GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-21-2013, 09:26   #26
fortyofforty
Capt. Hindsight
 
fortyofforty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,111
Yay government schools! Yay public educational institutions! Yay teachers' unions with lifetime job security! Yay no union rep left behind! Yay Natso control of schools for decades!

__________________
Odumbo: Unpatriotic, Narcissistic Man-Child. Democrat is the Party of Rape, Special Interests, Greed, Slavery, Sloth, Ignorance, Bigotry and Segregation. Click here to save animals! Gun Rights are Civil Rights.
fortyofforty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2013, 09:26   #27
Chronos
Senior Member
 
Chronos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,934
This is a cultural problem that government is trying to fix, but ends up making it worse at every turn -- standard government style. The government incentives are backwards as always -- the worse the problem gets, the more money you have thrown at you.

The bottom line is that education is now free. You can download dozens of textbooks for free and then watch lectures from top-of-the-top educators at every level for free. You can do testing for free. Then you can go to arxiv.org and have access to the cutting edge knowledge of mankind. For free. And you can even participate in it. And anyone can do it from their computer, regardless of where they live.

This is the dream of ancient philosophers -- we're living in an educational paradise. A space-age wonderland of free information and expert instruction for all. You only need one thing -- you have to want it badly enough. Badly enough to escape the educational trap that the government has set for you. And there's the rub.

But I can promise you that my kids will be educated, and I really don't give a s**t how predictably bad public schools get, because my kids won't be going anywhere near those "21 out of 23" failbot-factories.
__________________
If you've already accepted that "violence against the innocent" is a morally legitimate means of funding the government, who are you to complain when the majority apprporiates your legacy and sells your children into a lifetime of debt slavery?
Chronos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2013, 11:52   #28
Mad Ryan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sunny Southern Oregon
Posts: 1,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by akroguy View Post
You got that one right. BIG time. I'm a strong proponent of trade and technical schools. Why? I came from one, earn six figures working in the tech industry, fixing, improving and upgrading control systems. I love what I do, the school was affordable and everyone I know who went there in my program did very well for themselves, with little to no debt obligations coming out of it. It was/is a publicly funded tech school.

Yeah...goes against my grain politically, but this one works. Why? Perhaps because the instructors typically come from military or industrial PRIVATE SECTOR work experience. They show the students what REALLY matters out there. It's not just textbook bull*****, but practical work, solving real problems and learning to do so quickly and safely.

We seriously need to stop pushing every kid into the college debt spiral. When that bubble bursts, it's gonna get ugly.

EVERYONE needs a plumber, electrician, auto mechanic, dental assistant, SOME time in their lives. How many need an art history major?
Just curious, but do you think a good business school is any different?

I'm back in college again in my mid 30's and most of my business professors are retired business people. They made enough to retire and move to Ashland because it's a beautiful place to live, then got a teaching job at the local uni to keep busy.

Most of them barely use textbooks.

Any school, be it a trade school, a conventional college, whatever can be hugely beneficial for the person who goes into to it with a plan.

This idea that gets perpetuated that conventional liberal arts schools are all "theory" based and don't teach any sort of real subject matter is simply not the case. It all depends on what you're after but the Science and Business colleges tend to teach the up to the minute stuff that's relevant in the real world.

That said, I bump into people who are getting masters degrees in Art History or some such and I just mentally cringe. $80k in debt for a masters in Art History. That's gonna hurt down the road.

You're right that there's increasing demand for lots of apprenticeship type jobs. The baby-boomers are retiring and it's freeing up some pretty good jobs in lots of fields.
__________________
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't...

Last edited by Mad Ryan; 10-21-2013 at 11:54..
Mad Ryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2013, 15:12   #29
fortyofforty
Capt. Hindsight
 
fortyofforty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,111
Under Odumbo there will be plenty of hamburger flipping jobs. The cashiers will have to push some buttons, so they don't have to figure out change manually, but will still require a modicum of ability.

Under the Natsos, everybody should go to college, everybody needs to go to college, everybody deserves to go to college. Why? Maybe four more years of Natso indoctrination. Certainly not for any practical purpose.
__________________
Odumbo: Unpatriotic, Narcissistic Man-Child. Democrat is the Party of Rape, Special Interests, Greed, Slavery, Sloth, Ignorance, Bigotry and Segregation. Click here to save animals! Gun Rights are Civil Rights.
fortyofforty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-21-2013, 21:16   #30
Mad Ryan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sunny Southern Oregon
Posts: 1,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by fortyofforty View Post
Under Odumbo there will be plenty of hamburger flipping jobs. The cashiers will have to push some buttons, so they don't have to figure out change manually, but will still require a modicum of ability.

Under the Natsos, everybody should go to college, everybody needs to go to college, everybody deserves to go to college. Why? Maybe four more years of Natso indoctrination. Certainly not for any practical purpose.
You evidently forgot that your boy wrecked the economy while spending ungodly amounts of money on two wars and doing nothing to try and pressure the FED to raise rates to slow down the housing bubble a bit.

I'm not really a fan of Obama but some people just go full retard whenever anything goes wrong and blame it on him. Cracks me up.

Political Issues
__________________
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't...
Mad Ryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2013, 01:14   #31
akroguy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Ryan View Post
Just curious, but do you think a good business school is any different?

I'm back in college again in my mid 30's and most of my business professors are retired business people. They made enough to retire and move to Ashland because it's a beautiful place to live, then got a teaching job at the local uni to keep busy.

Most of them barely use textbooks.
That works too. Without first plying one's trade in actual conditions where you must PROVE yourself, day in, day out, meet deadlines, production and sales quotas, you really don't know WHAT to teach to the next generation. You can show students a schematic of, say, a motor control center; It looks so simple and clean in a drawing, but when you are faced with a bucket full of contactors, wiring, terminals, relays, cobwebs, spiders(!), transformers and switches....the reality sets in.

I had a digital circuits instructor who would give us circuits to wire up that when done correctly, would work fine. He would then have us leave the room and he'd screw with them....swap wires, remove them, pull wire out and re-install only insulation...all kinds of tricks. We learned to be THOROUGH and diligent in troubleshooting the problem. If he didn't like you much, he'd short circuit an IC so it would smoke upon power up. Great fun.

I've always thought that we, as an industrialized nation, would be so much better off if one had to first get an apprenticeship or even journeyman level of field experience BEFORE even being eligible for ANY engineering degree program. I've worked with a lot of new college engineering grads who didn't know jack squat about much of anything beyond how to fit an object of size X into a space of size Y. Most couldn't even use a hammer without hurting themselves. I kid you not! These guys/gals are supposed to be experts in systems that they have never even taken apart or repaired. Ever.

The skilled tradesman....a vanishing breed.
__________________
G19, G17, G36, G21SF, M4, Mosins, M1, 1903A3's.

The Second Amendment: giving teeth to the remaining 26.
Cogito, ergo armatus sum.
akroguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2013, 10:22   #32
Kablam
Senior Member
 
Kablam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Ryan View Post
Yeah, well in this case being the exception isn't a good thing.

Exceptionally bad healthcare.

Exceptionally bad education.

Exceptionally poor personal freedom.

etc.
I'm not so sure that it's the healthcare that is "exceptionally bad." "Exceptionally bad" health perhaps. "Exceptionally bad" delivery system? Seems that the three examples you cited are the result of "exceptionally bad" government meddling. Lets add "exceptionally bad" economic growth and "exceptionally bad" unemployment rate and "exceptionally bad" worker participation rate and "exceptionally bad" national debt. Also the result of "exceptionally bad" government meddling.
Kablam is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2013, 10:40   #33
Gundude
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 6,659
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Ryan View Post
I'm not really a fan of Obama but some people just go full retard whenever anything goes wrong and blame it on him. Cracks me up.
What's doubly funny is that many of those same people adopted or embraced the term "Bush Derangement Syndrome" to mock those who were so wound up about Bush they abandoned all rational thought.
Gundude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2013, 14:13   #34
fortyofforty
Capt. Hindsight
 
fortyofforty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Ryan View Post
I'm not really a fan of Obama but some people just go full retard whenever anything goes wrong and blame it on him. Cracks me up.
I'm not really a fan of Bush but some people just go full retard whenever anything goes wrong and blame it on him. Cracks me up.

__________________
Odumbo: Unpatriotic, Narcissistic Man-Child. Democrat is the Party of Rape, Special Interests, Greed, Slavery, Sloth, Ignorance, Bigotry and Segregation. Click here to save animals! Gun Rights are Civil Rights.
fortyofforty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2013, 14:15   #35
fortyofforty
Capt. Hindsight
 
fortyofforty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,111
So, spending us a trillion more dollars in debt in thirteen months gets us out of financial trouble how, exactly? I love Natso economics. It didn't work in the Soviet Union, it didn't work in Cuba, it didn't work in North Korea, it didn't work in East Germany, but they're just sure it will work here. Let's just try it once more. This time it's different.
__________________
Odumbo: Unpatriotic, Narcissistic Man-Child. Democrat is the Party of Rape, Special Interests, Greed, Slavery, Sloth, Ignorance, Bigotry and Segregation. Click here to save animals! Gun Rights are Civil Rights.
fortyofforty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2013, 14:17   #36
fortyofforty
Capt. Hindsight
 
fortyofforty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Ryan View Post
You evidently forgot that your boy wrecked the economy while spending ungodly amounts of money on two wars and doing nothing to try and pressure the FED to raise rates to slow down the housing bubble a bit.
You seem to forget whose mortgage policies caused the housing bubble. I suggest you do a bit of research, and check Barney Fwank, Chris Dodd, Janet Reno, and Bill Clinton. It might be a good history lesson for you.
__________________
Odumbo: Unpatriotic, Narcissistic Man-Child. Democrat is the Party of Rape, Special Interests, Greed, Slavery, Sloth, Ignorance, Bigotry and Segregation. Click here to save animals! Gun Rights are Civil Rights.
fortyofforty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2013, 16:07   #37
engineer151515
_______________
 
engineer151515's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 20,093


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Ryan View Post
You evidently forgot that your boy wrecked the economy while spending ungodly amounts of money on two wars and doing nothing to try and pressure the FED to raise rates to slow down the housing bubble a bit.
And yours spent twice as much in half the time whilst grabbing the Health care industry.

What till you see what a real "wrecked ecomony" looks like as a result.
__________________
A picture is worth a thousand words but you can't see what those shades of gray keep covered. You should have seen it in color. - Jamey Johnson - In Color

Last edited by engineer151515; 10-22-2013 at 16:08..
engineer151515 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2013, 17:09   #38
RussP
Moderator
 
RussP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 42,576
Blog Entries: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by fortyofforty View Post
You seem to forget whose mortgage policies caused the housing bubble. I suggest you do a bit of research, and check Barney Fwank, Chris Dodd, Janet Reno, and Bill Clinton. It might be a good history lesson for you.
Housing/mortgage problems began in the mid and late '70's. Values skyrocketed. Lenders were forced to make loans in declining areas due to anti-redlining laws. They were "persuaded" to give loans based on inflated values to previously unqualified borrowers. Those loans came back later to bite the market in the ass.

If you dared pre-qualify a buyer as a Realtor, as we were use to doing back then, and told the buyer they wouldn't qualify for the homes "they wanted to look at," you'd better be prepared for a visit from the discrimination investigators at HUD. This was especially true if your customer was a member of a minority group.

The laws and policies of the late '70s and early '80s were the beginning of "The American Dream", home ownership, transitioning from something you went out and worked for, that you earned the money to buy with, and accepted the responsibility for repaying the loan to the entitlement status people think it is today. No money down, low interest rates that let people buy more house than they should, and now programs that let borrowers walk away, even paying them to short sale their homes.

The 'housing bubble' was horrendous, but .gov started it, then did nothing to prevent lending institutions from following their lead. And the secondary mortgage market's incestuous relationship with originators and Wall Street...
__________________
Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

"Comment is free, but facts are sacred." C.P. Scott, 1921
RussP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2013, 21:23   #39
fortyofforty
Capt. Hindsight
 
fortyofforty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,111
Exactly.

And banks faced the full onslaught of Janet Reno's Department of Justice starting in the 1990s, as outlined in this New York Times op/ed piece from 1994.

Here's a snippet:

Quote:
Under the settlement, Chevy Chase [Bank] will set up new branches and mortgage offices in the excluded neighborhoods and recruit blacks for loan-production positions. It will also spend $11 million to set up special loan programs to provide mortgages at below-market rates in the excluded neighborhoods.
I'd suggest somebody research the Community Reinvestment Act, but it would do no good.
__________________
Odumbo: Unpatriotic, Narcissistic Man-Child. Democrat is the Party of Rape, Special Interests, Greed, Slavery, Sloth, Ignorance, Bigotry and Segregation. Click here to save animals! Gun Rights are Civil Rights.
fortyofforty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2013, 22:50   #40
Mad Ryan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sunny Southern Oregon
Posts: 1,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by engineer151515 View Post
And yours spent twice as much in half the time whilst grabbing the Health care industry.

What till you see what a real "wrecked ecomony" looks like as a result.
Hilarious.

This isn't even close to true. As previously mentioned, I don't even like Obama but I dislike willful ignorance even more.

Bush and Obama both suffer from the same problem. They're both ideologues.
__________________
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't...
Mad Ryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2013, 22:52   #41
Mad Ryan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sunny Southern Oregon
Posts: 1,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
Housing/mortgage problems began in the mid and late '70's. Values skyrocketed. Lenders were forced to make loans in declining areas due to anti-redlining laws. They were "persuaded" to give loans based on inflated values to previously unqualified borrowers. Those loans came back later to bite the market in the ass.

If you dared pre-qualify a buyer as a Realtor, as we were use to doing back then, and told the buyer they wouldn't qualify for the homes "they wanted to look at," you'd better be prepared for a visit from the discrimination investigators at HUD. This was especially true if your customer was a member of a minority group.

The laws and policies of the late '70s and early '80s were the beginning of "The American Dream", home ownership, transitioning from something you went out and worked for, that you earned the money to buy with, and accepted the responsibility for repaying the loan to the entitlement status people think it is today. No money down, low interest rates that let people buy more house than they should, and now programs that let borrowers walk away, even paying them to short sale their homes.

The 'housing bubble' was horrendous, but .gov started it, then did nothing to prevent lending institutions from following their lead. And the secondary mortgage market's incestuous relationship with originators and Wall Street...
I was going to point out that it was much more complicated than simply Dodd/Frank etc. but I think we can all agree that the FED providing free money and nobody doing anything at all to try and slow things down for the better part of the decade wasn't a good thing.
__________________
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't...
Mad Ryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 05:51   #42
engineer151515
_______________
 
engineer151515's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 20,093


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Ryan View Post
Hilarious.

This isn't even close to true. As previously mentioned, I don't even like Obama but I dislike willful ignorance even more.
...........
President Bush

Debt end (2008) . . . . . . $10,024,724,896,912.40

Debt start (2001) . . . . . . $ 5,807,463,412,200.06


Total accumulated debt (8 years) $4,217,261,484,712.34



President Obama
Debt current Debt start Total debt (4 years)

Debt current (2012) . . . . . . $16,066,241,407,385.80

Debt start (2001) . . . . . . $ $10,024,724,896,912.40


Total accumulated debt (4 years = one administrative term, not two) $6,041,516,510,473.40

Average rate

Bush = . . . . . . $527,157,685,589.04 per year
Obama =. . . . $1,510,379,127,618.35per year

Ratio Obama Rate / Bush Rate = 2.865

I intended to express a doubled rate of spending. I did word it incorrectly - should have said twice as much or half the time but the combo is incorrect.

That stated, I present the numbers. This is actually the rate of debt accumulation - not spending. But, since Obama did continue the tax cuts for the rich, I presume tax rates are reasonably the same therefore, the debt increase represents the actual spending increase - within some margin of error. I'm sure the medical device tax, tanning bed tax and the cigarette tax increased were not numbers that would change this assumption much, relative to the debts involved. But I don't have the time to look all that up.

It remains that President Obama has exceeded that and more in his first term. He increased the debt more in 4 years than Bush did in 8. By a good margin. Not even rounding up.

This, coupled with the facts that Bush's last two years were with a Democrat Congress (spending push) and Obama had a Democrat super majority in both houses of Congress for his first two years (total party spending control).

Numbers source = www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Us_debt
__________________
A picture is worth a thousand words but you can't see what those shades of gray keep covered. You should have seen it in color. - Jamey Johnson - In Color

Last edited by engineer151515; 10-23-2013 at 06:06..
engineer151515 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 06:01   #43
fortyofforty
Capt. Hindsight
 
fortyofforty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,111
We have had an accommodative Federal Reserve for some time now. Obama just nominated Janet Yellen to replace Bernanke. She promised to continue the easy money policy, so it continues. As Bush found out in 2008, a stock market drop can have disastrous consequences come election time. I doubt Obama will allow a market crash in 2014.

The economy was hardly "wrecked" when Bush left office in 2009. A recession is a normal part of the economic cycle, and the real unemployment rate is far higher now, as are the prices of gasoline, food, energy and almost anything else we can measure than it was in January 2009, when your hero took office. The economy is being battered by Obama's economic policies. If the media covered the story like they did in 2008 Obama would be hounded from office. Instead they cover up for him, still blame Bush, and continually make excuses as for why it's not Obama's fault. Where is that damn buck? It sure isn't stopping on Obama's desk. It must have slipped out the side window when nobody was looking.
__________________
Odumbo: Unpatriotic, Narcissistic Man-Child. Democrat is the Party of Rape, Special Interests, Greed, Slavery, Sloth, Ignorance, Bigotry and Segregation. Click here to save animals! Gun Rights are Civil Rights.
fortyofforty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 08:13   #44
Mad Ryan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sunny Southern Oregon
Posts: 1,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by engineer151515 View Post
President Bush

Debt end (2008) . . . . . . $10,024,724,896,912.40

Debt start (2001) . . . . . . $ 5,807,463,412,200.06


Total accumulated debt (8 years) $4,217,261,484,712.34



President Obama
Debt current Debt start Total debt (4 years)

Debt current (2012) . . . . . . $16,066,241,407,385.80

Debt start (2001) . . . . . . $ $10,024,724,896,912.40


Total accumulated debt (4 years = one administrative term, not two) $6,041,516,510,473.40

Average rate

Bush = . . . . . . $527,157,685,589.04 per year
Obama =. . . . $1,510,379,127,618.35per year

Ratio Obama Rate / Bush Rate = 2.865

I intended to express a doubled rate of spending. I did word it incorrectly - should have said twice as much or half the time but the combo is incorrect.

That stated, I present the numbers. This is actually the rate of debt accumulation - not spending. But, since Obama did continue the tax cuts for the rich, I presume tax rates are reasonably the same therefore, the debt increase represents the actual spending increase - within some margin of error. I'm sure the medical device tax, tanning bed tax and the cigarette tax increased were not numbers that would change this assumption much, relative to the debts involved. But I don't have the time to look all that up.

It remains that President Obama has exceeded that and more in his first term. He increased the debt more in 4 years than Bush did in 8. By a good margin. Not even rounding up.

This, coupled with the facts that Bush's last two years were with a Democrat Congress (spending push) and Obama had a Democrat super majority in both houses of Congress for his first two years (total party spending control).

Numbers source = www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Us_debt
One of the things you're neglecting is that Bush had control over his spending levels while Obama doesn't. He inherited his budget levels for FY 2008 from the previous administration and has actually been decreasing deficits since then.

You're also not mentioning the Recession which caused the debt to spike at the tail end of Bush II and continue to spike under Obama. This is purely unavoidable.

Lying is lying, even if it's just not telling the whole truth.

We'll neglect the fact that Obama hasn't the power to spend any money under the constitution without it first being appropriated by the congress. I know you don't care about that.

In most respects Obama is really just Bush 2.0
__________________
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't...
Mad Ryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 09:21   #45
Lethaltxn
Senior Member
 
Lethaltxn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Ryan View Post
One of the things you're neglecting is that Bush had control over his spending levels while Obama doesn't. He inherited his budget levels for FY 2008 from the previous administration and has actually been decreasing deficits since then.

You're also not mentioning the Recession which caused the debt to spike at the tail end of Bush II and continue to spike under Obama. This is purely unavoidable.

Lying is lying, even if it's just not telling the whole truth.

We'll neglect the fact that Obama hasn't the power to spend any money under the constitution without it first being appropriated by the congress. I know you don't care about that.

In most respects Obama is really just Bush 2.0
Dems controlled both house and senate the last two years of Bush's term and the first two of Obama's.
And don't forget about this.



Both sides suck, but you're doing what you complain others here do
__________________
Custom PC's
2012 Bumper Stickers
Lew Horton Springfield Compact 1911
Springfield Loaded

Last edited by Lethaltxn; 10-23-2013 at 09:27..
Lethaltxn is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 09:29   #46
Gundude
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 6,659
Quote:
Originally Posted by fortyofforty View Post
I'm not really a fan of Bush but some people just go full retard whenever anything goes wrong and blame it on him. Cracks me up.

Your admission that sufferers of BDS and ODS are cut from the exact same cloth is refreshing. Most will not admit they possess the exact same traits they mocked just a few years prior (or later).
Gundude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 09:40   #47
fortyofforty
Capt. Hindsight
 
fortyofforty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gundude View Post
Your admission that sufferers of BDS and ODS are cut from the exact same cloth is refreshing. Most will not admit they possess the exact same traits they mocked just a few years prior (or later).
My use of sarcasm was apparently too sophisticated for you to comprehend. Perhaps this is more your speed.
__________________
Odumbo: Unpatriotic, Narcissistic Man-Child. Democrat is the Party of Rape, Special Interests, Greed, Slavery, Sloth, Ignorance, Bigotry and Segregation. Click here to save animals! Gun Rights are Civil Rights.
fortyofforty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 09:51   #48
pugman
Senior Member
 
pugman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 6,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Ryan View Post
One of the things you're neglecting is that Bush had control over his spending levels while Obama doesn't. He inherited his budget levels for FY 2008 from the previous administration and has actually been decreasing deficits since then.

You're also not mentioning the Recession which caused the debt to spike at the tail end of Bush II and continue to spike under Obama. This is purely unavoidable.

Lying is lying, even if it's just not telling the whole truth.

We'll neglect the fact that Obama hasn't the power to spend any money under the constitution without it first being appropriated by the congress. I know you don't care about that.

In most respects Obama is really just Bush 2.0
Quote:
Originally Posted by engineer151515 View Post
President Bush

Debt end (2008) . . . . . . $10,024,724,896,912.40

Debt start (2001) . . . . . . $ 5,807,463,412,200.06


Total accumulated debt (8 years) $4,217,261,484,712.34



President Obama
Debt current Debt start Total debt (4 years)

Debt current (2012) . . . . . . $16,066,241,407,385.80

Debt start (2001) . . . . . . $ $10,024,724,896,912.40


Total accumulated debt (4 years = one administrative term, not two) $6,041,516,510,473.40

Average rate

Bush = . . . . . . $527,157,685,589.04 per year
Obama =. . . . $1,510,379,127,618.35per year

Ratio Obama Rate / Bush Rate = 2.865

I intended to express a doubled rate of spending. I did word it incorrectly - should have said twice as much or half the time but the combo is incorrect.

That stated, I present the numbers. This is actually the rate of debt accumulation - not spending. But, since Obama did continue the tax cuts for the rich, I presume tax rates are reasonably the same therefore, the debt increase represents the actual spending increase - within some margin of error. I'm sure the medical device tax, tanning bed tax and the cigarette tax increased were not numbers that would change this assumption much, relative to the debts involved. But I don't have the time to look all that up.

It remains that President Obama has exceeded that and more in his first term. He increased the debt more in 4 years than Bush did in 8. By a good margin. Not even rounding up.

This, coupled with the facts that Bush's last two years were with a Democrat Congress (spending push) and Obama had a Democrat super majority in both houses of Congress for his first two years (total party spending control).

Numbers source = www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Us_debt
Once again the American politician is smiling from ear to ear.

This argument is the equivalent of saying one pedophile is "better' than the other because he raped half as many children.

Bush and Obama are the 1-2 punch which true objective historians will see as the presidents who oversaw the point of no return.
__________________
Now when asked when I think things will change I answer "The next time Thomas (aka the fed) robs Peter (aka the 53%) to pay Paul (aka the 47%) and Peter pulls a gun...things will change"

Last edited by pugman; 10-23-2013 at 09:52..
pugman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 10:58   #49
engineer151515
_______________
 
engineer151515's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 20,093


My comments in red



Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Ryan View Post
One of the things you're neglecting is that Bush had control over his spending levels while Obama doesn't.

So, Bush had control with respect to the impact of the 9/11 attacks and a two country war?


He inherited his budget levels for FY 2008 from the previous administration and has actually been decreasing deficits since then.

It is four years past that point. President Obama has never reduced deficit spending to the levels of the Bush years. Decreasing deficits are only measured against his own unsustainable spending levels.



You're also not mentioning the Recession which caused the debt to spike at the tail end of Bush II and continue to spike under Obama. This is purely unavoidable.


That mortgage lending crisis. Yeah - we've covered that one. Repeatedly.

Lying is lying, even if it's just not telling the whole truth.

Your name calling only degrades your own point. Try it with a preschooler. Might work more effectively.

We'll neglect the fact that Obama hasn't the power to spend any money under the constitution without it first being appropriated by the congress. I know you don't care about that.

Bush had the same problem in his last two years with a Democrat Congress


In most respects Obama is really just Bush 2.0
On steroids
__________________
A picture is worth a thousand words but you can't see what those shades of gray keep covered. You should have seen it in color. - Jamey Johnson - In Color
engineer151515 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2013, 11:00   #50
engineer151515
_______________
 
engineer151515's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 20,093


Quote:
Originally Posted by pugman View Post
Once again the American politician is smiling from ear to ear.

This argument is the equivalent of saying one pedophile is "better' than the other because he raped half as many children.

Bush and Obama are the 1-2 punch which true objective historians will see as the presidents who oversaw the point of no return.
I see a big difference in scale.
__________________
A picture is worth a thousand words but you can't see what those shades of gray keep covered. You should have seen it in color. - Jamey Johnson - In Color

Last edited by engineer151515; 10-23-2013 at 14:45..
engineer151515 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 13:05.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,100
338 Members
762 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42