austerity

[redblack]

rich:

Reagan, Democrats agreed to cut expenses and reneged. Clinton got a minor tax increase but because of Gingrich and crew he declared the Era of Big Government is over. So, you are partially wrong. Admit it.

revisionist history.

reagan and democrats didn’t agree to cut spending, and no one reneged. reagan cut revenues to the bone, trying to force democrats to cut spending. democrats said, “screw you, we won’t be bullied.” so reagan turned in some of the largest budget deficits in history.

and i’ve told you before – and provided links – showing that gingrich did not reduce spending in any significant way. so it’s your turn to show me that he did, if you believe that to be the case.

so now, here we are, in 2013, facing a “budget crisis” that’s mostly manufactured by the “liberal” media and wall street. talking about whose ox gets gored first in pursuit of a balanced budget. and wouldn’t you know it? all signs point to the majority of americans taking it in the shorts again, all because someone else got rich at our expense and couldn’t – more like wouldn’t – pay the bills. and i’m not talking about the welfare queens or people whose home loans were foreclosed.

i say it should be wall street’s ox that gets gored first. let them face some harsh times for a change. give them the austere measures. they ain’t doing anything but making themselves rich, anyway.

oh, and regarding patty murray, she’s going to have a hard time cutting defense procurement with one of the largest contractors in the world in her state. it would be nice to believe that she would have the political courage to tell them “tough luck,” but i’m skeptical.

and please don’t try to pretend that republicans behave any differently.

which is why it’s time to get the money out of politics and elections. then, and only then, will we see who the altruists are and who are in it for themselves.

Share This

[wakeflood]

Revisionist history to be sure. Reagan saw the light and raised taxes several times to prevent those huge deficits from compounding.

I’m not holding my breath that Wall Street will cough up their share. Holder won’t prosecute the biggest criminals in history and the Treasury Sec. says you can’t break up the banks. The fix is/has been in and the foxes run the hen house.

WS the Mil.Ind.Complex and Medical Ind. Complex own our gov’t. Nothing short of term limits, overturning Citizen’s United, or millions of protesters on the Capital’s steps, we’re going to keep down this same path.

Patty Murray cutting military expenditures?? Yeah, like a few hundred bucks over ten years maybe.

Share This

[WorldCitizen]

HMC RIch:

Please show me how Obama and Congress are spending three times more than Bush without including the wars in the budget. Because as I’ve said (and has been widely reported) Bush didn’t have the wars on the books. Obama did.

Share This

[HMC Rich]

No Redblack. If it had not been discussed, Reagan would not have implemented the tax cuts over three years like Congress wanted. He would have done it immediately. Remember, except for Kemp he had to also convince the Keynsian Republicans.

Soooo….Reagan convinced congress to take the proposed tax cuts. (Remember the end of the Carter years, with high unemployment and inflation) He wanted 30% cuts in tax rates across the board. Congress was afraid of appearing to favor the rich (quite a theme when tax rates are discussed) so they strung the cuts out for three years in 5, 10, and 10 percent increments through the Economic Recovery Act, passed in August 1981.

Incidentally, Government increased outlays by nearly 40% in the same period. Reagan cut a deal with Congress in which the Democrats agreed to hold spending down in return for closing tax loopholes (which really involved raising taxes on luxury items in 1982). Well as soon as Congress closed the deal, it then passed new, higher spending, generating larger deficits.

Military Budgets increased but barely exceeded $200 Billion per year, whereas social spending consistently remained slightly higher. After Reagan left office, domestic nondefense spending was nearly double that of the Pentagons.

Now, let me be clear. Carter had started to slash some government regulations also. He did not see the fruits of his labors while in office. Reagan did so also. So when people talk about de-regulation, they need to remember that the airline deregulation was partly Carter/Partly Reagan.

So, if I were to revise my statement, I would say the Democrats and Republicans of Keynesian Economics reneged on the deal.

Share This

[HMC Rich]

WorldCitizen.

First, Bush had negotiated the end of the Iraq war before Obama took office. Only Obama set a date.

But lets look at this article. http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesglassman/2012/07/11/the-facts-about-budget-deficits-how-the-presidents-truly-rank/

And I want to directly answer your off budget query. The Costs were in the monthly Treasury Statements: (2001 we were not fighting in the Middle East – Chart shows percentages of increase in spending.)

2001 — $290.9

2002 — $332.1 (14.2%)

2003 — $388.9 (17.1%)

2004 — $437.1 (12.4%)

2005 — $474.4 (8.5%)

2006 — $499.4 (5.3%)

2007 — $529.9 (6.1%)

2008 — $594.7 (12.2%)

2009 — $636.8 (7.1%)

2010 — $666.7 (4.7%)

2011 — $678.1 (1.7%)

So, if you want to say the War was paid for by supplemental appropriations, you would be right. But it was paid by the Treasury.

Obama is still spending more whether on or off budget.

http://www.npr.org/2011/01/25/133211508/the-weekly-standard-obama-vs-bush-on-debt

(I was surprised to see an NPR and Weekly standard line)

To borrow a phrase, Bushes deficit spending was bad. Obama’s is vile.

Share This

[HMC Rich]

RedBlack, Your beloved Democrats of the past spoke with forked tongues. Except for 1946 to 1948 and 1954 to 1956 the House was ruled by Dems until 1994. Bills introduced to lower taxes, impose term limits or enact a line item veto were not brought up to votes on the house floor. Because of the Dem stronghold on what bills could be brought forth, the Dems used this as a tactic to stay off record, bring home the pork, while decrying national budget deficits.

Gingrich brought the public the Contract with America. Tom Foley was axed. Thank God. Only Democratic Governors were tossed that year too. The News media tried to spin it.

Clinton’s Triangulation Strategy brought him to middle while painting the Repubs and Dems as squabbling children.

The House passed 9 of the 10 items, and the Senate Voted on 6. They acted quickly because they knew Clinton to be a savvy adversary.

40% of the items the GOP promised to vote on became law. Term Limits and Line Item veto were struck down by the Supreme Court.

President Clinton and the economy actually thrived because of the Republicans. The Clinton economy was still riding the coat tails of the Reagan era and the New industries of High Tech were replacing the older brick and mortar industries.

And if you look on one of the links I provided above this thread you will see how the budget deficit was lowered tremendously

Spending has always increased no matter who the President is. The question is how much revenue vs spending.

Personally, I would take Bill Clinton in a NY minute over the current guy. Clinton made some mistakes but he also understood when to “work” with the opposition. This guy in office just blames everyone else for the countries woes, and takes no responsibility.

It really is pointless to argue anymore, but if you want, go ahead.

Share This

[dobro]

Do you even read your own posts? Look at this one…

2002 — $332.1 (14.2%)

2003 — $388.9 (17.1%)

2004 — $437.1 (12.4%)

2005 — $474.4 (8.5%)

2006 — $499.4 (5.3%)

2007 — $529.9 (6.1%)

2008 — $594.7 (12.2%)

2009 — $636.8 (7.1%)

2010 — $666.7 (4.7%)

2011 — $678.1 (1.7%)

After 2008, a fiscal year still overseen by the Bush admin., the percentages of increase in spending go down, down, and more down. That would be under the Obama admin. That, plus the myth that Clinton’s economic successes were due to Ronnie Reagan’s leftovers and Newt Gingrich’s brilliant gov’t shutdowns.

You’re right, tho, it is pointless to argue with people who have a tenuous relationship with facts and history. G’night.

Share This

[Author]

Posts