Trump's singular talent is using other people's money to promote himself. On January 20, he will be in charge of the US Treasury. What could go wrong?
LOL again, I don't think you really did read it because no halfway intelligent person could possibly think that's what the page YOU liked to was saying. Here I'll just post it all here for you. If you seriously believe that was making the case that the Democrats were the more fiscally responsible party......I mean, it would explain a lot, but man, that's just sad.
Can he just file for bankruptcy? I mean that is how he seemed to handle his own budgetary issues Rocket River
I think this is one thing that both sides need to hold all politicians' feet to the fire (including Trump's). Deficit spending is unsustainable and must be stopped. As to what spending to cut, they can fight it out. Getting rid of school lunches (and then some) to build a new fleet of aircraft carriers seems like a stupid priority to me, but that's just me.
Google is your friend. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2222rank.html Ours is the same % GDP as Russia, a country whose budget has been devastated by the persistent low oil price. What's our excuse?
With seignorage, we can print money and get away with it. Others can't. The day we can't get away with it, things will become more expensive. It's a double edged sword that has haunted us since the first Bretton Woods.
Let's be real. The debt and a balance budget only matter when the GOP doesn't have the WH. Maybe Trump will break that tradition. We'll see. But if he executes his tax plans, the budget will not come anywhere near balance and debt is expected to explode.
Well.... Obama added a little over 6.5 trillion and GW Bush added 6 trillion... so yeah, someone else could and indeed did manage to add as much debt as Obama. Also as a percentage Obama added 56% and GW Bush added 101%. Also Reagan increased it by 186% So essentially your entire premise is inaccurate.
Interesting. I'm not very well-informed on this stuff, I regret to say. Rather than just looking at who was President or who was in control of Congress during various periods of national debt increase, it would be interesting to see what were the actual expenses and budget cuts enacted over time, and which party was responsible for each. That seems like a more accurate way of tallying which of the two parties contributed more to the national debt. Do you know if there's any such analysis out there?
Well if you use completely inaccurate numbers, I could see how you would come up with this. However math disagrees with you. The national debt was 10.6 trillion when Obama took office, it's currently 19.8 trillion. How that adds up to 6.5 trillion in your mind, I'll never know.
Well, I think going by who controlled congress is probably the most accurate way because if you control congress, you set the budget. As to an even more detailed analysis, I'm sure it exists but I haven't seen it.
Not really, you seem quite ignorant on this issue. Over the last 40 years Republican Presidents have been as likely, if not more likely; to run the national deficit up to a new level.
