PDA

View Full Version : Another trip in the wayback machine!



LWW
07-21-2011, 05:28 AM
If only the democrooks would have listened in 1967 when the national debt was only $337B ... or about 2.5% of today's level.

Whatever happened to the leftist argument that if something could end in disaster, then we should err on the side of caution?

What's that?

That line is only valid when the party says it's valid?

Imagine that.

1967 (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=18ZaAAAAIBAJ&sjid=lWwDAAAAIBAJ&pg=7430,4564972&dq=debt-ceiling&hl=en)

1979 (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=DH4xAAAAIBAJ&sjid=4aEFAAAAIBAJ&pg=7253,4938880&dq=debt+ceiling&hl=en)

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/today.parcoltop11.33786.ImageFile.jpg

Sev
07-21-2011, 05:32 AM
History repeats is self.
Same tired Dem play book.

LWW
07-21-2011, 05:34 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">History repeats is self.
Same tired Dem play book. </div></div>

Troo dat ... and we have been infiltrated by invisible spies.

My mole tells me they are from Maryland and West Virginia!

Soflasnapper
07-21-2011, 06:29 AM
Silly and ahistorical.

GOP should have followed the Democrats' lead.

13 years after '67, the debt had not quite tripled, but was a lower percentage of gdp than in '67. It was becoming higher in nominal terms, but shrinking as a share of gdp.

Reagan found Carter's recession year deficit of $70 billion absolutely unacceptable, and brought a new economic idea. Which promptly doubled the deficit, and then nearly doubled it again. 8 years later under the regime designed to fix this problem and end this horrible deficit spending, the debt had tripled, and debt to gdp had begun to soar. The deficit never was less than twice its previous record level, even after a 5 year boom. 4 years after that, GHW Bush's one-term saw that large increase in debt up another 50%, to a still higher level of debt to gdp ratio.

Then the most recent Bush administration came in with Reagan II, and re-doubled the debt again in 8 years with the new version of supply side ideas.

So, to keep score, if total debt before these new ideas designed to curb the debt came into force was counted as 1, we have 1 x 3 x 1.5 x 2 = 9 times the horrible debt total under the Dems, created under lower tax regimes.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Economist Mike Kimel notes that the last five Democratic Presidents (Clinton, Carter, LBJ, JFK, and Truman) all reduced public debt as a share of GDP, while the last four Republican Presidents (GW Bush, GHW Bush, Reagan, and Ford) all oversaw an increase in the country’s indebtedness.[1] Economic historian J. Bradford DeLong observes a contrast not so much between Republicans and Democrats, but between Democrats and "old-style Republicans (Eisenhower and Nixon)" on one hand (decreasing debt), and "new-style Republicans" on the other (increasing debt).[2] Similarly, David Stockman, director of the Office of Management and Budget under President Ronald Reagan, as op-ed contributor to the New York Times, blamed the "ideological tax-cutters" of the Reagan administration for the increase of national debt during the 1980s.[3]</div></div>

National debt by US presidential terms, Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms)

LWW
07-21-2011, 06:52 AM
Where do you get this shiite from?

The reality is the (R)'s took control of the budget in 1995.

The US debt was $4,974B.

At the end of their last budget the debt was $9,007B.

That's an increase of $5,033B over 12 years.

That's $419B per year on average,

In 4 years running the budget the (D)'s have ran the deficit up to $14,500B.

That's an increase of $5,493B.

That's an average of $1,373B per year.

The democrooks inherited a budget in deficit by 1.2% of GDP ... in 4 years they have ran that up to 10.9% of GDP.

Next myth please?

Soflasnapper
07-21-2011, 05:35 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Where do you get this shiite from?

The reality is the (R)'s took control of the budget in 1995.

The US debt was $4,974B.

At the end of their last budget the debt was $9,007B.

That's an increase of $5,033B over 12 years.

That's $419B per year on average,

In 4 years running the budget the (D)'s have ran the deficit up to $14,500B.

That's an increase of $5,493B.

That's an average of $1,373B per year.

The democrooks inherited a budget in deficit by 1.2% of GDP ... in 4 years they have ran that up to 10.9% of GDP.

Next myth please? </div></div>

You start off wrong and then veer off further and further.

The R's took control of the Congress in January of 1995 (true), but didn't affect the budget that year until Oct. 1.

9 months of the year were already under the (actual) FY '95 budget, which they had no part of, which had started IN 1994 (Oct. 1).

The fiscal year, you've heard of the concept I'm sure but appear to not understand what it means, STARTS THE QUARTER BEFORE THE CALENDAR YEAR.

After you re-work your numbers to reflect that basic reality of the federal government's financing, check my link, to reflect exactly where I got this from-- the deficit/debt BY PRESIDENCY.

AGAIN, starting that presidential debt/deficit accounting as of the NEXT fiscal year from the calendar year they started in, since all but 1 quarter of the year was already written literally into law.

So, the president is given a pass for the FY with the same number as the calendar year he came in. AND he is assessed blame or credit for those FYs he had a part in, because although he cannot set the spending limit directly, the veto power is a very strong one to set spending levels, if only the POTUS will use it. As neither Reagan or W ever quite got around to doing.

LWW
07-22-2011, 02:29 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Where do you get this shiite from?

The reality is the (R)'s took control of the budget in 1995.

The US debt was $4,974B.

At the end of their last budget the debt was $9,007B.

That's an increase of $5,033B over 12 years.

That's $419B per year on average,

In 4 years running the budget the (D)'s have ran the deficit up to $14,500B.

That's an increase of $5,493B.

That's an average of $1,373B per year.

The democrooks inherited a budget in deficit by 1.2% of GDP ... in 4 years they have ran that up to 10.9% of GDP.

Next myth please? </div></div>

You start off wrong and then veer off further and further.

The R's took control of the Congress in January of 1995 (true), but didn't affect the budget that year until Oct. 1.

9 months of the year were already under the (actual) FY '95 budget, which they had no part of, which had started IN 1994 (Oct. 1).

The fiscal year, you've heard of the concept I'm sure but appear to not understand what it means, STARTS THE QUARTER BEFORE THE CALENDAR YEAR.</div></div>

That's why I used the data starting from that point.

Next deflection please?

LWW
07-22-2011, 02:33 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">After you re-work your numbers to reflect that basic reality of the federal government's financing, check my link, to reflect exactly where I got this from-- the deficit/debt BY PRESIDENCY. </div></div>

When you can show me where in the COTUS the POTUS sets the budget I will consider that to be a valid point.

Until then, I will consider it what it actually is ... a false flag argument to deflect blame away from where it lies.

If you actually want to learn how silly that argument is ... takes the last 3 years of an R POTUS combined with an R congress, and then compare it to the 2009-2011 D/D era.

What's that?

You don't like that comparison?

It exposes your myth as yet another slavish defense of the regime?

But ... I already knew that.

Next myth please?

Qtec
07-22-2011, 03:13 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> You start off wrong and then veer off further and further.</div></div>

Astute observation.

Its all he's got.

Q