SWCnomics: US debt nearly doubled under Obama, going up $2.38 Billion per day

[enhanced_deficit]

Spread freedom costs.



Source: Brillig.com



Link

[CPUd]

[Cutlerzzz]

Don't worry, were not like Greece. We have a printing press.

Wait?

$#@!!

[56ktarget]

90% of that was due to the bush tax cuts, recession, and the two wars.

Oops, didn't fit into my Paulite talking point.

[Cutlerzzz]

90% of that was due to the bush tax cuts, recession, and the two wars.

Oops, didn't fit into my Paulite talking point.

Right, because Paulites failed predict a severe recession, supported the wars, and the bailouts/stimulus.

Oh right, that was the Republicrats.

[enhanced_deficit]

90% of that was due to the bush tax cuts, recession, and the two wars.

Oops, didn't fit into my Paulite talking point.

Do you deny that SWC drone like his predecessor is a puppet of war lobbies and spent more than his predecessor?

"If one includes the war appropriations, then Obama's first three years spent about 10% more than Bush's last three years."

Source: Did President Obama spend more money than all the former presidents of the US combined?

[Warlord]

90% of that was due to the bush tax cuts, recession, and the two wars.

Oops, didn't fit into my Paulite talking point.

Tiresome troll.

[oyarde]

90% of that was due to the bush tax cuts, recession, and the two wars.

Oops, didn't fit into my Paulite talking point.

Tax cuts do not cause debt .Spending more than you take in causes debt .

[Zippyjuan]

By the Constitution, all spending bills must originate in the House of Representatives. The Senate must concur and then any bills are sent to the President for him to sign or veto. A president really has no direct control over spending or debts or deficits.

[Zippyjuan]

Tax cuts do not cause debt .Spending more than you take in causes debt .

Tax cuts not offset by cuts in spending do add to debt. Note you yourself agreed that "spending more than you take in causes debt". Taxes determine what you take in. If you cut them, you are taking in less and debt rises.

[oyarde]

Tax cuts not offset by cuts in spending do add to debt. Note you yourself agreed that "spending more than you take in causes debt". Taxes determine what you take in. If you cut them, you are taking in less and debt rises.

I am aware of that .They already spend too much and taxes are already too high .

[enhanced_deficit]

By the Constitution, all spending bills must originate in the House of Representatives. The Senate must concur and then any bills are sent to the President for him to sign or veto. A president really has no direct control over spending or debts or deficits.

So if a President escalates a good war in Afghanistan or does a good invasion of Iraq or increases aid to Isreal .. or engages in blowback generating interventions abroad really has no direct control over spending or debts or deficits?



America’s staggering defense budget, in charts

[Zippyjuan]

Yes- all that spending had to be approved by Congress. He can suggest what he would like to spend money on but they decide to authorize it or not. They can decide to approve more or less than he asks for.

Sample:
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/339777.html

Congress triples Obama's request on military aid to Israel

The US Congress has authorized $284 million to fund Israel’s missile systems program, triple the amount the Obama administration had requested.


The bill, introduced jointly by the House of Representatives and Senate budget committees, includes $33.7 million to improve the Arrow Weapon System, $117 million for the Short-Range Ballistic Missile Defense Program and $22 million for development of the Arrow-3 upper-tier interceptor, according to Business Week.

The measure comes as an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act for 2014.

[enhanced_deficit]

Yes- all that spending had to be approved by Congress.

So you are you saying Commander-in-Chief Obama had no direct control over escallating war in Afghanistan and Commander-in-Chief Bush had no direct control of US invasion of Iraq?

[Zippyjuan]

Yep. Though Congress does not often fight such requests the do have the power to do so.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...102202144.html

Bush Asks Congress For $46 Billion More In War Funding

President Bush challenged Congress to another clash over the direction of the Iraq war yesterday as he asked lawmakers for $46 billion more to pay for overseas military operations and insisted that they approve it by the end of the year.

The president's war funding plan revived the political struggle over Iraq that has grown somewhat dormant in Washington over the past month. Democrats vowed not to rubber-stamp the request and indicated that they will disregard Bush's holiday deadline, holding off any action until next year as they debate a new strategy to counter his leadership on the war.

The latest spending proposal brings the total current fiscal year request for Iraq, Afghanistan and counterterrorism operations to $196.4 billion, by far the largest annual tally since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. If approved by Congress in its entirety, it would bring the total appropriated since then to more than $800 billion. At their current rate, war appropriations could reach $1 trillion by the time Bush leaves office, a total that by some measures would exceed the cost of the Korean and Vietnam wars combined.

The Democrats who won control of Congress last year on the back of public opposition to the Iraq war instantly denounced Bush's spending plan and ridiculed him for seeking so much for the conflicts after vetoing the expansion of a children's health insurance program just weeks earlier. But Bush's proposal will force Democrats to confront the politically volatile choice of again following his lead or refusing to provide everything he wants.

More at link.

[enhanced_deficit]

Yep.

Bush Asks Congress For $46 Billion More In War Funding

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...102202144.html


More at link.

If there was an arguement that a President is the sole responsible party, your argument may have a leg to stand on.

"Bush Asks Congress For $46 Billion More In War Funding"

Obama asks for $65 billion in war funds
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/0...ar-108364.html

BBC News - Obama asks Congress for $500m to fund Syrian Rebels
Jun 26, 2014


Does this not indicate direct control?
Do you standby your statement that POTUS has no direct control over spending/debt increase?

[Zippyjuan]

That he has to ASK for the money means he has direct control over it?

If you have to ask you Mom for allowance money so you can buy that video game you want does that mean you have control over the allowance money? Can you get your allowance doubled if you want to? Or does Mom have a say?

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

That he has to ASK for the money means he has direct control over it?

If you have to ask you Mom for allowance money so you can buy that video game you want does that mean you have control over the allowance money? Can you get your allowance doubled if you want to? Or does Mom have a say?

Is this even a serious analysis of a real issue or are you just trying for humor with your usual trolling?

Even if you're serious, then this is a simplistic view more suitable to a 6th grade civics class than the real world. The real world of spending, appropriations, and authorizations have always been a tug--of--war between the president and congress. There have, for instance, been plenty of presidential commitments not authorized by Congress. From the Louisiana Purchase to Vietnam and beyond.

Presidents can also withhold funds appropriated for specific projects. They can transfer money from year to year, or from one program to another program. The purposes can be totally different. Nixon took money specifically allocated to the Philippines and other countries, and diverted them to Cambodia.

This is to say nothing of covert funding. I would even argue that people's apathy and ignorance today means it does not even have to be that covert. A lot of appropriations even have wide discretionary stipulations. A lot of program money ends up being spent on something totally different.

So, the money is going to be appropriated. To use your words--the allowance from Mom will be there. That's a given. There are countless examples of where the president is buying nothing remotely close to that video game that he promised to buy.

[enhanced_deficit]

That he has to ASK for the money means he has direct control over it?

If you have to ask you Mom for allowance money so you can buy that video game you want does that mean you have control over the allowance money? Can you get your allowance doubled if you want to? Or does Mom have a say?

What should mommy do if the swc kiddo says he doesn't need mommy's permission to start a war?

1. Obama: I Don't Need Congress's Approval For ISIS War
   Sep 9, 2014 - President Obama told congressional leaders from both parties that he does not need their approval to launch additional ... Obama: I Don't Need Congress's Approval For ISIS War ..... Looks like your browser doesn't accept
2. Obama to Congress: I don't need new permission on Iraq ...
   www.cnn.com
   Jun 19, 2014
3. Obama doesn't need Congressional approval to start a war
   4 days ago - ...

[56ktarget]

Lol, this is just too embarrassing, even for Paulites. Enhanced_deficit somehow thinks that asking for something is equal to having direct control of it. Lol, so if I ask the dealership for a free car then that apparently means I own it? Lol, too funny logic out of this guy.

[56ktarget]

What should mommy do if the swc kiddo says he doesn't need mommy's permission to start a war?

1. Obama: I Don't Need Congress's Approval For ISIS War
   Sep 9, 2014 - President Obama told congressional leaders from both parties that he does not need their approval to launch additional ... Obama: I Don't Need Congress's Approval For ISIS War ..... Looks like your browser doesn't accept
2. Obama to Congress: I don't need new permission on Iraq ...
   www.cnn.com
   Jun 19, 2014
3. Obama doesn't need Congressional approval to start a war
   4 days ago - ...

You've now shifted your argument from Obama asks for approval for Congress to Obama doesn't need it. Try again.

[fr33]

90% of that was due to the bush tax cuts, recession, and the two wars.

Oops, didn't fit into my Paulite talking point.

Good thing you got that Paulite trope in there. Zing!

Nevermind that we didn't support Bush. Nevermind that he was no different or no less guilty than those that came before and after him.

[Ronin Truth]

It took from 1789 - 1849 for the US Federal government to spend the first (stolen) BILLION dollars. (official government figures)

Do we have a cancerous out of control Frankenstein leviathan government growth problem, or what?

US Population increase from 1789 (~3 million) to 2014 (~317 million)

The good news is that exponential growth is ultimately NOT sustainable over time. Something's gotta give.

Government is not supposed to be a growth industry.
Government expands to meet the needs of expanding government.

[Ronin Truth]

By the Constitution, all spending bills must originate in the House of Representatives. The Senate must concur and then any bills are sent to the President for him to sign or veto. A president really has no direct control over spending or debts or deficits.

By law, the POTUS IS required to submit a budget for each fiscal year.

[idiom]

what the hell happened to this thread?

[Ronin Truth]

what the hell happened to this thread?

It looks like same as usual drift, to me.

[Zippyjuan]

By law, the POTUS IS required to submit a budget for each fiscal year.

As of 1921, that is true that the President has to submit a budget PROPOSAL. This is what he would LIKE to see done. But the actual budget is written by the House of Representatives. They and the Senate work out the actual details. Then he gets to sign or veto whatever they came up with. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...budget_process

He can make suggestions but that is the limit to his budget powers. Some Presidents (like Bill Clinton) have sought a line item veto so they could remove individual items they did not want. Another thing some Presidents have tried is to not release approved funds for programs they did not like.

[enhanced_deficit]

You've now shifted your argument from Obama asks for approval for Congress to Obama doesn't need it. Try again.

Disgraced SWC dronegangsta can veto spending bills from Congress or can't?

SWC Bush did.

1. Bush vetoes spending bill, tells Congress to cut the pork ...
   
   http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/...get/index.html
   Nov 14, 2007 - President Bush vetoed a $600 billion spending bill Tuesday, accusing Democratic leaders of wasting money and plotting tax increases, then ...
2. Bush Keeps Vow to Veto War Funding Bill - Washington Post
   
   www.washingtonpost.com › PoliticsThe Washington Post
   May 2, 2007 - President Bush vetoed a $124 billion measure yesterday that would have funded overseas military operations but required him to begin ...

[Zippyjuan]

Yes, a president can veto a spending bill. That or sign it. Just as I have been saying.

[enhanced_deficit]

Yes, a president can veto a spending bill. That or sign it. Just as I have been saying.

So to rehash, does a President really have control over spending or debt or deficits ... or not?