Jump to content

Disturbing data


Guest 2smart4u
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest 2smart4u

The projected national income from all collected taxes in 2010 is 900 billion. The interest payments for 2010 on all of the Obama incurred debt in the past

year is one trillion dollars. We will be paying China the bulk of this interest at 7%, far more than we are earning on bank rates. At this point we are unable to make the interest payments without borrowing more money, we are not paying anything off the principle.

Yet in spite of this nightmare projection, Obama is moving ahead with raising taxes on the middle class, ending the Bush tax cuts and forging ahead with ObamaCare, all projected to hurt job growth,the economy and further deepen the debt.

At what point do the Loonys wake up and say "Holy Shit, Obama is destroying this country"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The projected national income from all collected taxes in 2010 is 900 billion. The interest payments for 2010 on all of the Obama incurred debt in the past

year is one trillion dollars. We will be paying China the bulk of this interest at 7%, far more than we are earning on bank rates. At this point we are unable to make the interest payments without borrowing more money, we are not paying anything off the principle.

Yet in spite of this nightmare projection, Obama is moving ahead with raising taxes on the middle class, ending the Bush tax cuts and forging ahead with ObamaCare, all projected to hurt job growth,the economy and further deepen the debt.

At what point do the Loonys wake up and say "Holy Shit, Obama is destroying this country"?

You say "all projected to hurt job growth, the economy and further deepen the debt," while others say the Bush tax cuts were unfeasible to begin with. For starters, the middle-class bracket ceiling is a bit high ($250,000). Second, Bush tax cuts were costly and ineffective. They did nothing to create jobs. Proof of this can be seen in the economic decline that began under his watch and monthly job losses that began to mount to their highest in the waning months of his presidency. Go to August 2008 and see who was president. That is when the worst losses began. Lastly, it's nonsense to suggest that letting the Bush tax cuts expire will increase the deficit. I'm assuming that's what you mean when you say "ending the Bush tax cuts" and "raising taxes on the middle class." Look, the last guy to "tax and spend" (Willy-Jeff Clinton) landed us with a budget surplus... Bush, Bush and Reagan left us with deficits. Why did W. leaves us with a deficit? Because when cutting taxes, he forgot the part about reducing spending.

That said, Obama's deficit projections are indeed pretty steep. Coupled with the emergency spending measures he took to save us from the brink of depression, there is Obamacare. Yes, it's going to be costly at first. It's a damn shame it couldn't have waited (but it really couldn't have waited). So I say this in an attempt to not blame the guy who came before, but Obama is spending to save a country that was up to its neck in economic distress. Where it came from? Let's just say a bunch of White guys ran Washington & Wall Street like the Wild Wild West for a few decades. So jump on Obama for ending the Bush tax cuts. Whatever. If you think that's going to matter to the people whose jobs he saved with the Economic Recovery Act or the people who are going to benefit from Obamacare, then you're nuts. The cuts weren't working, so now they're going on the shelf. Sorry. Of course, you don't have to tell us your solution; we all know you'd just fire every teacher in America. Great idea!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest I fixed your post for you
The projected national income from all collected taxes in 2010 is 900 billion. The interest payments for 2010 on all of the Obama incurred debt in the past

year is one trillion dollars. We will be paying China the bulk of this interest at 7%, far more than we are earning on bank rates. At this point we are unable to make the interest payments without borrowing more money, we are not paying anything off the principle.

Yet in spite of this nightmare projection, Obama is moving ahead with raising taxes on the middle class, ending the Bush tax cuts and forging ahead with ObamaCare, all projected to hurt job growth,the economy and further deepen the debt.

At what point do the Loonys wake up and say "Holy Shit, Obama is destroying this country"?

What he really meant!

The number of times I will use the words loony and kool aid is projected to be 900 billion for 2010. The interest for 2010 on any of my posts will remain at less than 1%, far higher than the interest in the local repub party. At this point I am unable to make my posts more interesting without lying and making stuff up and and I have not demonstrated any positive principles.

Yet in spite of this nightmare projection, 2Smart is moving ahead with raising the number of insipid rants on the middle class and forging ahead with 2Smartfear , all projected to hurt brain cell growth, KOTW and further deepen his intellectual deficit.

At what point does 2Smart wake up and say "Holy Shit, I'm an idiot?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Keith
What he really meant!

The number of times I will use the words loony and kool aid is projected to be 900 billion for 2010. The interest for 2010 on any of my posts will remain at less than 1%, far higher than the interest in the local repub party. At this point I am unable to make my posts more interesting without lying and making stuff up and and I have not demonstrated any positive principles.

Yet in spite of this nightmare projection, 2Smart is moving ahead with raising the number of insipid rants on the middle class and forging ahead with 2Smartfear , all projected to hurt brain cell growth, KOTW and further deepen his intellectual deficit.

At what point does 2Smart wake up and say "Holy Shit, I'm an idiot?"

Amen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 2smart4u
You say "all projected to hurt job growth, the economy and further deepen the debt," while others say the Bush tax cuts were unfeasible to begin with. For starters, the middle-class bracket ceiling is a bit high ($250,000). Second, Bush tax cuts were costly and ineffective. They did nothing to create jobs. Proof of this can be seen in the economic decline that began under his watch and monthly job losses that began to mount to their highest in the waning months of his presidency. Go to August 2008 and see who was president. That is when the worst losses began. Lastly, it's nonsense to suggest that letting the Bush tax cuts expire will increase the deficit. I'm assuming that's what you mean when you say "ending the Bush tax cuts" and "raising taxes on the middle class." Look, the last guy to "tax and spend" (Willy-Jeff Clinton) landed us with a budget surplus... Bush, Bush and Reagan left us with deficits. Why did W. leaves us with a deficit? Because when cutting taxes, he forgot the part about reducing spending.

That said, Obama's deficit projections are indeed pretty steep. Coupled with the emergency spending measures he took to save us from the brink of depression, there is Obamacare. Yes, it's going to be costly at first. It's a damn shame it couldn't have waited (but it really couldn't have waited). So I say this in an attempt to not blame the guy who came before, but Obama is spending to save a country that was up to its neck in economic distress. Where it came from? Let's just say a bunch of White guys ran Washington & Wall Street like the Wild Wild West for a few decades. So jump on Obama for ending the Bush tax cuts. Whatever. If you think that's going to matter to the people whose jobs he saved with the Economic Recovery Act or the people who are going to benefit from Obamacare, then you're nuts. The cuts weren't working, so now they're going on the shelf. Sorry. Of course, you don't have to tell us your solution; we all know you'd just fire every teacher in America. Great idea!

Gobbledygook. Still blaming Bush while Obama spends us into bankruptcy. Amazing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
The projected national income from all collected taxes in 2010 is 900 billion. The interest payments for 2010 on all of the Obama incurred debt in the past

year is one trillion dollars. We will be paying China the bulk of this interest at 7%, far more than we are earning on bank rates. At this point we are unable to make the interest payments without borrowing more money, we are not paying anything off the principle.

Yet in spite of this nightmare projection, Obama is moving ahead with raising taxes on the middle class, ending the Bush tax cuts and forging ahead with ObamaCare, all projected to hurt job growth,the economy and further deepen the debt.

At what point do the Loonys wake up and say "Holy Shit, Obama is destroying this country"?

Are you nuts? Obama isn't destroying the country, he's saving it from the ravages of Bush and the neocons. If the rich hadn't gotten those tax breaks in the first place, and the financials hadn't been deregulated because of calls to "get the government off my back," we wouldn't have this debt.

At what point do right wing nutcakes like you admit the FACT that Clinton put the budget into the black and Bush put it right back into the red? We had our opportunity to invest in infrastructure and new energy sources then, when we had a surplus, but we squandered it so Bush could throw a trillion-dollar party for his rich friends. You want to know where your money went? They have it. Bush gave it to them.

So now we have to dig ourselves out of a hole. The only way countries get out of depressions this deep is to spend money they don't have. They have to borrow it. We did it in World War II and guess what, after the war the economy was booming and stayed strong for a very long time. We're going to have to do something similar, but just as then, people like you are 2stupid to understand why we're doing it and what would happen if we didn't.

Everybody's upset about the debt. We are too. But you have to use your brain. If we hadn't rescued the banks, the auto companies, etc., the unemployment rate would be more like 15% or 20% or worse. And the money is being paid back, with interest. The government even made an $8 billion profit on one of the loans. If we had listened to you and the Republicans, we would have finished the job of getting the country into a full depression that Bush started.

That's not spin. Those are facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
Gobbledygook. Still blaming Bush while Obama spends us into bankruptcy. Amazing.

"Gobbledygook." In other words, 2stupid4words didn't understand it.

Still blaming Obama for the mess Bush got us into.

You know, I think I figured out who 2stupid4words is.

"Gobbledygook!" That explains why his posts are so thoroughly idiotic. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Keith
Gobbledygook. Still blaming Bush while Obama spends us into bankruptcy. Amazing.

So why is it ok to spend billions to kill people but the minute we get a president who spends billions to help people you have a problem with it? Why is that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 4 the Record
Yet in spite of this nightmare projection, Obama is moving ahead with raising taxes on the middle class, ending the Bush tax cuts and forging ahead with ObamaCare, all projected to hurt job growth,the economy and further deepen the debt.

At what point do the Loonys wake up and say "Holy Shit, Obama is destroying this country"?

There is so much wrong with your post, I hardly know where to begin! But I'll try!

If memory serves me well (and my short-term memory has not yet failed), wasn't it the Bush Administration that left the country with our financial institutions in the toilet, the stock market sputtering, the auto industry on it's deathbed and the housing market in a shambles? And isn't it the Obama Administration that has proposed new monitoring of banking after the bail-out, spurred a rally on Wall Street (the Dow Jones hit 11,000 twice last week), been instrumental in encouraging the sale of domestic cars and provided incentives for real estate sales?

Please don't even try to burden the current president with the sins of his predecessor. Just look at Bush's economic legacy in only one area----the Iraq War:

1) As of February of this year, the war costs the U.S. 704 billion dollars (Congressional Research Service)

2) Every month thereafter that we remain in Iraq will cost an additional 12 billion (Joseph Stoglitz, Columbia School of Economics)

3) By 2017 the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will have cost 2.4-3 TRILLION dollars (Congressional Budget Office)

4) Lifetime health care for returning vets will cost in the area of 700 million dollars.

...and you have the unmitigated gall to protest the cost of health care for all Americans? Shame on you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Ditto
There is so much wrong with your post, I hardly know where to begin! But I'll try!

If memory serves me well (and my short-term memory has not yet failed), wasn't it the Bush Administration that left the country with our financial institutions in the toilet, the stock market sputtering, the auto industry on it's deathbed and the housing market in a shambles? And isn't it the Obama Administration that has proposed new monitoring of banking after the bail-out, spurred a rally on Wall Street (the Dow Jones hit 11,000 twice last week), been instrumental in encouraging the sale of domestic cars and provided incentives for real estate sales?

Please don't even try to burden the current president with the sins of his predecessor. Just look at Bush's economic legacy in only one area----the Iraq War:

1) As of February of this year, the war costs the U.S. 704 billion dollars (Congressional Research Service)

2) Every month thereafter that we remain in Iraq will cost an additional 12 billion (Joseph Stoglitz, Columbia School of Economics)

3) By 2017 the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will have cost 2.4-3 TRILLION dollars (Congressional Budget Office)

4) Lifetime health care for returning vets will cost in the area of 700 million dollars.

...and you have the unmitigated gall to protest the cost of health care for all Americans? Shame on you!

You had better stop with all these facts. You're giving 2smart a migraine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Keith
There is so much wrong with your post, I hardly know where to begin! But I'll try!

If memory serves me well (and my short-term memory has not yet failed), wasn't it the Bush Administration that left the country with our financial institutions in the toilet, the stock market sputtering, the auto industry on it's deathbed and the housing market in a shambles? And isn't it the Obama Administration that has proposed new monitoring of banking after the bail-out, spurred a rally on Wall Street (the Dow Jones hit 11,000 twice last week), been instrumental in encouraging the sale of domestic cars and provided incentives for real estate sales?

Please don't even try to burden the current president with the sins of his predecessor. Just look at Bush's economic legacy in only one area----the Iraq War:

1) As of February of this year, the war costs the U.S. 704 billion dollars (Congressional Research Service)

2) Every month thereafter that we remain in Iraq will cost an additional 12 billion (Joseph Stoglitz, Columbia School of Economics)

3) By 2017 the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will have cost 2.4-3 TRILLION dollars (Congressional Budget Office)

4) Lifetime health care for returning vets will cost in the area of 700 million dollars.

...and you have the unmitigated gall to protest the cost of health care for all Americans? Shame on you!

2smart4u ( I cringe everytime I have to type that) feels no shame. They are incapable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 2smart4u
There is so much wrong with your post, I hardly know where to begin! But I'll try!

If memory serves me well (and my short-term memory has not yet failed), wasn't it the Bush Administration that left the country with our financial institutions in the toilet, the stock market sputtering, the auto industry on it's deathbed and the housing market in a shambles? And isn't it the Obama Administration that has proposed new monitoring of banking after the bail-out, spurred a rally on Wall Street (the Dow Jones hit 11,000 twice last week), been instrumental in encouraging the sale of domestic cars and provided incentives for real estate sales?

Please don't even try to burden the current president with the sins of his predecessor. Just look at Bush's economic legacy in only one area----the Iraq War:

1) As of February of this year, the war costs the U.S. 704 billion dollars (Congressional Research Service)

2) Every month thereafter that we remain in Iraq will cost an additional 12 billion (Joseph Stoglitz, Columbia School of Economics)

3) By 2017 the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will have cost 2.4-3 TRILLION dollars (Congressional Budget Office)

4) Lifetime health care for returning vets will cost in the area of 700 million dollars.

...and you have the unmitigated gall to protest the cost of health care for all Americans? Shame on you!

Here's a fact you ignored: After 8 war years of the Bush administration, he left with a 1.5 trillion deficit. In the first year of the Obama fiasco, he has more than tripled what it took Bush 8 years to do.

Here's another one. I remember Obama pledging to bring the troops home within a year. Instead we're heavily involved in Afghanistan. We'll be out of

Iraq soon and we can thank Bush for the Democracy he created there.

As a veteran myself, I fully support the best health care for our returning vets, I don't support free health care for Joe Sixpack. But don't worry about

Obama's spending frenzy, the GOP is taking over Congress in Nov. and we're taking away Obama's credit cards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
Are you nuts? Obama isn't destroying the country, he's saving it from the ravages of Bush and the neocons. If the rich hadn't gotten those tax breaks in the first place, and the financials hadn't been deregulated because of calls to "get the government off my back," we wouldn't have this debt.

At what point do right wing nutcakes like you admit the FACT that Clinton put the budget into the black and Bush put it right back into the red? We had our opportunity to invest in infrastructure and new energy sources then, when we had a surplus, but we squandered it so Bush could throw a trillion-dollar party for his rich friends. You want to know where your money went? They have it. Bush gave it to them.

So now we have to dig ourselves out of a hole. The only way countries get out of depressions this deep is to spend money they don't have. They have to borrow it. We did it in World War II and guess what, after the war the economy was booming and stayed strong for a very long time. We're going to have to do something similar, but just as then, people like you are 2stupid to understand why we're doing it and what would happen if we didn't.

Everybody's upset about the debt. We are too. But you have to use your brain. If we hadn't rescued the banks, the auto companies, etc., the unemployment rate would be more like 15% or 20% or worse. And the money is being paid back, with interest. The government even made an $8 billion profit on one of the loans. If we had listened to you and the Republicans, we would have finished the job of getting the country into a full depression that Bush started.

That's not spin. Those are facts.

1. Actually banks were deregulated in 1999 under Clinton with the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. There was no banking deregulation under Bush. In fact, the Bush administration repeatedly called for more oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, only to be told none was needed by Democrats Dodd and Schumer.

http://fic.wharton.upenn.edu/fic/papers/02/0239.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm%E2%80%9...used_by_the_Act

2. See thread "Bush did it" post #5

Please site your sources for your "facts".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a fact you ignored: After 8 war years of the Bush administration, he left with a 1.5 trillion deficit. In the first year of the Obama fiasco, he has more than tripled what it took Bush 8 years to do.

Here's another one. I remember Obama pledging to bring the troops home within a year. Instead we're heavily involved in Afghanistan. We'll be out of

Iraq soon and we can thank Bush for the Democracy he created there.

As a veteran myself, I fully support the best health care for our returning vets, I don't support free health care for Joe Sixpack. But don't worry about

Obama's spending frenzy, the GOP is taking over Congress in Nov. and we're taking away Obama's credit cards.

- Doubt you're a veteran unless you mean that you were in the Salvation Army.

- You voted for the guy that said we would be in Iraq "for a hundred years", So you should be happy we're still over there.

- Thanks for the prediction and we all know what that means. Thumping Part 3.

- You're still an idiot

- the spending frenzy is led by............ repub Senator Cochran, #1 in earmarks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 2smart4u
- Doubt you're a veteran unless you mean that you were in the Salvation Army.

- You voted for the guy that said we would be in Iraq "for a hundred years", So you should be happy we're still over there.

- Thanks for the prediction and we all know what that means. Thumping Part 3.

- You're still an idiot

- the spending frenzy is led by............ repub Senator Cochran, #1 in earmarks

You doubt I'm a veteran. Maggots like you don't have a clue. Semper Fi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
So why is it ok to spend billions to kill people but the minute we get a president who spends billions to help people you have a problem with it? Why is that?

Because he's an ignorant, stupid right wing idiot who thinks Fox Noise is news. He has the brains of a sheep and the behavior to match.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
And isn't it the Obama Administration that has proposed new monitoring of banking after the bail-out . . .

Yes it is. And

every single Republican is opposing any real reform of the banks.

They have no shame and no sense of decency at all. All they care about is more and more give-aways of our money to the filthy rich. I know 2stupid4words isn't very bright but it's hard to understand how anyone can be so

STUPID as not to see that the

REPUBLICANS are just

LAP DOGS FOR THE RICH.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest
1. Actually banks were deregulated in 1999 under Clinton with the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. There was no banking deregulation under Bush. In fact, the Bush administration repeatedly called for more oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, only to be told none was needed by Democrats Dodd and Schumer.

http://fic.wharton.upenn.edu/fic/papers/02/0239.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm%E2%80%9...used_by_the_Act

2. See thread "Bush did it" post #5

Please site your sources for your "facts".

OK. Inexplicably, both parties supported Gramm-Leach-Bliley [but see http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s1999-105 ] but its named sponsors are all Republicans. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=300159 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Leach http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_J._Bliley,_Jr.

Nearly all of the opposition came from liberal Demcrats. See the pie charts under “Legislative History” at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm%E2%80%9...80%93Bliley_Act

So, if Congress and the President had listened to liberal Democrats, we wouldn’t have this problem.

That is a fact.

One thing is for sure: Obama didn't deregulate the banks.

Nice shell game with that little switch from the banks to Fannie and Freddie. Bush did absolutely nothing to rein in the banks while the markets heated up and drove the economy toward the cliff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Sure Jerk
You doubt I'm a veteran. Maggots like you don't have a clue. Semper Fi

Sure you are. You have denigrated others who made claims about being veterans or combat veterans but when YOU are challenged, you squeal like a little girl.

AND I'm sure you meant Semper LIE!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 2smart4u
Because he's an ignorant, stupid right wing idiot who thinks Fox Noise is news. He has the brains of a sheep and the behavior to match.

Since FOX has far more viewers than CNN and MSNBC combined, I think you may be the ignorant, stupid left wing idiot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since FOX has far more viewers than CNN and MSNBC combined, I think you may be the ignorant, stupid left wing idiot.

I don't get my news from cable television. Does that make me stupid?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 2smart4u
I don't get my news from cable television. Does that make me stupid?

Your idea of "news" is huffington and moveon which makes you misguided if not stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest *Autonomous*
You doubt I'm a veteran. Maggots like you don't have a clue. Semper Fi

You have in fact doubted the service of every veteran to ever disagree with you. What unity were you with again? Oh, I forgot-you're ashamed of your unit-unlike every other soldier in the entire military.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Keith
Your idea of "news" is huffington and moveon which makes you misguided if not stupid.

So when are you going to cite some of those "FOX news" facts you keep going on about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 2smart4u
You have in fact doubted the service of every veteran to ever disagree with you. What unity were you with again? Oh, I forgot-you're ashamed of your unit-unlike every other soldier in the entire military.

Autonomous ! Resurfaces and still spouting lies about my military service. My guess is you were a disgruntled E-2 who thinks he should have been an E-4.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...