Are there any believers left? Don't say you weren't warned.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

And... does it really matter? The deficit is only $680 billion. That's like you making $100,000 a year but spending a million.

Mathematically challenged, are we? It's like me making $100,000 and spending $124,500.00.

If your comparison was mathematically correct, the deficit would be $27.74 trillion dollars.

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

Um, correct me if I'm wrong but Obama wasn't the president back in 2005 was he?

Nope. That chart goes up to 2012. And the debt shows no lowering in the near future.

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

Nope. That chart goes up to 2012. And the debt shows no lowering in the near future.

Noted. I guess my point is we've had debt for a while. To say it's all Obama's fault would be inaccurate. Now, if Bush left us in good shape and Obama messed that up, this argument would hold more water. I don't know if anyone could have fixed this.

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

Noted. I guess my point is we've had debt for a while. To say it's all Obama's fault would be inaccurate. Now, if Bush left us in good shape and Obama messed that up, this argument would hold more water. I don't know if anyone could have fixed this.

Buddy, show me where i ever said it's Obama's fault. It's been happening for years, and unless it stops, this nation will be ruined. The ONLY way for it to get better is to reduce the deficit not to zero, but to get it to some large positive numbers, for a very long time.

Part of the reason the deficit is lower now is because the payroll tax holiday came to an end, so peeps are paying more taxes. That expired recently, and had nothing to do with Obama.

It's a step in the right direction, but we have a LONG way to go...

Mathematically challenged, are we? It's like me making $100,000 and spending $124,500.00.

Ok. So do that for 8 years. How much money would you have in your bank account?

Edited January 16, 2014 by DavenRoxy

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

Buddy, show me where i ever said it's Obama's fault. It's been happening for years, and unless it stops, this nation will be ruined. The ONLY way for it to get better is to reduce the deficit not to zero, but to get it to some large positive numbers, for a very long time.

Part of the reason the deficit is lower now is because the payroll tax holiday came to an end, so peeps are paying more taxes. That expired recently, and had nothing to do with Obama.

It's a step in the right direction, but we have a LONG way to go...

Ok. So do that for 8 years. How much money would you have in your bank account?

Wasn't talking to you, but folks like Danno(who started this thread) who have concluded that it's Obama's fault, even when he wasn't in office.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Nope. That chart goes up to 2012. And the debt shows no lowering in the near future.

When was the last time the debt was lowered?

Ok. So do that for 8 years. How much money would you have in your bank account?

How is that important or relevant in any way? You might be surprised to learn that I am not a sovereign nation.

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

When was the last time the debt was lowered?

How is that important or relevant in any way? You might be surprised to learn that I am not a sovereign nation.

Sorry, I forgot my chisel to get this thru your skull. But I'll type it real slow fer ya...

I F Y O U C O N T I N U E T O S P E N D M O R E T H A N Y O U M A K E Y O U W I L L N E V E R G E T A H E A D

You bi7ch about how rich the top 1% are. They are because they DON'T operate under a deficit for years on end.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

Sorry, I forgot my chisel to get this thru your skull. But I'll type it real slow fer ya...

I F Y O U C O N T I N U E T O S P E N D M O R E T H A N Y O U M A K E Y O U W I L L N E V E R G E T A H E A D

You bi7ch about how rich the top 1% are. They are because they DON'T operate under a deficit for years on end.

You are wasting O2.He can't understand we are not saying it started with Barry, but he sure has kept it going.

All from a fellow who said debt was unpatriotic.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Sorry, I forgot my chisel to get this thru your skull. But I'll type it real slow fer ya...

I F Y O U C O N T I N U E T O S P E N D M O R E T H A N Y O U M A K E Y O U W I L L N E V E R G E T A H E A D

I know the soundbite. I've heard it often enough. That doesn't make it valid. It's a useless and irrelevant comparison.

The Federal Budget is NOT like a Household Budget: Here’s Why

Whenever a demagogue wants to whip up hysteria about federal budget deficits, he or she invariably begins with an analogy to a household’s budget: “No household can continually spend more than its income, and neither can the federal government”. On the surface that, might appear sensible; dig deeper and it makes no sense at all. A sovereign government bears no obvious resemblance to a household. Let us enumerate some relevant differences.

1. The US federal government is 221 years old, if we date its birth to the adoption of the Constitution. Arguably, that is about as good a date as we can find, since the Constitution established a common market in the US, forbade states from interfering with interstate trade (for example, through taxation), gave to the federal government the power to levy and collect taxes, and reserved for the federal government the power to create money, to regulate its value, and to fix standards of weight and measurement-from whence our money of account, the dollar, comes. I don’t know any head of household with such an apparently indefinitely long lifespan. This might appear irrelevant, but it is not. When you die, your debts and assets need to be assumed and resolved. There is no “day of reckoning”, no final piper-paying date for the sovereign government. Nor do I know any household with the power to levy taxes, to give a name to — and issue — the currency we use, and to demand that those taxes are paid in the currency it issues.

2. With one brief exception, the federal government has been in debt every year since 1776. In January 1835, for the first and only time in U.S. history, the public debt was retired, and a budget surplus was maintained for the next two years in order to accumulate what Treasury Secretary Levi Woodbury called “a fund to meet future deficits.” In 1837 the economy collapsed into a deep depression that drove the budget into deficit, and the federal government has been in debt ever since. Since 1776 there have been exactly seven periods of substantial budget surpluses and significant reduction of the debt. From 1817 to 1821 the national debt fell by 29 percent; from 1823 to 1836 it was eliminated (Jackson’s efforts); from 1852 to 1857 it fell by 59 percent, from 1867 to 1873 by 27 percent, from 1880 to 1893 by more than 50 percent, and from 1920 to 1930 by about a third. Of course, the last time we ran a budget surplus was during the Clinton years. I do not know any household that has been able to run budget deficits for approximately 190 out of the past 230-odd years, and to accumulate debt virtually nonstop since 1837.

3. The United States has also experienced six periods of depression. The depressions began in 1819, 1837, 1857, 1873, 1893, and 1929. (Do you see any pattern? Take a look at the dates listed above.) With the exception of the Clinton surpluses, every significant reduction of the outstanding debt has been followed by a depression, and every depression has been preceded by significant debt reduction. The Clinton surplus was followed by the Bush recession, a speculative euphoria, and then the collapse in which we now find ourselves. The jury is still out on whether we might manage to work this up to yet another great depression. While we cannot rule out coincidences, seven surpluses followed by six and a half depressions (with some possibility for making it the perfect seven) should raise some eyebrows. And, by the way, our less serious downturns have almost always been preceded by reductions of federal budget deficits. I don’t know of any case of a national depression caused by a household budget surplus.

4. The federal government is the issuer of our currency. Its IOUs are always accepted in payment. Government actually spends by crediting bank deposits (and credits the reserves of those banks); if you don’t want a bank deposit, government will give you cash; if you don’t want cash it will give you a treasury bond. People will work, sell, panhandle, lie, cheat, steal, and even kill to obtain the government’s dollars. I wish my IOUs were so desirable. I don’t know any household that is able to spend by crediting bank deposits and reserves, or by issuing currency. OK, some counterfeiters try, but they go to jail.

5. Some claim that if the government continues to run deficits, some day the dollar’s value will fall due to inflation; or its value will depreciate relative to foreign currencies. But only a moron would refuse to accept dollars today on the belief that at some unknown date in the hypothetical and distant future their value might be less than today’s value. If you have dollars you don’t want, please send them to me. Note that even if we accept that budget deficits can lead to currency devaluation, that is another obvious distinguishing characteristic: my household’s spending in excess of income won’t reduce the purchasing power of the dollar by any measurable amount.

If you put your mind to it, you will no doubt come up with other differences. I realize that distinguishing between a sovereign government and a household does not put to rest all deficit fears. But since this analogy is invoked so often, I hope that the next time you hear it used you will challenge the speaker to explain exactly why a government’s budget is like a household’s budget. If the speaker claims that government budget deficits are unsustainable, that government must eventually pay back all that debt, ask him or her why we have managed to avoid retiring debt since 1837-is 173 years long enough to establish a “sustainable” pattern?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

You bi7ch about how rich the top 1% are. They are because they DON'T operate under a deficit for years on end.

I don't operate under deficits - in fact, I operate under a healthy surplus each and every year. That hasn't put me in the top 1%. Donald Trump, on the other hand, has done nothing but operate under deficits and then offload the accumulated debt in bankruptcy court and yet despite all of that deficit operation of his, he is in the top 1%. Now what? Yes, your postulate appears appears to be off. There must be other reasons for why some are and others are not in the 1%.

[luckytxn 2,264]

This man has been a disaster as POTUS. I was positive that no one could screw us up more than Bush. I was wrong. We have the most inept, weak, leader probably ever to hold that office. The ultimate empty suit.

NO, it's not just about healthcare and tracking your calls or gay marriage or prisoners in Gitmo..... face it many of us were duped by slick packaging by the Media.

In the end, the only thing we can count on will be he is the "first Black president"... and I know how important that is to some so I guess his two terms will have something to show of value after 8 long dismal years.

... Oh and his wife has nicely developed arms, never discount fitness.

http://youtu.be/pq-7Jt-f-mQ

[Danno 1,228]

Didn't OBL get killed under his watch? Or do we credit that to Bush?

I give him a little credit for that, but Jeez Marv lets not carry on like Obama carried out the killing, he simply suppressed that inner Puzz and gave it a "go ahead."

[Danno 1,228]

Wait, aren't gay people allowed to serve in the military freely because of Obama? Didn't the DREAM act happen because of Obama? DIdn't he create new jobs?

Ok, ok gays are out of the closet and more illegals are now ready to vote (for the party of big-gov't), but again, lets not overplay the few jobs being created, they are not even keeping up with the population growth.

[Danno 1,228]

So, does that mean he actually did some things positive? I see. And something tells me folks who didn't have healthcare before aren't complaining...

But the folks who "had" health-care and lost it, are complaining ...thanks to the first Black president (as they keep reminding us).

Those who still have it are paying more... and will keep paying more.

Go team Obama!!!

[Danno 1,228]

By the way, Danno. What did you warn us about anyway?

That he was was going to be a disaster, but to be honest, I thought by now the natural forces of the market would have spun us into a revitalized economy....

this long term sluggishness is unprecedented.

Had he just got out of the way.....