Register for a FREE GoComics account and get this plus any other comic strip delivered to your Personalized
Comic Page, Daily. With a free account you will be able to build a Comic Page filled with the Comics you
want to see each day.
With the largest collection of Comics and Editorial Cartoons online there is plenty to choose from. Upgrade
to a GoComics Pro account (Only $.99/Month) and have unlimited archive access to decades of comics.
I really wish that people would use actual numbers when they post on these message boards. On Dec 31.2008 (the last official day of the GWBush administration) the National Debt was $10.7 trillion dollars.
Today the National Debt stands at $16.1.
Now, if you are not math impaired and can do simple multiplication, if the national Debt had doubled in the current administration the national debt should now stand at just about $21.4 trillion dollars.
So, $16.1 trillion is NOT a doubling (or even almost doubling) of the national debt since the beginning of the current administration. Isn’t mathematics simply grand!!
Also, another fact to at least somewhat take somewhat into consideration is that when President Obama took office, the US was in the worst economic recession since the Great Depression of the 1930’s.
This has two negative affects on federal deficits which ultra conservatives here do not seem to want to take into account.
(1) It automatically decreases federal tax receipts, as there are now fewer people paying taxes. And (2) it also automatically increases federal tax expenditures to pay for millions of people needing increased federal program expenditures to stay even somewhat solvent.
In 2008 our government had been in effect for 219 years in that time it had accumulated a debt of 10.7 trillion dollars—using your numbers—for an average of 48.8 billion dollars a year. Under Obama it has averaged over 1.35 Trillion dollars a year. Isn’t math fun.
Not to complicated, but you shouldn’t skip over Jimmy Carter’s numbers which were worse than the current Bush/Obama recession making this the second worst recession working on being the longest.
The reality is……he didn’t deliver as promised. Now it’s nothing but excuses. He had the tools at his disposal and squandered the opportunity. His agenda was more important to him than actually helping the people. Stimulus was graft to the public sector unions, and big donors in the green energy sector. The auto bailout was graft to the UAW. Obamacare was simply a huge power grab for the progressive movement. Wall street bailout was graft to wealthy supporters. His regulation czar froze the private sector with fear and his tax policy caused uncertainty in the markets.
What a waste. When it becomes obvious that he will lose, the Democrats and liberals will abandon him. All this will be his fault, not theirs. He is largely a product of the media and when he is of no more value, his creators will destroy him.
Large looming government debt. That’s what O brought and if re-elected he will bring more of the same. For someone that has never held a real job in his life he is living up to what a failure looks like.
Take a look at the market indicies when Bush took office, when he left office (and Obama took office) and now. - Jan 2001 s&p 500 = 1366 Feb 2009 s&p 500 = 735 Friday s&p 500 = 1438
-
So, if your portfolio was in an S&P 500 index fund, when Bush left office it would have been worth a little over half what it was when Bush took office. - If you held on through Obama’s first term it would have returned to what it was when Bush took office, plus a little more, doubling while Obama was president. - Not too bad for a socialist, communist, fascist, muslim, bent on destroying the country. - I guess Obama haters don’t know that there is a stock market.
Exactly what was a dollar today worth some 200 years ago?
In 1935 my grand parents bought a large new home on .5 acre of land in Inglewood California, the price? Some $3500, just what do you think it would cost today?
So comparing anything in today’s prices to history far back (candy bars at $0.1, a cup of coffee at $0.5, or how about a gallon of gasoline for $0.10!) is not relevant. And this includes the deficit or the increase in the National Debt!!
My original point still holds however, even though the increase in the National Debt has indeed been 50% (with at least half of that because of the recession) it has NOT doubled as some on these post have asserted.
Now, if nothing is done (and the far greater majority of Americans want both prudent cuts to government spending along with prudent increases in taxes to those that can well afford them) then indeed by the end of a second term of President Obama, the national Debt will have doubled from the beginning of his first term.
And even this would be greatly reduced if the economy actually gets better faster, and if we do not get into anymore stupidities (wars in other words) in such fanatical areas as the Middle East!
As for candidate Romney’s ideas of heavily decreasing the taxes of those that can afford prudent increases, while increasing the taxes of those of the middle class. Middle class increases which would have relatively little affect on government income anyway, especially in comparison to increases on the wealthy and super wealthy, good grief man, you do not have to be an accountant to see this, just use a little common sense!
Trickle down economics might work if the wealthy and super wealthy were truly and patriotically interested in a greatly increasing American economy, instead of just making more money for themselves with decreased taxes. So far, this has proven to be a total pipe dream however!
I did not imply anything, what I was doing was countering the argument that the national debt had doubled under the current administration.
And at least half of the increase that has happened was because of the recession that began before President Obama was even elected.
And GWBush was not even totally responsible for that recession, but he does at least bear some of the blame, as the Republican Party it self seems to know, was he even invited to the RNC Convention?
And it is obvious that you do not believe in either facts nor numbers. So your arguments are just spurious at best. And that is really kind of sad in itself!
And you can not even go back to Fox so called NEWS, as they cancelled their discussion boards, sorry about that!
According to veteran Ohio cartoonist Stahler, the most satisfying part of his job is "those days when I can load my ink cannon with fodder faster than I can fire it."
Small World by Tom Briscoe
Scott Stantis by Scott Stantis
Comments (20) (Please sign in to comment)
Ketira shena Pretarasedrin
said, 9 months ago
Politics does seem like a maze at times…..
Murphy224 said, 9 months ago
Pretty much same place but almost double the debt.
Robert Landers said, 9 months ago
@Murphy224
I really wish that people would use actual numbers when they post on these message boards. On Dec 31.2008 (the last official day of the GWBush administration) the National Debt was $10.7 trillion dollars.
Today the National Debt stands at $16.1.
Now, if you are not math impaired and can do simple multiplication, if the national Debt had doubled in the current administration the national debt should now stand at just about $21.4 trillion dollars.
So, $16.1 trillion is NOT a doubling (or even almost doubling) of the national debt since the beginning of the current administration. Isn’t mathematics simply grand!!
Also, another fact to at least somewhat take somewhat into consideration is that when President Obama took office, the US was in the worst economic recession since the Great Depression of the 1930’s.
This has two negative affects on federal deficits which ultra conservatives here do not seem to want to take into account.
(1) It automatically decreases federal tax receipts, as there are now fewer people paying taxes. And (2) it also automatically increases federal tax expenditures to pay for millions of people needing increased federal program expenditures to stay even somewhat solvent.
Or am I being too complicated here?
Archimedes said, 9 months ago
@Robert Landers
In 2008 our government had been in effect for 219 years in that time it had accumulated a debt of 10.7 trillion dollars—using your numbers—for an average of 48.8 billion dollars a year. Under Obama it has averaged over 1.35 Trillion dollars a year. Isn’t math fun.
mikefive said, 9 months ago
@Robert Landers
Not to complicated, but you shouldn’t skip over Jimmy Carter’s numbers which were worse than the current Bush/Obama recession making this the second worst recession working on being the longest.
narrowminded said, 9 months ago
The reality is……he didn’t deliver as promised. Now it’s nothing but excuses. He had the tools at his disposal and squandered the opportunity. His agenda was more important to him than actually helping the people.
Stimulus was graft to the public sector unions, and big donors in the green energy sector.
The auto bailout was graft to the UAW. Obamacare was simply a huge power grab for the progressive movement.
Wall street bailout was graft to wealthy supporters.
His regulation czar froze the private sector with fear and his tax policy caused uncertainty in the markets.
What a waste.
When it becomes obvious that he will lose, the Democrats and liberals will abandon him. All this will be his fault, not theirs.
He is largely a product of the media and when he is of no more value, his creators will destroy him.
Sad, really.
Ms. Ima said, 9 months ago
Large looming government debt. That’s what O brought and if re-elected he will bring more of the same. For someone that has never held a real job in his life he is living up to what a failure looks like.
Justice22 said, 9 months ago
@ScottPM
When Carter left office the debt was less than one trillion $. When Reagan left office it was over $5 trillion.
mikefive said, 9 months ago
@Justice22
January 20, 1993—-$4,188,092,107,183.60
braindead08 said, 9 months ago
Take a look at the market indicies when Bush took office, when he left office (and Obama took office) and now.
-
Jan 2001 s&p 500 = 1366
Feb 2009 s&p 500 = 735
Friday s&p 500 = 1438
-
So, if your portfolio was in an S&P 500 index fund, when Bush left office it would have been worth a little over half what it was when Bush took office.
-
If you held on through Obama’s first term it would have returned to what it was when Bush took office, plus a little more, doubling while Obama was president.
-
Not too bad for a socialist, communist, fascist, muslim, bent on destroying the country.
-
I guess Obama haters don’t know that there is a stock market.
Robert Landers said, 9 months ago
@Archimedes
Exactly what was a dollar today worth some 200 years ago?
In 1935 my grand parents bought a large new home on .5 acre of land in Inglewood California, the price? Some $3500, just what do you think it would cost today?
So comparing anything in today’s prices to history far back (candy bars at $0.1, a cup of coffee at $0.5, or how about a gallon of gasoline for $0.10!) is not relevant. And this includes the deficit or the increase in the National Debt!!
My original point still holds however, even though the increase in the National Debt has indeed been 50% (with at least half of that because of the recession) it has NOT doubled as some on these post have asserted.
Now, if nothing is done (and the far greater majority of Americans want both prudent cuts to government spending along with prudent increases in taxes to those that can well afford them) then indeed by the end of a second term of President Obama, the national Debt will have doubled from the beginning of his first term.
And even this would be greatly reduced if the economy actually gets better faster, and if we do not get into anymore stupidities (wars in other words) in such fanatical areas as the Middle East!
As for candidate Romney’s ideas of heavily decreasing the taxes of those that can afford prudent increases, while increasing the taxes of those of the middle class. Middle class increases which would have relatively little affect on government income anyway, especially in comparison to increases on the wealthy and super wealthy, good grief man, you do not have to be an accountant to see this, just use a little common sense!
Trickle down economics might work if the wealthy and super wealthy were truly and patriotically interested in a greatly increasing American economy, instead of just making more money for themselves with decreased taxes. So far, this has proven to be a total pipe dream however!
Robert Landers said, 9 months ago
@mikefive
OK, but it still does not negate my original point.
Robert Landers said, 9 months ago
@ScottPM
I did not imply anything, what I was doing was countering the argument that the national debt had doubled under the current administration.
And at least half of the increase that has happened was because of the recession that began before President Obama was even elected.
And GWBush was not even totally responsible for that recession, but
he does at least bear some of the blame, as the Republican Party it self seems to know, was he even invited to the RNC Convention?
Robert Landers said, 9 months ago
@HOWGOZIT
And it is obvious that you do not believe in either facts nor numbers. So your arguments are just spurious at best. And that is really kind of sad in itself!
And you can not even go back to Fox so called NEWS, as they cancelled their discussion boards, sorry about that!
Eryx
said, 9 months ago
@Robert Landers
Well done!