Dems: We are better off than four yea...

Dems: We are better off than four years ago

There are 3586 comments on the Albany Times Union story from Sep 3, 2012, titled Dems: We are better off than four years ago. In it, Albany Times Union reports that:

Expect to hear variations on this theme all week: things are better than they were four years ago, and will get better.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Albany Times Union.

xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#1863 Sep 23, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
"We"? Is the truth coming out?
I've traded commodities for several years. Nothing to hide or be ashamed about.

Since: Jul 12

Capitol Heights, MD

#1864 Sep 23, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps, if we elected somebody other than DumBama, we might have crawled out of this. The Bush tax cuts are less than 2 trillion of our 16 trillion debt.
But since we were already $5.3 Tril in debt when inacted, they are 20% of our debt since they were inacted.

Throw in the wars, the unpaid prescription and NCLBA, the growth in DHS and how much of the debt is really do to the economic collapse?
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#1865 Sep 23, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
But since we were already $5.3 Tril in debt when inacted, they are 20% of our debt since they were inacted.
Throw in the wars, the unpaid prescription and NCLBA, the growth in DHS and how much of the debt is really do to the economic collapse?
I'm talking about less than 2 trillion from the time of the tax cuts up to 2011. Obama racked up over twice that amount in two years. No, I don't think that's enough to collapse the economy. What I do think is that we spend too much. That's the real problem, and spending less is the solution.
Eric Gustafson

Newport News, VA

#1866 Sep 23, 2012
Well the Tax Polices did hasten the erosion of the economy that until Bush signed that legislation was expanding at it's fastest record pace at any time since WW 2......

From 2001 to 2009 America loss 9 Million jobs, 4.4 since 2006. Trillions in tax cuts, and no set offs produced from tax cuts at least $2 Trillion in debt, than there are the wars, Iraq was a $2.4 Trillion expense of itself and all with no set offs in the budgets.... then there was other big spending and the 1.7 Million Federal Job which expanded government and the Federal pay roll, also with no set offs in the budget....... this is getting tiring......
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
WTF does it matter what he said the tax cuts were for? What does that have to do with the fact that the economy didn't tank because of those cuts? Bush Tax rates didn't amount to the 16 trillion in debt that we have today. It was only a fraction of that number. Plus the fact that the largest percentage went to people making under $250,000 per year.
According to the New York Times, if DumBama convinced the Republicans to keep the Bush tax rates only for those making under $250,000 per year, it would only amount to 700 billion in ten years. Doing the math, that's only 70 billion dollars per year. We spend more than that on Food Stamps alone. When we are trillions in debt, 70 billion is nothing and certainly not enough to bring this country down. It was mostly the housing market that caused these problems we have today.
Eric Gustafson

Newport News, VA

#1867 Sep 23, 2012
This is economic straight from fantasy island. The one single fact of property value and rents is Location, Location, Location!

Some company owner operators some weeks don't make a dime for themselves........ That's a common situation in America.

It's easy to tell you don't make any business decision where you work.
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Correct, but many business owners base their pay on what the company makes. They are not going to bring less home because their personal income taxes increased. They just take more out of the business so they get a larger paycheck to offset those increases.
I work for a small business so I know that's how my company operates. In a sense, I guess you can say that as a landlord, I have a small business too. When I have additional expenses, I don't take it out of my wallet. I raise rents like everybody else in this business. Rental prices are usually based on what it costs to operate the complex.

Since: Jan 10

Las Vegas, NV

#1868 Sep 23, 2012
Slew wrote:
<quoted text>Poor child, those "entitlements" include retired folks who paid SSI, students in school, and LOTS of red state citizens who support RawMoney !!!
SSI was conceived as a temporary stopgap for retirees during difficult economic time. It was also intended to supplement your own retirement saving. Now it's a crutch. It's the soul source of income. If you consume more SSI then you contributed in your working life, it becomes a welfare entitlement.

A lot of people frittered away money when they could have saved it. Bought things they didn't really need. Didn't save, Blew it off and became dependent. That's true and you know it.

Student loans: If the student is going to a real college and getting a degree in __________ Engineering then fine. If the student is studying __________ Mechanic at a quality trade school then fine. Going to a snobby private college and getting a degree in some liberal arts bullshit means nothing. Get a job in it. Univ of Phoenix Online et al are a waste. Pay your own bills kid.

Society needs to start accepting personal responsibility for the consequences of their choices.

Since: Jul 12

Capitol Heights, MD

#1869 Sep 23, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm talking about less than 2 trillion from the time of the tax cuts up to 2011. Obama racked up over twice that amount in two years. No, I don't think that's enough to collapse the economy. What I do think is that we spend too much. That's the real problem, and spending less is the solution.
You are forgetting that part of what Obama racked up included the Wars, the Pharmacy package, NCLBA and the tax cuts.

Further, you are discounting anything thrown in due to decreased revenues because of the economy.
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#1870 Sep 23, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
You are forgetting that part of what Obama racked up included the Wars, the Pharmacy package, NCLBA and the tax cuts.
Further, you are discounting anything thrown in due to decreased revenues because of the economy.
You can throw anything you like in the mix, but if you have expenses, you don't spend more unless it's a real emergency. Obama Care was not an emergency. Neither was cash for clunkers or the stimulus because the stimulus was nothing more than temporary employment for Obamas friends such as unions and environmentalists. They are playing even more politics with our military since it's election time.

From 2006 to 2010, we have had a Democrat led Congress. They could have stopped funding for the wars at any time. Then of course Obama has been there since 2008 to present. With that power, he didn't seem too concerned about the wars until recently because he has to try and get his people in line for November.
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#1871 Sep 23, 2012
Here in Vegas wrote:
<quoted text>
SSI was conceived as a temporary stopgap for retirees during difficult economic time. It was also intended to supplement your own retirement saving. Now it's a crutch. It's the soul source of income. If you consume more SSI then you contributed in your working life, it becomes a welfare entitlement.
A lot of people frittered away money when they could have saved it. Bought things they didn't really need. Didn't save, Blew it off and became dependent. That's true and you know it.
Student loans: If the student is going to a real college and getting a degree in __________ Engineering then fine. If the student is studying __________ Mechanic at a quality trade school then fine. Going to a snobby private college and getting a degree in some liberal arts bullshit means nothing. Get a job in it. Univ of Phoenix Online et al are a waste. Pay your own bills kid.
Society needs to start accepting personal responsibility for the consequences of their choices.
In my opinion, if you have a child today, you should have a college fund before that kid is born. With all this talk from the left about the rich getting richer, few have addressed the costs of college that seems to increase all the time.

My sister is putting both her children through college. My nephew recently graduated this year. My sister will be paying for their education until she is well into her retirement years, and that goes the same for my ex brother in law. Both my sister and ex brother in law have very good jobs.

My niece and nephew will be strapped with college bills for the loans they took out over the past couple of years. It's getting to the point where you just about have to be wealthy today to afford advanced education for your children. How much does it cost to run a college anyway?
Joe Nelson

AOL

#1873 Sep 23, 2012
Snake Dr wrote:
No point getting upset. We are better off, our country is better off. In spite of the republicans.
Obama may not be worthy of yesterday's strong, proud, productive America but he is a real hit with Islamic extremists, Occupy Trash, and Illegal Aliens.
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#1874 Sep 23, 2012
Eric Gustafson wrote:
This is economic straight from fantasy island. The one single fact of property value and rents is Location, Location, Location!
Some company owner operators some weeks don't make a dime for themselves........ That's a common situation in America.
It's easy to tell you don't make any business decision where you work.
<quoted text>
No, I really don't. But I often have conversations with the owner of my company, and I'm probably one of the few employees that understands where he's coming from because I do have a small business myself. The rest of the guys where I work constantly complain about my employer sitting on this pile of cash that he won't hand out. Like my rental properties, people only add up all this money coming in and don't understand where all that money goes. They assume it goes into my pocket and stays there.

Location, location, location used to be a good rule to live by before government got involved. When Clinton's new HUD director instituted 0% down on home loans, it just about destroyed my once nice suburb. Every cockroach from the inner city purchased homes here. Along with them came the crime.

The banks finally caught up on their foreclosures, so the scum were forced back to the city, but like a tornado, it's a long cleaning up process. Plus HUD in their never ending pursuit to put even more lowlifes in your city certainly doesn't help.

Before the federal government, location, location, location was the number one rule. Now you have to calculate how easy or difficult it will be if the federal government decides to target your area for destruction in the name of humanity.

Since: Jul 12

Capitol Heights, MD

#1875 Sep 23, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
You can throw anything you like in the mix, but if you have expenses, you don't spend more unless it's a real emergency. Obama Care was not an emergency. Neither was cash for clunkers or the stimulus because the stimulus was nothing more than temporary employment for Obamas friends such as unions and environmentalists. They are playing even more politics with our military since it's election time.
From 2006 to 2010, we have had a Democrat led Congress. They could have stopped funding for the wars at any time. Then of course Obama has been there since 2008 to present. With that power, he didn't seem too concerned about the wars until recently because he has to try and get his people in line for November.
If Obama's stimulus was not needed, what about bush's three stimulus' plus advancing the effective dates of the tax cuts?

Apparently that seems to be more your opinion than fact.

You don't cut off funding to wars abrubtly. They did not even do that to Vietnam and it was ended due to a lack of funding.

We have had a Republican House since January 201l. They could have refused to increase the debt ceiling or cut spending at anytime they wanted to. Nothing gets spent without House approval.

So you won't be voting for Republicans either, right?
liza

Fairmont, WV

#1876 Sep 23, 2012
The idiots are the ones that can only blame others
for the stupid actions of our leaders right now.
History will confirm that. Go down dems, go down.
Your kids will deny they ever knew you.
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#1877 Sep 23, 2012
okb2 wrote:
<quoted text>
If Obama's stimulus was not needed, what about bush's three stimulus' plus advancing the effective dates of the tax cuts?
Apparently that seems to be more your opinion than fact.
You don't cut off funding to wars abrubtly. They did not even do that to Vietnam and it was ended due to a lack of funding.
We have had a Republican House since January 201l. They could have refused to increase the debt ceiling or cut spending at anytime they wanted to. Nothing gets spent without House approval.
So you won't be voting for Republicans either, right?
I don't think you quite understand the situation. If the debt ceiling isn't raised, then we can't repay money we borrowed in the past. That puts us in default. If we go into default, that could lead us into a depression since nobody in their right mind would lend us money.

Republicans have been stopping requests from Obama to spend money since they got there. He wanted more stimulus and more wasted tax dollars. The Republicans wouldn't let him do it. Of course, Obama knows quite well the Republicans would never let him spend even more. It's all about politics. The same goes for this recent military bill. The Republicans voted it down. Now the Democrats are running around saying the Republicans are anti-military.

The campaign this year is not to show the people what Democrats have accomplished, it's about trying to get people to hate Republicans. That's how they are going to try and win this election. Mark my words, the Democrats are going to blame Republicans for stopping all this spending making claim such spending would have brought us a much better economy. There is no truth to it, but that's what they are going to run on.
Slew

Seattle, WA

#1878 Sep 23, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think you quite understand the situation. If the debt ceiling isn't raised, then we can't repay money we borrowed in the past. That puts us in default. If we go into default, that could lead us into a depression since nobody in their right mind would lend us money.
Republicans have been stopping requests from Obama to spend money since they got there. He wanted more stimulus and more wasted tax dollars. The Republicans wouldn't let him do it. Of course, Obama knows quite well the Republicans would never let him spend even more. It's all about politics. The same goes for this recent military bill. The Republicans voted it down. Now the Democrats are running around saying the Republicans are anti-military.
The campaign this year is not to show the people what Democrats have accomplished, it's about trying to get people to hate Republicans. That's how they are going to try and win this election. Mark my words, the Democrats are going to blame Republicans for stopping all this spending making claim such spending would have brought us a much better economy. There is no truth to it, but that's what they are going to run on.
8 years of Bushwhacking lead to the hate, were you in a coma ??? Sure, make excuses, right wooden chair ???
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#1879 Sep 23, 2012
Slew wrote:
<quoted text>8 years of Bushwhacking lead to the hate, were you in a coma ??? Sure, make excuses, right wooden chair ???
And who (and how) did Republicans promote hate? Democrats promote hating wealthy people. Democrats have repeatedly stated that any objection to DumBama is racism. We have this made-up war on women, we now have this Republicans hate on vets. It never stops with your party. How does a local shooting in self defense become a national issue in the Travon Martin case? Promote hatred of people with CCW's.

If you guys want to try and win elections with such negativity, then more power to you. Keep promoting hate. I hope Romney doesn't fall into this trap and promotes positivity instead of hate. You can't unite a country by creating dichotomies. Sooner or later, people will realize they are being used.
Ed Ortiz

AOL

#1880 Sep 23, 2012
Slew wrote:
<quoted text>8 years of Bushwhacking lead to the hate, were you in a coma ??? Sure, make excuses, right wooden chair ???
I saw the movie. Obama hates America. He said so and said he wanted to make it into North Korea with him as Dear Leader. It's a kool film cause no one is putting words in his mouth...he is speaking from the heart.

Since: Jan 10

Las Vegas, NV

#1881 Sep 24, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
In my opinion, if you have a child today, you should have a college fund before that kid is born. With all this talk from the left about the rich getting richer, few have addressed the costs of college that seems to increase all the time.
My sister is putting both her children through college. My nephew recently graduated this year. My sister will be paying for their education until she is well into her retirement years, and that goes the same for my ex brother in law. Both my sister and ex brother in law have very good jobs.
My niece and nephew will be strapped with college bills for the loans they took out over the past couple of years. It's getting to the point where you just about have to be wealthy today to afford advanced education for your children. How much does it cost to run a college anyway?
We started our son's college fund when we got his SSN. He's a freshman in chemical engineering now. We'll have just enough to get him thru college.

My theory is that the Gov't throws so damn much money at education the system gets flooded. And then they have to spend it all. And then ask for more. Cut of the supply of money and costs will come down.

Even good vo-tech's are pricey. My buddy's grand son just finished 2 year certification to work on Ford products --$35,000!!!!! And that was just tuition. And he had to buy all his own tools.

Shit's crazy. How can we continue like this?

You wait and see, kids will default on sally mae loans.

best wishes with the family members in school. You gotta make it happen, education is critical.

Since: Jul 12

Chester, VA

#1884 Sep 24, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think you quite understand the situation. If the debt ceiling isn't raised, then we can't repay money we borrowed in the past. That puts us in default. If we go into default, that could lead us into a depression since nobody in their right mind would lend us money.
Republicans have been stopping requests from Obama to spend money since they got there. He wanted more stimulus and more wasted tax dollars. The Republicans wouldn't let him do it. Of course, Obama knows quite well the Republicans would never let him spend even more. It's all about politics. The same goes for this recent military bill. The Republicans voted it down. Now the Democrats are running around saying the Republicans are anti-military.
The campaign this year is not to show the people what Democrats have accomplished, it's about trying to get people to hate Republicans. That's how they are going to try and win this election. Mark my words, the Democrats are going to blame Republicans for stopping all this spending making claim such spending would have brought us a much better economy. There is no truth to it, but that's what they are going to run on.
If the debt ceiling is not raised, we shut down government. We can still flip Treasuries as they come due (issue new ones to pay off old ones.)

So the Republicans are responsible for the deficit being over $1 Tril in 2012 and 2013. Glad to see you admit it. All they have been doing is telling Obama he can not spend it on that, spend it on this instead.

Have they cut the number of weeks for unemployment eligability?
Have they cut the requirements for Food Stamps?

Both of these are bills that have to be renewed, like the bush tax cuts. If the house does not pass them, it goes back to what it was before the extensions.

When the Republicans stand up and say "Making this President a one term President is job #1" how do you think that will be taken?

When the Republicans stand up against their own ideas (the Bowles-Simpson panel was a Republican idea sponsored by six Republican Senators. When they saw it was going to pass in the Senate each of the six voted against the bill they sponsored) how do you think it will be taken?

When the Republicans refuse to compromise on taxes, how do you think it will be taken?

When the Republicans continue to oppose bills until they see they are losing political favor (what happened to principles) how do you think it will be taken.

Cantor opposed additional FEMA spending without paying for it.....until his own state needed some.

It may be about disliking Republican policies........isn't that what it is supposed to be about? Policies?
Eric Gustafson

Newport News, VA

#1885 Sep 24, 2012
Bush removed the downpayment requirements that lead to Zero Downpayment home purchasing in 2003 with an aid program in promoting his ownership society.

I don't know the last time you purchased residential property not knowing that. That was the linchpin to the housing collapse. You were then able to over price the home the cost of a typical downpayment, and gift that amount back to the purchaser who then could come to the closing table with no money.

Anybody that purchased or sold homes in the last 10 years would know that, especially if they deal in property as an investment. Why don't you?
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I really don't. But I often have conversations with the owner of my company, and I'm probably one of the few employees that understands where he's coming from because I do have a small business myself. The rest of the guys where I work constantly complain about my employer sitting on this pile of cash that he won't hand out. Like my rental properties, people only add up all this money coming in and don't understand where all that money goes. They assume it goes into my pocket and stays there.
Location, location, location used to be a good rule to live by before government got involved. When Clinton's new HUD director instituted 0% down on home loans, it just about destroyed my once nice suburb. Every cockroach from the inner city purchased homes here. Along with them came the crime.
The banks finally caught up on their foreclosures, so the scum were forced back to the city, but like a tornado, it's a long cleaning up process. Plus HUD in their never ending pursuit to put even more lowlifes in your city certainly doesn't help.
Before the federal government, location, location, location was the number one rule. Now you have to calculate how easy or difficult it will be if the federal government decides to target your area for destruction in the name of humanity.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

US News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Poll: Trump now in play for general election 1 min WelbyMD 170
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min shinningelectr0n 1,275,349
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 4 min AMERICAN SUNSHINE 193,596
News Solar energy fails a free market test 10 min Solarman 1
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 11 min Dr Guru 196,958
News Bush, at Mexican border, denounces Trump's immi... 22 min ghmsnn 35
News 'Anchor baby' fight scrambles Republican field 27 min taletha 135
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 31 min taletha 340,790
News Donald Trump: Jorge Ramos 'like a madman' 45 min Donut Manic 157
News Cheneys liken Iran nuclear deal to Munich pact 56 min Retired SOF 30
More from around the web