Obama wants to half national debt in four years?

United States
February 23, 2009 8:45pm CST
Well that sounds all warm and fuzzy until you realize that with all the spending bills and bail outs, additional social programs, etc... that Obama has or is going to put in place in the next year, that he is going to DOUBLE the national debt. So even if he does cut it in half....it will only be getting it back to where it was when Bush left office. Is that change? He will be leaving at the end of 4 years with the same amount of national debt as there was when he walked in. Whre is the progress in that? Where is the responsibility in that? Also from what I am hearing on the news (not just fox news) his plan for paying off the national debt is hinged on the economy turning around so the gov is getting more tax dollar (oh and he is going to raise taxes too). How realistic is that. All the economist are saying this is going to take 10 years or more to get out of. So how does this plan work? Tell me what you think of this annoucement? What do you think should be done?
2 people like this
12 responses
@laglen (19778)
• United States
24 Feb 09
If he can get it back to what it was when he walked in, I will be amazed! All this spending, and with the socialist agenda, a lot of people will stop working and let our messiah figure out how to pay the bills. If a bank can not foreclose, people do not have to pay their bills, how is this stimulating???
1 person likes this
• United States
25 Feb 09
I agree. I will be surprised if he does it too. He seems to have no problems writting checks his butt can't cash so who knows.
1 person likes this
@ladyluna (7004)
• United States
24 Feb 09
Hello Lilwonders, I expect that that CHANGE will be to retire the Bush tax cuts, cut military spending, increase the top marginal rate, up the commercial tax rate and cap the benefits & eligibility of Medicaid, Medicare, SS recipients, all in an effort to halve the debt. Of course, your observation is precisely accurate; if Obama is successful (which he won't be with a spend, spend, spend Congress on board) then the debt will be dollar for dollar the same in four years. Though, the face of our government, and thus our nation, will be forever changed. As I see it, those functions of government which are outlined in the Constitution will be replaced by delusioned, and illegal emphasis on social programs, better known as 'vote bribe spending'. In other words, look to the history of what Hugo Chavez has done over the course of this past decade. The blueprint is right in front of our noses, and Team Obama is masterfully using the Alinsky methodology to push the agenda with lightning fast speed. On a slightly different note: Much to his chagrin, Chavez gets no credit for imagination, he has simply followed the blueprint that was laid out by other failed tyrants before him. Ten years? I haven't read or heard such a prediction. In fact, I've seen and heard much, more dire predictions. I've seen suggestion after suggestion, prediction after prediction that it will take generations of belt tightening to undo the financial mess that OPR (Obama, Pelosi, Reid) as well as Bush, Paulson and Bernacke have placed us in. That is if we're ever able to dig ourselves out before China, Russia, the UAE or the Saudi's either default or call in their markers by way of ownership transfer of tangible assets (land & US businesses), which would mark the end of the USA as we know it. How does his plan work? Well, that depends on which definition of "work" people apply . As I see it, the only perceivable success in all of this will be found in the perception of Socialists, Marxists, and Narcissists having coalesced around their irrational desire to 'share the misery', so that they sadistically 'self medicate' their own inner discontent by forcing it upon others. What do I think of the announcement? My first reaction was incredulous laughter. I first thought "What a moron." Then I caught myself. Obama and his minions are not really idiots, they are ideologues. They know better, but they just don't care. Power is their objective, and they will stop at nothing until they are positioned to dominate others. To be absolutely clear: We will rue the day that we let this sect of malcontents swoop in and cut our nation, nay our very way of life, off at the knees! What do I think should be done? First, intense public pressure to determine whether Obama was actually eligible to run for the office of the president. If he is unable to successfully prove his eligibility, then everything that Team Obama has signed into law since 1/20/09 will be revoked, and Obama will be booted out of the White House. Second, a 60 day special election concurrent to massive public demands that anyone who voted for the largest spending bill in our history, without having read it, should be forced to resign in disgrace from office. Next, an outright tax revolt until every tax cheat is out of Washington. Then, when new representatives are in place, the daunting work of getting back to our successful roots can begin. 'Course, I'm not holding my breath!
1 person likes this
• United States
24 Feb 09
I always love hearing from you. You always have the most detailed responses with great information.
1 person likes this
@LaurenInLA (2271)
• United States
24 Feb 09
I think that we are in uncharted territory and I don't think that anyone has the answer as to how to fix it. I'm an Obama supporter and am highly skeptical that the national debt will be cut in half by the end of his first term. Who's going to pay for the ever increasing corporate welfare? This is not going to be solved by taxing the wealthiest Americans and by withdrawing from Iraq. IMHO any dollars that are saved by an Iraw withdrawal will have to funneled into Afghanistan because unfortunately we didn't take care of that problem before we decided to jump into Iraq. An economic turnaround? I would be stunned if that happened within four years. I think that we're putting a lot of bandaids on a deep bleeding wound. I would first start by removing the toxic mortgage assets from the banks to encourage them to lend again. Without that happening, there is not going to be a free flow of lending from the banks. Secondarily, the problem is that consumers are not spending. Once consumers spend again, corporations problems will be greatly minimized. What would I do? First instead of giving the money to the banks, I would evaluate all of the morgages that are in default. Where a homeowner has an ability to actually pay the mortgage, I would take stimulus money to buy down their mortgages to current market value. I think that you can protect government interests by the government somehow taking an equity position in those homes upon sale of the property. I would also give another huge round of stimulus payments but those checks would only be tax free if the taxpayer actually spent the money. Too many people used the last stimulus check to pay down existing debt or to save the money. Perhaps the way that you do it is by issuing debit cards instead of checks. I would also give some sort of tax incentive to businesses who did not lay off people. Even if we were giving the business the supplemental payment that the employee would be collecting in the form of an unemployment check. Then, a significant tax incentive to businesses who actualy created jobs.
1 person likes this
@scheng1 (24688)
• Singapore
24 Feb 09
Personally I think he talks too much and too loudly. He's still too young and too gungho to know that whatever he says impact on the stock market throughout the world. It's much better for him to keep his mouth shut. Act to keep the national debt down and then talk about it. Now that he keeps saying he wants to do this, to do that, with no concrete action plan, nobody will dare to believe him in the future. On hindsight, Clinton did a very good job of keeping national debt down.
• United States
24 Feb 09
clinton did it by not spending more tax dollars than the government took in a year. Unlike Obama who is spending it faster than we can print it. Did you know that the economic stimulus bill was almost equal to what the federal gov. takes in from tax payers in a whole year. One bill basically spent a years worth of our dollars. How responsible is that? How is spending like that going to help? It's not.
@scheng1 (24688)
• Singapore
24 Feb 09
He has no choice now, he got to spend the money to restore the economy. The famous economist Keyes said that in a downturn, government must spend to boost the economy. Otherwise the whole world (with the exception of Africa, which is already very poor and Middle East, which is too rich) is going to sink deeper and deeper. Just hope that the money used to bail out those companies will return to the government in future, with high interests!
• United States
24 Feb 09
Don't count on it. What is going to happen is the gov. is going to dig itself into deeper and deeper debt. Borrow more and more from china. we already look like Oliver Twist saying "can I have some more sir, please". All of this will printing of money we do not have will cause inflation. Which means the averag joe is going to pay for this. Now because of all the gov. spending it is also going to take us a lot longer to recover. How long do you think it is going to take to pay off our national debt? How long before inflation drops so that consumers can buy more than the necessies? Which means in the end it costs us MORE because of what they did.
@coffeebreak (17811)
• United States
24 Feb 09
Well, he promised a tax cut for 95% of Americans...and now one month into his term we get that tax cut...what are you going to do with your $26 a month for the last 6 months of the year and your $16 extra a month for a few months next year? I wont' be surprised if he does cut it in half... the worry is what gets cut and of course it is the working people that will take the cuts. Promising a tax cut to get voted in and then giving working people a pathetic $26 a month for a few months and calling it a tax cut and economic recovery is an insult to the american people that trusted him and voted him in based on that promise... To paraphrase Forrest Gump - "pathetic is as pathetic does".
• United States
24 Feb 09
I agree. The $16.00 is not going to go far....especially with all the inflation caused by the gov. printing off money from thin air. I do not see $16.00 making much of a difference in anyone's life right now. I half way want to tell him....if $16.00 was all you could do than why did you even bother. He may be able to do it. But who will get hurt? The tax payers that is who. He is not going to upset the lobbyist and speical interest groups so cutting social programs budgets is not going to happen. Or the big money people that give money to his campaign or the democratic party, so there goes increasing taxes on the rich. If he increases taxes in corporations they will just not hire as many people or lay off to make up the difference of what they are loosing to the gov. Who does that hurt? The average person. Face it we are going to be the ones to pay for all of it and our kids and grandkids with the way are spending.
1 person likes this
@coffeebreak (17811)
• United States
24 Feb 09
Yep we will pay for it.... on the other side, if you live in california it is already spent and you won't even get it.... Gov Terminator raised state sales tax by a penny - so there goes our $26 a month and then some! He also raised vehicle registration by $15 per car, two cars in the family - that comes out of my pocket he has already spent my tax cut! Yes, we "main street" folks that he prioritized during his campaign are the ones to pay for it... when all is said and done.
@B3lla86 (101)
• United States
24 Feb 09
You know it amazes me that all you guys can down him for his ideas, but could you think of anything that would benefit this ever falling economy. Do you honestly think that you could run this country better than he could. You're quick to judge, but can't come up with the correct answer. I think you should leave the running of the country to the one elected the responsibility and keep the criticisms and disbelief to a minimum. The majority of citizens obviously believed he could makes some changes or HE WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ELECTED! I despise all the drama of politics.
@ladyluna (7004)
• United States
24 Feb 09
Hello B3lla86, First welcome to MyLot. I hope that you thoroughly enjoy your time here. Second, if you take the time to persuse the "Politics" and "America" categories of this forum, you will surely be FLOORED at the volumes of outstanding ideas on and about governance that have been put forth in this forum. Could some members of this forum do a better job than Obama has shown himself capable of? You bet!!! Third, the majority of citizens did NOT vote for Obama. 39% of all eligible voters didn't vote in November. Of the 61% who did, nearly half voted against Obama. So, it is unreasonable to assign majority support behind a candidate who received between a quarter and a third (a clear minority) of all eligible votes. Fourth, if you despise the drama of politics, then a word of warning, the political category of this MyLot forum is no place for the squeamish. Politics is a rough and tumble sport, and this forum's exploration of the politic is no exception.
• United States
25 Feb 09
I agree with ladyluna, it is pretty rough on here in the politics area. You may want to think about posting in another topic of interest. This site has a lot to choose from.
1 person likes this
• United States
25 Feb 09
Well Bush racked up a ton of debt in a time when the economy was doing fairly well (although it was built upon a house of cards). To expect Obama to start paying off the national debt in the worst economic downturn since the 1930s is silly. I am an economic student right now. The only way this recession will last 10 years is IF we don't fix the banking system right now. Take over the bad ones, nationalize them... clean them up... and then spin them back into the market in a year or two. That is how you fix the financial system and if we do that, we will return to economic growth by mid 2010. Another thing, he is not raising taxes. Learn your facts. 95% will get a tax cut and the other 5% will return to the tax rate they were paying in 1999... oooo scary! Not.
• United States
25 Feb 09
Oh ya and how are the banks using the money for fancy retreats, parties and bonuses going to help us? Another story just came out tody of another bail out bank that used millions for a fancy party and retreat including paying Cheryl Crowe to come and perform. How is that helping our economy? It is not....it is just wasting our tax dollars. The gov. told us they could control this money. THey can't. The companies and banks are spending it as the please while we sit back and fit the bill. Our gov. lied to us. NOthing is being done to companies that are wasting the money.
• United States
24 Feb 09
no one has ever dealt with this kind of thing before with gov's crashing. not even the depression. i think hes doing ok because: 1. at least he may stop this bad recession before its to late 2. at least he's leaving it at less than what he made it. every little bit counts
• United States
25 Feb 09
Spending tons of money we dont have is not going to solve the problem. It just diggs our debt deeper. Also paying off our national debt and our deficit would greatly improve our economy. WIth all this money they are spending that we do not have....it causes inflation. Which means our money will be worth even less. Want to pay more in the store of things? Can you afford to? It is counter productive. Bush spending like there was no tomorrow is what got us into this mess (well part of it anyway). Obama spending like no tomorrow is not going to fix it. Cutting spending and paying off our bills will.
@xfahctor (14126)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
24 Feb 09
It of course doesn't include the trillion he just shelled out. I equate it this way. It is like when a store has a sale, 50% off on our usual 100% mark up.
• United States
25 Feb 09
yep that sound about right. Make it look like you are getting a good deal when you aren't.
@mscott (1924)
• United States
24 Feb 09
I think there is some reading between the lines that needs to be done. When he says the debt it doesn't count a lot of the new money they are spending. I watched a segment on the news and they spoke of how the debt he is talking about won't include many of these new expenses. Those are considered something else. I guess one can do anything if they word it correctly.
• United States
24 Feb 09
Obama is playing word games. Either is doing to cut it in half or he isn't. SO much for change. He is using all the same dirty tricks the rest of the politicans use.
@Taskr36 (13923)
• United States
24 Feb 09
I just wanted to start by making a quick correction. He said he would half the deficit, not the debt. Far too many people get the two confused. I just argued with a moron today who tried to claim that Bush QUADRUPLED the national debt. In retrospect the pud probable meant the deficit, but I gave him a chance to correct that and spelled out the debt for him even linking him to the treasury website. He just kept claiming he knew he was right. Either way, I know that you meant deficit anyway. So yeah, I don't see him halving the deficit at all. A trillion dollars in extra spending is not going to decrease the deficit unless it is followed with the biggest tax hikes this country has ever seen. The only things the government can do to "force" the deficit to go down is to either raise taxes, or decrease spending. Obama's never seen a spending bill he didn't like so we know that won't happen. Raising taxes in a recession won't raise the revenues as much as predicted because people will spend less. Even tax cuts won't guarantee people spending more because psychologically, he's frightened the country so much that they are stashing their money and are afraid to spend. It's the unintended result of his doom and gloom preaching to buy time.
• United States
24 Feb 09
Thanks you are right I got them confused. I see a big tax raise in our future. He is not going to cut spending. So therefore we are all going to be paying uncle sam more. Wait and see....there will be a protest over that. He said on the campaign trail he would not raise taxes on the average american. But he can not deliver on his promise on the deficit without it. People get ticked when you take more of their money. Especially when the economy is so bad and inflation is going to kick in and make it worse. I also think you are right about the doom and gloom. He has lost his "hope" message big time. he has people so scared that it is going to take longer before people feel comfortable spending money on anything but those things they have to have.
@anniepa (27523)
• United States
24 Feb 09
Actually he says he intends to cut the deficit in half not cut the national debt in half. It sure won't be easy but IF there are more jobs created that will obviously mean more revenue plus he's also counting on the war in Iraq being drawn down. Another thing is in the new budget Obama will be proposing he's going to actually include the funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan instead of keeping them separate as Bush did. Annie