17 replies [Last post]
Thu, 2009-02-26 13:14
Thu, 2009-02-26 17:37#1
I'm more curious as to why he was 25 minutes late.
Thu, 2009-02-26 22:35#2
It's called "Obama time." He's chronically late wherever he goes. I saw it myself this summer when thousands of people were left standing outside in temps over 90 because he delayed the start of the parade for over an hour.
When someone in his position is habitually late, there are two possible explanations: 1) poor time management; or 2) arrogance. Neither one reflects positively on a president. Say what you want about Bush, but he was famously punctual.
I have a real hard time watching Obama on TV, because all I hear is the sound of Charlie Brown's teacher talking. The problem with the Obama budget is that it's going to grow government 30 percent in a single year. The US government's debt is going to grow 63 percent in two years. Also, publicly held debt was 40.8 percent of the GDP in 2008. By 2010, it'll be up to 64.6 percent.
Don't pee down my back and tell me it's raining.
Fri, 2009-02-27 07:30#3
By 2010, it'll be up to 64.6 percent.
Let's just say 60% for the next few years, over the next 10 on average. Not so high by international standards but certainly higher than anything since WWII.
I like the health care reform, the cap and trade, taxes for greedy rich folks (and even normal rich folks) at least to where Reagan had them. There are many many other things I like also. Elections have results.
Great timing too. Story line already written by stimulous. (Obstructionist say no repubs, reaching out the hand of freindship Obama) I laugh at the late to the party story. Is that what they say on Fox or Rush? They're-a-takin our gunz!!!!! Meanwhile we change America forever. What time is it?
Fri, 2009-02-27 10:48#4
Why shall we "just say 60 percent"? Are you just pulling numbers out of the air? If we can just make stuff up, then I'll argue that Bush cut it to 20 percent.
As far as percentage of GDP goes, there are 20 nations sitting at higher than 64.6. At the top of the list? You guessed it -- Zimbabwe! Oh yeah, and there's Jamaica, Sudan, Egypt, Ivory Coast, Sri Lanka, Morocco, Bhutan...that's a heck of a club to join.
And by the way, it's still "stimulus", not "stimulous." If you can't spell it, your credibility for understanding it is diminished.
Fri, 2009-02-27 20:07#5
I say 60% because it's very hard to predict the future. Remember Bush's tax cuts weren't going to decrease the surplus we enjoyed? But call it 70% if you'd like, it still isn't much.
But lets discuss something I find even more important than spelling.
Like debt as a percent of GDP. Japan 170% Italy 103% Singapore 92% Norway 89% Canada, France, Germany, Portugal, you must have read the names of those countries on whatever list you looked at and not seen them right? Skipped right over and went to Africa? I wonder why?
Remember, in the last 32 years, one president has cut debt and created a surpluss, a Democrat called Clinton. Obama just might get 8 years, even with the wreck of an ecomomy he was left, he might do pretty well.
Fri, 2009-02-27 20:53#6
Well, alphabetically Africa would come first on the list of those you mentioned so he would not have had to "skip over" the others.
Just a thought
Fri, 2009-02-27 21:27#7
I used the CIA fact sheet, came up first on google and it's a good source, they list in descending order of debt as a percent of GDP.
Fri, 2009-02-27 22:03#8
I mentioned Zimbabwe because it was at the top of the list. I also said there were 20 nations on the list above us, and only listed eight.
Suppose for the sake of argument you make $40,000 a year. If you run up $68,000 in credit card debt (170% of income), do you think you're in fine financial shape?
We spent $412 billion last year on interest for the national debt. That's before adding a couple trillion more onto the debt pile. $412 billion spent, and we got nothing in return. That may not seem like much to a liberal like you that's hell-bent to rub the numbers off the credit card, but it's a huge chunk of change being spent to fill a bottomless hole.
Mon, 2009-03-02 07:50#9
Well the 412 billion spent on interest on debt last year might well be for tax breaks for rich folks and starting wars of choice. You have to admit those are great things to spend money on.
You cherry picked the list, skipping major European democracies and listing marginal states, and you got caught.
Suppose you make 20K a year and borrow 100K to go to med school, 500% of income, are you in better shape?
Mon, 2009-03-02 09:43#10
Caught? Are the countries I mentioned not on that list?
We're not borrowing money to go to med school here. I wouldn't have a problem borrowing money for something that would actually produce economic growth and repay the investment. We're not borrowing for med school -- we're borrowing money to buy new furniture and carpeting, and to put a diamond collar on the dog.
And here's another thing you and the rest of your "bash the rich" crowd don't get. New York City has 8 million people in it, and around 60 percent of the city's government income is funded by about 40,000 people. Suppose NYC decides to go after the rich, and 5,000 of them leave. What happens to the city's financial situation? This kind of thing is why communism and socialism have failed throughout history -- they cook the goose that lays the golden eggs.