memBrain Loc: North Carolina (No longer in hiding.)

Get a degree in Economics. What you say here is pure unadulterated CRAP! I happen to have said economics degree. When you have one, I may respect what you have to say about the economy.

As for Bush "borrowing" from SS, evidence please. Also, you really need to study your political history. It was the Democrats who started borrowing from the SS fund...a promise to SS broken. It was never to be used that way.

Another thing, it's not "Bush's wars". They are America's wars. Why, because Democrats and Republicans alike saw the SAME EVIDENCE in making the declaration for war. True, that evidence was tainted, but not by Bush. The evidence came from a foreign power. Besides, even if it did come from the United States, do you really believe that the President ever sees the original data?...can understand the data? Absolutely not! The President is given summaries created by functionaries below him. Everything is ultimately filtered. So stop blaming Bush for everything.

The deficit is not shrinking. If anything, the rate at which it is growing may be shrinking, but that means that it is still growing.

With respect to lines 5-8, The Fed is going through it's 3rd or 4th round of quantitative easing. Do you know what that means? Simply put, they are printing money. As any economist knows, when you print money, you deflate the value of the currency. That's why investors would be losing money on T-bills. That's why investors will inevitably stop buying T-bills. That's why we are borrowing less from China. It's not like we have a choice in the matter. China simply won't pay for bad debt instruments anymore. It has nothing to do with us suddenly becoming more fiscally responsible.

With respect to the "savings" created by Obama Care, historically the CBO i always wrong with their estimates of costs respecting the effects of changes due to new laws. It is always wrong in an unfavorable direction. It will be wrong this time as well. When adjusted by the rate at which the CBO traditionally gets it wrong, you can figure that OC will cost considerably more than what is reported such that we will wind up paying more for it than the most pessimistic forecasts made.

With respect to Republicans loving large deficits, that is complete nonsense. Since you clearly have no understanding of economics, let me enlighten you a bit. While it may be true that the United States had a large deficit under Reagan, lets look at a few facts. Reagan had to rebuild a badly deteriorated Military due to the shortsighted mismanagement of liberal administrations who only ever seem to see the military as something to be cut down. We have only been able to keep the peace in the world by having the best military available to man. The consequences of that build up were tangible. Resources were extracted and transformed into tangible products. Jobs were created. People spent money in the economy. Reagan created one of the best economic booms we've had in the last 30 years.

What you don't understand here is the time value of money. In a perfect system (one without the influence of government) it is possible for money to grow without limits.

For example: The treasury prints out $1000 for the Federal Reserve Bank. The federal reserve ban then lends that money out a bank. That bank lends the money to Man A (ignoring interest rates as they are not a part of this example) who deposits it into a bank (same one or another...it doesn't make a difference.) The bank loans that money Man B. Man B in turn deposits that money int a bank which loans it to Man C. The supply of money in the economy is only $1000 dollars, yet the money on the books is $3000. You can draw this example out infinitely. However, you cannot create infinite wealth without creating a bubble to match. Eventually people are going to want to use that money, but there is only $1000, so they can't all have it at the same time. This is what can cause a run on the banks, thus causing them to close down. Sound familiar? This is why the government mandates that a bunk must hold back a percentage of every deposit and make that percentage unavailable to loans.

New example: Law stipulates 10% of deposits held back in reserve. Man A Deposits $1000 into bank. Bank loans $900 to Man B and holds $100. Man B deposits $900. Bank loans $810 to Man C, and holds $90. Man C deposits $810 into bank. The bank can loan up to 729 but must hold back $81. There is a limit to this process, and eventually the money will be divided down to a point where it is no longer viable to be split further. So, for the circumstances of this example, $2710 of money was grown. This is less than the $3000, but is more stable as money was held in reserve. This resembles (in part) the system we now have in place.

This process doesn't always involve lending, but at some point a person or company borrows money, or earns money through sales and then deposits that money into the bank. They also eventually spend that money.

So, if we were to interject the government into the equation through taxes, we get a new dynamic. If that money each men had came from wages earned, and the government imposed a tax on that money, the government has removed money from the system that could otherwise go to the economy. Some of it does go back into the economy, but the government itself does not actually produce a product or service for profit. It is always a drain on the economy. So, now there is even less money in the system than before. Increase taxes long enough, and the system collapses due to the drain on the money supply. Likewise, increase government spending long enough, you achieve the same result. The point is that government is a problem to be managed, not a cure-all. It should only be spending money on projects that benefit everyone equally; not on projects that affect only a minority or special interest.

(Disclaimer, the above examples are simplistic, and as such do not come close to adequately covering the dynamics of our economic system.)

At any rate, this is one of the many reasons you don't know what you are talking about

memBrain Loc: North Carolina (No longer in hiding.)

Don't go that route. You'll just embarrass yourself. I'll give you one example, Eleanore Roosevelt. She to has frolicked with astrologers and held seances.

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

Great source for this mostly untrue info. ToppleBush.org ?????

stymie

MemBrain - Informedvoter77 will never get the message. You, me and others are wasting our time because like I said before Liberals are incapable of the reasoning process. All of his so-called sources were straight out of the Obama administrations talking points. The obvious omissions of detail on the charts and graphs should have jumped out to someone claiming to have a background in Economics. Also anyone with basic understanding knows that the CBO is not at liberty to figure costs realistically but are required to use the unrealistic information given them to guide the minions in a specific direction. Frustrating and sad, we are doomed. Like someone said your not going to beat Santa. By the way I did not see the 1.2 billion for Obamaphones on his cost side along with numerous others omitted. Last it was Barney not Bush on subprime debacle, you get confused on B's huh.

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

The thing that bothers me most at this point is that the CBO, that group that liberals like to quote all the time has changed their numbers concerning the amount that Obamacare will cost us. They could only use the numbers inserted by the administration and now have more realistic numbers to work with and have come up with numbers about double what they said at first. Of course, no liberals will hear those words since they don't make health care look so rosy as it did at first.

On the topic of the thread, how many non-establishment GOP members did Obama entertain the other night. In other words weren't most of those he met with nothing but RINO progressive Republicans? It is pretty obvious that he knows he can make nice with those clowns and take advantage of them just as he did with Boehner in 2011. He has some very smart advisors and is smart enough, himself, to use their advice.

Tasine Loc: Southwest US

I don't know what you're smoking, but I think it's getting to your brain cells. BTW, what is YOUR definition of corrupt?

InformedVoter77

DimBrain ... your so full of BS it cracks me up ... you try to baffle people with bullshit ... just like a true republican ... to bad over half of America has you boys figured out ...

But I would like to ask one of you diehard republican's something ... the GOP is sticking it up the ass of 98% of the American people ... they are being paid by Grover Norquist and the other republican lobbyist that work for the mega rich ... if you had half of a brain you could see through it ... even when you are shown since Reagan started Voo Doo Economics the richest in the land have take 40% of the wealth from American citizen's ... so I ask you ... why doesn't it bother you that the rich bastards are taking away your money ???

InformedVoter77

Everything qouted on that Reagan post is true and correct ... look it up ... do a web search ... educate yourselves you poor misguided fools ... Did it bring up the fact that he lied to Congress about selling planes, missile's, and weapons to Iran ... missed that one did ya ??? And those rich SOB's that you bury your head up their ass don't really care about one thing ... greed and money ... not you

Didn't you catch the part in the New Testament that said to turn away and run from the moneychangers ??

InformedVoter77

Hell man ... there were 36 immediate members of his staff and cabinet convicted of felony's ... is that not corrupt ??

Reagan declared war on drugs for all his buddies that invested in the prison system ... put alot of non violent people in prison for them ... and then let's his boy Ollie North sell drugs in Los Angeles ... selling guns to Iran and the Contras ... financing both of their terrorist activities ... you boys born blind or is it something in the kool-aid you drink ????

One other thing about Reagan .... Reagan helped create the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden. Reagan fought a proxy war with the Soviet Union by training, arming, equipping, and funding Islamist mujahidin fighters in Afghanistan. Reagan funneled billions of dollars, along with top-secret intelligence and sophisticated weaponry to these fighters through the Pakistani intelligence service. The Talbian and Osama Bin Laden — a prominent mujahidin commander — emerged from these mujahidin groups Reagan helped create, and U.S. policy towards Pakistan remains strained because of the intelligence services’ close relations to these fighters. In fact, Reagan’s decision to continue the proxy war after the Soviets were willing to retreat played a direct role in Bin Laden’s ascendancy.

InformedVoter77

Stymied ...

You dimwit ... those charts were put out by the Congressional Budget Office ... LOL

InformedVoter77

Deny this one Dimbrain ...

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2011/12/bailout-total-29-616-trillion-dollars/

memBrain Loc: North Carolina (No longer in hiding.)

You crossed the line. You have resorted to name calling. That is more than enough evidence for me that you are a person whose opinion doesn't matter. If there were a block button, You'd be presently blocked. Since that is not the case, I will simply have to ignore you the old-fashioned way. Good day!

stymie

Informedvoter77 -Did you ever get a job from a POOR guy. How can you say we are sticking 98% when the 51% pay no taxes and the other 47% are on some kind of government program. Again you drank the Kool-aid of POTUS. Nothing I said above could be further from the truth at this point, we still have many hard working families that want the American dream but Obama wants you to think exactly as you do (informedvoter77) its divide and conquer. You are one of his minions and are being used for the so-called greater good. Hopefully one day you will wake up and if you don't the greater good will have you by the balls and it will be to late for you and the others like you.. You have fallen under his spell and are no longer capable of thinking objectively. You are a lost soul that will hopefully wake up one day and say "WHAT HAPPENED" Do you actually think Obama or the Democrats give a damn about you are yours. NO, they are using you. Have a good life I'm through trying to reason with you and no you did not win; I just will not waste any more of my time dealing with stupidity.

memBrain Loc: North Carolina (No longer in hiding.)

I think the term of preference is "useful idiots".

InformedVoter77

DimBrain ... you remind me of a little boy take your ball and storm off the court anytime they didn't get their way ... grow up and face facts ... I'm sure you have a pair of nads ... use them ... pull your head out of the arse of the rich man and let them dangle