someone actually started a thread about such a mundane topic as the deficit.

After all, the important factors voters everywhere are contemplating are:

What did Obama really mean when he said "lipstick on a pig"?
Could anyone support a candidate who doesn't wear a flag lapel pin and sometimes neglects to place his hand over his heart during the national anthem?
Who would make the better first lady?
How can Palin be a VP AND the mother of five children?
How many houses does McCain really own?
GUNS!
Does Obama really write his own speeches?
When exactly does a fetus acquire the same rights as the woman carrying it?
Which attack ads are 'right on' and which are cruel and unfair?
Who is going to look better in the debates?
Can we really elect a man whose name is only one letter removed from "Osama"?
Who has the more prominent American flag on their campaign plane?
Should I vote to support my gender or my race?

With all these weighty issues to ponder, fussing over a plus or minus sign and a few zeros and a decimal point is rather trite, isn't it?

Sheesh. Next you'll be telling us the future is worth worrying about. You must be one of those socialist pinko communist liberal tree huggers out to destroy America. Living beyond our means is a time honored tradition dating all the way back to.....Reagan, refined and perfected by Bush.

Are you saying we should abandon the American way?

Where are your priorities?



OK, I feel better now.

As you were,

Dave
 gtomustang
Joined: 6/16/2007
Msg: 8
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 9/10/2008 5:13:21 AM
Lipstick on a pig? You mean, Obama actually used this phrase before Sept 9th?
I notice this post was created before the freemarketeers decided to bailout Freddie/Fannie by making it easier again to get home mortgages.

The Dems are weak, for sure. But it doesn't help that their "majority" includes Sen. Lieberman, who went to the RNC to denounce the Dem's pick for prez. That's a majority vote? No wonder they don't get much done. Can you imagine trying to vote for impeachment when their own won't back them up?

But that doesn't mean they should be lying down on the job, either. Attempts are still worth something--for certain, the Republicans don't worry about it. They're trying to privatize the G.I.Bill, by letting a company create a computer program to run what GIs say ain't broke...and when the VA hospitals privatized their supply chain, found themselves constantly short of items needed to care for our vets.
 wvwaterfall
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 9
view profile
History
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 9/10/2008 7:52:42 AM

The problem is not the amount of money we take in but it is the out of control spending by Liberal and RHINO Pols. Reduce taxes, cut Government useless Social Programs, allow oil drilling, refinery construction, coal and nuclear power plants construction, shale oil production and all the work that supports these very high paying jobs.


No, the problem, whether in federal or personal financial practices, is whether what we take in matches or exceeds what we spend. If we have more money we can spend more money. If we don't, we can't.

In response to your post I did a simple google search, typing in "national debt, timeline". The first graph to pop up was the following:


http://zfacts.com/p/318.html


It clearly shows that recent increases in the debt have precisely coincided with the Reagan and Bush administrations.

So in your world we should cut our federal income, give industry free reign to do as they please for short term gain with no regard to long term consequences, with a particular focus on exploiting the last of our finite fossil fuel resources that will provide short term employment rather than develop renewable energy sources that will provide long term benefits.

Yours sounds like classic but flawed economic theory that relies on eternal growth to keep an economy going. In the words of Edward Abbey, "growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell".

All systems have their limits. I believe we've seen the limits uncontrolled businesses provide. The trickle in trickle down economics never made it past the elite. Bear in mind that corporations exist for the benefit of society, not the reverse. Profit should be our servant, not our master.

Dave
 Draskinn
Joined: 7/11/2007
Msg: 10
view profile
History
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 9/10/2008 10:12:48 AM
People have to learn the truth.

The Republicans and the Democrats are just two wings on the same hawk and the tax payer? Oh the tax payer is the field mouse living it its shadow.

Both parties are screwing us. BOTH OF THEM!

Vote 3rd party.
 tallskier
Joined: 5/20/2005
Msg: 11
view profile
History
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 9/10/2008 10:21:02 AM
The whole world runs on oil. Bush invaded Iraq to seize control of that oil.


Then why don't we control the Iraqi oil?
 Draskinn
Joined: 7/11/2007
Msg: 12
view profile
History
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 9/10/2008 10:29:40 AM

Then why don't we control the Iraqi oil?


Control is about more then just who owns the well.

What currency is Iraqi oil being traded in?

Dollars

What currency was Iraq planning to switch to just before we invaded?

Euros

What do you think would happen to the dollar if the world started to switch over to trading oil in Euros and all those nations around the world didn’t need huge dollar reserves anymore to pay for their oil and so started dumping those dollars on the open currency markets?

Control is about more then just who owns the well.
 StrangerInTheHouse
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 13
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 9/10/2008 12:03:14 PM

Liberals have no sense of history and will ignore facts/figures and I have been watching this for years.

Since Reagan took office in 1981, the republican presidents have approved budgets that average 340 billion dollars a year deficits (otherwise known as national debt). By comparison, during the eight years of Clinton's administration, he averaged slightly over 200 billion... and actually balanced the federal budget the last three years in office, which gave us a surplus of cash in 2001... that being the revenues raised by taxes which were not spent in paying the governments bills in the fiscal 2000/2001 year... so Bush actually had 200 billion dollars that was carried over into the 2001/2002 budget before he even started.

Under Reagan the amount of money to US Treasury increased.

It certainly did.. because he borrowed to get it by selling bonds. The money we pay for that money is called the national debt, and it's not just a matter of paying it back to the owners of bonds. It also includes interest. For this reason the national debt increased from under 1 trillion to 4 trillion dollars before Bush I left office in 1993. Reagan and Bush quadrupled it.
... and the value of those dollars before the bonds were sold was what is called fiat money: "Phony" dollars in other words...which greatly devalued the dollar and made it so the price of any imported goods went through the roof!
Most Americans during much of the eighties couldn't even afford to buy leather shoes, because they're made abroad and our currency wasn't worth squat.


The same happened with the Bush tax cuts.

Yes, it sure did... and that's why 17 cents (or more) of every dollar we pay in taxes now goes for nothing but interest!

The so called Clinton economy did not take off until after the Conservatives came into power in 1994

It was 1997 in fact, when he came up with the idea for a "middle class tax cut". The republicans resisted it, as they wanted a regressive tax cut where the rich would get the biggest cut.. but Clinton didn't let them do that and there was a long budget impasse before congress finally gave in.
http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/New/html/20000316.html

and most of his 'surplus' was book keeping.

*hahahahah* I don't think so!!!
If you think that... then tell me how you know that?
How can not having a deficit budget be (creative) "book keeping"?
Actually, by not having a deficit for three years running, he paid the debt down and there was a surplus of as much as 200 billion dollars when he left office...
No. You really don't know.

The problem is not the amount of money we take in but it is the out of control spending by Liberal and RHINO Pols.

Liberals didn't buy a missile system that costs us $170 billion per year. Liberals aren't paying Blackwater employess like major league baseball rookies to work security jobs in Iraq while our people in uniform get paid like MacDonald's employees.
Liberals don't pay $1000 per truck trip to Haliburton, which sometimes uses 28 trucks to carry one truckLOAD.
This war is nothing but a scam to throw money out the back door of the treasury to the big construction companies and arms industry. The GAO recently discovered over 200,000 US bought weapons are missing there.


Reduce taxes, cut Government useless Social Programs, allow oil drilling, refinery construction, coal and nuclear power plants construction, shale oil production and all the work that supports these very high paying jobs. Get Government out of the road. A bloated Federal Government is the problem not the solution.

If it hadn't been for this stupid war Bush lied to start, and stupid missile system, Bush could have balanced the budget, even with his tax cuts.
He's done everything possible to try and start as many wars as he could while in office. His family is tied to the arms industry and they'll do anything they can to build the family fortune. This means starting wars... and the republicans have given him nothing but help in taking us to the cleaners and now McCain is trying to do it some more.
 mjk21258
Joined: 10/20/2007
Msg: 14
view profile
History
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 9/10/2008 1:15:02 PM

Your giving Congress a pass, why?

One senator can stop everything, I saw ..."Mr Smith goes to Washington"

Where have the Dem's been?

It isn't going to make much difference whose in the W/H, Change is coming.


Won't give congress a pass on this. BUT, if you care to look at the national debt over the last 50 years or so, you will see a direct correlation between Republican Presidents vs. Democratic Presidents, especially Reagan and Bush 2.

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

Check it out if you dare, might make you think twice about voting Republican. And do a google search on National Debt.

And here is some food for thought, if there was no debt right now. That 407 billion dollar deficit for this year would be a surplus. You know what they could do with a surplus? Maybe a tax cut!!!!!
 mjk21258
Joined: 10/20/2007
Msg: 15
view profile
History
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 9/10/2008 1:32:13 PM
[quote}Then why don't we control the Iraqi oil?

I don't know the real reasons behind invading Iraq, hell the people that made the decision might not even know. But if they did do it for the oil, it wouldn't have been for us poor folks, it would be for the fat cats that control Exxon, BP, Shell, etc., so they could line their pockets with our cash. Control the oil, jack up the prices! Make sense to you now?
 StrangerInTheHouse
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 16
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 9/10/2008 1:44:42 PM
There's alot of things you can call democrats, but one of them is not wasteful spenders... especially if you're a republican.

Here's an interesting graph, showing how our republican presidents have run the national debt through the roof:

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

Here's some more budget data you might find interesting...Note: the years of Clinton's administration when he balanced the budget and the amounts of surplus in billions of dollars are in bold.
All years with a minus sign in front of them are years the budget was not balanced and we added to the national debt.

Very interesting how a democrat can cut taxes and balance the budget... and then your republican guy gets in and averages 300 billion a year in deficits and can't balance the budget and you won't even admit he's a thief.

from: http://www.reuters.com/article/bondsNews/idUSN0454704720080204

Feb 4 (Reuters) - U.S. President George W. Bush proposed a
budget on Monday that foresees a deficit of $410 billion, or
2.9 percent of GDP, this year. On Jan. 23, the Congressional Budget Office had projected a
$219 billion deficit, or 1.5 percent of GDP, for fiscal 2008.
In its last budget forecast in July, the White House had said
it expected the 2008 deficit to come in at $258 billion. Following are White House figures for budget surpluses or
deficits for the budget years 1985-2007, and the latest
projections from both CBO and the White House. The government's fiscal year runs from Oct. 1 through Sept.
30. BUDGET YEAR SURPLUS OR DEFICIT (-) AS PCT OF GDP
2007 -$162.0 bln -1.2
2006 -$248.2 bln -1.9
2005 -$318.3 bln -2.6
2004 -$412.7 bln -3.6
2003 -$377.6 bln -3.5
2002 -$157.8 bln -1.5
(Bush's total for his first 5 years in office= $1.676 trillion. The budgets for the next 3 years after this are his also... including the 403 billion that hasn't even been counted as part of this...)
2001 $128.2 bln 1.3
2000 $236.2 bln 2.4
1999 $125.6 bln 1.4
1998 $ 69.3 bln 0.8

1997 -$ 21.9 bln -0.3
1996 -$107.4 bln -1.4
1995 -$164.0 bln -2.2
1994 -$203.2 bln -2.9
1993 -$255.1 bln -3.9
(Clinton's deficits over 8 years= only $320.5 billion)..)
1992 -$290.3 bln -4.7
1991 -$269.2 bln -4.5
1990 -$221.0 bln -3.9
1989 -$152.6 bln -2.8

(Bush I's deficits= $933.1 billion dollars of national debt we're still paying interest on..)
 tallskier
Joined: 5/20/2005
Msg: 17
view profile
History
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 9/11/2008 3:02:23 PM

Control is about more then just who owns the well.


Certainly it is. Since you seem to wish to assert that we *do* indeed "control" Iraqi oil, perhaps you might share with us some fact on which you base that opinion.

Oil worldwide is traded in dollars. Do you suggest that for that reason, the US controls the world's supply of oil?
 tallskier
Joined: 5/20/2005
Msg: 18
view profile
History
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 9/11/2008 3:04:13 PM

I don't know the real reasons behind invading Iraq, hell the people that made the decision might not even know. But if they did do it for the oil, it wouldn't have been for us poor folks, it would be for the fat cats that control Exxon, BP, Shell, etc., so they could line their pockets with our cash. Control the oil, jack up the prices! Make sense to you now?


That looks pretty much like a theory to me. Have you any actual evidence that we control Iraqi Oil?

I think the Iraqis entering into oil development contracts with China pretty much rules that out, myself.
 mjk21258
Joined: 10/20/2007
Msg: 19
view profile
History
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 9/12/2008 3:38:14 PM
That looks pretty much like a theory to me. Have you any actual evidence that we control Iraqi Oil?

I think the Iraqis entering into oil development contracts with China pretty much rules that out, myself.


As I said, I don't know the real reason for invading Iraq and neither do I know the workings behind the Cheney Energy Commission. But, I firmly believe that if we do control the Iraqi Oil or even a portion of it, it wasn't so you and I could buy our gas at a lower price, it would have been about bigger profits for Big Oil. Why do you think Cheney's Meettings were so d@#$ secret!
 eeeo4U
Joined: 6/25/2007
Msg: 20
view profile
History
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 9/12/2008 3:49:44 PM
Stranger, I would vote for anybody who can reduce taxes and pay off the national deficit...were it not for flawed foreign policy I would have supported Clinton over Dole. Show me how it happens and I'll seriously consider it...
 StrangerInTheHouse
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 21
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 9/12/2008 3:59:55 PM
eeeo4U: It happens by the federal government not spending more than it takes in. If we take in more than we spend, then we can cut taxes by that amount the next fiscal year... really.

The government financed bonds can't be paid earlier than they're due.. because they draw interest for the owners... but if for instance, the feds take in 253 billion more than they spend in a given year, as they did in 99/00 with Clinton's budget/tax cut, then it gets carried over into next year's budget and it's revenue "earned" and they can actually cut the tax amount they need to collect and therefore lower the percentages of withholding income in the following fiscal year.

Make sense?

That's what they meant when they said "surplus". It's not like a permanent surplus of money. It's only a surplus of money at the end of the last fiscal year... but it means there will be a need to collect less money in the following year.... and if there's a surplus in the next fiscal year, then even less the year after and so forth and so on...

Okay?
 cncgandolf
Joined: 7/29/2007
Msg: 22
view profile
History
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 9/12/2008 7:38:29 PM
"You mean the republican controlled congress? Hardly. The dems only have a numerical advantage for the last six months but not veto proof control. The republicans have used the filibuster more times than ever before in history since that happened so the fact that congress can't get anything done is the fault of Bush and his republican cronies."

At best it is what has historically been called a lame duck congress. Expecting anything of them or blaming the newly elected for not turning things around faster is unreasonable.
 cncgandolf
Joined: 7/29/2007
Msg: 23
view profile
History
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 9/12/2008 7:47:12 PM
According to the NY Times report of a Senate investigation
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/09/world/middleeast/09iraq.html
The huge Iraqi oil profits are going to Iraqis. The Senate complaint is that the burden of reconstruction is being paid by American citizens money while the Iraqis keep their oil profits.
 cncgandolf
Joined: 7/29/2007
Msg: 24
view profile
History
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 9/12/2008 11:24:40 PM
"sat in congress for 20 something years and voted against every single pork barrel spending bill that was thrown at him. he even went agaisnt his own party, voting against bush's tax cuts. he didn't vote against the tax cuts because he thought it was a bad idea, no, he voted against it because it was not accompanied by spending cuts as well. "

How could he do that and still match up to the Bush machines 90% of the time. Something doesn't match up here. We know he matched 90% of the time.
 StrangerInTheHouse
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 26
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 9/13/2008 8:32:05 AM

and your right, we should put obama in there. yeah, sure, he'll cut down on the spending...please...the guy wants to create a whole new monstrous dept called nationlized medicine.

Both Obama and McCain recognize that we have a health care problem that's going to require a federal plan to get under control.
I guess you don't read the papers that much... but here they are, if you'll pull your head out of the sand long enough to read. IN fact, either of them are calculated to be able to cut healthcare costs by over 1/2 trillion from what they are now and make it available to every US citizen:

http://www.epi.org/content.cfm/pm126
 RadicalTraderNY
Joined: 10/4/2007
Msg: 27
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 9/13/2008 10:52:48 AM
McCain would be a disaster. Anyone remember what Reagan was like at McCain's age? He didn't run anything. A puppet. Same as Bush has been for the past 8. Get out the vote. www.therealmccain.com
 RadicalTraderNY
Joined: 10/4/2007
Msg: 28
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 9/13/2008 11:01:49 AM
I would be very surprised if the National debt is only 14 trillion. I don't think anyone knows the real number, but I have heard numbers as high as 54 trillion.
 dragonpat
Joined: 9/29/2006
Msg: 29
view profile
History
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 9/13/2008 2:09:56 PM
First off according to the constitution, it is congress that passes spending bills. The president ask, congress passes, and the president then signs... so yes Congress is as much or more to blame than the president. If you give someone a blank check and they blow more money than you can afford whos fault is is? yours, ie congress.
here are some facts for you all to think about...
Name, Dates Party Debt

George Washington, 1789-1797 82M

John Adams, 1797-1801 federalist 83

Thomas Jefferson, 1801-1809 Dem-Repub 57

James Madison, 1809-1817 Dem-Repub 123

James Monroe, 1817-1825 Dem-Repub 83

John Quincy Adams, 1825-1829 Dem-Repub 58
Andrew Jackson, 1829-1837 Dem 336,957.83
Martin Van Buren, 1837-1841 Dem 5
William Henry Harrison, 1841 Whig 5
John Tyler, 1841-1845 Whig 15
James Knox Polk, 1845-1849 Dem 63
Zachary Taylor, 1849-1850 Whig 63
Millard Fillmore, 1850-1853 Whig 59
Franklin Pierce, 1853-1857 Dem 28
James Buchanan, 1857-1861 Dem 90
Abraham Lincoln, 1861-1865 Repub 2,680
Andrew Johnson, 1865-1869 Dem/National Union 2588
Ulysses Simpson Grant, 1869-1877 Repub 2,205
Rutherford Birchard Hayes, 1877-1881 Rep 2,069
James Abram Garfield, 1881 Rep 2069
Chester Alan Arthur, 1881-1885 R 1863
Grover Cleveland, 1885-1889 D 1619
Benjamin Harrison, 1889-1893 R 1545
Grover Cleveland, 1893-1897 D 1817
William McKinley, 1897-1901 R 2143
Theodore Roosevelt, 1901-1909 R 2639
William Howard Taft,1909-1913 R 2,916
Woodrow Wilson, 1913-1921 D 23,977
Warren Gamaliel Harding, 1921-1923 R 22,963
Calvin Coolidge, 1923-1929 R 16,931
Herbert Clark Hoover,1929-1933 R 22,538

Franklin Delano Roosevelt, 1933-1945 D 258,862 **** D- house D- senate

Harry S. Truman, 1945-1953 D 266,071 R R
Dwight David Eisenhower 1953-1960 R 288,970 D D
John Fitzgerald Kennedy, 1961-1963 D 305,859 D D
Lyndon Baines Johnson, 1963-1968 D 353,720 D D
Richard Milhous Nixon, 1969-1974 R 475,059 D D
Gerald Rudolph Ford, 1974-1976 R 698,840 D D
James Earl Carter, Jr., 1977-1980 D 907,701 D D
Ronald Wilson Reagan,1981-1988 R 2,602,337
George Herbert Walker Bush, 1989-1992 R 4,064,620
William Jefferson Clinton, 1993-2000 D 5,656,270
George Walker Bush,2001-2008 R 9,007,653


yEAR DEBT PRES SENATE HOUSE
09/30/2007 9,007,653,372,262.48 R D D
09/30/2006 8,506,973,899,215.23 R
09/30/2005 7,932,709,661,723.50 R
09/30/2004 7,379,052,696,330.32 R
09/30/2003 6,783,231,062,743.62 R
09/30/2002 6,228,235,965,597.16 R
09/30/2001 5,807,463,412,200.06 R
09/30/2000 5,674,178,209,886.86 D R R
09/30/1999 5,656,270,901,615.43 D R R

09/30/1997 5,413,146,011,397.34 D R R

09/29/1995 4,973,982,900,709.39 D R R

09/30/1993 4,411,488,883,139.38 D D D

09/30/1991 3,665,303,351,697.03 R D D

09/29/1989 2,857,430,960,187.32 R D D

09/30/1987 2,350,276,890,953.00 R D D

09/30/1985 * 1,823,103,000,000.00 R R D

09/30/1983 * 1,377,210,000,000.00 R R D

09/30/1981 * 997,855,000,000.00 R R D

So it seems to me that they both blow money. Doesnt matter who is president, nor really who is in charge of congress, they simply spend and spend...
Comments?
 StrangerInTheHouse
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 30
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 9/13/2008 3:58:50 PM

First off according to the constitution, it is congress that passes spending bills. The president ask, congress passes, and the president then signs... so yes Congress is as much or more to blame than the president.

No... because a president can't be forced to sign it.
Congress makes the budget, but the president must approve it before it becomes law; or else congress has to override his veto.
Any president who can be pressured into signing a budget he doesn't approve would be the lamest of lame ducks... It doesn't happen.
If the president doesn't sign a budget, the public invariably blames the congress for not being reasonable. That's the was it was in the 90's when Clinton insisted on his middle class tax cut. That's the way it was with Ford when he wouldn't pass democrat majority budgets. That's the way it was when Nixon balanced the budget back in 1968/69 and that's the way it's always been to my knowledge.
Show me a time when this wasn't the case?

 ManeRider
Joined: 5/22/2005
Msg: 33
view profile
History
Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B
Posted: 10/20/2009 8:05:03 PM
Yeah, that's funny.^^^^^

Tell me another one.

After Bush broke the bank, it's going to cost money to get out of this mess. His stimulus plan greased the pockets of elite bankers and wall streeters, thanks to Paulsen, leaving nothing for the average American. SO the banks got their bailout (golden parachute) monies, presumably to free up loan monies, in order to keep America moving.

Well, you see how far that took us.....NOWHERE!!!

Carter left us with 900 Million. When Reagan was done, it had quintupled to 4.3 trillion.

I'd take Obama over McCain, anyday. Imagine where we'd be with McCain's trigger happy fingers, who didn't have a single plan to do anything to restructure the economy.
Show ALL Forums  > Politics  > Federal Deficit Estimated at Near-Record $407B