Today 16.7, by the end of 3 more years, easily 20+.
This is without any further promised CHANGE.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
AHA Discussions Go On & On.......
- Thread starter whitedust
- Start date
Today 16.7, by the end of 3 more years, easily 20+.
This is without any further promised CHANGE.
i have that quote with the picture of the loser on my wall in my office for all to see, too bad the low information voters dont have a clue.Is this the same administration that said this back in 2006?:
Sen 0bama 3/20/2006 - 'The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure.'
How ironic.
HH
just like the body count they did while Bush was in office, now all you hear is crickets......
Today 16.7, by the end of 3 more years, easily 20+.
This is without any further promised CHANGE.
Congress, not the President, controls spending. Spending is a legislative problem, not an administrative problem.
Heres a good site for debt info: http://www.skymachines.com/US-National-Debt-Per-Capita-Percent-of-GDP-and-by-Presidental-Term.htm
Based on percentage of change, looks like good old Cigar boy did well, even the first GB! Obama's change has been an increase of 53% and the second GB was 89% over the life of their term. We still will have to wait and see what happens for the next couple years to see where Obama's lands. They both did a terrible job. One major issue is the basic nature of exponential growth, once it starts getting high it explodes. also, DCSnomo is correct, your Congress is in charge of the purse! Check out the numbers!
Based on percentage of change, looks like good old Cigar boy did well, even the first GB! Obama's change has been an increase of 53% and the second GB was 89% over the life of their term. We still will have to wait and see what happens for the next couple years to see where Obama's lands. They both did a terrible job. One major issue is the basic nature of exponential growth, once it starts getting high it explodes. also, DCSnomo is correct, your Congress is in charge of the purse! Check out the numbers!
Last edited:
Congress, not the President, controls spending. Spending is a legislative problem, not an administrative problem.
The President is supposed to submit a budget to Congress though. Congress hasn't passed a budget since 2008, I believe (I might have the year wrong, but this hasn't happened before for this many years).
The President is supposed to submit a budget to Congress though. Congress hasn't passed a budget since 2008, I believe (I might have the year wrong, but this hasn't happened before for this many years).
And this is EXACTLY why spending can go on and on and on. There is no limit, they just keep raising it! Which is why funding of everything gets done, nothing gets cut!
highhertel
Member
And this is EXACTLY why spending can go on and on and on. There is no limit, they just keep raising it! Which is why funding of everything gets done, nothing gets cut!
Unfortunately since we can barely make interest payments on our national debt, the government feels they need to keep spending to keep interest rates artificially low.
How is this going to end? Very badly my guess. Get your debt paid off and be prepared just in case, cash and physical gold/silver is king.
HH
D
Deleted member 10829
Guest
Heres a good site for debt info: http://www.skymachines.com/US-National-Debt-Per-Capita-Percent-of-GDP-and-by-Presidental-Term.htm
Based on percentage of change, looks like good old Cigar boy did well, even the first GB! Obama's change has been an increase of 53% and the second GB was 89% over the life of their term. We still will have to wait and see what happens for the next couple years to see where Obama's lands. They both did a terrible job. One major issue is the basic nature of exponential growth, once it starts getting high it explodes. also, DCSnomo is correct, your Congress is in charge of the purse! Check out the numbers!
Keep in mind GWB had 9/11 to deal with and all the costs that went along with the aftermath of that and making sure our country was properly protected.
The reason cigar boy did well is Congress was controlled by the other party and he actually worked with them to get things done.
true and unfortunately there are only a small hand full of people in the house that are trying to change the direction of spending.Congress, not the President, controls spending. Spending is a legislative problem, not an administrative problem.
we are on a fast train to disaster.
but It is best to just mock the few people trying to slow this disaster down.
the government admits if things dont change we are looking at 80% tax rates with in 20 yrs .
and that is with out Obumer care that alone is going to add over 700billion in DEBT in the next 10 yrs.
not my numbers the CBO numbers.
but hey your kids deserve nothing but the best for there life's outlook .
and BTW the president sets the agenda and did the first 2 yrs unopposed.
the president by law is to present a budget every yr and has not done that yet.
Oh yeah Harry we deff need to increase the debt ceiling a extra 1trillon yeah that should work out just fine
- - - Updated - - -
Never make excuses for GB he was a big government progressive with a awful track record of spending and presenting the worst piece of legislation to that date. the patriot act we can see haw that POS is playing out .Keep in mind GWB had 9/11 to deal with and all the costs that went along with the aftermath of that and making sure our country was properly protected.
The reason cigar boy did well is Congress was controlled by the other party and he actually worked with them to get things done.
but hey the patriot act will be very helpful to the death panels when it comes to life and death decisions about they health care
F
fusion
Guest
Heres a good site for debt info: http://www.skymachines.com/US-National-Debt-Per-Capita-Percent-of-GDP-and-by-Presidental-Term.htm
Based on percentage of change, looks like good old Cigar boy did well, even the first GB! Obama's change has been an increase of 53% and the second GB was 89% over the life of their term. We still will have to wait and see what happens for the next couple years to see where Obama's lands. They both did a terrible job. One major issue is the basic nature of exponential growth, once it starts getting high it explodes. also, DCSnomo is correct, your Congress is in charge of the purse! Check out the numbers!
One has to be of questionable intellect, to not understand, the reason for the spike in spending GWB's 1st term was a direct result of 9/11/01. Security increases, dept of homeland security, and the Iraq war, and we get spending up there pretty quickly. But I guess we've all forgotten about the 3000 Americans killed on 9/11/01 and the required reaction to that terrorist act.
One has to be of questionable intellect, to not understand, the reason for the spike in spending GWB's 1st term was a direct result of 9/11/01. Security increases, dept of homeland security, and the Iraq war, and we get spending up there pretty quickly. But I guess we've all forgotten about the 3000 Americans killed on 9/11/01 and the required reaction to that terrorist act.
Do you also have to be of questionable intellect to question why the initial focus was on Saddam in Iraq instead of Al Queda and Bin Ladin in Afghanistan (not sure on spelling on some of that)? Good riddance of Saddam, but that was costly (still is).
Spending under GWB increased in many areas outside of terror responses.
When repubs took office in the mid-90's, imagine what the country would be like now if they passed term limits and a balance budget amendment, both of which I think were part of the Contract with America. Obama would probably still be community organizing and hanging out with acorn-types in Chicago.
Do you also have to be of questionable intellect to question why the initial focus was on Saddam in Iraq instead of Al Queda and Bin Ladin in Afghanistan (not sure on spelling on some of that)? Good riddance of Saddam, but that was costly (still is).
Spending under GWB increased in many areas outside of terror responses.
When repubs took office in the mid-90's, imagine what the country would be like now if they passed term limits and a balance budget amendment, both of which I think were part of the Contract with America. Obama would probably still be community organizing and hanging out with acorn-types in Chicago.
better question is why the initial focus was on Saddam in Iraq instead of Al Qaeda and Bin Ladin in Afghanistan
and not Saudi Arabia and why were the only planes in the air after 9 11 Saudi nationals? air force 1 was grounded but oh we have to get those Saudi nationals out of the country.
I get Afghanistan I mean they were burning the CIA poppy fields. who do they think they are dont they know the cia grew those fields to fund afghan AKA Al Qadea rebels when paying back Russia for Vietnam. and those field were still needed and are still needed today come on how do u expect them to be buying the weapons they are running through Benghazi to Sierra to arm Al Qadea with out feeding this country's explosive Heroin addiction. it was nice to get control of those fields back though It had been close to 10 yrs but now we control again and since the invasion the heroin addiction in this country is larger than ever and the arms running has never been more sleazy.
One has to be of questionable intellect, to not understand, the reason for the spike in spending GWB's 1st term was a direct result of 9/11/01. Security increases, dept of homeland security, and the Iraq war, and we get spending up there pretty quickly. But I guess we've all forgotten about the 3000 Americans killed on 9/11/01 and the required reaction to that terrorist act.
Master's Degree from the University of Illinois 2001; Professor Of Environmental Biology; Successful small business owner for over 10 years. I might not be the most intellectual person in the world but I think I can hold my own. Thanks for inquiring.
rocketman356
New member
www.usdebtclock.org read all the lines ,,,,,,way to many in the wagon
rocketman356
New member
And if yaa want some really good reading,,,,go to Illinois debt clock on the above site,,,,,,The Democrooks here have done a wonderfull job of making this state ILL.
rocketman356
New member
And if you think these incompentant goverment morons can run Obummer Care,,,,,just think about the three and a half years and the 600,000,000 spent on this great website to sign on, Gotta luv it
F
fusion
Guest
Ok guys let's not get too far off topic
Yes Father, I'll be real good for now on....
LOL
Yes Father, I'll be real good for now on....
LOL
UNFRICKEN believable! I have been pricing individual health insurance for myself. Before October 1st for Dean care HMO, with a 5,000 deductible, it was 87 a month. I just checked again, same plan, except now the deductible is 5500 a month, starting Jan 1st 2014, will now be $298 a month!!!!!!!!!! YOU CAN STICK THIS ACA PLAN RIGHT UP YOUR AZZ OBUMMER! Cheaper eh? STICK IT!
UNFRICKEN believable! I have been pricing individual health insurance for myself. Before October 1st for Dean care HMO, with a 5,000 deductible, it was 87 a month. I just checked again, same plan, except now the deductible is 5500 a month, starting Jan 1st 2014, will now be $298 a month!!!!!!!!!! YOU CAN STICK THIS ACA PLAN RIGHT UP YOUR AZZ OBUMMER! Cheaper eh? STICK IT!
LOL, not a shocker.