Yes, and it worked very well. So did the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 that George Bush signed earlier. Certainly. And a great many other things, like Congressional budgets, economic factors, etc,. And like all projections, they are based on assumptions which will affected by the policies of several future presidents and Congresses. To blame all future dire projections on Obama is disingenuous.
Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 (Bush) "The congressional Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that the three provisions together will reduce federal revenue by $152 billion in fiscal 2008 and by another $16 billion in fiscal 2009. In subsequent years, revenue will actually rise as firms will claim less depreciation for investments made in 2008 than they otherwise would have. As a result, revenue losses from 2008 through 2018 will total $125 billion." The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Obama) "The approximate cost of the economic stimulus package was estimated to be $787 billion at the time of passage, later revised to $831 billion between 2009 and 2019." What's disingenuous is to claim " the stimulus was signed by Bush" without mentioning the $831 billion stimulus that Obama signed. Once again my point was not who signed the stimulus bills but that there was a lot of stimulus and bailouts that played a large part in substantially increasing the deficits. These one time expenses, as they diminished over time, naturally cut the deficits. To claim Obama miraculously cut the deficit in half is disingenuous.
are you serious. man when you are losing an argument you get loopy. Where the hell do you think the debt comes from magical Disney tinkerbell dust. When you spend more than you make you run a deficit which is a debt owed to the debtor that you borrowed from. Rookie ha ha I was dead on and you guys gotta throw a smoke screen and and play liberal tricks with words so you don't have to face the simple fact that 18-12 = 6. Pretty simple really. Obama cut the debt ( deficit ) from 12 to 18 and you guys think he cut it in half. And I am the one confused. Give me some of that stuff your smokin
Well of course it is. He is flake and his entire tenure has been smoke and mirrors with an end around on the constitution once or twice a year.
Do you apply that same logic to the current Republican congress? For all the things you rail against Obama for, can you apply 1/3 of the blame for those issues on the Republican House? If not, your question is moot.
I can, Congress has sucked for as long as I can remember. The Reid/Pelosi gang was probably the worst of all but the GOP bunch isn't far behind. My biggest gripe is the cower in fear when it's go time. All talk no action. At least Cruz had the guts to stand tall and stick by his word, rest of em are still looking for a spine.
Well, you had already mentioned it. I had to add what you conveniently left out. And my counterpoint was that the stimulus was clearly not all on Obama, good or bad, and that 2009 was the logical point to assess Obama's era. And yet the deficit has been cut. No one claimed a miracle, it was simply effective policies.
Your continued inability to understand the difference between the budget deficit and the national debt is not my problem.
No, I was replying to all of the blame for the great recession being placed on GWB and used as an excused by the Obama defenders. Blame for a slow recovery was being placed upon the Republican Congress who wasn't in charge until January 2011. Sure they can take some of the blame now although they have caved and funded everything they said they were against as Shane pointed out. By your logic, the Great Recession was 2/3 Democrats fault, and the slow recovery became 1/3 Republican's fault in 2011. We have been told by some here that the economy is doing much so much better which tracks with 2/3 Republican control as of 2015.
There is blame to go around for the great recession but none of it belongs at Obama's feet. Clinton signed the legislation that ended Glass-Steagall and that played a large part in enabling the banking sector to reach "too big to fail status." So I will not lay all the blame on GWB but he made many questionable decisions that, I believe, accelerated the collapse. 1-Lowering taxes when we had a budget surplus and were paying down our debt, 2-Still refusing to repeal those tax breaks after 9/11 and we knew we were in for a protracted war against terrorism, 3-Expanding Medicare with Part D, 4-Invading Iraq, which combined with Afghanistan cost us nearly two trillion dollars and untold riches in human sacrifice. Blame for a slow recovery goes to those who originally caused it, which I have already conceded involved previous democrats. The Great Depression began with the crash in 1929 and by any account was not over until sometime after the onset of WW2. That's 12-14 years. The fact that we are where we are 7-8 years later is a testament to how well we've handled this recovery. Is it as robust as any of us would prefer? Of course not. But it's been steady and consistant......ask Europe how badly they would like to have slow and steady right about now.
