Total Posts:10|Showing Posts:1-10
Jump to topic:

The cause of the huge deficit

goldman
Posts: 12
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2012 7:01:35 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
The U.S. government faces serious deficit. Mass media and the general public attribute the cause of the problem to the poor economic situation and policy-making taken by the president. However, I believe the president should not be blamed for the mounting deficit of the national government. Who should be blamed for it?
I want to invite opinion on this serious problem.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2012 7:29:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/27/2012 7:01:35 AM, goldman wrote:
The U.S. government faces serious deficit. Mass media and the general public attribute the cause of the problem to the poor economic situation and policy-making taken by the president. However, I believe the president should not be blamed for the mounting deficit of the national government. Who should be blamed for it?
I want to invite opinion on this serious problem.

Why shouldn't you blame the president? He has the power to influence Congress. He has the power to repeal deficit spending.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2012 7:36:58 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/27/2012 7:29:57 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/27/2012 7:01:35 AM, goldman wrote:
The U.S. government faces serious deficit. Mass media and the general public attribute the cause of the problem to the poor economic situation and policy-making taken by the president. However, I believe the president should not be blamed for the mounting deficit of the national government. Who should be blamed for it?
I want to invite opinion on this serious problem.

Why shouldn't you blame the president? He has the power to influence Congress. He has the power to repeal deficit spending.

deficit spending has historically helped the economy. However, the Conservative fear has been that we're building an issue that future generations may have difficulty confronting. However, we would then simply make up the deficit in the ensuing bull market. So, I see no reason why the president should repeal it.

You know as well as I that the president cannot do anything about the House majority that decided it would obstruct any reform measures because letting President Obama succeed would undermine the Republican Party. The president does not "influence" the Congress. The only president I think one could make such an argument for is Lyndon Johnson since he was very effective at getting what he wanted. However, Congress acts on its own according to the political climate, and if they decide they want a 1-term president come all hell, then how can you blame Obama for that?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2012 7:50:22 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The economy was fvcked before Obama got into office, but a lot of people like to forget things if they can use it to push some political agenda.

The fact is, both parties are woefully incompetent when it comes to economic matters.

You can hardly blame them once they get to the federal level. The federal government is really just too fvcked to work with effectively.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2012 8:06:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/27/2012 7:36:58 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 1/27/2012 7:29:57 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/27/2012 7:01:35 AM, goldman wrote:
The U.S. government faces serious deficit. Mass media and the general public attribute the cause of the problem to the poor economic situation and policy-making taken by the president. However, I believe the president should not be blamed for the mounting deficit of the national government. Who should be blamed for it?
I want to invite opinion on this serious problem.

Why shouldn't you blame the president? He has the power to influence Congress. He has the power to repeal deficit spending.

deficit spending has historically helped the economy.

Likewise, If I decifit spend, I'd be historically better off If I keep doing it.

However, the Conservative fear has been that we're building an issue that future generations may have difficulty confronting. However, we would then simply make up the deficit in the ensuing bull market.

Except even in "bull markets" we still run deficits. This also assumes rapid economic growth. Current estimates show that future liabilities and spending will not be made up by economic growth. Economic growth is also finite since resources are scare.

And its not just present that's important but future spending. With the baby boomers retiring, there simply aren't enough workers to pay for the current medicare and social security promises.

So, I see no reason why the president should repeal it.

You really don't think the current spending track is unsustainable.

You know as well as I that the president cannot do anything about the House majority that decided it would obstruct any reform measures because letting President Obama succeed would undermine the Republican Party.

However, Democrats do exist in the House and Senate. Not too mention the President has huge influence in power due to the effects of logrolling:
http://en.wikipedia.org...

He essential has legislation-like power through issuing executive orders, the power to veto, the power to control the executive branch, and the power to make appointments.

In any event, Obama has never made serious plans to cut the deficit.

The president does not "influence" the Congress. The only president I think one could make such an argument for is Lyndon Johnson since he was very effective at getting what he wanted.

And then you contradict yourself.

However, Congress acts on its own according to the political climate, and if they decide they want a 1-term president come all hell, then how can you blame Obama for that?

Analysis given above. You constantly state that Obama's going to win the election, but now you say that he is going to be a 1 term president? You do realize that its a very unstable strategy for the republicans to try to block legislation just so Obama will lose the election. Not to mention, Obama hasn't shown any support for legislation like Paul Ryan's that will reduce the deficit.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2012 8:21:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Does it really matter who's to blame?
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2012 8:33:58 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/27/2012 8:21:00 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
Does it really matter who's to blame?

The English language is designed so that we seem to worry about "who" to blame
http://www.cracked.com...

when in reality it's just institutes and agents all interacting with one another, all with a diffused responsibilities.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2012 8:35:47 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/27/2012 8:33:58 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/27/2012 8:21:00 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
Does it really matter who's to blame?

The English language is designed so that we seem to worry about "who" to blame
http://www.cracked.com...

when in reality it's just institutes and agents all interacting with one another, all with a diffused responsibilities.

Hm.

My point is that we should be more concerned with the "what," aiming to actually fix things than point fingers.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2012 8:38:37 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/27/2012 8:35:47 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 1/27/2012 8:33:58 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/27/2012 8:21:00 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
Does it really matter who's to blame?

The English language is designed so that we seem to worry about "who" to blame
http://www.cracked.com...

when in reality it's just institutes and agents all interacting with one another, all with a diffused responsibilities.

Hm.

My point is that we should be more concerned with the "what," aiming to actually fix things than point fingers.

Well we personally can't fix things. Our amount of influence is minimal.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
goldman
Posts: 12
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/28/2012 5:54:15 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
In my opinion the U.S.president should not be blamed for the mounting deficit of the U.S. government. The reason is that once upon a time the U.S. presidents spent a large amount of financial resources to protect the modern civilization and the life of human beings of the world from being destroyed by nuclear attack by the Soviet Union or the countries which had hatred and anti-American sentiment llike Iran and some of the Islamist countries. The financial resourcies of the government collected mainly by income and corporate tax were used to strengthening the national security. Therefore, I think the decision which were taken by Ronald Reagan and George Bush should be justified. By the way, who should be blamed for the huge deficit of the U.S.government? This is the problem which I must discuss next time. Before that, I want to invite a comment on my opinion.