National Debt by Year Compared to GDP and Major Events

You avoided the proposition. I do not wonder why.

 

Thats like gaining 100 lbs one year and then bragging the next year when you only gain 60.

 

Ask a Bill Clinton fan.

 

Those exist?

 

You aren't one ?

 

I'm fine with deficit spending during recessions, I'm not during economic booms.

 

LMAO, no. The Clintons can suck it.

 

So, when did you stop being "fine" with Obama's deficits?

 

Agreed. And already admitted to.

Not false at all. You can't show me where these breakdowns of where the money is spent. If you can, then please do so. But saying "25 billion for counter-terrorism activities" doesn't count as a breakdown

Not at all
https://www.heritage.org/budget-and...fghanistan-funding-the-regular-budget-process

https://www.concordcoalition.org/bl...ens-budget-discipline-and-increases-deficit-0

So they were misused gimmicks that added spending and increased deficits outside the usual budget process.

Oh? Again, where are the breakdowns then?

I agree to a point. They knew that large amounts were allocated. Nobody knows exactly where this money was spent.

And then you have this

https://www.cnbc.com/2014/06/19/how-the-us-lost-billions-over-nine-years-in-iraq.html

So, my overall point that the financial situation as it relates to the Iraq was a boondoggle (unless you can somehow show how losing 8-9 Billion dollars outright isn't mismanagement of the highest order)

My details regarding Bush and his accounting was off in terms of certain specifics (which I readily admit to). But the overall point that this was a mess is correct. ​

You did not present the full story at all. You simply said 'Obama extended bush era tax cuts'. That's not even close the whole story at all.

 

As explained, that's exactly how budget line items are phrased ; the money is allocated to a department/agency/program and then spent according to the guideline attached to same.
That you are not satisfied with this doe snot mean the point has not been proven false.

Nothing here in any way negates the fact that spending through supplemental bills adds to the debt in exactly the same way budgeted spending adds to the debt -- $500B is $500B, regardless how it is appropriated.
You can argue that supplemental bills do not add to the debt projected by a budget, but that's meaningless ad a projection is always superseded by an actual amount.

Which means nothing in terms of the total amount of debt incurred.

Thus, your points, proven false.

Please try to not move the goalpost.
​

It is. In toto. No other information is necessary.

 

False, I don't personally care ether way. And I see the same exact dynamic on both sides. How's about you?

 

point A - it may not have been proven false, but neither has it been proven true. Not enough information to say one way or the other. And when dealing with a multi trillion dollar budget, that’s a negative.

Point B - same answer.

Point C - if you think that’s all that’s needed to know, the you need to take the blinders off and get the full story.

 

The only thing you have left to hang your hat on is your opinion that the line-item appropriations, made in the same manner as any other appropriations bill, lacks sufficient specificity. As this is your opinion and it falls outside the established norm, it means nothing.
Thus, proven false.

The rest of the story?
You mean the part where The Obama said the Bush Tax Cuts for the Rich were...
- "a package of tax relief that will protect the middle class, that will grow our economy and will create jobs for the American people"?
- "a substantial victory for middle-class families across the country"?

 

Point A - acceptable

Point B - yes, that would also be part of it. It’s almost like major decisions like that are based off of a lot of moving parts and politics of the day.

And he was right. They did help the middle class. The dispute was keeping them for the class that needed them the least

 

So, the whole "tax cuts for the rich" mantra from the left, a ceaseless chant that began the moment Bush proposed the idea, was... a big lie?

 

I’m sorry, but I’m pretty sure I said “middle class”. Not the rich.

But, it was a tax cut for the rich who didn’t need it. It just happened to also be a tax cut for the middle class who did. And Obama fought to extend those cuts for the lower and middle class and lost that battle. So felt it better to keep for the middle class then raise taxes on them.

It’s almost like using a single component of a situation to propel a specific narrative creates confusion and makes it harder for everyone to come to a consensus

 

Oh. So, as the tax cut applied to and indeed helped the middle class, the phrase "tax cut for the rich" is a lie. Right?

Why did the left choose to lie about Bush's tax cut being "for the rich"?

 

Absolutely, he's proving to the vast majority that the government is over bloated and needs to be shrunk in size. The longer the shut down goes on the left's meme the sky will fall is being peeled away like layers of an onion. The way to fix the debt is to shrink the size of Government.

Two words........"Who Cares!"

 

Help yourself by reading the thread and doing some actual research, non partisan research and you will be enlightened.

 

I care if he/she is taking the country in what I believe to be the right direction. You know like the left did with Clinton.

 

It wasn't a lie.

They did the same thing you were doing early in the thread. Taking a sliver of the situation and making that the only part of the situation that 'mattered'.

When in actuality, it was both a tax cut for both the Rich and the Middle Class. Only one of which should have been extended and one ended.

 

That's called a "Lie of omission".

 

Oh good, you Do know what that is. I was worried about this earlier in the thread when you constantly harped on Obamas extending of the tax cuts.

 

So you agree - they lied about Bush's Tax Cut for the Rich.

 

Who? The Left or the Right?

The Left lied about the tax cuts only being about the rich

The Right lied about the necessity of keeping the tax cuts for the rich

It's almost like politicians lie.