Revenues rose substantially under Reagan but I understand that this is akin to a religious experience to the left to deny that.
Keep the faith and ignore the spending
At least Reagan's rampant deficit spending helped the economy. It was worth it IMO.
As for spending increases....
Hmmmm. GW is a bit more understandable after 9/11. How could Obama rack up a deficit greater than all prior president's only spending at an 2% higher rate?
Revenues rose substantially under Reagan but I understand that this is akin to a religious experience to the left to deny that.
Keep the faith and ignore the spending
At least Reagan's rampant deficit spending helped the economy. It was worth it IMO.
As for spending increases....
Hmmmm. GW is a bit more understandable after 9/11. How could Obama rack up a deficit greater than all prior president's only spending at an 2% higher rate?
I wish I could say I am shocked by such ignorance. Welcome to troomps america. Ts&Ps for the United States.
Cool story. Spending was lowest with a GOP congress under Clinton. We knew that.
I prefer the Democratic President + Republican Congress arrangement too.
One party rule for either side is horrible.
Whenever one side has control they get all excited and jerk off all over each other then quickly lose control. Dumbo with a Powerpoint is a prime example.
Revenues rose substantially under Reagan but I understand that this is akin to a religious experience to the left to deny that.
Keep the faith and ignore the spending
At least Reagan's rampant deficit spending helped the economy. It was worth it IMO.
As for spending increases....
Hmmmm. GW is a bit more understandable after 9/11. How could Obama rack up a deficit greater than all prior president's only spending at an 2% higher rate?
Revenues rose substantially under Reagan but I understand that this is akin to a religious experience to the left to deny that.
Keep the faith and ignore the spending
At least Reagan's rampant deficit spending helped the economy. It was worth it IMO.
As for spending increases....
Hmmmm. GW is a bit more understandable after 9/11. How could Obama rack up a deficit greater than all prior president's only spending at an 2% higher rate?
You do realize that there's 2 sides to deficits, right? You say a lot of ignorant shit, that one takes them all.
Yeah color me stupid maybe it's the chart from the "short, contemporary news and opinion through the lens of Austrian economics and libertarian political economy". Oh and the doubling of the debt.
Yeah color me stupid maybe it's the chart from the "short, contemporary news and opinion through the lens of Austrian economics and libertarian political economy". Oh and the doubling of the debt.
Yeah color me stupid maybe it's the chart from the "short, contemporary news and opinion through the lens of Austrian economics and libertarian political economy". Oh and the doubling of the debt.
Cool story. Spending was lowest with a GOP congress under Clinton. We knew that.
I prefer the Democratic President + Republican Congress arrangement too.
One party rule for either side is horrible.
In 94 we had two parties. I agree in principle but the GOP Congress needs to be aborted n a back alley with a hanger regardless of who is in the white house. Not that the dems deserve any better
Not always does this work and to support my statement I present to you....Hondo.
Cool story. Spending was lowest with a GOP congress under Clinton. We knew that.
I prefer the Democratic President + Republican Congress arrangement too.
One party rule for either side is horrible.
In 94 we had two parties. I agree in principle but the GOP Congress needs to be aborted n a back alley with a hanger regardless of who is in the white house. Not that the dems deserve any better
Not always does this work and to support my statement I present to you....Hondo.
Yeah color me stupid maybe it's the chart from the "short, contemporary news and opinion through the lens of Austrian economics and libertarian political economy". Oh and the doubling of the debt.
Yeah color me stupid maybe it's the chart from the "short, contemporary news and opinion through the lens of Austrian economics and libertarian political economy". Oh and the doubling of the debt.
Yeah color me stupid maybe it's the chart from the "short, contemporary news and opinion through the lens of Austrian economics and libertarian political economy". Oh and the doubling of the debt.
The debt would have risen by $3 trillion because of tax and spending policies that were already in place. Plus, the Great Recession drove up spending on safety net programs, such as Medicaid and food stamps, without the president or Congress doing a thing.
This is not to say that Obama had zero impact on the debt during his two terms in office. His 2009 stimulus plan and his making most of the Bush tax cuts permanent in 2012 contributed to the debt. But the 2011 Budget Control Act, which curbed government spending, helped slow the projected growth in debt.
Also, keep in mind that Obama can't take any financial steps without Congress' approval. And Republicans controlled the House for six years of his term and the Senate for two years.
Yeah color me stupid maybe it's the chart from the "short, contemporary news and opinion through the lens of Austrian economics and libertarian political economy". Oh and the doubling of the debt.
Cool story. Spending was lowest with a GOP congress under Clinton. We knew that.
I prefer the Democratic President + Republican Congress arrangement too.
One party rule for either side is horrible.
In 94 we had two parties. I agree in principle but the GOP Congress needs to be aborted n a back alley with a hanger regardless of who is in the white house. Not that the dems deserve any better
I always support classy coat hanger abortions of Congresscritters (note: this is not a call for genocide)
I gotta tell you, that sounds a lot like genocide to me. And I know genocide.
Comments
Disagree.
Not always does this work and to support my statement I present to you....Hondo.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/19/news/economy/debt-obama-trump/index.html
The debt would have risen by $3 trillion because of tax and spending policies that were already in place. Plus, the Great Recession drove up spending on safety net programs, such as Medicaid and food stamps, without the president or Congress doing a thing.
This is not to say that Obama had zero impact on the debt during his two terms in office. His 2009 stimulus plan and his making most of the Bush tax cuts permanent in 2012 contributed to the debt. But the 2011 Budget Control Act, which curbed government spending, helped slow the projected growth in debt.
Also, keep in mind that Obama can't take any financial steps without Congress' approval. And Republicans controlled the House for six years of his term and the Senate for two years.
So we rate Moore's claim as true, but misleading.
Whichever.