Federal deficit increases 26% to $984 billion for fiscal 2019

Do you like tofu?

 

Love it!

 

Good. Then you can pay for it.

 

I was talking debt.. Mr. Obatard created/barrowed/printed however you like almost 8 trillion! Deficit be damned, he created as much debt from barrowing as Trump will by deficit..

I fail to see the difference in the end process ¯\_(º¸º)_/¯

At least with Trump there are clear improvement in job growth and Economics that Mr, Obatard never achieved in eight and eight trillion to debt..

 

But I can do without it *shrugs*

 

Obama also inheritted the worst deficit since the great depression. But he cut the deficit in half, and had GDP growth every year from 2012 to 2017, when his final budget ended..

Bush started with a debt of $4 trillion and ended with a debt of $11 trilllion. Obama did around the same, starting at $11 trillion and ending at either $17. They each added around $6 trillion.

Trump is scheduled to add $4 trillillion by the end of 2020. If he is reelected in 2020, and continues as he does, he will add more than either Bush or Obama, and he doesn't even have a recession to blame.

 

Doesn't matter, he also had the luxury of running a deficit and barrowing/stimulus/Quantum easing to simply bandaid it all together until he faded away.. Trump has to hold this shlt show together with what he has without the aid of the feds!

Obama’s $4 trillion gift to the rich

At least Trump has the balls to try and hold it all together with what many economist warned the last administration would happen in 2020! Mr. Obatard did nothing more then feed the rich and feed the poor for four more years. He didn't create living wage job, he didn't fix infrastructure, he destroyed healthcare as we knew it and saddled Us, our children, their children and every President after him and beyond with debt that can not be reduced in a tradition manner..

 

Without that stimulous, we never would have gotten out of the recession. Bush also tred several stimulous packages.

The reason for the high deficit now is that Trump gave billionares and corporates huge tax cuts, but also doubling subsidies, and not cutting any spending that would have balanced it out.

 

Several? Hardly! He had one in 2008 of a 168 billon..

 

And of course reality and the economic data show your post to be complete bullshit.

 

Refuted in the post you quoted.

 

Every economic metric has been on the exact same unchanging go by upward trend since 2010. Nothing trump has done has had any effect on any economic trend line.

 

OK, you are always right! But lemme think what I like and gather the wrongness from my propaganda sites if you don't mind?

 

It’s just empirical fact butters. The economic data is perfectly clear. Every economic metric has been on the same upward unchanging trend since 2010.

 

Ya I got it in the last post, YOU DA MAN WIT ALL DA KNOW'ns!! No need to beat me up with your superior intellect

 

If you don’t want your nonsense refuted with facts, then don’t post things that are so easily refuted. Simple.

 

What's the problem? I gave you creds for being the more intelligent and always right? At this point you're just trolling me

​

 

The sub prime loan bubble and redlining separate and largely unrelated practices.
I know, because I was one of the people that first put together detailed evidence for redlining back in the mid 80’s first, using early GIS technology (long before Google got interested), followed by actual statements of the practice by bank officials letters admitting to the practice to an audience they thought receptive to the practice. That evidence showed a definite pattern of loans being rejected for minorities wanting to purchase homes in predominantly white neighborhoods. The justification wasn’t made on an economic/earnings basis but on the assumptive basis that a minority buyer would eventually default on a loan and in the meantime wouldn’t maintain a property to the standards of the neighborhood, resulting in an overall decline in property value in that neighborhood. Several banks contacted at the time defended the practice as ‘listening and being sensitive to’ to the ‘pulse’ of the residents in the neighborhood.
My group was funded by HUD block grants with a mission to develop public policies for improving the quality of life and economic opportunity in urban areas. We weren’t task with any specific social justice mission... discovering the prevalence of geographic based ‘redlining’ practices was a discovery made from analysis of scattered sources of housing data, thereto unanalyzed because the means for the geographical data integration, analysis, and visualization hadn’t existed prior. The early identification and substantiation of redlining practices wasn’t performed in Chicago, but in Wisconsin.
While a bit simplistic, the sub prime loan debacle in my opinion was more the result of Democrats (some well meaning) developing social justice motivated policies (to cultivate minority and poor voters with the ‘chicken in every pot’ type of bumper sticker promise) that intersected with profit motivation practices of the banking industry that made larger profits not just on mortgage interest, but on trading blocks of mortgages as a commodity... it’s still practiced... a impeded, but not stopped, by new regulations since the bubble collapse... it was a banking practice that spread throughout other banking institutions all over the world.
That Obama was involved in the Redlining controversy wasn’t because he the champion, but as a consequence of being a community activist riding the coattails of others...