Sat, Apr 19, 2014, 12:55 AM EDT - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Alcoa Inc. Message Board

  • squamish7b squamish7b Dec 1, 2012 8:23 PM Flag

    Messiah's Thanksgiving spending spree

    Certainly gives new meaning to Black Friday...

    "The U.S. Treasury increased the net debt of the United States $24,327,048,384.38 on the day after Thanksgiving, which equals approximately $211.69 for each of the nation’s 114,916,000 households.

    At the close of business last Wednesday, according to the Treasury, the national debt was $16,283,161,895,179.85. On Thanksgiving, the Treasury took the day off and did no borrowing. But on Friday, the Treasury increased the debt of the United States to $16,307,488,943,564.23. That was a one-day increase of $24,327,048,384.38."

    "Friday was also the first time in the history of the United States that the debt has topped $16.3 trillion."

    When President Barack Obama first took office on Jan. 20, 2009, the national debt stood at $10,626,877,048,913.08. Since then, it has increased by $5,680,611,894,651.15. That means that since Obama has been president, the national debt has increased by about $49,432.73 per household."

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Will you please stop telling the truth. It ruins a good leftist argument.

    • The election is now about one month old - your extreme depression should be subsiding by now. You can resume moderate shots of whiskey in anticipation of the holiday season.

    • The deficit for fiscal year 2009 — which began more than three months before President Obama’s inauguration — was $1.4 trillion and, at 10 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), the largest deficit relative to the economy since the end of World War II. At $1.3 trillion and nearly 9 percent of GDP, the deficits in 2010 and 2011 were only slightly lower. If current policies remain in place, deficits will likely exceed $1 trillion in 2012 and 2013 before subsiding slightly, and never fall below $700 billion for the remainder of this decade.

      The events and policies that pushed deficits to these high levels in the near term were, for the most part, not of President Obama’s making. If not for the Bush tax cuts, the deficit-financed wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the effects of the worst recession since the Great Depression (including the cost of policymakers’ actions to combat it), we would not be facing these huge deficits in the near term. By themselves, in fact, the Bush tax cuts and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will account for almost half of the $18 trillion in debt that, under current policies, the nation will owe by 2019.[1] The stimulus measures and financial rescues will account for less than 10 percent of the debt at that time

      • 2 Replies to brinerbriner
      • Because Dumbya was too incompetent to pay for the wars he started.
        Too incompetent to pay for his drug program.
        Too incompetent to finance the tax cuts.

      • "The deficit for fiscal year 2009 — which began more than three months before President Obama’s inauguration — was $1.4 trillion"

        Other than that, you seem to have a "defeciency" with facts regardless of what moniker you post under...

        "The previous president proposes a budget, in February of the prior year. But the previous Congress approves, enacts and implements the budget. And what Congress approves, enacts, and implements can be radically different from what the President proposes."

        "But for fiscal year 2009, President Bush in February, 2008 proposed a budget with just a 3% spending increase over the prior year. Recall, however, that in 2008 Congress was controlled by Democrat majorities, with Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House, and the restless Senator Obama in his fourth year in the Senate. As Hans Bader reported on May 26 for the Washington Examiner, the budget approved, enacted and implemented by Pelosi, Obama and the rest of the Congressional Democrat majorities provided for a 17.9 percent increase in spending for fiscal 2009!"

        "Actually, President Obama and the Democrats were even more deeply involved in the fiscal 2009 spending explosion than that. As Bader also reports, “The Democrat Congress [in 2008], confident Obama was going to win in 2008, passed only three of fiscal 2009’s 12 appropriations bills (Defense, Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, and Homeland Security). The Democrat Congress passed the rest of them [in 2009], and [President] Obama signed them.” So Obama played a very direct role in the runaway fiscal 2009 spending explosion."

        "Obama’s first major legislative initiative was the so-called stimulus, which increased future federal spending by nearly a trillion dollars, the most expensive single piece of legislation in history up to that point. "

        "But this was just a warm up for Obama’s Swedish socialism. Obama worked with Pelosi’s Democrat Congress to pass an additional, $410 billion, supplemental spending bill for fiscal year 2009, which was too much even for big spending President Bush, who had specifically rejected it in 2008. Next in 2009 came a $40 billion expansion in the SCHIP entitlement program, as if we didn’t already have way more than too much entitlement spending."

        "The biggest single spending bill in world history, Obamacare, was enacted in March, 2010, before the 2010 elections could shut Obama down. That legislation, not yet even counted in Obama’s spending record so far because it mostly does not go into effect until 2014, is now scored by CBO as increasing federal spending by $1.76 trillion in the first 10 years alone, with trillions more to come in future years."

    • Some lawmakers, pundits, and idiot message board posters continue to say that President George W. Bush’s policies did not drive the projected federal deficits of the coming decade — that, instead, it was the policies of President Obama and Congress in 2009 and 2010. But, the fact remains: the economic downturn, President Bush’s tax cuts and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq explain most of the deficit over the next ten years — according to this update of our analysis, which is based on the Congressional Budget Office’s most recent ten-year budget projections (from August) and congressional action since we released the previous version of this analysis in May 2011. (For a fuller discussion, see the technical note that begins on p. 6.)

      The deficit for fiscal year 2009 — which began more than three months before President Obama’s inauguration — was $1.4 trillion and, at 10 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), the largest deficit relative to the economy since the end of World War II. At $1.3 trillion and nearly 9 percent of GDP, the deficits in 2010 and 2011 were only slightly lower. If current policies remain in place, deficits will likely exceed $1 trillion in 2012 and 2013 before subsiding slightly, and never fall below $700 billion for the remainder of this decade.

      The events and policies that pushed deficits to these high levels in the near term were, for the most part, not of President Obama’s making. If not for the Bush tax cuts, the deficit-financed wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the effects of the worst recession since the Great Depression (including the cost of policymakers’ actions to combat it), we would not be facing these huge deficits in the near term. By themselves, in fact, the Bush tax cuts and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will account for almost half of the $18 trillion in debt that, under current policies, the nation will owe by 2019.[1] The stimulus measures and financial rescues will account for less than 10 percent of the debt at that time.

    • Thank goodness I'm here to set you straight when your propensity for being stoooooooopid takes over. Which is pretty much all the time. Like I told you, the correlation of Obama being President with budget deficits lacks causation. If you are looking for someone to blame about the constant whining you do over the deficit look no furhter than McBoner, the metaphorical name for the GOP policies that have us close to going over the cliff.

      "Some lawmakers, pundits, and stooooooooopid AA board posters continue to say that President George W. Bush’s policies did not drive the projected federal deficits of the coming decade — that, instead, it was the policies of President Obama and Congress in 2009 and 2010. But, the fact remains: the economic downturn, President Bush’s tax cuts and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq explain most of the deficit over the next ten years — according to this update of our analysis, which is based on the Congressional Budget Office’s most recent ten-year budget projections (from August) and congressional action since we released the previous version of this analysis in May 2011. (For a fuller discussion, see the technical note that begins on p. 6.)

      The deficit for fiscal year 2009 — which began more than three months before President Obama’s inauguration — was $1.4 trillion and, at 10 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), the largest deficit relative to the economy since the end of World War II. At $1.3 trillion and nearly 9 percent of GDP, the deficits in 2010 and 2011 were only slightly lower. If current policies remain in place, deficits will likely exceed $1 trillion in 2012 and 2013 before subsiding slightly, and never fall below $700 billion for the remainder of this decade.

      The events and policies that pushed deficits to these high levels in the near term were, for the most part, not of President Obama’s making. If not for the Bush tax cuts, the deficit-financed wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the effects of the worst recession since the Great Depression (including the cost of policymakers’ actions to combat it), we would not be facing these huge deficits in the near term. By themselves, in fact, the Bush tax cuts and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will account for almost half of the $18 trillion in debt that, under current policies, the nation will owe by 2019.[1] The stimulus measures and financial rescues will account for less than 10 percent of the debt at that time."

    • if we go off the fiscal cliff into a recession,
      remember "double dip" no one has
      used that for awhile.
      repuklitards will get to call it the "Obama Recession"
      democlowns get the rich to pay righteous taxes
      it's a win win

      Sentiment: Strong Sell

      • 1 Reply to sonya20911
      • "if we go off the fiscal cliff into a recession"

        It's called "cold turkey", an unpleasant but quite necessary means to break the messiah's "righteous" addiction to other people's money. Perhaps you forget how the messiah's last "stimulus" went...

        "At this point, Obama smiled and interjected, "Shovel-ready was not as ... uh .. shovel-ready as we expected." The Council, led by GE's Jeffrey Immelt, erupted in laughter."

 
AA
13.56+0.14(+1.04%)Apr 17 4:00 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.
Rayonier Inc.
NYSEThu, Apr 17, 2014 4:03 PM EDT