September 20, 200817 yr Bush is now asking for $700 BILLION to bail out the financial institutions. This is 40% more than has been spent on the entire Iraq war. This is socialism at its worst. The economy is weak partly because the dollar is weak, so lets right some more bad checks. Why is it that that profits should go to the investors but losses should go to the taxpayers? I urge everyone to call their elected officials and tell them to stop this corporate welfare. A vote for this bailout is a vote they won't get from me.
September 20, 200817 yr I agree that the chart is eye opening. However I would like to see a chart that explained more why the debit went up or down. I know spending and all that but what spent exactly went up to cause the debit to increase and what went down when it decreased. To just put a line to it doesn't tell the story IMO.Any such chart would be subject to its creator's biases. Bottom line ... the numbers will bear out, I suspect, that the Reagan and Bush II administrations have accounted for a great deal of our current national debt.
September 22, 200817 yr Any such chart would be subject to its creator's biases. Bottom line ... the numbers will bear out, I suspect, that the Reagan and Bush II administrations have accounted for a great deal of our current national debt. I guess I am talking about a chart outlining the spending and revenue of each administration. In other words, everyone makes a big deal out of Clinton paying down the debt. But how did he do it? You always hear he dismantled the military to cut spending but how much did he dismantle it? How much more did we pay in taxes under Clinton? I would agree that the Reps have spent it like it's someone else's money.
September 22, 200817 yr No way you saw it coming. Sorry but that's just hyperbole. There were a few people who saw it coming but they were ignored. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0 I'm sure this article is greatly biased, and I admit that I have no idea who the author is or what their full intentions were, but this person is claiming that a few people saw it like you say. One being John McCain.
September 22, 200817 yr http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0 I'm sure this article is greatly biased, and I admit that I have no idea who the author is or what their full intentions were, but this person is claiming that a few people saw it like you say. One being John McCain. The author works for the American Enterprise Institute and is an adviser to the McCain campaign.
September 22, 200817 yr The author works for the American Enterprise Institute and is an adviser to the McCain campaign. I figured that may be the case, but it seems as though McCain was on to something in 05.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.