TRUMP'S RISING DEBTS WILL SOON FORCE THE U.S. TO SPEND MORE ON INTEREST THAN MEDICAID, DEFENSE

"Needed" is in the eye of the needer!!! Its my money. The government needs to be put on a diet.

 

Few things in the world would put a smile on my face quite like this. It's maybe the most unlikely thing I could imagaine... but a boy can dream.

For the OP... this is more of the same. Republicans cry and moan and deficits and debt until their in office, then forget all about that. Democrats never cared about fiscal responsibility to begin with.

 

not hardly, the debt was almost 10 trillion by 2008 when Bush handed off the economy and the bank bailout that Bush did showed up after 2008

 

it was ruled unconstitutional cause then the party in power could trick the minority party into voting for a bill and then the president line item veto all the minority party stuff out of said bill

 

not without laws that restrict outsourcing to foreign contries

it's a national security risk for our information network\critical apps to be run by places like India

 

Clinton used supply side economics and benefited from reduced military spending. It's very clear which economic policies produce superior economic growth.

The national debt is inherited from Obama. Trump couldn't reduce it because the R's did not have 60 Senate votes. And now with the D's controlling the House there is absolutely no chance to reduce spending.

The Great Recession was caused by low income housing policies started by Bill Clinton, dumba$$ monetary policy, and a tragic interaction of banking regulations some which were from the 1930's.

This is all a mystery to those who are ignorant of the recent economic history.

 

He can't.

 

Come'on man, do your homework. Reagan raised taxes in 1983 (but not on income) because he was promised spending cuts by Tip O'Neal - the ratio was $1 of tax revenue increase for $3 of spending cuts. The taxes were implemented - the spending cuts were not.

Clinton did not raise income taxes with the support of the R's in Congress - where does that BS come from. When Clinton triangulated he reduced the tax rate on capital gains resulting in a huge increase in cap gains tax revenue. Approximately 25% of the Clinton total surplus comes from cap gains tax revenue.

Greenspan acted responsibly in the Clinton years but lost his mind during the Bush 43 years contributing to the housing bubble. Money doesn't flow into the economy from fiscal policy. The Fed can print money but that will result in inflation if not correctly managed.

 

That's ridiculous.

 

Democrats took the Congress January 2007 and TARP was paid back with interest. The treasury made about $250B off it.

 

Bush and the Republicans had it down to $161B heading to surpluses. Then the Democrats took back the Congress.

 

Trump was elected to place the welfare of US citizens above those of non citizens and to get the economy going again. He has done both. Spending reductions are not possible previously without 60 Senate votes and now with D control of the House. Obama's legacy of pathetic economic growth and record national debt is secure for now.

 

And created a horrible set of incentives. But the right quit caring about moral hazard with the Savings and Loan bail out.

 

Reagan requested less spending than Congress authorized each year in office. Clinton OTOH requested more spending and was forced to sign the Gingrich/Kasich budgets which restrained the rate of growth of spending. He came into off on a strong upward tax revenue growth curve, past a tax rate increase and that tax revenue growth slowed as did GDP growth. It was the Gingrich/Kasich tax rate cuts that got things back on track and with their burgers produced the surpluses.

 

I know we all blame Presidents for economic failures, but the truth is, Congress controls the money. Clinton did balance the budget, but he did so with a Republican Congress. Obama had to deal with the worst recession in American history, and succeeded in keeping it from degrading into a recession, but he was very limited in what he could do politically due to the economic crisis. He also had a Congress whose publicly stated goal was to do everything possible to oppose his every move. Success in any administration requires some cooperative efforts between the President & Congress. McConnell was determined to never give that. Anyway, reducing spending isn't one of Trump's goals. His deficit is climbing at a horrendous rate, and he simply ignores it. Republicans are good at fault finding against Democrats on the deficit, but when in power they do nothing at all to fix it. These past two years--no, these past 8 years--are ample proof that Republicans are incompetent when it comes to governance.

 

And didn't cause the huge deficits the Democrats got us into.

 

... sort of? The huge deficits come as a result of unfettered defense spending and bloated, poorly managed entitlement systems.

But saying that bailing out private creditors was neither deficit spending nor lead to an increase in the national debt is just factually incorrect/impossible/nonsensical.

An appropriate dodge on the incentives front, really no arguing with that.

 

That’s complete BS.

 

Gingrich and Kasich bonged the budget Clinton opposed the measures that did so until his political adviser Dick Morris warned if he didn't get on board he would lose reelection.

Obama fame into office on the back end of the recession with the job loss rate bottoming out the month he took office. Albhe had to do was help get us into a full recovery. He got what he wanted iland it was a total failure.

No he did not.

Tell that to the Democrats in the House this January.

He just instructed his cabinet officials to bring him a plan to cut their spending by 5% and the left howled that he couldn't do that. Is tax cut plan has finally got the economy out of the Obama doldrums and THAT is Whitewater is needed to get tthe budget back in balance.

 

Complete and utter.

 

The Reagan defense spending contributed to the demise of the Soviet Union (a very good thing) and the Clinton budget surpluses.

Poorly managed entitlement systems ??

Again TARP was all paid back with interest. What part of that do you not understand ??

 

They cameout

They came out the Democrats 10% spending increase in 2008 followed by their 20% increase in 2009 taking the previous Republican $161B deficit to $1,400B in just those two years and keeping it at $1,000B for the next three it only coming down because of Republican sequester and austrerity programs.

It was paid back WITH INTEREST and AHEAD OF SCHEDULE.

 

The Soviet Union was going to collapse regardless of how many tanks and rockets we built. The arms race didn't end the soviet union, gulags and the inherit problems with top down government did.

Maybe some time you ought to actually take a look at what the bulk of the federal budget is spent on. Once you've done that, you come on back now, ya hear?

Too bad I'm not talking about TARP buddy, while you're looking at the federal budget also take a walk down history lane and visit the S&L bail out and the Mexican banking crisis. Perhaps then you'll understand enough to have this be a meaningful conversation!

 

You and your bosom buddy keep talking about TARP when it's the S&L crisis that's been laid before you. Marking a moment in time when incentives were perverted and creditors no longer felt obligated to properly capitalize.

You folks either don't understand moral hazard or don't care. Gotta protect the tribe at all costs, aye?

 

Just a coincidence the USSR was ascendant under Carter, and collapsed under Reagan's watch, huh? Educate yourself: https://aleteia.org/2014/07/30/how-ronald-reagan-won-the-cold-war/

I remember well while Reagan was busy winning that war, the left screaming that he was a warmonger, going to start WWIII, etc......