Politics Trump on Coming Debt Crisis: ‘I Won’t Be Here’ When It Blows Up

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
MarAzul said:
If we can not make the deficit be gone by growing the economy and there by revenue, then we lose. End of game.
If you try to increase revenue with increase taxes, you will not get the debt paid before the interests rates rise and the economy shrinks.
That will be end of game.
Click to expand...

The percent of the deficit as part of the GDP under the Obama administration is a direct contradiction to this fallacy.

The reversal of this trend under the Trump administration is a continued affirmation of the fact that the measures taken by the Republican administration to grow the economy are the wrong ones.

There is nothing really to say about it - the numbers tell a pretty clear picture.

FWIW - under the current budget / income estimates - the federal deficit in 2019 will be $985B

https://www.thebalance.com/u-s-federal-budget-breakdown-3305789

in 2015 - under the so called "socialist" Obama administration, the deficit was 2.4% of the GDP.

It is almost 4.0% in 2018 and is estimated to be higher in 2019
 
Last edited:
andalusian said:
The percent of the deficit as part of the GDP under the Obama administration is a direct contradiction to this fallacy.

The reversal of this trend under the Trump administration is a continued affirmation of the fact that the measures taken by the Republican administration to grow the economy are the wrong ones.

There is nothing really to say about it - the numbers tell a pretty clear picture.
Click to expand...

I will respectfully disagree. Your number still leave a deficit. Perhaps smaller but still a slow walk to falure when interest rate climb.
If we can not find a way to make enough to pay down the debt ( not just reduce deficits) then we are on the path to failure.

Right now, I doubt we could stay a float with 8 percent interest rates. 10 would be out of the question. Slow walking with a deficit
will be a slow walk to the end.
 
MarAzul said:
I will respectfully disagree. Your number still leave a deficit. Perhaps smaller but still a slow walk to falure when interest rate climb.
If we can not find a way to make enough to pay down the debt ( not just reduce deficits) then we are on the path to failure.

Right now, I doubt we could stay a float with 8 percent interest rates. 10 would be out of the question. Slow walking with a deficit
will be a slow walk to the end.
Click to expand...


Obama's administration started with a recession - and the defiict/gdp percentage was 9.8% - it went down to 3.1% at the end - directly contradicting your analysis.

The entire lower taxes to spur the economy stuff is bullcrap when you go below a certain number (which empirically seems to be just short of 40% for the highest tax bracket).

Let me remind you that this is not the first time we have seen that the "cut taxes to spur the economy" bullshit does not work.

In 1992, Last year of Bush #41 - the percentage of deficit / GDP was 4.4%. Clinton raised taxes and after 8 years, we actually had a federal surplus (of 2.4% of the GDP) at the last year of the Clinton administration

Bush #43 signed the "Economic Growth and TaxRelief Reconciliation Act of 2001" - and we all know what happened at the end of his administration.

As shown - the Obama tax hikes has taken the country out of the recession and brought down the percentage of the deficit / gdp to pre-recession levels - and since the Trump tax cut - we are growing it up again quickly.

All you need to do is look at the Clinton surplus to see that your assertion is just wrong.

Now - to be clear, there is of course an opposite side to it - there are levels where it is too high and cripples the economy - like the Carter years showed - but like everything in life you need to have some kind of a balance - and this administration, despite it's cries for small government and responsibility - is anything but.
 
MarAzul said:
We either grow out of the hole or succumb to the debt.
Click to expand...

Then understand what tax breaks for the rich do. They don't help you or I.

Trumpets don't seem to understand Obama cut Bush's deficit by 2/3rds while the guy they voted for just exploded that deficit. And that just adds to the debt.

It's like Dick Cheney said, deficits don't matter.
 
Chris Craig said:
Make money off China? China owns our ass
Click to expand...

China needs us too and even though we owe them the most of any foreign power, 70% of our debt is owed to the American people.

Who else is China gonna sell their cheap goods to?
 
andalusian said:
Bush #43 signed the "Economic Growth and TaxRelief Reconciliation Act of 2001" - and we all know what happened at the end of his administration.
Click to expand...

Add this to 2 wars on the credit card, a big giveaway to big Pharma, then he cut taxes again....
 
PtldPlatypus said:
Most of Western Europe? :dunno:
Click to expand...

Well yes, Western European countries will still probably import Chinese goods.

But are they going to import <150% more goods from China than they already do?

We import ~25% of all Chinese exports, not a trivial amount of business to lose.

I would say that our debt, and our insatiable consumption of cheap labor, create a fairly congruent death pact of mutually assured destruction. If that changes then we are all in for a brave new reality, likely involving cannibalism, stationary bike power generation, landfill mining, or even worse, less convenience in our day to day lives.
 
Funny in a sad way how ignorant libs are about how our government functions.

Congress is 100% in control of government spending. Presidents can only ask them to approve it, or ask them to approve cutting wasteful/inappropriate programs.

Swamp resistance to Trump’s agenda is costing billions of dollars and prolonging financial pain for millions of Americans.
 
andalusian said:
What amazes me is how a party that caters to the super-rich manages to get so many poor people to support them and continue to support them while they they do unholy things to them.
Click to expand...

Both parties cater to the super rich.

Dems do it by taxing the poor and adding regulations and fees to Conservative-owned businesses, and Reps do it by limiting regulations and taxes on businesses (which are paid by the poor through purchase of goods and services.
 
MARIS61 said:
Both parties cater to the super rich.

Dems do it by taxing the poor and adding regulations and fees to Conservative-owned businesses, and Reps do it by limiting regulations and taxes on businesses (which are paid by the poor through purchase of goods and services.
Click to expand...

Even if we ignore the nonsense of taxing the poor and take your assertions at face value - the results shows that the way the Democrats do it benefits the economy more than the way the Republicans do it.
 
dviss1 said:
Then understand what tax breaks for the rich do. They don't help you or I.

Trumpets don't seem to understand Obama cut Bush's deficit by 2/3rds while the guy they voted for just exploded that deficit. And that just adds to the debt.

It's like Dick Cheney said, deficits don't matter.
Click to expand...

Sigh!
 
MARIS61 said:
Funny in a sad way how ignorant libs are about how our government functions.

Congress is 100% in control of government spending. Presidents can only ask them to approve it, or ask them to approve cutting wasteful/inappropriate programs.

Swamp resistance to Trump’s agenda is costing billions of dollars and prolonging financial pain for millions of Americans.
Click to expand...

Have you ever complained about Obama's "spending"?

I'd love to see someone dig up those posts...
 
dviss1 said:
Have you ever complained about Obama's "spending"?

I'd love to see someone dig up those posts...
Click to expand...

Yes. I once posted that Obama spent more money bailing out GM than the previous 10 Presidents spent building ships for the US Navy.
I was correct too.
 
andalusian said:
Even if we ignore the nonsense of taxing the poor and take your assertions at face value - the results shows that the way the Democrats do it benefits the economy more than the way the Republicans do it.
Click to expand...

But but trickle down economics is one of the most fantastic policies to boost the economy. Oh wait, that didn't work the first time so it must be going to work this time.
 
Don might be wrong again. Stock market epically sucks biggly for the second day in a row.
 
MarAzul said:
Yes. I once posted that Obama spent more money bailing out GM than the previous 10 Presidents spent building ships for the US Navy.
I was correct too.
Click to expand...

Maybe you were.

But most of the bailout was repaid, so the net cost was less than the cost of just one recent boat (the Gerald Ford).

barfo
 
All those prior to him had the same Presidential view.
 
This is what Trump is talking about...he pays good money to a guy to blow it up for him
sheep.jpg
 
He won't be here in two years.
 
MarAzul said:
Yes. I once posted that Obama spent more money bailing out GM than the previous 10 Presidents spent building ships for the US Navy.
I was correct too.
Click to expand...

The money was paid back. We literally made money on that deal. You know this, but still wanna talk shit.
 
dviss1 said:
The money was paid back. We literally made money on that deal. You know this, but still wanna talk shit.
Click to expand...

I believe the US made money on the banks bailout, but not on the automotive one. It does not matter, it was done for a very good reason - we would likely still be in a recession or worse if it was not done at the time.

The US proved it believes in it's economy and restored confidence in the market - and the recession was over in about 18 months. When the Japanese did not do the same - they had lost a couple of decades to bad economy - so the decision was right in it's entirety even if some elements of it lost money.
 
andalusian said:
I believe the US made money on the banks bailout, but not on the automotive one. It does not matter, it was done for a very good reason - we would likely still be in a recession or worse if it was not done at the time.

The US proved it believes in it's economy and restored confidence in the market - and the recession was over in about 18 months. When the Japanese did not do the same - they had lost a couple of decades to bad economy - so the decision was right in it's entirety even if some elements of it lost money.
Click to expand...

We made money by still having those jobs in the economy.
 
dviss1 said:
We made money by still having those jobs in the economy.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I said. This line item actually lost money (So Marzy is correct there) - but it was still the right decision (lost the battle, win the war)
 
CupWizier said:
Where in the fuck did you dig this clown up from? My god, could that video be less informative?
Click to expand...

I've seen some of his videos. Some of it's good, but most of it's just some blow hard who does a lot of jump edits (which are so fucking annoying).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top