Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

1…6768707273…314

Comments

  • #2072
    Black Swan
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 47,769 CMod ✭✭✭✭Black Swan


    conditioned games wrote: »
    Trump is their last hope.
    The president does not legislate debt, the US Congress does. So precisely what past and verifiable experience does Donald Trump have in working with the US Congress in terms of the federal budget, taxation, federal deficit, etc.? Not what comes solely out of Trump's MOUTH, rather verifiable past experience?


  • #2073
    Suryavarman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,583 ✭✭✭Suryavarman


    conditioned games wrote: »
    Obama has already been a disaster. Now 23 trillion in debt and no way out. Trump is their last hope.

    The debt has become more affordable under Obama. The nominal value of the debt is irrelevant.


  • #2074
    Devon Breezy Restaurant
    Posts: 24,798 ✭✭✭✭ Devon Breezy Restaurant


    Suryavarman wrote: »
    The debt has become more affordable under Obama. The nominal value of the debt is irrelevant.

    Only if you believe that interest rates are fixed at this level into perpetuity.

    Which, if wrong, would be an exceptionally expensively bad mistake.


  • #2075
    pumpkin4life
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,435 ✭✭✭pumpkin4life


    Suryavarman wrote: »
    The debt has become more affordable under Obama. The nominal value of the debt is irrelevant.

    The distribution of risk is the key problem here and that is the big problem with increased debt. The nominal value of the debt is anything but irrelevant. Also, the debt being affordable effect has been minuscule.

    Countries moving away from the petrodollar.

    Velocity of money.

    Increase in interest rates.

    Any of these happen and the debt is going to nuke the United States, especially with the compounded cost of Obamacare in recent years.


  • #2076
    Suryavarman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,583 ✭✭✭Suryavarman


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Only if you believe that interest rates are fixed at this level into perpetuity.

    Which, if wrong, would be an exceptionally expensively bad mistake.

    Even in the unlikely scenario that interest rates increase massively in the next few years the debt is still affordable.
    pumpkin4life wrote: »
    The distribution of risk is the key problem here and that is the big problem with increased debt. The nominal value of the debt is anything but irrelevant. Also, the debt being affordable effect has been minuscule.

    Interest payments on the debt have more than halved as a proportion of GDP.
    Countries moving away from the petrodollar.

    Isn't going to happen.
    Velocity of money.

    If the velocity falls then the money supply can just be expanded.
    Increase in interest rates.

    Even if interest rates increase then the debt is still affordable.
    Any of these happen and the debt is going to nuke the United States, especially with the compounded cost of Obamacare in recent years.

    The US has a very low tax burden. Even if interest rates increased fivefold the US could easily raise enough taxes to pay for it.


  • Advertisement
  • #2077
    Devon Breezy Restaurant
    Posts: 24,798 ✭✭✭✭ Devon Breezy Restaurant


    Suryavarman wrote: »
    Even in the unlikely scenario that interest rates increase massively in the next few years the debt is still affordable.

    I agree. That's not the point I rebutted though.
    This was
    Suryavarman wrote: »
    The debt has become more affordable under Obama. The nominal value of the debt is irrelevant.

    The nominal value of the debt is not irrelevant. It is extremely relevant, as is a large determinant of the servicing costs.


  • #2078
    conditioned games
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 683 ✭✭✭conditioned games


    Quin_Dub wrote: »
    conditioned games wrote: »
    Obama has already been a disaster. Now 23 trillion in debt and no way out. Trump is their last hope.

    Whilst still a huge number it's actually 19.5T
    conditioned games wrote: »
    The debt has doubled in the last 8 years alone, every 12 months over a trillion debt is added. They need to go back to basics and become more competitive domestically rather than relying on debt to maintain their consumer driven economy. The wall is a metaphor for self sufficiency and independence. Continue on the same path is not an option.

    From here

    Yes , the debt has almost doubled in the last 8 years , in the teeth of the worst recession in the better part of a 100 years.

    The debt in Sept 2008 was 10.6T , in Sept 2012 is was 16T and today it's 19.5T , so the rate of increase is slowing down..

    FYI - The Debt was 5.5T in in 2000 and 10.6T in 2008 so it doubled under GWB as well...(it Tripled under Reagan!)

    To say that Obama specifically is responsible for the US issues with Debt is disengenuous at best..

    The US (not unlike many governments to be fair) has shown itself to be completely incapable of balancing it's books, that has been the case for many decades not just in the lifetime of a specific administration.

    Also - Given that Trump would add an additional 5T+ to the debt over a similar period suggesting that he is somehow the economic saviour is a very dubious claim indeed.
    Obama is responsible for the debt getting worse and worse. Bush was bad but Obama is worse. He came in with a promise of hope but during his time the middle class got poorer and the wealthy banking elite got richer. The country is worse off after he leaves than when he started.

    They reinflated the popped bubbles of 2008 with a bigger government debt and dollar bubble that is not too far away from popping as well. Trump is willing to make America great again, taking back the jobs, producing goods in America, eliminate tax loopholes for large multi nationals. If he could make America stand on its feet again they would not need to keep creating debt to fund their consumer economy. Its all heading for a disaster and Obama has played his part in it.


  • #2079
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Suryavarman wrote: »
    The debt has become more affordable under Obama. The nominal value of the debt is irrelevant.

    What planet do you live on? Interest on our debt will be about $280 Billion in 2016. By 2021 it is forecast to exceed defense spending and non-defense spending. And by 2025 it is expected to reach almost $800 Billion. Wonderful legacy Obama will leave us with all that accumulation of debt he incurred on us with little to show for it.

    BN-GT738_ristid_G_20150203110744.jpg


  • #2080
    conditioned games
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 683 ✭✭✭conditioned games


    Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »
    Quin_Dub wrote: »
    Whilst still a huge number it's actually 19.5T



    From here

    Yes , the debt has almost doubled in the last 8 years , in the teeth of the worst recession in the better part of a 100 years.

    The debt in Sept 2008 was 10.6T , in Sept 2012 is was 16T and today it's 19.5T , so the rate of increase is slowing down..

    FYI - The Debt was 5.5T in in 2000 and 10.6T in 2008 so it doubled under GWB as well...(it Tripled under Reagan!)

    To say that Obama specifically is responsible for the US issues with Debt is disengenuous at best..

    The US (not unlike many governments to be fair) has shown itself to be completely incapable of balancing it's books, that has been the case for many decades not just in the lifetime of a specific administration.

    Also - Given that Trump would add an additional 5T+ to the debt over a similar period suggesting that he is somehow the economic saviour is a very dubious claim indeed.

    The funny thing the last president to balance the books and reduce the national debt in that he ran 3 surpluses plus set up the first year of the next president for a surplus, was and wait for the drum roll, Bill Clinton.

    I assume you are taking the piss. The baby boomers came along combined with low interest rates led to massive consumer spending in America giving marginal surpluses during Bill's time. That was the time to take advantage and reinvest back in to the country building up its infrastructure which Clinton didn't do.


  • #2081
    Christy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,108 ✭✭✭Christy42


    conditioned games wrote: »
    Obama is responsible for the debt getting worse and worse. Bush was bad but Obama is worse. He came in with a promise of hope but during his time the middle class got poorer and the wealthy banking elite got richer. The country is worse off after he leaves than when he started.

    They reinflated the popped bubbles of 2008 with a bigger government debt and dollar bubble that is not too far away from popping as well. Trump is willing to make America great again, taking back the jobs, producing goods in America, eliminate tax loopholes for large multi nationals. If he could make America stand on its feet again they would not need to keep creating debt to fund their consumer economy. Its all heading for a disaster and Obama has played his part in it.

    And you want to vote for the man who has promised to make this worse? You can't criticise Obama on the debt and support Trump. It makes no sense as he will increase the debt far more than Obama did.


  • Advertisement
  • #2082
    Pro Hoc Vice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    conditioned games wrote: »
    I assume you are taking the piss. The baby boomers came along combined with low interest rates led to massive consumer spending in America giving marginal surpluses during Bill's time. That was the time to take advantage and reinvest back in to the country building up its infrastructure which Clinton didn't do.

    So can we make up our mind in national debt rising a good or a bad thing? Bush during a boom increased National debt did he do the right thing? Did Obama spending and increasing national debt during the worst collapse in a hundred years, do a good thing?

    And no I was not taking the ****ing piss, I simply reported a statement of fact! Did I make any editorial comment, so what in my statement was a piss take.


  • #2083
    conditioned games
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 683 ✭✭✭conditioned games


    Christy42 wrote: »
    conditioned games wrote: »
    Obama is responsible for the debt getting worse and worse. Bush was bad but Obama is worse. He came in with a promise of hope but during his time the middle class got poorer and the wealthy banking elite got richer. The country is worse off after he leaves than when he started.

    They reinflated the popped bubbles of 2008 with a bigger government debt and dollar bubble that is not too far away from popping as well. Trump is willing to make America great again, taking back the jobs, producing goods in America, eliminate tax loopholes for large multi nationals. If he could make America stand on its feet again they would not need to keep creating debt to fund their consumer economy. Its all heading for a disaster and Obama has played his part in it.

    And you want to vote for the man who has promised to make this worse? You can't criticise Obama on the debt and support Trump. It makes no sense as he will increase the debt far more than Obama did.
    I never voted for Obama who made it worse. I would vote for Trump who would try and make it better. Trump would try and make America competitive again, building an economy that actually makes something instead of borrowing money to maintain wasteful spending. Under Obama and Clinton this sharade of a so called recovery will continue until confidence in the US dollar is gone. I'm sure that will end well.


  • #2084
    conditioned games
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 683 ✭✭✭conditioned games


    Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »
    conditioned games wrote: »
    I assume you are taking the piss. The baby boomers came along combined with low interest rates led to massive consumer spending in America giving marginal surpluses during Bill's time. That was the time to take advantage and reinvest back in to the country building up its infrastructure which Clinton didn't do.

    So can we make up our mind in national debt rising a good or a bad thing? Bush during a boom increased National debt did he do the right thing? Did Obama spending and increasing national debt during the worst collapse in a hundred years, do a good thing?

    And no I was not taking the ****ing piss, I simply reported a statement of fact! Did I make any editorial comment, so what in my statement was a piss take.
    Both Bush and Obama were bad presidents. Clinton is a continuation of Obama. The American people now deserve better. I think Trump is their last hope.


  • #2085
    Devon Breezy Restaurant
    Posts: 24,798 ✭✭✭✭ Devon Breezy Restaurant


    Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »
    So can we make up our mind in national debt rising a good or a bad thing? Bush during a boom increased National debt did he do the right thing? Did Obama spending and increasing national debt during the worst collapse in a hundred years, do a good thing?

    And no I was not taking the ****ing piss, I simply reported a statement of fact! Did I make any editorial comment, so what in my statement was a piss take.

    As always it's a textured and nuanced question.

    Deficits which are investment-geared in nature can and do have multiplicative effects for economies, expanding them beyond their previous growth paths. Building Infrastructure for $$$$$ that costs $$ each year into perpetuity to maintain but also increase revenues by $$$$ (through higher taxes take & 'profit' of servicing) into perpetuity can pay for themselves over time.

    Deficits which are geared towards covering current expenditure are far more dangerous and self-immolating, as you are borrowing from tomorrow's people to pay for today's running. This is almost always a bad idea as we have seen just how difficult it is (in Ireland) to close current deficits when they get out of hand. Running up a $$$ expense that also includes a promise to spend that same $$$ each year forever does not have the same multiplier effect towards GDP growth.

    Deficit = Good & Deficit = Bad are both far too simplistic in nature.


  • #2086
    Pro Hoc Vice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    conditioned games wrote: »
    I never voted for Obama who made it worse. I would vote for Trump who would try and make it better. Trump would try and make America competitive again, building an economy that actually makes something instead of borrowing money to maintain wasteful spending. Under Obama and Clinton this sharade of a so called recovery will continue until confidence in the US dollar is gone. I'm sure that will end well.

    http://m.industryweek.com/competitiveness/top-10-manufacturing-countries-2020#slide-0-field_images-192471

    While China overtook America a few years ago as you can see above USA is predicted to to regain top slot by 2020 and that has nothing todo with Trump or Clinton.

    https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42135.pdf


  • #2087
    Pro Hoc Vice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    conditioned games wrote: »
    Both Bush and Obama were bad presidents. Clinton is a continuation of Obama. The American people now deserve better. I think Trump is their last hope.

    The funny thing is everyone I have asked gives different reason why the like trump, the funny thing is many give contradictory reasons. Trump may be a great president but he nor any president can solve Americas or the worlds ills. He may if he is lucky do good in a couple of areas but saying he is americas last hope is just silly, contrary to what some believe America is a country ahead of most on any issue.


  • #2088
    Pro Hoc Vice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    As always it's a textured and nuanced question.

    Deficits which are investment-geared in nature can and do have multiplicative effects for economies, expanding them beyond their previous growth paths. Building Infrastructure for $$$$$ that costs $$ each year into perpetuity to maintain but also increase revenues by $$$$ (through higher taxes take & 'profit' of servicing) into perpetuity can pay for themselves over time.

    Deficits which are geared towards covering current expenditure are far more dangerous and self-immolating, as you are borrowing from tomorrow's people to pay for today's running. This is almost always a bad idea as we have seen just how difficult it is (in Ireland) to close current deficits when they get out of hand. Running up a $$$ expense that also includes a promise to spend that same $$$ each year forever does not have the same multiplier effect towards GDP growth.

    Deficit = Good & Deficit = Bad are both far too simplistic in nature.

    Exactly but reading some on here you would think it's a black or white issue. All I did was in response to another poster point out a fact.


  • #2089
    Suryavarman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,583 ✭✭✭Suryavarman


    Deleted User wrote: »
    I agree. That's not the point I rebutted though.
    This was


    The nominal value of the debt is not irrelevant. It is extremely relevant, as is a large determinant of the servicing costs.

    The nominal value at any one time is irrelevant. The only thing that ever matters is the cost of servicing the debt. The nominal value has no impact on servicing costs. The only thing that matters is the Government's ability to meet interest payments which the US Government can easily do, even under the worst case scenarios.
    Amerika wrote: »
    What planet do you live on? Interest on our debt will be about $280 Billion in 2016. By 2021 it is forecast to exceed defense spending and non-defense spending. And by 2025 it is expected to reach almost $800 Billion. Wonderful legacy Obama will leave us with all that accumulation of debt he incurred on us with little to show for it.

    Nominal values don't matter.

    And yes Obama has left a good legacy. Avoiding a second Great Depression is an impressive achievement.


  • #2090
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,683 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    conditioned games wrote: »
    I never voted for Obama who made it worse. I would vote for Trump who would try and make it better. Trump would try and make America competitive again, building an economy that actually makes something instead of borrowing money to maintain wasteful spending. Under Obama and Clinton this sharade of a so called recovery will continue until confidence in the US dollar is gone. I'm sure that will end well.

    Do you think Obama did not try to make it better? That he did not try to make America competitive again? Because I seem to remember that the banking system got a bailout, the auto industry got bailed out, and we're also seeing the growth of alt energy and alt driven cars, we've also seen the private space industry unfold, and still continue to albeit with mixed feelings, produce a lot of military industrial goods at home. The DOW has also nearly tripled since the crash, and recovered and grown from prior to that.

    We still produce quite a number of goods in the United States. I'm not sure how you believe that the current POTUS was somehow trying to sabotage that?

    Also again, the President doesn't spend money: congress does.


  • #2091
    Black Swan
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 47,769 CMod ✭✭✭✭Black Swan


    Overheal wrote: »
    Also again, the President doesn't spend money: congress does.
    Indeed. It seems that many folks fail to understand this fact. The president does not legislate, the US Congress does. If elected president, Donald Trump cannot legislate change. He has the power to sign or veto legislation, but he cannot lower or raise taxes no matter what promises he makes to his followers while campaigning. He can propose a budget to the US Congress, but Congress decides the budget through legislation, not the president. Donald Trump may have experience in business, but in governance he has ZERO experience.


  • Advertisement
  • #2092
    FA Hayek
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,084 ✭✭✭FA Hayek


    Suryavarman wrote: »
    And yes Obama has left a good legacy. Avoiding a second Great Depression is an impressive achievement.


    Obama alone has raised the debt more by all other presidents combined. That buck will be passed onto the next generation. The can has just been kicked down the road. Anyone who is a fiscal conservative or veers anywhere libertarian, should be seething about this. We have gone over this before but the mantra that avoiding another Depression was avoided without cost should be challenged.
    The only thing that matters is the Government's ability to meet interest payments which the US Government can easily do, even under the worst case scenarios.

    That is plainly false. You yourself have admitted that current entitlements will be bankrupt in the medium term.

    As per servicing the debt...

    interest_chart_5-9-16.jpg

    Again, we have gone over this before and after a brief tussle you dropped your argument like a hot potato.
    Last post from me was here, which you did not respond to http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=101041187&postcount=1044


  • #2093
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,683 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Could you link to the CBO report that graph is pulled from or otherwise explain how they infer that the cost of servicing the debt will shoot skyward faster than Al Gore on a scissor lift?


  • #2094
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 23,016 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    FA Hayek wrote: »
    Obama alone has raised the debt more by all other presidents combined. That buck will be passed onto the next generation. The can has just been kicked down the road. Anyone who is a fiscal conservative or veers anywhere libertarian, should be seething about this. We have gone over this before but the mantra that avoiding another Depression was avoided without cost should be challenged.



    That is plainly false. You yourself have admitted that current entitlements will be bankrupt in the medium term.

    As per servicing the debt...

    interest_chart_5-9-16.jpg

    Again, we have gone over this before and after a brief tussle you dropped your argument like a hot potato.
    Last post from me was here, which you did not respond to http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=101041187&postcount=1044

    "Projected" based on what? A sharp straight line seems a little unbelievable.

    they/them/theirs


    The more you can increase fear of drugs and crime, welfare mothers, immigrants and aliens, the more you control all of the people.

    Noam Chomsky



  • #2095
    Overheal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,683 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Did some looking and the CBO projected by Jan 2016 the rate would be 4%. Obviously that hasn't panned out. For whatever reason in both cases they always project a dramatic shift immediately after actual figures.

    http://crfb.org/blogs/moving-interest-costs-cbo-baseline

    While the CBO is non partisan that still begs context and math behind it.


  • #2096
    Suryavarman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,583 ✭✭✭Suryavarman


    FA Hayek wrote: »
    Obama alone has raised the debt more by all other presidents combined. That buck will be passed onto the next generation. The can has just been kicked down the road. Anyone who is a fiscal conservative or veers anywhere libertarian, should be seething about this. We have gone over this before but the mantra that avoiding another Depression was avoided without cost should be challenged.

    Libertarians and fiscal conservatives probably will get worked up over this. That is because they are ideologues and if something conflicts with their worldview then they will be angry regardless of it is a good thing.
    That is plainly false. You yourself have admitted that current entitlements will be bankrupt in the medium term.

    I said they pose a problem in the long term and action should be taken now to avoid that problem.
    As per servicing the debt...

    The US is a low tax economy. It can afford those repayments.
    Again, we have gone over this before and after a brief tussle you dropped your argument like a hot potato.
    Last post from me was here, which you did not respond to http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=101041187&postcount=1044

    That's because there was nothing new or anything worth responding to in it.


  • #2097
    Suryavarman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,583 ✭✭✭Suryavarman


    GAry Johnson's position as a joke candidate solidifies as he fails to name a foreign leader he admires.


  • #2098
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Suryavarman wrote: »
    And yes Obama has left a good legacy. Avoiding a second Great Depression is an impressive achievement.

    Give me a break. A 'second great depression' was never in the cards. Or is there some magical revelation you’d like to bestow upon us?


  • #2099
    TheDoctor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,980 ✭✭✭TheDoctor


    http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

    Trumps disaster of a first debate is beginning to take effect.
    Florida has tilted back to Hillary and Nevada nearly also gone.

    Clinton 290 - 248 Trump


  • #2100
    Billy86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    TheDoctor wrote: »
    http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

    Trumps disaster of a first debate is beginning to take effect.
    Florida has tilted back to Hillary and Nevada nearly also gone.

    Clinton 290 - 248 Trump
    But but but... Trump 'won' the debate? An anonymous online poll totally not manipulated by 4chan or the_Donald subreddit told me so.


  • Advertisement
  • #2101
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    TheDoctor wrote: »
    http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

    Trumps disaster of a first debate is beginning to take effect.
    Florida has tilted back to Hillary and Nevada nearly also gone.

    Clinton 290 - 248 Trump

    We all love fact checkers these days, right? It’s all the rage I hear.

    So, where does FIVETHIRTYEIGHT stand in regards to Media Bias/Fact Check?

    leftcenter04.png?w=620&h=69

    LEFT-CENTER BIAS
    These media sources have a slight to moderate liberal bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes) to favor liberal causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information, but may require further investigation.

    SURPRISE! :D


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement