Affordable Care Act / ObamaCare

[strigori]

Care to rethink that, Johnny? Reagan destroyed the deficit, doubling it over Carter's, nearly doubling it every year he was in office.

 

Can't be true knapplc. Today's GOP repeatedly says that Reagan was a small government fiscal conservative. There is no way that he passed massive spending increases and exploded the deficit.

 

And it also can't be true because Fox News didn't tell me to think this way. Fox News wouldn't misconstrue data to serve their own ends. I mean, if we can't trust Fox News enough to mindlessly regurgitate their derp, then who CAN we trust?

If only we could build some sort of derp-to-electricity technology. We could be energy independent in no time at all.

 

Are you guys done with your circle jerk? Because if you are then you need to get your facts straight.

 

1. The President of the United States can't spend a penny of the tax-payers money.

 

2. During Ronald Reagan's two terms as President Congress was controlled by at least a 60% Democrat majority. It was the Democrats who started spending the additional revenues and then some thus INCREASING the budget deficit.

 

3. The Democrats lied to Bush I. They promised Bush I that if he raised taxes they wouldn't increase spending. This was after Bush said, "Read my lips, no new taxes." Bush I stupidly fell for the ploy, raised taxes, broke his chief campaign re-election promise and was as a result, a one term President.

 

Look you guys are perfectly free to be on the left side of the political isle-but at least have your facts right and not try and rewrite history to make "your side" look better.

 

Edit: And I love the way you bash Fox News, as if MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, NPR or pick whatever liberal left leaning media outlet you wish, is any better or worse than slanting the news than Fox is. It just absolutely kills the left that they don't have 100% control of all the media. That's why you/they incessantly bash Fox and talk radio-because you want to completely silence or take away any views which run counter to yours.

 

If you weren't finished with the circle jerk then by all means please continue and come back to this thread when you are done.

By that logic its all the republican congress fault now then, since Obama can't spend anything....

[gobiggergoredder]

Carlfense (King of Graph),

 

You've been using that graph in #168 for over a year now. It's still a gem. Oh yeah......and meaningless. Make sure to add #194 to your list. It is equally worthless.

 

How so many of you say if we do X and Y happens then only X controls Y is beyond me. There are so many factors that got us into this current mess and it is nothing short of ignorant to turn this into a Bush-Obama battle. It's no different than saying Red Wine consumption reduces a women's risk of breast cancer. The fact of the matter is no one ever pulls the data on women that drink red wine. They are usally wealthier, more educated, have better access to healthcare and overall maintain a healthier life style.....Of course, that wouldn't get grant dollars or sell newspaper ad space.

 

I am equally baffled how anyone in the right mind thinks that you could put a price tag on government health care. If you can't put a cost to it, how do you know if you can pay for it?

 

How the Government Is Swallowing the Economy

Economist Gary Shilling has calculated that 58 percent of the population is dependent on the government for "major parts of their income," including teachers, soldiers, bureaucrats, and other government employees; welfare and Social Security recipients; government pensioners; public housing beneficiaries; and people who work for government contractors. By 2018, Shilling estimates, an astounding 67 percent of Americans could be dependent on the government for their livelihood. The implications aren't comforting.

[carlfense]

You've been using that graph in #168 for over a year now. It's still a gem. Oh yeah......and meaningless. Make sure to add #194 to your list. It is equally worthless.

You only claim that they are meaningless because you don't like what they say. You like to put the blame where it belongs: on Obama and Democrats. Facts be damned.

 

I'll continue to use it. Wherever deficit ignorance pops up, I'll post it. Hopefully that won't ruffle your feathers too much.

[carlfense]

2. During Ronald Reagan's two terms as President Congress was controlled by at least a 60% Democrat majority. It was the Democrats who started spending the additional revenues and then some thus INCREASING the budget deficit.

I suppose it isn't too hard to forge the president's signature. No one would notice.

[carlfense]

By that logic its all the republican congress fault now then, since Obama can't spend anything....

Don't be ridiculous.

['SkersRule]

By that logic its all the republican congress fault now then, since Obama can't spend anything....

 

Except for the fact that when Obama recommended the bailout/stimulus package Congress had reverted back to Democrat control. No President can can spend even a penny. The President can request spending but ultimately it is up to Congress. Republicans certainly aren't totally blameless here, but to try and pin the entire budget deficit on Republicans is almost absurd. It's absurd because it ignores the reality of which political party taxed and spent the vast majority of the money causing this insane deficit. There are many things to blame a sitting President for but the deficit isn't one of them.

[strigori]

By that logic its all the republican congress fault now then, since Obama can't spend anything....

 

Except for the fact that when Obama recommended the bailout/stimulus package Congress had reverted back to Democrat control. No President can can spend even a penny. The President can request spending but ultimately it is up to Congress. Republicans certainly aren't totally blameless here, but to try and pin the entire budget deficit on Republicans is almost absurd. It's absurd because it ignores the reality of which political party taxed and spent the vast majority of the money causing this insane deficit. There are many things to blame a sitting President for but the deficit isn't one of them.

TARP started under Bush, and was, for a time anyway, fairly bipartisan. And this 'deficit' is not the sole property of Obama. Bush is the one who really started racking up massive deficits. Remember he had a surplus from Clinton, and that was gone before Bush's first year was out. You can't instantly undo long term policy and plans in a couple years. Bear in mind Obama actually accounts for the costs of all of our middle east military actions, and Bush had kept that off the books to make numbers look better. Two foreign wars, and tax cuts for the wealthy and big business all at the same time was fool-hearty at best.

['SkersRule]

By that logic its all the republican congress fault now then, since Obama can't spend anything....

 

Except for the fact that when Obama recommended the bailout/stimulus package Congress had reverted back to Democrat control. No President can can spend even a penny. The President can request spending but ultimately it is up to Congress. Republicans certainly aren't totally blameless here, but to try and pin the entire budget deficit on Republicans is almost absurd. It's absurd because it ignores the reality of which political party taxed and spent the vast majority of the money causing this insane deficit. There are many things to blame a sitting President for but the deficit isn't one of them.

TARP started under Bush, and was, for a time anyway, fairly bipartisan. And this 'deficit' is not the sole property of Obama. Bush is the one who really started racking up massive deficits. Remember he had a surplus from Clinton, and that was gone before Bush's first year was out. You can't instantly undo long term policy and plans in a couple years. Bear in mind Obama actually accounts for the costs of all of our middle east military actions, and Bush had kept that off the books to make numbers look better. Two foreign wars, and tax cuts for the wealthy and big business all at the same time was fool-hearty at best.

 

I'm saying that no President, regardless of political affilliation, is really to be "blamed" for any budget deficit because it is not the President who actually authorizes expenditures. And tax cuts are not foolhardy unless there isn't a cut in spending to go along with it. We can not afford to keep spending like we do. Cuts in spending need to be made and made sooner rather than later otherwise our nation will end up like either Greece or California-on the verge of bankruptcy.

[gobiggergoredder]

You've been using that graph in #168 for over a year now. It's still a gem. Oh yeah......and meaningless. Make sure to add #194 to your list. It is equally worthless.

You only claim that they are meaningless because you don't like what they say. You like to put the blame where it belongs: on Obama and Democrats. Facts be damned.

 

I'll continue to use it. Wherever deficit ignorance pops up, I'll post it. Hopefully that won't ruffle your feathers too much.

 

Now you're just making things up. My worldview is based on the idea that there are very rarely black and white answers. I think most everything is shades of gray.

 

But, hey. Whatever you want to believe.

[carlfense]

You've been using that graph in #168 for over a year now. It's still a gem. Oh yeah......and meaningless. Make sure to add #194 to your list. It is equally worthless.

You only claim that they are meaningless because you don't like what they say. You like to put the blame where it belongs: on Obama and Democrats. Facts be damned.

 

I'll continue to use it. Wherever deficit ignorance pops up, I'll post it. Hopefully that won't ruffle your feathers too much.

 

Now you're just making things up. My worldview is based on the idea that there are very rarely black and white answers. I think most everything is shades of gray.

 

But, hey. Whatever you want to believe.

Why don't you think that those quotes can work together?

 

It shouldn't be difficult at all for you to figure it out.

[carlfense]

. . . but to try and pin the entire budget deficit on Republicans is almost absurd.

Agreed. Who is trying to do that?

 

It's absurd because it ignores the reality of which political party taxed and spent the vast majority of the money causing this insane deficit.

Now you've got it backwards. It's not the taxing that increased the deficit. Quite the contrary actually.

[gobiggergoredder]

You've been using that graph in #168 for over a year now. It's still a gem. Oh yeah......and meaningless. Make sure to add #194 to your list. It is equally worthless.

You only claim that they are meaningless because you don't like what they say. You like to put the blame where it belongs: on Obama and Democrats. Facts be damned.

 

I'll continue to use it. Wherever deficit ignorance pops up, I'll post it. Hopefully that won't ruffle your feathers too much.

 

Now you're just making things up. My worldview is based on the idea that there are very rarely black and white answers. I think most everything is shades of gray.

 

But, hey. Whatever you want to believe.

Why don't you think that those quotes can work together?

 

It shouldn't be difficult at all for you to figure it out.

 

It's not for me, but it appears to be that way for you.

[carlfense]

It's not for me, but it appears to be that way for you.

Apparently. Please explain it for little ol' me. Use small words if possible.

[Mavric]

It's absurd because it ignores the reality of which political party taxed and spent the vast majority of the money causing this insane deficit.

Now you've got it backwards. It's not the taxing that increased the deficit. Quite the contrary actually.

Exactly - it's not the taxing that increased the deficit it's the spending. That's what you're getting at, right?

[carlfense]

It's absurd because it ignores the reality of which political party taxed and spent the vast majority of the money causing this insane deficit.

Now you've got it backwards. It's not the taxing that increased the deficit. Quite the contrary actually.

Exactly - it's not the taxing that increased the deficit it's the spending. That's what you're getting at, right?

Nope. Cutting taxes without decreasing spending (or increasing spending while reducing taxes) will increase the deficit.