The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 36

Thread: Who increased the debt....

  1. #21
    Senior Member twall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by caryalsobrook View Post
    I give Clinton his due. After the healthcare debacle of Hillery, he got slamed by the republicans, losing both the house and the senate. Because he and Newt Ginhrich could deal, the budget was indeed balanced.
    It is easy to blame the top dog. I think the leadership of congress party affiliations and presidential party affiliations have a bigger impact.

    How does that graph look when you do it for Speaker and Senate President party affiliations?

    Tom
    Tom Wall

  2. #22
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    6,680

    Default

    I have an idea ... suppose we stop talking about spending cuts and call it "redistribution of wealth".

    Since the Dept. of Education has not done a real good job of improving the quality of graduating students (those that do graduate), how about redistributing some of their wealth to fixing roads and bridges?

    We can then redistribute some of the wealth to the ineffective Dept. of Engergy to decreasing the deficit.

    We can redistribute some of the wealth of the EPA to fixing some more of those bridges and some to decreasing the deficit.

    "Redistribution of wealth" that could work for me
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  3. #23
    Senior Member YardleyLabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Yardley, PA
    Posts
    6,639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by twall View Post
    It is easy to blame the top dog. I think the leadership of congress party affiliations and presidential party affiliations have a bigger impact.

    How does that graph look when you do it for Speaker and Senate President party affiliations?

    Tom
    The difficulty of any such analysis is determining how to attribute credit or blame given the lag between when policies are adopted legislatively and when they actually affect the budget and economy. Thus, if you pass a tax cut in 2003 that doesn't have it primary effect until 2-5 years later, who is responsible for the deficit that arises as revenues begin to decline? In the last 40 years, control of the branches of government has been divided most of the time. There are three congressional terms when Democrats controlled all three branches and 2 1/2 - 3 terms when Republicans have controlled al three branches (The senate was evenly split during GWB's first term for part of the time, with Cheney holding the tie breaking vote. That was reversed with a party switch in the second half of the session.) The period of Republican control was during GWB's presidency and saw the greatest increases in deficits ever, measured as a percentage of GDP. The periods of complete Democratic control were during the Carter Presidency and the first two years of the Clinton Presidency. In both, deficits declined as a percentage of GDP.

    The question of who should be credited - Congress of the President - is more complex. During the Reagan administration, Democrats controlled the House all eight years, while Republicans controlled the Senate for six of those years. The deficit grew fastest when Republicans controlled the White House and the Senate, and slowest when Democrats controlled the Senate and House. Under GB41, the growth in deficit slowed further. That was a period when Democrats controlled both houses. Under Clinton, the deficit shrank throughout his Presidency both because of economic growth and because of tax increases adopted during his first two years in office. The tax increases were adopted when Democrats controlled all three branches. The primary impact of those increases happened when Republicans controlled the Senate and the House.

    In general, I think it is appropriate that we credit or blame Presidents for what happens on their watch even though some of that credit and blame belongs to legislators. The President's job is to provide leadership. The more effective he is in doing that, the more Congress will support him regardless of party. Ultimately, legislators are more interested in winning elections than in hold an ideological line. If there is something that scares me in our current political scene, it is that more and more legislators seem willing to see the ship sink if it will promote their own ideological beliefs.
    Last edited by YardleyLabs; 10-02-2011 at 04:15 PM.

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Shelbyville, Tn
    Posts
    1,450

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by caryalsobrook View Post
    Only one part I completely dissagree with, "However cutting spending under these circumstances would make the recession worse". I cite the recession of 1920 when unemployment went above 30% and GDP dropped about 30% also(it has been a while since I looked at the actual numbers so take them as approximate), far higher than anything that we have experienced now. the action taken was to CUT FED spending from a little over 6 billion to less than 3 billion and to CUT the maximum tax rate from 75% to 25% in only 2 YEARS. The result was meteoric recovery. While during the Roosevelt admin. the policy was to INCREASE SPENDING AND INCREASE TAXES WITH THE RESULT OF A DEPRESSION THAT LASTED ALMOSST 15 YEARS.

    One simple question. It seems to me that all those liberals argue during good times that given the increased revenues that that is the time to increase Gov. spending. During times as these, they argue that we must INCREASE SPENDING inorder to increase demand. Tell me WHEN IS THERE EVER A TIME THAT LIBERALS WOULD ARFUE FOR THE GOV. TO CUT SPENDING???????
    Just reminding you of the uestion Yardley. Have an answer or should we resign ourselves that liberals only have excuses to increase spending and raise taxes and debt and never cut spending or decrease the debt.

  5. #25
    Senior Member Goose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    McKinney, Texas
    Posts
    806

    Default

    I just want to take a moment to congratulate Barack Milhous Obama for his record breaking $14,790,340,328,557 of debt that he continues adding to. We should all place bets on when we will hit $15 trillion. It won't be long.

    We live in Cuba now.

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    2,124

    Default

    Who increased the debt....

    I hardly care which monkey was President when the checks were being written.

    The first thing to do when you find yourself in a hole is to quit digging.
    Stray labs make great pets.
    Proud member of the FF society.

  7. #27
    Senior Member Cowtown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    Posts
    875

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hew View Post
    My eyes glaze over in utter boredom while gazing at your "Blame Republicans!" chart created by such an unbiased and unimpeachable source like the Democrat Leader, yet I am pleased that you're posting again. Welcome back!
    Exactly.

    Just for fun eh?

    hahahahaha

  8. #28
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    6,680

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TN_LAB View Post
    Who increased the debt....

    I hardly care which monkey was President when the checks were being written.

    The first thing to do when you find yourself in a hole is to quit digging.
    Ditto.

    The perennial problem with politicians (non-partisan!) is that whenever they see revenue increase, they have an irrestible impulse to spend it. That is why I so strongly resist allowing them to raise taxes.


    The reason they "stole" from the SS fund was because it actually was looking good at the time. God forbid that they should leave any excess $ untouched.

    The "real world" is subject to cycles ... acts of nature, unexpected political upheavals in other parts of the world, technology bursts and busts. People living in the real world try to plan for those cycles. Politicians just increase taxes ... because they can.

    We may be able to solve one problem at a time, and gradually, with planning, solve several. If we try to solve them all at once, we end up in trouble.
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  9. #29
    Senior Member road kill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    New Berlin, WI
    Posts
    10,566

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TN_LAB View Post
    Who increased the debt....

    I hardly care which monkey was President when the checks were being written.

    The first thing to do when you find yourself in a hole is to quit digging.
    Or BUY new shovels!!!!!!


    RK
    Stan b & Elvis

  10. #30
    Senior Member YardleyLabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Yardley, PA
    Posts
    6,639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by caryalsobrook View Post
    Just reminding you of the uestion Yardley. Have an answer or should we resign ourselves that liberals only have excuses to increase spending and raise taxes and debt and never cut spending or decrease the debt.
    I'd say that what the numbers show pretty clearly is that during the 30 or so years before the GWB Presidency, the Federal government maintained spending at a fairly constant percentage of GDP. During the Reagan administration, that didn't change a lot. However, general taxes were cut while social security taxes and Medicare taxes were increased dramatically. The tax increases for social security and medicare were immediately diverted to cover the deficits that resulted from the cut in general taxes rather than to cut spending. Things came back into balance following Reagan as spending was held at a fairly constant level of GDP, but tax increases were adopted that brought the budget back into balance, producing a cash flow surplus for social security and medicare, as was needed to finance future spending needs. Under GWB, that surplus was used to justify massive cuts in general taxes (social security and medicare taxes continued to rise) that were far in excess of any anticipated cash flow surplus. Rather than implement spending cuts to eliminate that deficit, Federal spending was increased by a greater percentage than had been seen under any President since WWII, laying the foundation for what we have today. Obama has done nothing to make that situation better, meaning that the deficit continues to grow. The biggest issue that I have with Republican proposals is that they still would do nothing to reduce the deficit. Rather, they would add to it by extending tax cuts that are now scheduled to expire. That will make the problem even worse.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •