Scott Stantis by Scott Stantis

Scott Stantis

Comments (10) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. ConserveGov

    ConserveGov said, almost 3 years ago

    On Oct. 4, the debt held by the public — not including Social Security and Medicare — had risen 89.3 percent since Mr. Obama took office, according to, a nonprofit project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania.
    The administration recently projected an annual deficit of $750 billion in the fiscal year that began Oct. 1 and $626 billion the year after that.
    “At that rate, the debt owed to the public will more than double during the Obama presidency,” FactCheck said in its quarterly statistical report on Mr. Obama’s tenure in office.

  2. Robert Landers

    Robert Landers said, almost 3 years ago

    Perhaps it might possibly be computed just what slowly climbing out from the second greatest recession the history of this country might just play at least a part in possibly at least some 50% of that increased debt. And strangely enough, I am not one to totally blame the former administration of GW Bush for all of that recession, but his administration does warrant at least some of that blame at best.

    It is going to take a fairly fortunate streak of luck, prudent cuts to government spending, and prudent tax increases to those that can afford such increases, to even bring things down to a zero level deficit, let alone ever even begin to chop away at the actual debt. And that is not going to be totally influenced by even a completely GOP run government, any more than a completely Democrat one. Sorry, but that is the truth of the situation.

  3. narrowminded

    narrowminded said, almost 3 years ago

    @Robert Landers

    ^Flawed logic. Liberal progressive, shallow thinking based on static reasoning. Economic growth(something liberals despise because people tend to prosper during such times) is more than able to compensate for the current debt and future liabilities. However growing the size of government actually shrinks the economy. Government CAN’T solve this problem other than simply allowing the greatest force for prosperity (unfettered capitalistic free markets) to reign.
    The American people with Government out of the way can easily pay this debt off.

  4. Respectful Troll

    Respectful Troll said, almost 3 years ago

    My compliments to Narrowminded for providing one of the best posts he ever has. While there is some context and content missing, he provides an excellent snapshot of a Democrat trying to improve the economy of the early 1960s.
    I just wish to point out that the head of the International Monetary Fund said last summer that had the US Congress done its job regarding passing legislation, budgets, et al, the world economy would be 4% better than it was at the time of her comments. CEOs last summer said that if Congress would do specific things, the CEOs could start hiring and spending money to invest on corporate infrastructure and innovations.
    We need compassionate conservatives and fiscally responsible liberals to come together to do those things that will make our nation stronger and reunify a people divided by paid media hotheads and politicians who are more loyal to party than country.
    As far as RINOs go… when you hear about the Republicans who are now referred to as, “In Name Only”, it makes one realize that not even Ronald Reagan or Bush Sr could get elected unless more of the moderate right was willing to come forward.
    The party that wins isn’t the one who has the most people who support their views, it’s the ones who has the most supporters come out to vote. If you don’t vote, you are part of the problem, no matter what side you are on.

  5. warjoski

    warjoski GoComics PRO Member said, almost 3 years ago

    @Respectful Troll

    I agree in principal with you. But here’s my counter: there is no one worth voting for. The two parties are the only ones who can take an election and frankly they both suck. Both are controlled by their fringe elements. Both are more concerned with their particular agendas than doing any good for the entire country. And both are pretty much nothing but Cults of Personality at this point. So really any given election is simply a choice between terrible and awful. Don’t get me wrong. I will vote. But all it really does is keep the two parties in power which is the same thing in my opinion as feeding the infection. So. What do we do about that? Or do you even consider that a real concern? I mean those as honest questions by the way. Thanks.

  6. Respectful Troll

    Respectful Troll said, almost 3 years ago


    Great Reply, Warjoski.
    I usually vote for the purposes of keeping the worse of the two evils out of a position of power. I have decided that if I’m invited to the Va. caucuses again next year, I’ll go. At least I can then use my voice to help pick the lesser of evils.
    Short of a national referendum where we get our fellow Americans to petition for election reform, I’m at a loss of how to fight against two parties whose only true bipartisan effort is in keeping themselves in power.
    I really enjoyed your reply and if you can’t tell, I am VERY concerned. Just limited in resources and imagination on what to do next.
    Thanks again.

  7. warjoski

    warjoski GoComics PRO Member said, almost 3 years ago

    @Respectful Troll

    It’s nice to know there’s someone else in the same boat. Thanks for the reply and good luck at the caucuses.

  8. wbr

    wbr said, almost 3 years ago

    in 2008 the USA suffered the 7 worst panic in its history and due to gov actions it is still hurting // the 1873 panic which ranks number 2 took 6 years to recover i am afraid this recovery will take longer

  9. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, almost 3 years ago

    “Private debt” is many times the “federal debt”, and HAS been coming down a little. It’s a result of better controls in the market, and some improvement in the economy. Yes, we need more improvement, but “Reaganomics” created that private debt, and allowing banks to solicit to folks who had nothing, conning them into either credit cards, or houses they couldn’t afford, was THE BANKS, with removal of Glass-Stiegal, NOT “Dodd -Frank”. They took what should have been a better law there, and twisted every chink in the armor that Glass Stiegal would have kept sealed, and DF would have worked to everyone’s benefit.

  10. ConserveGov

    ConserveGov said, almost 3 years ago

    I tell them I’m a Junior.

  11. Refresh Comments.