Math question for libs.

pineinthegrass wrote: First of all, you need to stop confusing debt with the deficit.

In your fist post you said the debt under Bush in his last year was $400 billion. No, that was the deficit. The debt was far higher.

So I gave you a graph of yearly deficits from the conservative Cato institute. And the graph is pretty close to the one you just provided, except for the projected deficit in 2011. Cato used a CBO number, your source (can you give the exact link?) used OMB data. 2011 projections isn't part of what I'm saying anyway.

The main point is you can't blame Obama for the $1.4 trillion deficit in 2009. That fiscal year started Oct 1st, 2008 under Bush. And the biggest item that Bush added to the 2009 deficit was the TARP bill (up to $700 billion). That was Bush's bill, not Obama's.

Who passed it? Bipartisan but over 66% of the yes's were from the Dems passing it. Should Bush have signed it? NO! $700 billion more for the Dems and Bush gets credit for signing it too. THAT is where he was wrong. If more people would say NO to the Dems this country would be in SO much better shape! Glad they finally are this time!

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll681.xml

Cash for clunkers? ALL Dems and one republican voted yes. ALL Republicans but one voted against it! Another Dem bill!

Failed $870 Billion dollar Stimulus bill that Obama laughs about?

244 - 188. ALL Dems voted for that failure and waste! And even 11 Dems voted against it! Again another $870 billion on the Dems.

jmc wrote: You pretend to be a business person, He was saddled with debt from a medicare enhancement, 2 wars ,tax cuts and loopholes to the wealthiest people. 2 years of a housing disaster (also more than 10 years) of Republican endorsements.This a long term work out process. Obama was not close to perfect. The stimulus was poorly designed and a waste . Your "solution" is a further disaster, Get off your "my team" mentality and get to the real world solutions. I am fine and love watching the promoters of disaster keep digging yourselves into poverty.
I do have the answers but you brain deaders are not worth the keystrokes.
Have fun on your way to bankruptcy. Hope you all feel like you "won" Losers all.

:hands:

Vikings stock is at an all-time low around here lately

The Viking wrote: Failed $870 Billion dollar Stimulus bill that Obama laughs about?

244 - 188. ALL Dems voted for that failure and waste! And even 11 Dems voted against it! Again another $870 billion on the Dems.

Less than $200 billion of that was in FY2009.

H.R. 384 [111th]: TARP Reform and Accountability Act of 2009. almost 95% of the yes votes were Dems. WAY more than enough to pass it alone. Another $700 Billion all on the Dems and Obama.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2009-26

pineinthegrass wrote:

The Viking wrote: Failed $870 Billion dollar Stimulus bill that Obama laughs about?

244 - 188. ALL Dems voted for that failure and waste! And even 11 Dems voted against it! Again another $870 billion on the Dems.

Less than $200 million of that was in FY2009.

When was it passed? And who signed it?

So when was the other $670 billion? And what does that have to do with anything?

I'll help. A week after Obama took office and here is the link on the votes. How do you blame this on Bush or the Republicans?

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2009/roll046.xml

The Viking wrote:

pineinthegrass wrote:

The Viking wrote: Failed $870 Billion dollar Stimulus bill that Obama laughs about?

244 - 188. ALL Dems voted for that failure and waste! And even 11 Dems voted against it! Again another $870 billion on the Dems.

Less than $200 million of that was in FY2009.

When was it passed? And who signed it?

I corrected my typo before I saw this post... should of said $200 billion.

The stimulus was Obama's bill, signed Feb 2009. TARP was Bush's bill signed Oct 2008. TARP contributed more to the FY2009 deficit than did the stimulus.

Let me try to be clearer by breaking down your original post...

The Viking wrote: OK, let's see how you answer (or deflect and don't answer) this one.

Obama keeps saying that he is trying to CUT more spending than ever in history.

When Bush left office the debt that year was about $400 billion.

It starts out confusing because the deficit for fiscal year 2008 was $400 billion, not the debt. I assume you ment to say deficit?

And fiscal 2008 ended Sept 30, 2008. Bush was still in office for four months after that. He signed off the fiscal 2009 budget which began Oct 1, 2008. TARP was put into law after that, and that was the biggest unexpected contribution to to the 2009 deficit (up to $700 billion). Obama did sign his stimulus bill in Feb 2009, but that did not contribute nearly as much to the 2009 deficit as TARP did, the CBO estimated $185 billion for FY 2009.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Recovery_and_Reinvestment_Act_of_2009

The Viking wrote: Debt spending was about $400 billion when Obama took over, and drove it up with many huge spending bills, bailouts, stimulus, and healthcare bills to, let's say $1 trillion per year for the reason of SIMPLE math for you. And now he is willing to lower it to about $800 billion per year. So does taking our debt spending from $400 billion UP to $1 TRILLION and bringing it BACK down

Again, you seem to mix debt with deficit. Or does what you call "debt spending" (whatever that is?) mean the same as just saying deficit?

And by the way, I now see why the projected deficit for 2011 in the Cato graph does not match the OMB graph. The Cato graph was from November 2009. It's 2009 number is actual data and does match the OMB. It's 2010 number was projected, but still matched the actual number pretty closely. But the projected 2011 number has apparently now changed quite a bit in the last year and a half.

But still the point is that you blame Obama for all of the 2009 deficit. Most of that was locked in under Bush (including the standard military, discretionary, and entitlement spending), and I don't believe the unexpected stuff that Obama added would of matched what Bush added with TARP. I think it's fair to say Bush was responsible for over $1 trillion of the $1.4 trillion 2009 deficit. Even if a Ronald Reagan could of taken over in 2009, we'd still of had a huge deficit that year. 1/3rd of FY2009 was already over when Obama took ofice. The deficit went up far more under Bush than it has under Obama, so far at least. But I'll agree future deficits are worrisome.

Guys..Saying the stimulus did'nt work is like saying rain doesn't make you wet..If you dropped the money outta airplanes it would work. Money pumped into the economy can't not work...All you can say for sure is that we put 100's of billions into the economy and we are still in a resession. You can say it wasn't enough, but you can't say it did'nt work..The money, for the most part, is in the economy. I wish we could say the same for the trillion dollar Bush Bank Bailout