US to acquire third world status if trends continue.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Obama wants it to be 3rd world. Easier to take over everything.

Perhaps *you* want it to be 3rd world, just so you can say you were right about Obama.

We're closer to being 3rd world thanks to decades of Reaganite economic policy. Our infrastructure has gone decades without significant public investment and is in shambles as a result, the gap between the rich and the poor has grown larger and larger...

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Obama wants it to be 3rd world. Easier to take over everything.

Perhaps *you* want it to be 3rd world, just so you can say you were right about Obama.

We're closer to being 3rd world thanks to decades of Reaganite economic policy. Our infrastructure has gone decades without significant public investment and is in shambles as a result, the gap between the rich and the poor has grown larger and larger...

So, Obama is just another in a long line of Reaganites?

Or, is he the true Commie we need him to be?

Edited October 19, 2009 by Lone Ranger

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Obama has yet to dismantle decades of Reaganite economic policy.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Obama wants it to be 3rd world. Easier to take over everything.

Perhaps *you* want it to be 3rd world, just so you can say you were right about Obama.

We're closer to being 3rd world thanks to decades of Reaganite economic policy. Our infrastructure has gone decades without significant public investment and is in shambles as a result, the gap between the rich and the poor has grown larger and larger...

Yeah I do have to wonder what the trickle down economics has achieved - there is certainly a lot of wealth in this country, but very little of it is spent on the infrastructure; and as you say there is a sizeable gap between the rich and poor - to the extent that parts of this country might as well be a completely different country entirely.

[Joseph & Ana 0]

Obama wants it to be 3rd world. Easier to take over everything.

Perhaps *you* want it to be 3rd world, just so you can say you were right about Obama.

We're closer to being 3rd world thanks to decades of Reaganite economic policy. Our infrastructure has gone decades without significant public investment and is in shambles as a result, the gap between the rich and the poor has grown larger and larger...

Hey I think I just read that on the DNC website.

Obama has yet to dismantle decades of Reaganite economic policy.

Not completely, but he's well on his way and we're getting closer and closer to that 3rd world stasus. Just ask BY.

Obama wants it to be 3rd world. Easier to take over everything.

Perhaps *you* want it to be 3rd world, just so you can say you were right about Obama.

We're closer to being 3rd world thanks to decades of Reaganite economic policy. Our infrastructure has gone decades without significant public investment and is in shambles as a result, the gap between the rich and the poor has grown larger and larger...

Yeah I do have to wonder what the trickle down economics has achieved - there is certainly a lot of wealth in this country, but very little of it is spent on the infrastructure; and as you say there is a sizeable gap between the rich and poor - to the extent that parts of this country might as well be a completely different country entirely.

It was the longest period of peacetime growth in US history.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It was the longest period of peacetime growth in US history.

On paper, sure.

[mawilson 2,133]

And Gregg said that during the same ten-year period, public debt as a percentage of gross domestic product would increase from 40 percent — which Gregg called “tolerable but still too high” — up to 80 percent.

Wrong. It's already at 85% and it will increase to 170%.

No, but seriously, how does he figure the ratio is now 40%?

http://usdebtclock.org/

US National Debt: $11,925 billion

US GDP: $14,366 billion (projected for this year)

11,925 / 14,366 = 83%

[Joseph & Ana 0]

It was the longest period of peacetime growth in US history.

On paper, sure.

I guess facts only work when you want them to.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It was the longest period of peacetime growth in US history.

On paper, sure.

I guess facts only work when you want them to.

I never denied that there wasn't a lot of wealth in the country, just agreed that the gap between rich and poor has consistently widened and that this is most apparent in the dilapidated urban environments in many parts of the US.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

And Gregg said that during the same ten-year period, public debt as a percentage of gross domestic product would increase from 40 percent — which Gregg called “tolerable but still too high” — up to 80 percent.

Wrong. It's already at 85% and it will increase to 170%.

No, but seriously, how does he figure the ratio is now 40%?

http://usdebtclock.org/

US National Debt: $11,925 billion

US GDP: $14,366 billion (projected for this year)

11,925 / 14,366 = 83%

You must have misfigured somehow, because Wikipedia is never wrong.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

December 19, 1984

Policy Analysis no. 45

<h2 align="center">Deficits and Taxes: Federal Budget and Fiscal Policy in the 1980's</h2>

by Thomas S. McCaleb

The economic program proposed by the Reagan administration at its inception in 1981 was designed to reduce government spending and taxes relative to the economy's total output or gross national product (GNP). As a first step in implementing the program, the administration proposed a phased reduction in tax rates over the three years from 1981 to 1983. This was to be accompanied by reductions in the level of spending proposed by the Carter administration for fiscal year (FY) 1982. The tax reductions were in fact adopted by Congress, and a set of spending reductions was incorporated into the First Congressional Budget Resolution. The budget process for 1982 was never completed, however, and the 1981-82 recession intervened.

The net result of these efforts has been that tax rates are lower now than in 1980, but not lower than rates in 1979. The reductions in aggregate federal expenditures relative to GNP, however, have not materialized. Indeed, during the first three years of the Reagan administration, federal spending as a percentage of GNP increased to historically high peacetime levels. Because the decline in the rate of growth of tax revenues has not been matched by a decline in the growth of expenditures, the government's budget deficit in real terms has also reached unprecedented peacetime levels. The 1983 deficit was almost 6 percent of GNP. Projected deficits for 1985 and 1986 exceed 4 percent of GNP. These levels are of the same order of magnitude as those reached during the Great Depression of the 1930s. Without a reversal of the tax reductions or significant real spending cuts, the projected deficits will not fall below 3 percent of GNP until 1989.

The projected federal budget deficits have now become the central focus of economic policy. Furthermore, deficit mania has swept Wall Street, the national media, and even the groves of academe, where the National Bureau of Economic Research has launched a major project to investigate the impact of government budget deficits. The deficit issue poses three major questions: (1) Where did the deficit projections come from? (2) Where did the projected deficits come from? (3) Where will the deficit reductions come from?[1]

Thomas S. McCaleb is associate professor of economics at Florida State University and a former senior staff economist with the Council of Economic Advisers.

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=911

Yep. We've seen this happen in many of the states, like California and Arizona. The Republicans have managed to capitalize on the unpopularity of taxes (nobody likes the idea of having to pay taxes) while avoiding gutting government to the severity that people didn't feel the pinch until the deficits become so high, there is no choice but to gut government spending. Now the people are sobering up to the reality that - to have a functioning society, like good schools, adequate law enforcement, roads, etc....you need to spend money, which in turn actually helps the economy. Meanwhile, Republicans in states like California are trying to spin the whole debacle as government spending run amok.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

It looks like BY is right. I'm moving.

I am still thinking Philippines.

Yeah - look how much the Philippine government spends on infrastructure. If we're moving towards being a Third World country, it's because the policies of the Right have driven us there. Public schooling for all children? Who needs it? Look at Philippines. Food Stamps for the poor? Who needs it? Have 4 year old Filipino children sell candles in the streets for a handful of rice...their daily sustenance.

[Joseph & Ana 0]

It looks like BY is right. I'm moving.

I am still thinking Philippines.

Yeah - look how much the Philippine government spends on infrastructure. If we're moving towards being a Third World country, it's because the policies of the Right have driven us there. Public schooling for all children? Who needs it? Look at Philippines. Food Stamps for the poor? Who needs it? Have 4 year old Filipino children sell candles in the streets for a handful of rice...their daily sustenance.

Exactly - thats what we'll become under Obama. We'll have to ask him for rice.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

It looks like BY is right. I'm moving.

I am still thinking Philippines.

Yeah - look how much the Philippine government spends on infrastructure. If we're moving towards being a Third World country, it's because the policies of the Right have driven us there. Public schooling for all children? Who needs it? Look at Philippines. Food Stamps for the poor? Who needs it? Have 4 year old Filipino children sell candles in the streets for a handful of rice...their daily sustenance.

Exactly - thats what we'll become under Obama. We'll have to ask him for rice.

The best you thing you can do is let him prove you right. Support his agenda that he campaigned and won the popular vote on and then if you are right, and those ideas will be miserable failures, you can claim victory. Because, the Republicans got to push forward their agenda for the last 8 years without any effective opposition and we are now reaping the consequences. While some hardliners such as yourself are blinded to the truth, the majority of Americans, thankfully can see the truth.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

It was the longest period of peacetime growth in US history.

Absolutely. There was no other peacetime period where any President managed to triple the national debt. What a growth record! Not sure it's something to be particularly proud of, though.

1981: $ 997 billion

1989: $ 2,857 billion