What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?

[GracefullyYours]

http://i1136.photobucket.com/albums/n488/GracefullyYours/hypocrisy.jpg

 

[NeverEndingMe]

http://i1136.photobucket.com/albums/n488/GracefullyYours/hypocrisy.jpg

Awesome!

 

[Sean Renaud]

http://i1136.photobucket.com/albums/n488/GracefullyYours/hypocrisy.jpg

What utter bullshit. Nobody thinks any of the shit in those posters.

 

[NeverEndingMe]

What utter bullshit. Nobody thinks any of the shit in those posters.

those with intelligence see through the crap you smear

Sean, its only you that stinks like poo

 

[unregistered]

 

[mercury14]

Another Obama bullshit exposed:

Obama budget to miss deficit goal

President Obama's proposed 2013 budget will forecast a $901 billion deficit for next year, falling far short of his goal to halve the deficit in four years.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2012/02/obama-budget-to-miss-deficit-goal/1

The article doesn't say what the deficit goal actually is or how far short we are from it.

There's little Obama can actually do though, because as the article says the deficit is almost entirely dependent on Congress taking action. If Bush promised to cut the deficit and then the Democratic congress went and ballooned it, would you blame Bush?

Earlier this week, the White House announced that its unemployment projections included in the budget -- 8.9% in 2012 and 8.6% in 2013 -- already are outdated.

So jobs are already where they were not projected to be until 2014 and the calculation hasn't been updated with the new, larger tax base.

 

[unregistered]

 

[mercury14]

Gee I guess you'll have to look up his bullshit then eh? The fact is he isn't going to halve it, like he said he would, and you fervently believed.

Well.. first of all the deficit projection is being done by the CBO, which most right wingers here call an inept group of clowns who don't know how to calculate the budget. But it looks like it's convenient for you now to return them to their solid-gold status. Until the next time a liberal uses them as a reference then well, they were never legitimate after all.

Secondly, Obama's promise to halve the deficit was made four weeks into his presidency. This was a time when nobody knew exactly how bad the Great Recession was going to get. Turns out it was far worse than any Democrat or Republican thought. But you will hold Obama accountable for not seeing it coming, right or wrong.

Lastly, the deficit is not decreasing much because congress is gridlocked. Under a hypothetical president McCain it would be the exact same way. The fact is Republicans filibustered the Dems' original deficit reduction plan and today they would never take one to the House floor. There's no failed policy here like you want to believe (nor is there successful policy), only policy that was never enacted because of partisan gridlock.

 

[mercury14]

Gee I guess you'll have to look up his bullshit then eh? The fact is he isn't going to halve it, like he said he would, and you fervently believed.

Looking at the numbers, halving the deficit would mean dropping it to around $675 billion by November. It looks like it's going to come in at around $900 billion, or $800 billion after the improved job figures your article mentioned. So a $125 billion difference.

If the GOP blocks Obama's payroll tax cuts like they're saying, then it's a $75 billion difference. If the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire for the wealthy at the end of the year then the goal will be met or exceeded.

EDIT: never mind the last sentence since ending the tax cuts on the wealthy is already factored in. So unless something changes Obama will miss his goal by $75 billion-ish. Meh.

 

[richard_daily]

Looking at the numbers, halving the deficit would mean dropping it to around $675 billion by November. It looks like it's going to come in at around $900 billion, or $800 billion after the improved job figures your article mentioned. So a $125 billion difference.

If the GOP blocks Obama's payroll tax cuts like they're saying, then it's a $75 billion difference. If the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire for the wealthy at the end of the year then the goal will be met or exceeded.

EDIT: never mind the last sentence since ending the tax cuts on the wealthy is already factored in. So unless something changes Obama will miss his goal by $75 billion-ish. Meh.

Your hand must be sore from all the times you've bitch-slapped veteman.

 

[richard_daily]

Warren Buffett on why gold is a losing proposition





http://pragcap.com/warren-buffett-why-gold-is-a-losing-long-term-bet

Gold does nothing, which is exactly why it's the favorite hording currency of your average wingnut.

 

[unregistered]

 

[mercury14]

Yeah, have another Pink Owl. All he did was confirm what I said, chihuahua.

No Vette, your message has NEVER been that Obama cut more than half a trillion dollars out of the deficit.

Your shit is all screwed up. You can't say Obama is ballooning the deficit and then go around posting articles showing how many hundreds of billions of dollars it has shrunk during his presidency. It's getting really damn hard for us to follow your muddled message these days.

 

[unregistered]

 

[amy_li]

We will pay for our debt, just as Greece is paying for their's now.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Warren Buffett on why gold is a losing proposition





http://pragcap.com/warren-buffett-why-gold-is-a-losing-long-term-bet

He's exactly right.

However, he owns gold in case of a currency collapse himself...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Looking at the numbers, halving the deficit would mean dropping it to around $675 billion by November. It looks like it's going to come in at around $900 billion, or $800 billion after the improved job figures your article mentioned. So a $125 billion difference.

If the GOP blocks Obama's payroll tax cuts like they're saying, then it's a $75 billion difference. If the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire for the wealthy at the end of the year then the goal will be met or exceeded.

EDIT: never mind the last sentence since ending the tax cuts on the wealthy is already factored in. So unless something changes Obama will miss his goal by $75 billion-ish. Meh.

You are relying on static modeling again.

 

[mercury14]

My message in that post, was simply that Obama was going to fail to meet his promised deficit goals, as was predicted at the time he said it.

Oh so you're saying that disproving one of the biggest right wing lies out there was just an accident? So nicely illustrating the fact that Obama shrunk the deficit by half a billion dollars during his term was a big oopsie for you wasn't it?

Question for you though... The next time one of the conservative quacks on Lit accuses Obama of exploding the deficit what are you going to do?

You are relying on static modeling again.

And you have no proof at all that the CBO is incapable of performing adequate budget estimates. You're just here again pretending that things you want to be true, actually are.

As for static modeling, Vette's very own article says that the CBO projected higher unemployment numbers than what we currently have. In fact it didn't have us at 8.3% until 2014. So you're right that there are of course going to be some inaccuracies... However it appears that the actual deficit is going to come in substantially lower than the original projection.

But by all means join forces with Vette in pointing out things that makes Obama look better.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Show me the CBO estimate(s) that was spot on...

I am confident that a simple counting will show they are more often off than on for Congress provides them with political numbers that provide political answers and by law, even though they might suspect the books are being cooked, they must use those numbers.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I don't care how Obama looks.

He is not my motivating factor.

My motivating factor is the truth I can see, the growth of government and the decline of America for I feel one leads to the other.

 

[richard_daily]

My motivating factor is the truth I can see, the growth of government and the decline of America for I feel one leads to the other.

So you were, and are, anti-Reagan?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

So you were, and are, anti-Reagan?

I was anti-Reagan.

I was a Socialist Democrat.

Then I began to study to defeat the right.

Now, it doesn't really matter, how I feel about Reagan, now does it?

 

[Disgustipated]

I was anti-Reagan.

I was a Socialist Democrat.

Then I began to study to defeat the right.

Now, it doesn't really matter, how I feel about Reagan, now does it?

It doesn't matter how you feel about Obama either, that's the beauty of keyboard cowboys -- they are insignificant.

 

[richard_daily]

It doesn't matter how you feel about Obama either, that's the beauty of keyboard cowboys -- they are insignificant.

Posting 50+ times per day about stuff he reads on american thinker gives him meaning in his otherwise insignificant life.

 

[mercury14]

Show me the CBO estimate(s) that was spot on...

I am confident that a simple counting will show they are more often off than on for Congress provides them with political numbers that provide political answers and by law, even though they might suspect the books are being cooked, they must use those numbers.

No, coward. If you want to make a sweeping accusation it's your responsibility to find your own evidence. Since you're empty-handed and empty-minded on the subject, your comment carries as much weight as a poodle barking at the mailman.