Obama's First Term: 2.4T in deficit reduction

[Direckshun]

Considering that cutting the deficit retards growth, and Obama inherited the Great Recession, this is pretty astonishing we've had this much deficit reduction without tanking growth. It does help explain, however, why growth has been steady but sluggish.

The CBPP says we need an additional 1.4T in deficit reduction, and that's it: our long term debt would be stabilized under our current economy. Which means, of course, if we could get the economy growing at a 3%+ clip again, the long term deficit is put on a downward spiral.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by patteeu

You seem to be having trouble distinguishing between projections and actuals.

By all means, educate me.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by RINGLEADER

Holy crap.

Deficit reduction means jack when it comes after you inflate said deficit.

All these morons running around crowing about $1 trillion and $2 trillion and $4 trillion in deficit reduction over ten years keep forgetting to remind all of us that it still means trillions more in debt.

I really can't stand the idiots who proffer this bs line. They look at trillion dollar deficits and point to percentages and historical averages. By the time Obama is done he will have doubled the debt.

But hey, he cut the deficit!

A lot of steam here, but essentially agreeing with the OP.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by RINGLEADER

If you compare it to one year in the midst of a financial meltdown. Compare Obama's deficits to the average of any two years (not even asking for the typical ten year averages) and your argument that Obama is some great fiscal/debt/deficit hawk doesn't hold up.

I'm not saying the deficit/debt is in good position.

It's still atrocious. But it's significantly less atrocious now than it was four years ago, and there's not much we can do to the deficit without retarding growth other than to do it gradually and responsibly, proportional to the health of the economy.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by mlyonsd

And stop with this inherited nonsense. Obama was a member of congress for 8 years before becoming president. Your trying to pretend he isn't partially responsible for the deficit he 'inherited' isn't playing here.

Originally Posted by patteeu

It was only 4 years, I think, but your point is still a good one.

It's a fair point.

By inherited, I of course mean as President. As I assumed it's been very clear from the start.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by patteeu

Compare that ridiculous $2.4T in imaginary deficit reduction over the next 10 years with the appalling $6T in real deficits he's generated in just the past 4 years. Bottom 5.

"He's generated." Right.

Again, he walked into a 1.3T deficit.

You can't turn that into a balanced budget in four years without retarding growth.

He's still managed to reduce it, with the greatest speed we've seen in a generation. Which has had a negative effect on growth, by the way.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by loochy

dude, even your fellow democrats think this is stupid

Stupid, maybe.

Incorrect? I think not.

[Comrade Crapski]

I found an even bigger loser than Drek:



After 1,460 Letters, Heart-Broken CNN Reporter to Stop Writing to President, Lamenting "He Never Called"

http://www.punditpress.com/2013/01/a...ama-heart.html

[Bo's Pelini]

Government spending is up 28 percent in 4 years.

[HC_Chief]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

"He's generated." Right.

Again, he walked into a 1.3T deficit.

You can't turn that into a balanced budget in four years without retarding growth.

He's still managed to reduce it, with the greatest speed we've seen in a generation. Which has had a negative effect on growth, by the way.

Wow, you should be in Kool Aid adverts!

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by HC_Chief

Wow, you should be in Kool Aid adverts!

In what way.

Please. Tell me. What exactly, in that post that you criticized for being off-the-wall kooky, was remotely inaccurate.

I am dying to know.

[HC_Chief]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

In what way.

Please. Tell me. What exactly, in that post that you criticized for being off-the-wall kooky, was remotely inaccurate.

I am dying to know.

http://www.usgovernmentdebt.us/feder...cit_chart.html
http://www.usgovernmentdebt.us/federal_debt

Have you studied economics?
Basic mathematics?

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by HC_Chief

http://www.usgovernmentdebt.us/feder...cit_chart.html
http://www.usgovernmentdebt.us/federal_debt

Have you studied economics?
Basic mathematics?

Maybe you could help me with some basic mathematics.

This is from the link you just provided me:



Now, is $901B significantly larger, or significantly smaller, than $1,413B?

It's gotta be one of the two, right?

[Comrade Crapski]

flies on shit

[HC_Chief]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Maybe you could help me with some basic mathematics.

This is from the link you just provided me:



Now, is $901B significantly larger, or significantly smaller, than $1,413B?

It's gotta be one of the two, right?

heh, you're also not a strong reader. You see the little symbol next to FY2009? Did you read the description?

Do you know what "FY" stands for?

Which number is greater, 8 or 4?

Now, google the word "aggregate". Apply to the values in the table; go back and read the post you tried to refute via Kool Aid blather.

That's your homework assignment for the evening. Tomorrow we'll cover bar charts.

[mlyonsd]

This $1.4T deficit. How much of it was Bush's and how much was Obama's considering Obama was president for 8 months of that fiscal year?

When was the Obama/Reid/Pelosi failed stimulus passed? I thought it was like in February 2009, well within the $1.4T fiscal deficit year.