What's another trillion dollars of debt?

1. 0

   JaxsonRaineposted 11 years ago

   Or, for that matter, another 6 or 7 trillion dollars of debt?
   
   http://www.cbo.gov/publication/42972
   
   Another 6.3-6.8 trillion dollars of debt with what Obama wants to do. 3.5 trillion is directly attributed to Obama's budget proposal. Considering that this is what we have been doing to our economic situation, it's a good thing we have debt ceilings or who knows how many more trillions we would be spending.
   
   Not only that, but Obama's policies would increase productivity in America during 2013-2017 by 0.8%, and decrease productivity in America from 2018-2022 by 1.35%. Typical American policy though, who cares about the future?

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Paul Wingertposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Are you done?

      replyreport
      1. 0

         JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Exactly. Who cares?

         replyreport
   2. 61

      recommend1posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Cherry picking figures is about as useful as picking your nose.
      
      The difference can easily be made up by the planned reductions in your military, and minding your goddam international business alone.  Let alone such things as improving your horrendous education system and dealing with that huge mass of your population that is so ignorant they don't understand evolution or, like you, don't understand economics or politics.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         I'm not cherry-picking figures.
         
         That's the projection based off of Obama's proposed budget. It includes any cuts he wanted made. It's what he is asking for. Where is the cherry picking?
         
         Try to have a little civility as well, recommend1.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            recommend1posted 11 years agoin reply to this

            I don't see the need for too much civility when people are clearly kite flying issues to muddy the information in the hope of persuading simple minded people to accept the creeping tyranny of any right wing group.   Obama is not as popular as he could be - but damn is he better than the lying money grabbing a$$holes who have been propped up to compete with him.
            
            When those with little grasp of actual economics and no ability to see any kind of big picture start in with this kind of nonsense then I have to accuse them of being a politic al shill.  So no I will not be civil.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               You haven't told me how I was cherry-picking information recommend1. How about you stop with the ad hominem and present a real argument if you disagree.
               
               The figures I gave are projections based off of Obama's budget request. What he wants to spend money on, what he wants cut. How is looking at Obama's budget cherry-picking?

               replyreport
               1. 61

                  recommend1posted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  I'm sorry - I thought it was obvious that picking one item from a mass of budget items without referencing the balancing parts is called cherry picking information - not hard really.

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     The "one item" I picked was the net total. The total includes everything.
                     
                     Cherry picking would have to exclude data. If I were to say 'Look, Obama is increasing the budget for Program X by $225 billion, he is increasing spending!', that would be cherry picking.
                     
                     Looking at the sum effect of the net total includes all expenditures and all receipts, so what data is being excluded?

                     replyreport
                     1. 61

                        recommend1posted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        One at least is the planned massive reduction in your armed forces that has to be fought through - you know, the battle that will be presented as what do you want - more killing or better healthcare ??  From figures I recall, cutting a trillion over three years from your military budget would hardly be noticed.

                        replyreport
                        1. 0

                           JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                           Obama's proposed budget decreases military spending by approximately 30%, or about $800 billion over three years.
                           
                           You're trying to ignore what Obama wants to do, and erase his proposed deficits with other possible future cuts. Essentially, you're cherry picking by ignoring the concrete data in favor of anything else that could make his budget look better.

                           replyreport