Obama's False Claims of an Improved Economy

FreedomWorks said:

As always, you want it both ways.

Click to expand...

like yelling about the debt then advocating for the election of the republicans who are demonstrably the main culprits behind it?

FreedomWorks said:

You're either blind, or completely retarded. The line clearly gets steeper with the stimulus that the republicans and democrats signed on for. ( not conservatives) And has continued to escalate ever since under president Obama, as well as the governments addiction to free money. You never hear once Obama talking about making serious cuts in government spending unless its to gut our military. He has demonstrated time after time he wants to expand entitlement programs and government benefits.

Click to expand...

not so good with numbers, eh?

the line is flattening because obama has been cutting the massive deficit he inherited.

UncleBuck said:

not so good with numbers, eh?

the line is flattening because obama has been cutting the massive deficit he inherited.

Click to expand...

The line is flattening like global temperatures are rising... Oh wait...

NLXSK1 said:

The line is flattening like global temperatures are rising... Oh wait...

Click to expand...

remind me when the hottest decade on record occurred.

now remind me when the second hottest decade on record occurred.



dumbass.

even the oil companies are admitting to the rise in temperatures, they are just saying it will be beneficial. at least try to keep your idiocy current.

BigNBushy said:

That is the most absurd claim ever... Sure, it is technically true. But when Obama exploded the deficit in his first term, cutting it in half is easy.. But it is still larger than any previous administration's deficit.

Click to expand...

Barack Obama said the deficit has fallen at the fastest rate in 60 years. While economists vary on how to best measure that decline, the president used an acceptable approach and his numbers are accurate. There are no statistical tricks in play.
Our experts warned against reading too much into Obama’s claim. While Obama did not spend much time one way or the other on the significance of the decline in the deficit, he didn’t mention ongoing concerns over the national debt.
We rate the statement True.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...a-says-deficit-falling-fastest-rate-60-years/

The Congressional Budget Office – Washington's nonpartisan number crunchers – released new projections Tuesday showing that the deficit will fall to $642 billion this fiscal year, a 24 percent drop in its projection from just a few months ago. The improvement is primarily due to increasing revenue and fewer expected outlays to government-backed mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
If this holds, it will be the smallest the deficit has been since President Barack Obama took office. As a percentage of the economy, the deficit will have been cut by more than half over Obama's first five years, from 10.1 percent in 2009 to 4 percent in 2013.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs...et-deficit-is-gops-incredible-shrinking-issue

UncleBuck said:

what debt problem? other nations have more debt, comparatively, and are doing just fine.

hell, even america has been worse off before, and saw our greatest years of prosperity happen right after.

the debt is not a problem, political groups have manufactured it as such and plenty of people are falling for it.

Click to expand...

Then why collect income taxes?

ginwilly said:

Then why collect income taxes?

Click to expand...

is you reading compensation has failed you?

the size of our most current debt is not a problem, not the idea of debt in general.

debt can be used wisely, however. i put my first grow space on the credit card, and i can't tell you how many times over it has paid me back.

we've been well over 100% of GDP before (debt), well over 4% of GDP before (deficit), and we've recovered just fine every time.

get some historical perspective about the issue, and stop trying to confuse my statements with your own out of context interpretations.

a big hint, ginwilly, is that i said "the debt", not "debt".

and even if i had generalized, using debt wisely is one of the skills of good capitalists. don't try to demonize capitalism, commy.

OK, then why did we fight so hard to raise taxes on the evil rich? Since "the debt" is not a problem, it must have been in the name of fairness and votes, not any logical economic reasons (if our debt is not an issue).
[video=youtube;aufAtuTwKlE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aufAtuTwKlE[/video]

ginwilly said:

OK, then why did we fight so hard to raise taxes on the evil rich? Since "the debt" is not a problem, it must have been in the name of fairness and votes, not any logical economic reasons (if our debt is not an issue).

Click to expand...

Raise the taxes on The rich?
Oh you mean let the temporary tax cuts expire and the rates go back to where they were

Just like congress originally intended

And just so you know

In your video Obama said it 3 times
You dont raise taxes during a recession

Guess what

Recession is over

health care bill with it's myriad of tax increases was already passed when he said you don't raise taxes. They even argued the mandate was a tax during the SC hearings...

All tax rates are temporary aren't they? Can you name even 1 that has been permanent?

When taxes go from X to X + 1, have they been raised? or is it just they are going back to some number we've used in the past? In this case how is ANY tax rate classified as a raise or reduction?

We still blaming Bush? that's lame man. Let's blame FDR or Wilson.

ChesusRice said:

Just like congress originally intended

And just so you know

In your video Obama said it 3 times
You dont raise taxes during a recession

Guess what

Recession is over

Click to expand...

Are you sure about that dumass. And even if so, does that mean its time to beat the middle class over the head with another tax hike? 53% of working Americans make less than 30,000$ a year. The price of gas, food, and just about everything else has been steadily increasing. How can we afford it all? How oppressive must the government become before people finally get paid for their contributions, not according to their needs.

ginwilly said:

health care bill with it's myriad of tax increases was already passed when he said you don't raise taxes. They even argued the mandate was a tax during the SC hearings...

All tax rates are temporary aren't they? Can you name even 1 that has been permanent?

When taxes go from X to X + 1, have they been raised? or is it just they are going back to some number we've used in the past? In this case how is ANY tax rate classified as a raise or reduction?

We still blaming Bush? that's lame man. Let's blame FDR or Wilson.

Click to expand...

If your favorite store has a sale on an item and that sale ends
Did they raise the price of the item?

Here is a better explanation
(otherwise known as the law)
The Bush tax cuts had sunset provisions that made them expire at the end of 2010, since otherwise they would fall under the Byrd Rule. Whether to renew the lowered rates, and how, became the subject of extended political debate, which was resolved during the presidency of Barack Obama by a two-year extension that was part of a larger tax and economic package, the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010. In 2012, during the fiscal cliff, the tax cuts were made permanent for single people making less than $400,000 per year and couples making less than $450,000 per year, and eliminated for everyone else, under the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012.
Before the tax cuts, the highest marginal income tax rate was 39.6 percent. After the cuts, the highest rate was 35 percent. Once the cuts were eliminated for high income levels (single people making $400,000+ per year and couples making $450,000+ per year), the top income tax rate returned to 39.6 percent

ChesusRice said:

If your favorite store has a sale on an item and that sale ends
Did they raise the price of the item?

Here is a better explanation
(otherwise known as the law)
The Bush tax cuts had sunset provisions that made them expire at the end of 2010, since otherwise they would fall under the Byrd Rule. Whether to renew the lowered rates, and how, became the subject of extended political debate, which was resolved during the presidency of Barack Obama by a two-year extension that was part of a larger tax and economic package, the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010. In 2012, during the fiscal cliff, the tax cuts were made permanent for single people making less than $400,000 per year and couples making less than $450,000 per year, and eliminated for everyone else, under the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012.
Before the tax cuts, the highest marginal income tax rate was 39.6 percent. After the cuts, the highest rate was 35 percent. Once the cuts were eliminated for high income levels (single people making $400,000+ per year and couples making $450,000+ per year), the top income tax rate returned to 39.6 percent

Click to expand...

All the links to your cut and paste are dead. Progressives will never stop pushing to confiscate wealth. Too much will never be enouph. Their greed for power depends on it. All they want to hear from you and me is "yes sir, no sir, suck your dick sir", and thats it.

Hey 10 year US bonds are up 138 basis points.

How many of you know what that means?

UncleBuck said:

not so good with numbers, eh?

the line is flattening because obama has been cutting the massive deficit he inherited.

Click to expand...

The line is flattening because of quantitative easing. It is very dangerous and deceitfully gives false positives about stability in the American economy. The Federal Reserve’s holdings of publicly traded U.S. Treasury securities—federal government debt—pushed above $2 trillion for the first time last week, hitting approximately $2,001,093,000,000 as of Aug. 14.
Back on Dec. 31 2008 before the Fed began its strategy of “Quantitative Easing," the Fed owned only $475.9 billion in U.S. Treasury securities. Since then, the Fed’s holdings of U.S. government debt have more than quadrupled.
By law, the Fed is not permitted to buy U.S. Treasury securities directly from the Treasury. Instead it buys them in the secondary market. However, when the Fed buys U.S. government debt even on the secondary market it creates a closed circle: The Treasury pays the Fed the interest owed on that part of the federal government’s debt, and almost all of that interest--considered “profit” by the Fed--is paid back to the Treasury.
“Nonetheless," said CRS, "the effect of the Fed’s purchase of Treasury securities on the federal budget is similar to monetization whether the Fed buys the securities on the secondary market or directly from the Treasury. When the Fed holds Treasury securities, Treasury must pay interest to the Fed, just as it would pay interest to a private investor. These interest payments, after expenses, become profits of the Fed. The Fed, in turn, remits about 95 percent of its profits to the Treasury, where they are added to general revenues. In essence, the Fed has made an interest-free loan to the Treasury, because almost all of the interest paid by Treasury to the Fed is subsequently sent back to Treasury.

The $2,001,093,000,000 in Treasury securities now owned by the Fed equals 16.7 percent of the U.S. government’s debt held by the public. Another $5.6006 trillion in U.S. Treasury securities is owned by foreign entities, according to the Treasury's latest report on foreign holders of U.S. debt. The combined $7,601,693,000,000 in U.S. Treasury securities owned the Fed and foreign entities equals about 64 percent of all extant U.S. Treasury securities.
After the Fed, entities on Mainland China are the largest owners of U.S. government debt, holding $1.2758 trillion as of the end of June.

Freedom, It'd be one thing if it were only about needs. Now we must cater to wants. It's not enough we give free phone service. Most have cell phones, as Buck put it. So what. Why are those in need picky? I'm in need too. But I don't have the urge to make stealing legal. The shame from stealing would hurt much more than any hunger.

Thats right Canna, Maybe our liberal friends could all learn a lesson from Ashton Kutcher:

[video=youtube;FNXwKGZHmDc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNXwKGZHmDc&feature=player_detailpage[/video]

138 basis points on the 10 year bond is no big deal when it normally takes a year to do so, but when the 10 year gains 138 points in several weeks its very hard to hedge.

How much more until the interest due is larger than the amount taxed?