What a great President....

Under President Barack Obama, the total debt of the U.S. government has increased by approximately $1,608,304 for each of the 4,130,665 babies born in the United States in 2009, the year Obama took office.

Today–Jan. 20, 2009–is the fifth anniversary of Obama’s first inauguration.

If the federal government were to continue accumulating net debt throughout the expected 78.5-year lifespan of a baby born in 2009 at the same average annual pace it has accumulated net debt during Obama’s first five years as president, the government would add more than $104 trillion in net debt during the life expectancy of those babies.

So far during Obama’s presidency, the federal government has borrowed a net total of $6,643,363,305,451.78. That works out to an average of approximately $1,328,672,661,090 per year, or $104,300,803,895,565 over 78.5 years.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-...ook-office

Thank you Mr. President.

(01-20-2014 06:52 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  
Thank you Mr. President.

Love it

Sure, let's pretend counter-cyclical spending isn't a normal aspect of proper fiscal policy.

Chatting with a Democrat coworker about this headline today...

He said that he's been promised the world would end 50 times in his life, from Cuban missiles to Christ returning and he's still here getting ready to collect his SS that was supposed to be bankrupt by now.

I reminded him that a fiscal collapse wasn't the end of the world but we may wish it was, and he was speechless.

(01-21-2014 03:52 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  Sure, let's pretend counter-cyclical spending isn't a normal aspect of proper fiscal policy.

Keynesian drivel.

Has a lot more historical support than severe austerity measures.

(01-22-2014 10:31 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  Has a lot more historical support than severe austerity measures.

Historical support of failure

yep, america sure failed over the past century huh?

(01-22-2014 10:41 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  yep, america sure failed over the past century huh?

Riggght Lets ignore the fact there was (1) a war and (2) we were the only industrial power who's infrastructure was left untouched by that war...

(01-22-2014 10:57 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(01-22-2014 10:41 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  yep, america sure failed over the past century huh?

Riggght Lets ignore the fact there was (1) a war and (2) we were the only industrial power who's infrastructure was left untouched by that war...

they don't like facts. Giving facts to them is like feeding gremlins after midnight.

*Shock* Now he's an economist too! Amazing!

(01-22-2014 10:41 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  yep, america sure failed over the past century huh?

It's probably just a coincidence though that the two biggest gov't interventions during the past century produced the two weakest recoveries on record.

By the way, "counter-cyclical" implies that at some point you cut into the debt. We're years into the "recovery" now, so when does that start? Of course, since you're such a fan of history, you probably know that we're just about due for another recession. So what then? Just pile up trillions more in debt, right? I'm sure if we just do a greater amount of what failed in the past, it'll eventually work. Sure seems to be for Japan right now.