why voters are angry in one graph

Discussion in 'Economics' started by DB_sezwhat, Jul 17, 2010.

  1. MKTrader

    MKTrader

    Heee's back! From the depths of the bottom of the gene pool...from the crusty bottom of the sub-60 IQ "yes we can" (take your money and live on handouts so we don't have to work).

    Every single stat? I'm so impressed you've reviewed them all. Yes, small business owners really need higher personal/corporate tax rates, regulutions galore, tax-n-trade and every other asinine proposal from the Black Panthers. (Or was that the Obama administration...I forget...one group is in power and the other group "polices" voting booths to keep whitey out. I'm sure you'll be defending your adorable, white baby-killing Panthers next, though).
     
    #41     Jul 19, 2010
  2. Hello Trader666, it amazes me how you can accept that democrats will win 3 time in a row. I think you secretly love Obama and the democrats. Otherwise you would think the republicans would win. :p
     
    #42     Jul 19, 2010
  3. ROTFLMAO!!! Let's see who the real moron is.

    Among other places, THEY'RE IN THE PRESIDENT'S BUDGET.

    Have an adult explain Table S-1 to you.
    http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2011/assets/budget.pdf

    You're done.

     
    #43     Jul 19, 2010
  4. <img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=2900281>
     
    #44     Jul 19, 2010
  5. <img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=2900282>
     
    #45     Jul 19, 2010
  6. <img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=2900284>
     
    #46     Jul 19, 2010
  7. In spite of those who still believe "Reganomics was GREAT"... this graph clearly shows that it was REAGAN who kicked-off the deficit storm. "Cutting taxes and running up the deficit" help the GDP to look good... on the surface.

    And NO, it's "not OK" for Obama to spend a TSUNAMI Deficit, "just because Bush ran deficits".... 2 wrongs still don't make a right.
     
    #47     Jul 19, 2010
  8. Obama will be 12 years in office, all hail Obama says Trader666! :p
     
    #48     Jul 19, 2010
  9. #49     Jul 19, 2010
  10. Get yourself some brain before posting numbers from neocon groups out for world domination, it turned out real well in Iraq.

    In constructing its baseline, Heritage partly assumes its own conclusion. The baseline projections developed by Heritage generally resemble CBPP’s, with one crucial difference. Heritage assumes that regular discretionary spending (other than war costs and stimulus funds) will grow at the same rate as the GDP over the next 10 years. In contrast, we assume that such appropriations will grow somewhat more slowly in the 10-year budget window because they will grow with inflation; this is the standard, widely accepted baseline assumption. Heritage’s decision to scrap normal baseline practices and assume higher levels of discretionary spending boosts such spending by more than a full percentage point of GDP by the end of the ten-year period and adds to interest costs as well. Heritage then uses this increased spending it assumes to buttress its claim that it is excessive spending growth that causes the deficit. In theory, policymakers might choose to increase discretionary spending to keep pace with GDP, but that is highly unlikely in these straitened times. And that is not how the Budget Enforcement Act, CBO, and the Office of Management and Budget define “current policy” when they make their baseline budget projections for the coming decade

    http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3036#_ftnref14

    <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/VcJohfS4vTQ&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/VcJohfS4vTQ&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
     
    #50     Jul 21, 2010