What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

POTUS 45.21 STAND for our great National Anthem

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: POTUS 45.21 STAND for our great National Anthem

Did the annual deficit increase or decrease under Obama? Was it a small change or a significant one? Answer the question. While both lead to an increase in the debt, the amount of increase is not the same, stop pretending like it is.
Sort of, kind of, but....not really.

Deficit as a Percentage of GDP by year (from alfa's links)
GWB years
2001 = 1.2% surplus
2002 = 1.4%
2003 = 3.3%
2004 = 3.4%
2005 = 2.4%
2006 = 1.8%
2007 = 1.1%
2008 = 3.1%

BO years
2009 =9.8%
2010 = 8.7%
2011 = 8.5%
2012 = 6.8%
2013 = 4.1%
2014 = 2.8%
2015 = 2.5%
2016 = 3.1%
 
Re: POTUS 45.21 STAND for our great National Anthem

I get paid a government salary, so I could not care less whether you personally feel ripped off by some attorney from your past.

But aggregating thousands of small claims into one class action is not a bug but the point. It's a way to hold businesses responsible for things that would otherwise not be corrected because it's not worth any one individual's time or money.

Nah lawyers are evil! Sure the bank is screwing people over but they might be harmed for doing so and we cant allow it!

Who knew the Right was a bunch of bleeding hearts ;)
 
Re: POTUS 45.21 STAND for our great National Anthem

My point exactly.

Wells Fargo didn't harm me. They used me to look good to their shareholders, but they didn't harm me.

Now you want to use me too. You won't even let me in your office because I have no damages. But, if you can group me in with tens of thousands of other nameless suckers, then there is some coin in it for you. I won't see anything. Hey, maybe I'll get another voucher.

But I understand. You're out there saving the world from predatory corporations. I mean I'll keep getting ripped off, but hey at least you got paid.

Speaking as someone who may or may not have a certain amount of inside access to the goings-on here...

Many people were ultimately harmed, and it happened in two basic ways. First, they had savings accounts and/or checking accounts that would be free if opened for some dollar value greater than a minimum threshold, but were instead opened, unknowingly to the client, and for balances that did not meet the threshold. That caused them to be charged maintenance fees on those accounts until they were closed.

Also, these accounts, along with credit card accounts, had the potential - some realized, others unrealized - to harm these people in their credit scores, costing them actual money by forcing them into a higher interest rate bracket when borrowing money.

Not all people who were classified as "victims" were harmed in this charade, but a great number of people were.
 
Re: POTUS 45.21 STAND for our great National Anthem

Sort of, kind of, but....not really.

Deficit as a Percentage of GDP by year (from alfa's links)
GWB years
2001 = 1.2% surplus
2002 = 1.4%
2003 = 3.3%
2004 = 3.4%
2005 = 2.4%
2006 = 1.8%
2007 = 1.1%
2008 = 3.1%

BO years
2009 =9.8%
2010 = 8.7%
2011 = 8.5%
2012 = 6.8%
2013 = 4.1%
2014 = 2.8%
2015 = 2.5%
2016 = 3.1%

2009 Is the final Bush budget, 2017 will be Obama's final budget.
 
Re: POTUS 45.21 STAND for our great National Anthem

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-data-guru-i-tried-to-team-up-with-julian-assange

Alexander Nix, who heads a controversial data-analytics firm that worked for President Donald Trump’s campaign, wrote in an email last year that he reached out to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange about Hillary Clinton’s missing 33,000 emails.

Nix, who heads Cambridge Analytica, told a third party that he reached out to Assange about his firm somehow helping the WikiLeaks editor release Clinton’s missing emails, according to two sources familiar with a congressional investigation into interactions between Trump associates and the Kremlin. Those sources also relayed that, according to Nix’s email, Assange told the Cambridge Analytica CEO that he didn’t want his help, and preferred to do the work on his own.

...

By April, Trump’s CIA director was calling WikiLeaks a tool of Kremlin spies and the equivalent of a “hostile intelligence service.”

...

Robert and Rebekah Mercer, a billionaire father-daughter duo that spent big to boost Trump’s presidential candidacy, are major investors in Cambridge Analytica. Robert Mercer co-manages a hedge fund that drew scrutiny from congressional investigators in 2014 for using questionable banking tactics to allegedly dodge paying upward of $7 billion in taxes. Steve Bannon, formerly a senior White House aide, was on the company’s board before he joined the White House. He has worked with the Mercers on multiple conservative projects, and Bloomberg News reported he previously had holdings in Cambridge Analytica valued at between $1 million and $5 million.
 
Re: POTUS 45.21 STAND for our great National Anthem

It makes me laugh that people like 5mn Major think flake is some courageous hero. It is easy to speak your mind when you are dying. The clown wasnt going to be re-elected so he quit. Some courage! Then he spoke his mind, but votes with El Presidente every chance he gets. He is Paul Ryan with terrible support by his citizens.
Exactly.
 
Re: POTUS 45.21 STAND for our great National Anthem

2009 Is the final Bush budget, 2017 will be Obama's final budget.
OK.
GWB budget years 2002 - 2009 Deficit as percentage of GDP = 3.4%
BO budget years 2010 - 2017 Deficit as percentage of GDP = 4.8%

ETA: Again numbers from alfa's link
 
Re: POTUS 45.21 STAND for our great National Anthem

OK.
GWB budget years 2002 - 2009 Deficit as percentage of GDP = 3.4%
BO budget years 2010 - 2017 Deficit as percentage of GDP = 4.8%

ETA: Again numbers from alfa's link

I don't know where the 2002-2008 #'s are coming from since the link starts at 2009, but they look like they are using Bush's phony deficit #s where he decided that money spent on the GWOT magically didn't count as part of the deficit (if you look at the year over year growth in debt you'll see there are some big discrepancies to the declared deficit). On the whole, yes the average is higher under Obama, but we're talking about the direction it moved. Bush went from bad to worse, Obama went from worse to bad, even your #s agree with that. Which all points to the larger trend that Ds are a hobo's barrel fire on the deficit, while R's are a landfill fire.
 
Re: POTUS 45.21 STAND for our great National Anthem

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/trump-csrs-senate-confusion

Senators left a Tuesday lunch meeting with President Donald Trump just as confused about his position on stabilizing the individual health insurance market as when they went in.

“We really didn’t get into details on that,” Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) told reporters, noting that the meeting was cordial and “nobody called anyone an ignorant slut.”

Well that's a low bar.
 
Re: POTUS 45.21 STAND for our great National Anthem

I don't know where the 2002-2008 #'s are coming from since the link starts at 2009, but they look like they are using Bush's phony deficit #s where he decided that money spent on the GWOT magically didn't count as part of the deficit (if you look at the year over year growth in debt you'll see there are some big discrepancies to the declared deficit). On the whole, yes the average is higher under Obama, but we're talking about the direction it moved. Bush went from bad to worse, Obama went from worse to bad, even your #s agree with that. Which all points to the larger trend that Ds are a hobo's barrel fire on the deficit, while R's are a landfill fire.
Right, there's also a matter of why you're running a deficit and what you hope to accomplish by doing it. If ie giving more ridiculous tax cuts to the rich vs digging out of an economic crisis.
 
Re: POTUS 45.21 STAND for our great National Anthem

I don't know where the 2002-2008 #'s are coming from since the link starts at 2009, but they look like they are using Bush's phony deficit #s where he decided that money spent on the GWOT magically didn't count as part of the deficit (if you look at the year over year growth in debt you'll see there are some big discrepancies to the declared deficit). On the whole, yes the average is higher under Obama, but we're talking about the direction it moved. Bush went from bad to worse, Obama went from worse to bad, even your #s agree with that. Which all points to the larger trend that Ds are a hobo's barrel fire on the deficit, while R's are a landfill fire.

Correct. Bush lied about everything regarding the budget. He also refused to raise taxes for his programs.

NCLB
Medicare Prescriptions
Iraq and Afghanistan Wars
Bush Tax Cuts

It was a dishonest shell game. Not a single ounce of revenue was added to the Treasury to pay for any of that.

Obamacare had to add taxes to pass.
 
I agree with you. The tricky part is it would likely increase costs in the short term. It's really a rock and a hard place situation.

Does the situation concern you very much?

No, because we can always raise taxes and/or inflate our way out of it if needed. The federal government is not a household.
 
Re: POTUS 45.21 STAND for our great National Anthem

Raise taxes when the economy is expanding. Cut taxes when there is a recession.

It seems counter productive, but you want a certain amount of $$$ moving through the economy at any one time.
 
Re: POTUS 45.21 STAND for our great National Anthem

Well, Obama was on a path to eliminate the deficit, but you and other people voted for "hope" and not for the reality that Clinton would have kept that going. Stop doing that, and accept that Democrats do understand spending and the economy. Evidence is pretty clear.

And right NOW, D's are against tax cuts that are clearly going to raise the deficit. They are not suggesting huge tax cuts for people who don't spend money, and then expanding the most expensive voluntary expense that we have (military).

All you are doing is dismissing D's words, and complaining that they are part of the problem. You may not like D policy, but at least they have some, and work toward it. R's have no ideas other than "anti-Obama", Tax cuts, and bigger military. If they had something real, we would have seen something by now- we are 10 months into this administration, with zero significant things done through congress.

Hell, Trumpy's executive order ending the ACA subsidies is going to increase the deficit, but somehow this doesn't bother the so-called "deficit hawks", either in the real world or in Congress.
 
Re: POTUS 45.21 STAND for our great National Anthem

I don't know where the 2002-2008 #'s are coming from since the link starts at 2009, but they look like they are using Bush's phony deficit #s where he decided that money spent on the GWOT magically didn't count as part of the deficit (if you look at the year over year growth in debt you'll see there are some big discrepancies to the declared deficit). .
If you have access to those "cooked books" and could post them I'd appreciate it. Otherwise, I can only use what the Gov't produces.

Did the annual deficit increase or decrease under Obama?
OK.
GWB budget years 2002 - 2009 Deficit as percentage of GDP = 3.4%
BO budget years 2010 - 2017 Deficit as percentage of GDP = 4.8%
On the whole, yes the average is higher under Obama, but we're talking about the direction it moved. Bush went from bad to worse, Obama went from worse to bad, even your #s agree with that. Which all points to the larger trend that Ds are a hobo's barrel fire on the deficit, while R's are a landfill fire.
I'm sorry I misconstrued your original question. I thought you were comparing GWB vs. BO. My bad. It's hard to concentrate appropriately when one is dodging moving goalposts.
 
Re: POTUS 45.21 STAND for our great National Anthem

I don't know where the 2002-2008 #'s are coming from since the link starts at 2009, but they look like they are using Bush's phony deficit #s where he decided that money spent on the GWOT magically didn't count as part of the deficit (if you look at the year over year growth in debt you'll see there are some big discrepancies to the declared deficit). On the whole, yes the average is higher under Obama, but we're talking about the direction it moved. Bush went from bad to worse, Obama went from worse to bad, even your #s agree with that. Which all points to the larger trend that Ds are a hobo's barrel fire on the deficit, while R's are a landfill fire.

And much of that is due to the fact that GDP was so much lower in Obama's early years thank's to the Wall Streeter's practically destroying the global economy.
 
Re: POTUS 45.21 STAND for our great National Anthem

No, because we can always raise taxes and/or inflate our way out of it if needed. The federal government is not a household.

I certainly hope you are right. I don't want to see us go the way of Greece.
 
Raise taxes when the economy is expanding. Cut taxes when there is a recession.

It seems counter productive, but you want a certain amount of $$$ moving through the economy at any one time.

Careful, Joe. They'll revoke your GOP membership if they find out you support Keynesian economics.
 
I certainly hope you are right. I don't want to see us go the way of Greece.

Greece was farked by the Euro. It ceded monetary policy to Brussels, and the rest of Europe chose not to help it out, instead calling for austerity, which was the exact wrong thing to do ("we're in a recession, so let's cut government spending and make it even worse").

The U.S. controls the dollar. We're fine.
 
Re: POTUS 45.21 STAND for our great National Anthem

I'm sorry I misconstrued your original question. I thought you were comparing GWB vs. BO. My bad. It's hard to concentrate appropriately when one is dodging moving goalposts.

There was zero movement of goalposts. I was comparing the CHANGE each had on the deficit during their terms, not the average. Please show me where I was comparing their average performance. The whole point of the comparison was what impact they made from what they inherited to what they left for their successors.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top