Dems will run us off a cliff rather than vote again before the election

You don't have even a rudimentary understanding of what took place if you think thats the case. Stop repeating talking points Joe, you're smarter than that.
 
As any idiot could figure out, the problem the Dems have with Boehner's plan (besides that he would get credit for it) is that they'd have to vote to raise the debt ceiling again, too close to the 2012 election.

Rather than endanger their chances for re-election, they'll just fuck the economy (again).

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/07/all-53-senate-democrats-sign-letter-to-boehner-threatening-to-default-on-us-debt/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+gatewaypundit2+%28Gateway+Pundit%29&utm_content=FaceBook
 
I think you mean 100% of GDP? Debt is currently 100% of GDP.

And debt to GDP isn't what determines real growth...the DEFICIT to GDP does. The Deficit is 10% of GDP and yes I'd argue that is distorting growth.

After WWII the debt was higher than it is now.
 
First off you are picking 2007 instead of 2008 for "yearly deficit" for an unknown reason

Also, it's not JUST $465b because revenue was also supposed to go naturally because of the AMT and other measures that gradually increase (Notice a 700b increase in revenue from 2004 to 2007?)

Also, if you are going to attack the chart, please post some figures instead of just saying "lol politics are involved so it must be at fault"

Considering everything that comes out of DC (including this link) is political
 
The only thing preventing consensus on this is the timeline. If the GOP offered a bill that would raise the debt ceiling past the election, it would pass. They'll fight til the 11th hour in an attempt to prevent having to rehash this clusterfuck in a few months, and at the end of the day they'll do what they have to do.



The "bailouts and other nonsense" did pretty much exactly what they were intended to do. 2nd quarter indicators were better than expected, things were looking up in general prior to this idiocy.
 
Sure, which doesn't even count social security (just one example) that doesn't hit the books right away.

But my point was even using the generous nurabers he's worse than Bush. And he didn't even start a war unless you count the "accident" in Lybia. No tax cuts, no war, and still spending more.
 
Thread starter & article is lame

The republicans are holding the debt ceiling hostage (which is why they want to do this again in 6 month)

Problem is republicans can't even get a plan that they all can agree on to pass the house Even if they did, it'll be so one sided that it'll never pass senate let alone make it to president (which is the main point of that durab article)
 
Back
Top