So how much has Obama increased federal spending?
Mitt Romney has accused Barack Obama of igniting a “debt and spending inferno.” American Crossroads, the Karl Rove SuperPAC, says free spending by Obama “drove us $5 trillion deeper in debt.” Veep nominee Paul Ryan, who also chairs the House Budget Committee, this week accused Obama of stealing the next generation’s future with his spending spree.
All of that talk finally got me curious: Just how much HAS spending increased under President Obama? Put another way, what does a “debt and spending inferno” look like in numerical terms?
As the base year for this analysis, let’s take 2008, the last full year of George W. Bush’s presidency. You could make the argument for using 2009 as the base year, since the ‘09 spending bills had already been passed and fiscal 2009 was already almost four months underway by the time Obama took office. But to satisfy our conservative friends, we’ll take 2008 as a cleaner, less controversial starting point.
So, after adjusting for inflation, how much did federal spending increase from fiscal 2008 to fiscal 2012, which ended Oct. 1? Any guesses?
Just to give you some guidance in making that guess, federal spending under the sainted President Reagan grew by 9.6 percent from 1980 to 1984. (Again, all of these numbers are inflation-adjusted.) Under the second President Bush, with a largely Republican Congress, federal spending grew by 16.5 percent from 2000 to 2004.
So how much has it increased under Obama’s “spending inferno”? 25 percent? 35 percent?
The answer is 9.9 percent. Between 2008 and the recently completed fiscal 2012, total federal spending has increased by 9.9 percent, about the same amount as under Reagan and considerably less than under Bush.
The chart above explains a lot about how we got here. On the right-hand side, you can see the impact of the Great Recession. In inflation-adjusted terms, federal spending is up less than 10 percent from 2008, but federal revenue is down substantially, falling 18 percent from fiscal ‘08 to ‘09.
In the longer term, you can see the rate of spending growth pick up under Bush in 2001. You can see revenue falter as a result of a small recession in 2001, and then continue to slide as a result of the Bush tax cuts. Those tax cuts have permanently altered the revenue trajectory, and combined with the Great Recession account for much of our debt and deficit woes.
So, to get bring us back to where we started:
Spending growth of 9.6 percent makes you a great conservative hero.
Spending growth of 9.9 percent makes you a great conservative villain.
And spending growth of 16.5 percent, combined with large tax cuts, makes you a recent two-term president whom nobody in your party wants to mention, and sets your country on a financially dangerous glide path.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
491 comments Add your comment
Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)
October 16th, 2012
10:01 am
Thank you for explaining the problem of this country in such simple terms, INCREASED spending
Well, you got that right. The sooner we cut Those People loose from the dole and get back to the Eisenhower days, the sooner we’ll be a great country. Those were good times. You worked or you starved. And if you got too old to work you just moved in with your kids. And if you got sick and never had health insurance you had the decency to die, instead of being a burden on hard-working taxpayers. And we never had the federal guvmint down here telling us how to handle Those People and giving us this Equal Rights spiel.
Ah, the good old days!
Union
October 16th, 2012
10:05 am
so if i increase my spending by 10% on an income of 50k its the same as increasing it by 10% on 100k…
TaxPayer
October 16th, 2012
10:05 am
Stevie Ray is competing with Marty. A race to the bottom is always fun to watch.
Joseph
October 16th, 2012
10:05 am
RB from Gwinnett:
That flew over the head of all the foaming at the mouth libs on here. They honestly believe that throwing money at a problem will fix it. Until they educate themselves and change their mindset on what our tax dollars should be used for we’ll always disagree with them…
willie lynch
October 16th, 2012
10:06 am
Japan has been in a recession for 20 years. Ireland, Greece and Iceland all went under due to the WORLD economic recession. Currently the IMF and other economic forecasters are warning that the austerity measures (the same measures being trumpeted by the republicans) has put Europe on the brink of a second dip into recession and you on the right following the lead of the lying nominees you have offered up for leadership want to bash the man who is leading the only recovery of merit.
Why don’t you guy’s just take your freedom of choice denying, Barack Obama hating, voter suppression supporting agenda and join the Taliban? You guy’s have a lot in common.
TaxPayer
October 16th, 2012
10:06 am
so if i increase my spending by 10% on an income of 50k its the same as increasing it by 10% on 100k…
Ten percent is ten percent.
Ben
October 16th, 2012
10:07 am
Jay, 2008 was boosted by lots of stimulus. Shouldn’t you take 2007 as your base year, pre-stimulus? Or are you saying it’s okay that Obama has taken what was supposed to be a one-time save the economy spending measure, and added that to his base level of spending?
Use some honest numbers that don’t use the stimulus as base spending, then we’ll talk.
Joseph
October 16th, 2012
10:07 am
Its laughable that Jay toys and manipulates data and his followers actually believe it. There’s no way to spin that Obama has increased the debt with reckless spending every year he has occupied the White House….
stands for decibels
October 16th, 2012
10:08 am
Why don’t you guy’s just take your freedom of choice denying, Barack Obama hating, voter suppression supporting agenda and join the Taliban?
Because the Taliban isn’t interested in a bunch of doughy pantloads who are scared of their own shadows, that’s why.
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
October 16th, 2012
10:08 am
JAY
What else would I expect? Point here is that many different opinions exist as all domestic economist (i guess i can count you in this group) have a political incentive that results in manipulating data to the desired outcome…..in his chart, the relationship between revenues and tax cuts over the time period suggest one way to manipulate variables in favor of GOP..
Of course Forbes said something completely opposite in July..the idea that you take data to support your desired outcome is not new given pundits who simply change arguing points after change in control…”the other guy cheated”, they lied…blah blah blah..
How do we really know who is corrrect? You?
Joseph
October 16th, 2012
10:09 am
Ben:
He can’t use honest numbers Ben. Then his narrative that Obama has been fiscal will be thrown out the window. Sane, informed people take Jay’s tripe for what it is. BS…
Jay
October 16th, 2012
10:10 am
for every LIB that says reduced taxes results in less revenue, I can find one that convincingly counters…
No, Stevie Ray, you cannot. Very few if any conservative economists make the claim that cutting taxes increases federal revenue. A lot of politicians make that claim, but most economists do not.
In 2005, for example, a CBO study found that a 10 percent cut in income taxes might generate enough growth “to offset between 1 percent and 22 percent of the revenue loss from the tax
cut over the first five years and add as much as 5 percent to that loss or offset as much as 32 percent of it over the second five years.”
The CBO director at the time was Douglas Holtz Eakin, another well-known conservative economist.
Doggone/GA
October 16th, 2012
10:11 am
“W’s whole point was that it would be worth every penny to nationbuild a free Iraq. He argued that the beacon of freedom would light the way for many other countries”
“Let me tell you what else I’m worried about: I’m worried about an opponent who uses nation building and the military in the same sentence. See, our view of the military is for our military to be properly prepared to fight and win war and, therefore, prevent war from happening in the first place.”
George W. Bush
“I mean, are we going to have some kind of nation-building corps from America? Absolutely not.”
George W. Bush
” and so I don’t think our troops ought to be used for what’s called nation building. ”
George W. Bush
Peadawg
October 16th, 2012
10:12 am
“The chart above demonstrates to any clear-minded person that the tax cuts of 01 and 03 significantly reduced government revenue, and continue to do so today.”
One small typo, Jay. Weren’t the current tax rates signed by Obama back in December 2009 or 2010 (can’t remember) along with the unemployment benefits extension?
getalife
October 16th, 2012
10:13 am
The poo slinging picked up.
The gop are losing again.
Miss Understood
October 16th, 2012
10:13 am
Still waiting for evidence of a single “bad Bush policy” that created the recession and has been reversed by Obama… Surely Obama would have reversed those bad policies by now, right?
Honestly, what universe do you guys LIVE in? Only the courts, SUPREME court,can make an immediate impact on a “policy or law”. Anything else takes YEARS and more laws to dilute the original law.
Example: Separate But Equal. Took about 45 years to knock that one down; and the final blow came from the courts.
==================
RB: Hey jay, I can’t find anything on the AJC web site about Clinton taking the heat for Libya security lapse. Can you post a link?
Once upon a time, in a land far far away, there was something called a “search engine”. Now this search engine was special, and unique. It was the golden child of all search engines and her name was Google. Google came from a loving family of older search engines — her father was Ask Jeeves and her mother was Encyclopedia.
One day a handsome prince came along and kissed Google (slipped her some tongue); and the world rejoiced!!! Because of that kiss we now have things like Bing and many many other search engines.
So the next time you have a question that needs to be answered, and no one wants to talk to you, just go online and ask Google.
The end.
southpaw
October 16th, 2012
10:15 am
Lord Help Us @9:49
“Let me guess…you voted twice for the guy that gave us a ,’decade of…insanely inflated spending’ ”
——————————————————–
With the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, can you honestly suggest how to avoid doing that, other than a throwaway vote or staying home on Election Day? Vote for Gore and Kerry? Seriously?! I voted for W twice, but I wanted to hold my nose the second time. The first time, I didn’t know the budget would increase as much as it did.
stands for decibels
October 16th, 2012
10:15 am
Now this search engine was special, and unique. It was the golden child of all search engines and her name was Google.
Now, be nice. Our RB is just asking questions.
Jesus payan
October 16th, 2012
10:16 am
I dont believe R or D both are incredible corrupt I will vote for gary johnson or Rocky Anderson they have good solutions strategic plan they dont take money from corporete and lobbying. We never have a good change R or D stop voting for the same.
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
October 16th, 2012
10:19 am
TAXPAYER,
Your sole contribution to the forum is to investigate only those “facts’ that support your pre determined position…if you had it your way, we would only have one party since the other can’t do or say anything you don’t dispute with biased data…you would be better off being able to understand by your own investigation both sides then draw your own conclusions..
Lord Help Us
October 16th, 2012
10:19 am
‘The first time, I didn’t know the budget would increase as much as it did.’
Simple math could take the tax cuts, plus the two wars at that point, plus the medicare expansion and easily come up with the result…
Marty Huggins'
October 16th, 2012
10:21 am
Jay
October 16th, 2012
9:51 am
“Early 2000s recession – 2001 to 2003: the collapse of the Dot Com Bubble, September 11th attacks
and accounting scandals contribute to a relatively mild contraction in the North American economy.
http://www.stocktradingtogo.com/2008/07/18/timeline-of-all-recessions-and-world-crises-since-great-depression/
Now I would argue we are still suffering effects from the recession that ended in June of 2009, now to this day.
But the actual recession ended over 3 years ago.
It hasn’t stopped you or others for giving Obama cover on the results he has produced after the recession. Often times referring back to the recession, I think the President and Vice President even do it during their campaign speeches.
But when it comes to evidence against tax cuts there are no lingering effects. Eventhough some economist place the recessions effects well into 2003.
But again you are the only one with real facts right Jay.
Any and all who disagree with you are just making stuff up.
That’s mighty arrogant of you to feel you are the only one able to come to a conclusion from facts.
And that only the conclusion you come to is correct.
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
October 16th, 2012
10:21 am
JESUS,
Here are three reads you may enjoy that offer a left, a right, and a middle overview of the corrupted nature of our broken government..
Glenn Greenwald: Liberty & Justice for a Few
Schweitzer: Throw Them All Out
Lessing: Republic Lost
Erwin's cat
October 16th, 2012
10:22 am
If he reduced across-the-board rates by 20% revenue of course will go down. That’s basic math
only true if income tax was the only form of govt revenues
Miss Understood
October 16th, 2012
10:23 am
Its laughable that Jay toys and manipulates data and his followers actually believe it.
Jay is actually Karl Rove in disguise — without the spiked heels, lipstick and drag outfit though.
In Karl’s defense, he only dresses like that for “special” appearances. (wink, wink)
=========================
Ben: Jay, 2008 was boosted by lots of stimulus.
the stimulus bill was signed AFTER October 1 – when a new Fiscal Year, (2009) came into play.
Ben: Use some honest numbers that don’t use the stimulus as base spending, then we’ll talk.
You want honest numbers?!!? You want honest numbers?!? You can’t HANDLE any honest numbers!!!
Honestly – GWB took a $6T surplus and squandered it in 60 days. Honest.
Honestly – the US deficit did not reach $1 trillion until 1981 which was the start of the Ronald Reagan presidency. Honest.
Honestly – Bush and Cheney used a series of tax cuts which were shown to benefit only the wealthiest of Americans while middle class incomes declined from 2001 through 2009. Honest.
Honestly – corporations have continued to have record numbers of profits while an extension of the Bush era tax cuts resulted in the creation of only 18,000 jobs in June 2011. Honestly.
Is that honest enough for ya?
Jay
October 16th, 2012
10:23 am
“One small typo, Jay. Weren’t the current tax rates signed by Obama back in December 2009 or 2010 (can’t remember) along with the unemployment benefits extension?
Yes, Pea. And as you know quite well despite your feigned ignorance, he signed those reluctantly, after fighting hard against extending them for the most affluent of Americans.
stands for decibels
October 16th, 2012
10:24 am
a left, a right, and a middle
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Balance_fallacy
southpaw
October 16th, 2012
10:24 am
“Simple math could take the tax cuts, plus the two wars at that point, plus the medicare expansion and easily come up with the result…”
On Election Day, 2000, no one could have forecast that. Election Day 2004 I’ll believe, but I already said I wanted to hold my nose while casting my vote.
Peadawg
October 16th, 2012
10:25 am
“Yes, Pea.”
Thanks.
The rest of that comment was blah blah, excuses, and some good ‘ol sugar coating.
Oscar
October 16th, 2012
10:25 am
only true if income tax was the only form of govt revenues
______________________
Revenues would go down. Other revenues are not enough to make up the difference.
Joe Hussein Mama
October 16th, 2012
10:26 am
ByteMe — “Yes. I’ve even seen them on PBS here (or maybe it was CSPAN). It’s really breath-taking to watch, because they get really snarky. Think of it like a “town hall debate”, except half the questions are from people who hate your guts AND you get to respond to it in kind.”
They’re on CSPAN, and the last time I checked, they aired on Sunday evenings.
Each time I see it, I’m amazed by the ‘proper’ behavior of the British MPs and how it mixes with the barely-disguised contempt some MPs obviously have for each other (and for the Prime Minister). You’ll hear things like ‘my right honorable friend is not only mistaken, but also lying.’ And there’s lots of noisy murmuring and talking over each other. It’s like a Congressional cocktail party after everyone present is at least two or three drinks into the evening’s festivities.
Thomas Heyward Jr
October 16th, 2012
10:26 am
After Bookman’s “adjustable inflation” figures….as per Washington figures, inflation is at 0.1%(if you don’t eat, use fuel or drive)…………Anyhow……………………the only Truth ever spewed forth from Obama’s mouth———————-while campaigning—————————was———————-
.
“We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times … and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK. That’s not leadership. That’s not going to happen.”
.
lol
.
Forward Soviet!
Lord Help Us
October 16th, 2012
10:27 am
‘Election Day 2004 I’ll believe, but I already said I wanted to hold my nose while casting my vote.’
Okay, well given what you know now, perhaps you should hold your nose and vote for Obama…that is unless you see huge tax cuts, huge defense spending increase and neocon foreign policy as having a DIFFERENT result this time than it did LAST TIME!
Miss Understood
October 16th, 2012
10:32 am
‘The first time, I didn’t know the budget would increase as much as it did.’
Didn’t you find it strange that Bush kept giving people “extra money” from their tax returns, with no apparent binding legislation, and then told us to go out and shop for the good of the country?
Or how about that time when he put out his yearly budget, and the two wars WEREN’T on the books? Didn’t you think that was kinda strange or didn’t even SUSPECT something just wasn’t right about that?
And when they (Bush’s whtiehouse staff), said that the war would “Pay For Itself”; you mean you never stood up and asked your Congressman, or anyone for that matter, HOW?
I swear, sometimes I think republicans just came back from Oz in Dorothy’s house.
mm
October 16th, 2012
10:32 am
“Keep raising taxes and those that provide the capital for our economy will stop producing or take their expertise to another country.”
Hint, they already have. Screw them.
clem
October 16th, 2012
10:33 am
did reagan step up on iran contra?
clem
October 16th, 2012
10:33 am
did bush cheney step up on cia agent outing?
Miss Understood
October 16th, 2012
10:34 am
Forward…
Compared to the Republicans Pledge:
BACKWARDS!!! (Towards the 14th Century!!!)
Hey, you guys believe that the earth revolves around the sun yet?
stands for decibels
October 16th, 2012
10:34 am
Heyward, here are those comments you’ve cherry picked @ 10.26, in context:
We want to go to Barack Obama now he is campaigning in Roseburg, Oregon at that event. You just heard the sound bite in which he addressed Senator Kennedy. Here is the senator from Illinois who is now taking on the front-runner status almost without question at this point, talking about green technologies and how that may affect the job picture here in Oregon.
BARACK OBAMA, (D) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Is a huge opportunity but we’ve got have leadership from Washington, the same way we had leadership when Kennedy said we’re going to the moon, we want to invest what we need to make it happen and there are all sorts of spin offs benefits from that. So that’s what we want to do on global warming here in the United States.
We are also, though, going have to negotiate with other countries. China, India, in particular Brazil. They are growing so fast that they are consuming more and more energy, and pretty soon, if their carpet footprint even approaches ours, we’re goners. That’s part of the reason why we’ve got to make the investment; we’ve got to lead by example. If we lead by example — if we lead by example, then we can actually export and license technology that have been invented here to help them deal with their growth pain. But keep in mind, you’re right. We can’t tell them, don’t grow. We can’t — drive our SUVs and you know, eat as much as we want and keep our homes on you know, 72 degrees at all times, and whether we’re living in the desert or we’re living in the tundra, and then just expect that every other country’s going say OK.
You guys go ahead and keep on using 25 percent of the world’s energy. Even though you only account for 3 percent of the population, and we’ll be fine. Don’t worry about us. That’s not — that’s not leadership. That’s not going to happen. And that’s, by the way, why, for example, I had this big argument with Senator Clinton and McCain about the gas tax, holiday. Which was an example. That’s how Washington works. It’s not thinking long term. It’s thinking, how do we get through the next election?
And, you know, John McCain, for him to come to Oregon as an environmental president, but his big strategy is to do more drilling and to have a gas tax holiday for three months, that’s a phony solution. You know, you can’t — John McCain has consistently been opposed to fuel efficiency standards, raising fuel efficiency standards on cars. How is he going to meet any of these targets? Maybe he’s imagining it the way he did imaging getting out of the war in Iraq. You know? We — we need somebody with a plan. And who is willing to talk to the American people about these difficulties and how we’re going to get through these challenges together.
Kindly tell me why you disagree with the sentiments expressed by then-candidate Obama.
thanks in advance.
Oscar
October 16th, 2012
10:34 am
that is unless you see huge tax cuts, huge defense spending increase and neocon foreign policy as having a DIFFERENT result this time than it did LAST TIME!
______
Thinking doing the same thing will yield different results has been called insanity.
clem
October 16th, 2012
10:34 am
did bush cheney step up on wmd failures?
southpaw
October 16th, 2012
10:35 am
LHU @10:27
That’s worth considering. I consider the “huge tax cuts” and “huge defense spending increase” less likely than you do, but I’ll keep my eyes and ears open. The “neocon foreign policy” puzzles me, though. Check this out:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/neoconservative?s=t
Now tell me what a conservative’s previous liberal or socialist belief has to do with the wisdom, or lack of it, in foreign policy. I keep seeing “neocon” this and “neocon” that, but I never have been able to connect the dots.
Lord Help Us
October 16th, 2012
10:37 am
‘I consider the “huge tax cuts” and “huge defense spending increase” less likely than you do, but I’ll keep my eyes and ears open.’
Make sure you do not listen to or read Romney’s own campaign that promises those exact items…
Oscar
October 16th, 2012
10:37 am
Keep raising taxes and those that provide the capital for our economy will stop producing or take their expertise to another country.”
-___________
Nobody has said they want to keep raining taxes until they become counterproductive. We are talking about letting the Bush tax cuts for the top income expire.
And talking about not shifting the tax burden to the middle class by deleting their deductions.
USMC
October 16th, 2012
10:37 am
“We can’t drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times … and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK. That’s not leadership. That’s not going to happen.”–Comrade Obama
Pasha Obama enroute… Forward Soviet indeed!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jO763sSAnM
Peadawg
October 16th, 2012
10:38 am
“Keep raising taxes and those that provide the capital for our economy will stop producing or take their expertise to another country.”
Dude. They’re already doing that now with low taxes.
Lord Help Us
October 16th, 2012
10:39 am
‘ The “neocon foreign policy” puzzles me, though. ‘
If the term confuses you then take a look at the foreign policy team under Bush, look at the results of that team…then look at the foreign policy advisers to Romney.
moonbat betty
October 16th, 2012
10:40 am
Hear Ye, Hear Ye!
Come on people!
Can’t we have one day of peace?
Why can’t we have a day where each poster says one nice thing about the other party?
Wouldn’t the world be a nicer place?
Now, who is with me?
Brosephus™
October 16th, 2012
10:40 am
mark in mid-town @ 8:54
Jay, the recession officially ended well over 3 years ago. You know very well that the steeper the recession, the stronger the economic recovery is supposed to be. Obama did inherit a very steep recession. That set him up to potentially have a remarkably strong recovery. That the recovery has been so abysmally weak by any historic measure is how Obama’s policies should be judged.
Still reading through the comments, so excuse me if somebody’s already made this point. Look at the previous recessions since Reagan’s terms and compare post recession government spending vs this last recession. Obama’s recovery period is the only one in recent history where government spending did NOT significantly increase.
If you want to know why this recovery isn’t like the rest of them, then look at the spending. Our economy does best when we consume or spend.
————————-
If you look at the Federal Debt every year, it never dropped from the previous year.
There IS this thing called “interest” that accumulates even if there is not a single cent added to the debt.
southpaw
October 16th, 2012
10:40 am
Miss Understood @10:32
No, I didn’t think it was strange. I had already figured out that W had become too much of a spendthrift. I did think each one was a bad idea, though.
Also, for what it’s worth, although I am a republican (meaning I support representative government), I’m not a Republican.
getalife
October 16th, 2012
10:40 am
That was some debate there Pea.
Yaaaaawn.
Miss Understood
October 16th, 2012
10:41 am
Marty: But when it comes to evidence against tax cuts there are no lingering effects.
Marty — you ARE being humorous right? I mean you couldn’t REALLY mean that tripe ^^ you just said do you? Are you running for public office or something and signed a pledge and HAVE to say stuff like that or you won’t get funded?
Taxes pay for all sorts of things, that NOW each city, county, and state are running short on:
School funding
Policeman
Fireman
Water conservation
etc., etc., etc. The reduction of taxes is why we have bridges falling down all over the US; and schools falling down on the job due to lack of funds.
I hope that pledge you signed is worth it in 15 years. I sure hope its worth it.
Erwin's cat
October 16th, 2012
10:42 am
Taxpayer – Ten percent is ten percent.
to level the playing field you would have us all paying in percentages…a gallon of gas or a jar of peanut butter should cost everyone ~2% of their income, that way there is no advantage to being wealthy and no penalty for being poor and we all essentially make the same income regardless of our contributions…it can’t get much fairer than that huh?
Georgia
October 16th, 2012
10:42 am
History proves that you can’t cut spending. Nobody will vote for it. If we hadn’t spent to free Iraq, then we would now be saying, “I wish our only problem was wasteful government spending.”
That is our only problem. That’s the peace dividend we now enjoy thanks to the Republicans and their nationbuilding adventures of the new millenia. The only thing that really happened was that unemployment went up a few points and a few people lost their homes. The alternative to freeing Iraq after 911 and the alternative of accepting the new reality of perpetual war would be unthinkable. I think we should rename the Washington Monument to the W Monument. The W could stand for either George.
Oscar
October 16th, 2012
10:43 am
The “neocon foreign policy” puzzles me, though. ‘
____________
Under Bush the second we started two wars. Neocons are people that think we should use war as foriegn policy.
Look up neoconservatives and read up on them, who they are and how they think. That will remove your confusion.
getalife
October 16th, 2012
10:43 am
Moonbat,
It is almost over then we will all get along.
TaxPayer
October 16th, 2012
10:44 am
Stevie Ray, et al,
Let’s discuss the numbers, the actual numbers. Tables 2.1 and 3.2 are quite interesting. None of your rhetoric. Just the numbers. Can you handle it.
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
October 16th, 2012
10:44 am
JAY,
I disagree…I’m not for increasing taxes per Obama simply to find another group (in addition to congress and Bush) to demonize for political gain..the increase will only fill 6% of our hole…what will he do with the other 94%?
I can find many economists who interpret the data in GOP spinned fashion..they are all biased and as mentioned before, the CBO has zero credibility with 10 year predictions, here’s what a former CBO head had to say about raising any taxes..lets assume that you are correct…
Per Elmendorf in 2010:
Congressional Budget Office Director Doug Elmendorf testified before the Senate Budget Committee today on long-term effects from extending the Bush tax cuts. The headline claim in his testimony is that an extension, whether full or partial, will reduce national income in 2020. While lower tax rates grow the economy, increased government borrowing shrinks it; in CBO’s estimation, the latter will more than offset the former.
We will need the tax rates lowered or remain where they are since they are more than offset by increased government borrowing..in his opinion he is stating that lower taxes will as you suggest will reduce income by 2020 (there we go again with CBO’s 10 year estimates) but unless we stop borrowing it is all for naught..
CBO also projected a surplus of 7 trillion by now per 2001 estimates..
Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)
October 16th, 2012
10:46 am
Election Day 2004 I’ll believe, but I already said I wanted to hold my nose while casting my vote.
Well, I only went to the 5th grade but even I can recognize a dumbbell when I see one. And I bet he’d hold his nose and vote that way a 3rd time too. Sometimes I can see that the abortion rights people might have a point. Too bad it’s illegal to do it after the birth.
Georgia
October 16th, 2012
10:47 am
Yes, I’m saying that these are the good old days. The comments here are from professional boiler room partisans trying to sell their spins and influence votes. There’s nothing wrong with that. In fact, it’s their duty to stir up debate.
southpaw
October 16th, 2012
10:48 am
If the term confuses you then take a look at the foreign policy team under Bush, look at the results of that team…then look at the foreign policy advisers to Romney.
————————————————-
That will tell me about the similarity of Romney’s advisers to Bush’s advisers. The part of it I don’t get is your use of “neocon.” Once again, what do their previous liberal or socialist beliefs have to do with current foreign policy? Would you prefer for Romney to pick advisers who have always been conservative? I’m still trying to figure out what difference that makes.
TaxPayer
October 16th, 2012
10:50 am
to level the playing field you would have us all paying in percentages
The last time I checked a sales receipt, the taxes imposed were a percentage of the purchase amount. Marginal tax rates are given in percentages. Property taxes are calculated as a percentage of the assessed value. What do you mean by “you would have us…” We already have us such a tax system. Some do choose to skirt it while others abide by it though. I, for one, have never had a Swiss bank account.
DannyX
October 16th, 2012
10:51 am
Romney tax plan finally revealed, click link for details.
http://www.romneytaxplan.com/
getalife
October 16th, 2012
10:51 am
I think the cons just can’t help themselves from fighting for the wealthy that do not need their help.
Must be an addiction.
Lord Help Us
October 16th, 2012
10:52 am
‘Would you prefer for Romney to pick advisers who have always been conservative? I’m still trying to figure out what difference that makes.’
Dude, you are either hopelessly naive or playing stupid…do the names Cofer Black, Michael Hayden, Dan Senor, Josh Bolton or John Lehman mean anything to you? If you can find one of these guys that has ever been a ‘liberal’ please show me.
Oscar
October 16th, 2012
10:52 am
southpaw
Take my advice and type neoconservative into google and start reading about them.
moonbat betty
October 16th, 2012
10:53 am
Yeah, getalife, I guess no one else is with me.
Fair enough.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCGvONbVCa0
Regnad Kcin
October 16th, 2012
10:54 am
“I disagree…I’m not for increasing taxes per Obama simply to find another group (in addition to congress and Bush) to demonize for political gain..the increase will only fill 6% of our hole…what will he do with the other 94%?”
I’m sure your position is not, “if it doesn’t solve 100% of the problem, why bother?”. Six percent is six percent, and it’s a good start, right?
willie lynch
October 16th, 2012
10:54 am
I’ll ask again. Is the austerity philosophy (again the plan being offered by the right) proving fruitful for those who have implemented these policies, or is the world looking at what OUR PRESIDENT (without the help of the 7% approval rated congress) has done?
Job growth, housing recovering, consumer confidence up, 30 million more Americans covered by health insurance.
Why do you guy’s hate America so much?
TBone
October 16th, 2012
10:55 am
Interesting that spending keeps climbing and Harry Reid hasn;t passed a budget in the senate in how long? So why go throught he process? What has to be changed is the whole base-line budgeting joke.
Erwin's cat
October 16th, 2012
10:55 am
TaxPayer – Some do choose to skirt it while others abide by it though. I, for one, have never had a Swiss bank account.
you completely ignored my point while trying to take a swipe at Romney..or the rates rates of the wealthy
legal tax loopholes are legal and not considered skirting the system, it’s actually meeting your legal obligation…I for one have never driven a pontiac
getalife
October 16th, 2012
10:56 am
The neocons want another Iraq disaster in Iran.
They are dictating mitt’s foreign policy.
godless heathen
October 16th, 2012
10:56 am
Why can’t we have a day where each poster says one nice thing about the other party?
Joe Biden has nice teeth.
Peadawg
October 16th, 2012
10:56 am
DannyX
October 16th, 2012
10:51 am
Took me a second to get it…too funny.
getalife
October 16th, 2012
10:57 am
Moonhbat,
Try after the relection of our President when the cons are in a better mood.
godless heathen
October 16th, 2012
10:57 am
getalife: So who won the debate tonight?
southpaw
October 16th, 2012
10:57 am
Oscar @10:43
Look up neoconservatives and read up on them, who they are and how they think. That will remove your confusion.
——————————–
Except for “who they are,” I already did. See my link @10:35. Some food for thought: Given the choice between moderate conservatives and further-right conservatives (and I realize there are other choices), which ones would you prefer to have making foreign policy and other decisions? Also, which of those groups actually fits the definition of neoconservative?
Oscar
October 16th, 2012
10:58 am
Regnad Kcin
_______
Nobody said that would solve all our problems. But that, combined with cuts in waste will. Defense spending needs to be cut. Obama saved money already by cutting waste in Medicare.
Romney’s plan is just to go in the opposite direction of where we need to go. He is against cuts in medicare and is in favor of increased defense spending, and wants to cut middle class deductions. He is just dead wrong.
getalife
October 16th, 2012
10:58 am
godless,
I think our President wins the last two debates.
moonbat betty
October 16th, 2012
10:59 am
Thank you, heathen.
That was nice.
Erwin's cat
October 16th, 2012
11:00 am
get – I think our President wins the last two debates.
that’s the best he can hope for ’cause he completely got hammered in the first one
Regnad Kcin
October 16th, 2012
11:00 am
Oscar – agree.
southpaw
October 16th, 2012
11:02 am
Oscar @10:52
I took your advice. The top articles give longer versions of the definition in my 10:35 link. Once again, what does somebody’s previous liberal or socialist background have to do with the wisdom, or lack of it, in his or her current beliefs?
getalife
October 16th, 2012
11:02 am
cat,
Joe Biden destroyed their lies and laughed in their face.
He set the stage so our President can finish them off..
Oscar
October 16th, 2012
11:02 am
southpaw
————-
Obviously I would prefer the moderates. But don’t see what that has to do with the question. But I am not sure we agree on who the moderates are and who the far right is.
My problem with the neos is their penchant for starting wars and their ideas about the military and use of the military.
TaxPayer
October 16th, 2012
11:03 am
you completely ignored my point while trying to take a swipe at Romney..or the rates rates of the wealthy
legal tax loopholes are legal and not considered skirting the system, it’s actually meeting your legal obligation…I for one have never driven a pontiac
Erwin,
Were you being serious when you suggested that I would have us all paying a price for goods and services based on our net worth or income. Excuse me for thinking you were speaking in jest. Further, at best Romney could only be one of thousands of tax evaders (and using Swiss bank accounts, etc., to evade taxes is illegal) using Swiss and other bank accounts so I don’t see how you jump to the conclusion that I singled him out based on my earlier statement. In fact, I think it is you that have single him out, not I.
Brosephus™
October 16th, 2012
11:04 am
Stevie Ray: I disagree…I’m not for increasing taxes per Obama simply to find another group (in addition to congress and Bush) to demonize for political gain..the increase will only fill 6% of our hole…what will he do with the other 94%?
So, what’s your opinion on the fact that, to date, the only group that has been demonized and forced to contribute towards debt repayment has been federal workers to the tune of $75 Billion over 10 years? The increase Obama supports and you opposes would generate ten times that much over the same time period.
Miss Understood
October 16th, 2012
11:05 am
I had a really great comment concerning Clinton’s “taking one for the team” and Col. Oliver North, “Taking one for the team”. Didn’t go through though.
I think it’s because I intimated that Regan’s “sickness” manifested itself WAY before it was reported to the masses.
Even on a lib blog, you can’t say nuthin’ about St. Ronnie of the Republican Ronnettes.
Sigh.
Oh well, maybe it’ll go through on Kyle’s blog!! Be right back — in the meantime Watch This Drive!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCm9788Tb5g
Doggone/GA
October 16th, 2012
11:05 am
“Once again, what does somebody’s previous liberal or socialist background have to do with the wisdom, or lack of it, in his or her current beliefs?”
the child is the father of the man
Erwin's cat
October 16th, 2012
11:05 am
Joe Biden destroyed their lies with his own lies and laughed in their face and at the rest of America
fixed your typo get
moonbat betty
October 16th, 2012
11:05 am
Tonight, I hope Obama follows Biden’s lead from last week.
Great strategy! lol
Lord Help Us
October 16th, 2012
11:05 am
Rabbit hole alert at 10:57 – not worth the bother…
RB from Gwinnett
October 16th, 2012
11:06 am
Miss Understood
October 16th, 2012
10:13 am
Do us a favor, if you can’t answer the question, don’t.
AmericaShrugged
October 16th, 2012
11:06 am
Following the tax cuts of 2001-2003 revenues were increasing faster than spending, as the graph clearly shows. Despite two expensive wars, the tax policy had reduced the deficit significantly by 2007. Then the robber barons at Goldman Sachs totally destroyed the economy and reveues fell off a cliff.
BTW it looks like the tax cuts of 2001-2003 led to faster revenue growth than the Porkulus of 2009 did!
godless heathen
October 16th, 2012
11:07 am
Note I didn’t say “who wins the debate” but “who won”.
Erwin's cat
October 16th, 2012
11:08 am
TaxPayer
Why should a rich guy pay less for a gallon of gas than you?
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
October 16th, 2012
11:08 am
Blame Obama for four deaths in Libya. But don’t blame Bush for nearly 3,000 deaths in New York.
In that statement and others, Cheney invoked every excuse he and his allies now deride in the Libya fiasco. The warnings weren’t specific enough. Broad analyses of persistent dangers aren’t actionable. Warnings from our people on the ground didn’t “trickle up to the presidential level.” Connecting the dots isn’t the president’s job. It’s a failure of the “system.”
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/frame_game/2012/10/blame_obama_for_the_libya_consulate_attack_but_don_t_blame_bush_for_9_11.2.html
stands for decibels
October 16th, 2012
11:09 am
Joe Biden has nice teeth.
Paul Ryan’s actual marathon time was decent.
moonbat betty
October 16th, 2012
11:10 am
I hope our president doesn’t get made a fool of again.
moonbat betty
October 16th, 2012
11:12 am
“Paul Ryan’s actual marathon time was decent.”
That was nice stands, thank you.
I am feeling warm and fuzzy already.
It’s going to be a great day!