Obama Top 50 accomplishments

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Riot

Yes, as I posted in the other thread, "stimulus" is, by definition, short term. So your economists agree with definitions of stimulus.

Can you post anything from an economist proving the CBO data wrong? That the stimulus didn't work?

Because the above doesn't say that, in spite of your pretending it does.

You are burdened with proof in this, you claimed 999 out of 1000 stand behind it working, now the argument is the CBO said so...
Please provide the names of the economists that are supporting the stimulus, and do so at the above rate.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

You are burdened with proof in this, you claimed 999 out of 1000 stand behind it working now the argument is the CBO said so...
Please provide the names of the economists that are supporting the stimulus, and do so at the above rate.

Yep - here's your proof: The CBO said the stimulus worked. Please provide one economist that says the CBO's facts about jobs and GDP are wrong.

Just one economist who disputes the CBO's numbers on jobs and GDP.

We'll wait.

In fact, I started another entire thread for you to join and discuss this and post your studies.

Here's some figures for you to reference - I've posted the link to the CBO report previously in other threads

November 2011 Politico

The economy would have been in much worse shape without the 2009 stimulus — which increased employment in the third quarter of this year by as many as 3.3 million full-time jobs, according to a report by the Congressional Budget Office.

Republican lawmakers and presidential candidates have blasted the $800 billion pumped into the economy through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act as a waste of taxpayer dollars that failed to put people back to work.

The nonpartisan CBO figures offer a more nuanced picture of how government spending impacted an economy still coping with unemployment above 9 percent. It provides an alternative glimpse of an economy with even higher unemployment and drastically lower growth.

The CBO figures released Tuesday estimate that the stimulus package raised the gross domestic product this past quarter by 0.3 percent-1.9 percent.

The CBO report provided a broad range of the estimated number of full-time jobs created because of the stimulus — from a low of 500,000 to a high of 3.3 million jobs.

Previous estimates indicated that the stimulus funded more than 400,000 full-time jobs in the third quarter, but the CBO said in its report that the figure was not a “comprehensive” look at the law’s impact.

The effects of the stimulus are fading after having peaked in the first half of 2010, the report noted.

However, the CBO estimates that the stimulus will raise GDP by 0.1 percent to 0.8 percent next year and employment by 200,000 to 1.1 million jobs.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories...#ixzz27W9GzEzC

[ARyan]

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by ARyan

Damned data always gets in the way of propaganda and demogoguery...

[joeydb]

I'd be impressed if he can remember that there are 50 and not 57 states.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by joeydb

I'd be impressed if he can remember that there are 50 and not 57 states.

yeah, cause that's so damned important that it has to be brought up ad nauseum.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Danzig

yeah, cause that's so damned important that it has to be brought up ad nauseum.

The current administration can make anyone's stomach turn over.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Damned data always gets in the way of propaganda and demogoguery...

Hey, Joey? Hey, ARyan? No offense, but you guys are really looking clueless here. Perhaps you are simply unable to understand this?

For the third time, concentrate really hard here, and try to understand this reality:

NOBODY IS SAYING THE DEFICT HASN'T GONE UP!

Only pointing out that Obama has NOT caused a $5 trillion dollar increase. That is not true.

Obama's polices did NOT cause that debt increase. Obama has NOT added "$5 trillion to the deficit and debt" by his policies. That is false.

Obama's policies cost us $1.4 trillion through 2016.

Our paying interest, and basic costs, still, on policies from previous administrations still cost us money, we are still paying for them, we are still compounding interest on them.

Yes, the debt has gone up. The debt would continue to go up, no matter who was president. Why?

Because the interest on the debt compounds, and policies created under previous administrations, that were not paid for, continue to be unfunded and cost us money.

Are you guys really incapable of understanding this most basic concept about how money works?

Bush cost us trillions in unfunded wars, the cost of those wars extending out approximately 20 years well past his presidency. WE ARE STILL PAYING FOR THAT, WITH COMPOUNDING INTEREST! That is NOT the current administrations' fault.

Can you understand that concept?

The ongoing over-time cost of Bushes' wars, and unfunded tax cuts, did not magically stop the day he flew home to Crawford. Can you two not understand that?

Try this for help:



And see this for what has created that ongoing debt - hint, it wasn't the current President. If you want to know why the debt has increased another $5 trillion, put it in the lap of the right person, and stop trying to falsely blame it on someone else.

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Riot

Hey, Joey? Hey, ARyan? No offense, but you guys are really looking clueless here. Perhaps you are simply unable to understand this?

For the third time, concentrate really hard here, and try to understand this reality:

NOBODY IS SAYING THE DEFICT HASN'T GONE UP!

Only pointing out that Obama has NOT caused a $5 trillion dollar increase. That is not true.

Obama's polices did NOT cause that debt increase. Obama has NOT added "$5 trillion to the deficit and debt" by his policies. That is false.

Obama's policies cost us $1.4 trillion through 2016.

Our paying interest, and basic costs, still, on policies from previous administrations still cost us money, we are still paying for them, we are still compounding interest on them.

Yes, the debt has gone up. The debt would continue to go up, no matter who was president. Why?

Because the interest on the debt compounds, and policies created under previous administrations, that were not paid for, continue to be unfunded and cost us money.

Are you guys really incapable of understanding this most basic concept about how money works?

Bush cost us trillions in unfunded wars, the cost of those wars extending out approximately 20 years well past his presidency. WE ARE STILL PAYING FOR THAT, WITH COMPOUNDING INTEREST! That is NOT the current administrations' fault.

Can you understand that concept?

The ongoing over-time cost of Bushes' wars, and unfunded tax cuts, did not magically stop the day he flew home to Crawford. Can you two not understand that?

Try this for help:



And see this for what has created that ongoing debt - hint, it wasn't the current President. If you want to know why the debt has increased another $5 trillion, put it in the lap of the right person, and stop trying to falsely blame it on someone else.

And all of this data is why the President has ended Bush policies en masse and enforced his own fairness policies! Oh wait, he hasn't because despite what you want to believe, nothing has changed but the that is spewing the nonsense.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

And all of this data is why the President has ended Bush policies en masse and enforced his own fairness policies! Oh wait, he hasn't because despite what you want to believe, nothing has changed but the that is spewing the nonsense.

Was that supposed to make any sense? Just another vague, random "Hate Obama" rant?

If you think that "nothing has changed" between November 2008 and now, I beg of you - please do not vote.

Back to the subject: Nobody is disputing the debt has gone up. It would go up if we didn't have any president at all and didn't spend a dime.

That the RWNJ, including Joey and ARyan, have fallen for and keep repeating the blatent falsehood that Obama's policies caused all of it is why this country is currently an international joke - because that superior thinking has given us Mitt Romney as a candidate for president of the United States, and the rest of the adult world wonders what the hell ever happened to America?

Worse health care of any first world nation, only FW nation without universal care, most expensive health care of any first world nation, highest infant death rate, half our country near or at poverty, failing behind 10-20 other countries in reading, science, math, a religious taliban forcing their morality laws on everyone else, a political group denigrating and blaming the poor, homeless, starving. But hey! Let's look at Herman Cain and Michelle Bachmann for President! And hope to still be taken seriously in this world??

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Riot

Hey, Joey? Hey, ARyan? No offense, but you guys are really looking clueless here. Perhaps you are simply unable to understand this?

For the third time, concentrate really hard here, and try to understand this reality:

NOBODY IS SAYING THE DEFICT HASN'T GONE UP!

Only pointing out that Obama has NOT caused a $5 trillion dollar increase. That is not true.

Obama's polices did NOT cause that debt increase. Obama has NOT added "$5 trillion to the deficit and debt" by his policies. That is false.

Obama's policies cost us $1.4 trillion through 2016.

Our paying interest, and basic costs, still, on policies from previous administrations still cost us money, we are still paying for them, we are still compounding interest on them.

Yes, the debt has gone up. The debt would continue to go up, no matter who was president. Why?

Because the interest on the debt compounds, and policies created under previous administrations, that were not paid for, continue to be unfunded and cost us money.

Are you guys really incapable of understanding this most basic concept about how money works?

Bush cost us trillions in unfunded wars, the cost of those wars extending out approximately 20 years well past his presidency. WE ARE STILL PAYING FOR THAT, WITH COMPOUNDING INTEREST! That is NOT the current administrations' fault.

Can you understand that concept?

The ongoing over-time cost of Bushes' wars, and unfunded tax cuts, did not magically stop the day he flew home to Crawford. Can you two not understand that?

Try this for help:



And see this for what has created that ongoing debt - hint, it wasn't the current President. If you want to know why the debt has increased another $5 trillion, put it in the lap of the right person, and stop trying to falsely blame it on someone else.

So, basically, since it's "not Obama's fault" and the deficit did go up, we can deduce that President Obama voted "present" ?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

So, basically, since it's "not Obama's fault" and the deficit did go up, we can deduce that President Obama voted "present" ?

No. Not even close to what I said.

The part of the deficit that is from Bush policies, is his; the part that is Obama's (not $5.7 trillion) is his; the part from before both men is neither of theirs.

Again - the debt when Bush left was nearly twice the actual cost of his policies - WHY was that?

Same reason Obama hasn't been responsible for "raising the debt by $5.7 trillion"

Every president inherits ongoing debt from the previous president. You can't blame a president for policies and debt that is hanging around, due to the guy before him.

That's beyond absurd, but it's exactly what the superficial and shallow are doing with the false attempt to blame Obama for debt not from his policies.

And the non-questioning keep repeating it. It's wrong.