• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

$16,000,000,000,000 And counting....

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Zorkorist

Diamond Member
Apr 17, 2007
6,867
3
76
Obama has had 4 years, and it is pretty sure he has only fucked things up.

tl;dr Vote Republican
 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,820
1,123
126
It matters very much, Shehatesme.

People that'd vote for Obama, have given up...

People that'd votte for Romney, hope we can assert ourselves as indiviuduals again.

-John
:rolleyes: Funniest post in a long time. I know that wasn't your intention which is tragic. Neither are a viable option is the correction choice. One continues to be the far lesser of two evils.
 
Last edited:

Zorkorist

Diamond Member
Apr 17, 2007
6,867
3
76
One, is turning are county into socialism...

You Know, Communism,

It isn't his fault of course, it is people like you!

-John
 

Double Trouble

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,276
103
106
We (the voters) are responsible. We punish politicians who say anything about trying to reign in one of the big 3 drivers of the deficit (Medicare/Medicaid, SS, Military spending), and we reward those who overspend or promise to spend money on the things we like without explaining where that money will come from.

Ultimately, the voters are to blame. The two parties have shrewdly figured out that by having the voting public bicker about meaningless stuff and cheer on their team as if it were a football squad they can maintain power and control.

Until the voters say "that's enough" and take action by voting out irresponsible spenders, we're going to continue down this path.
 
Oct 16, 1999
10,497
3
0
Does the debt even matter at this point? The US has been in deep debt since forever...so, I have no idea why people think its some type of revelation that the debt is getting deeper. We have had TWO republican presidents that served two terms each...the debt still went up..did anyone say anything about it? Is anyone saying anything now?

More importantly, why is it such a big fucking deal that the debt has went up by 6 trillion dollars? It would have only gone up under another President. It will continue to go up until we find a way to plant Money trees.


*eats popcorn*
At this point, no, it doesn't matter. Not that it's not potentially an issue, but until inflation starts running rampant, borrowing rates start going sky high, and folks start dropping the US dollar as a reserve currency any alarms of debt "crisis" are quite premature and politically motivated.
 

nextJin

Golden Member
Apr 16, 2009
1,848
0
0
Intrest rates will not stay at near 0 forever. It will eventually go up and so will inflation (not something crazy like over 20 percent). That is when this might become an issue. We simply cannot keep having QE 3 4 5 etc.

My problem is that if the economy can't be turned around at near 0 who honestly believes it will turn around at say 7 percent?
 

Dulanic

Diamond Member
Oct 27, 2000
9,773
375
136
And how much of this again is Obama's fault? Very little compared to what he was thrown.... Yeah yeah first response will be but but but bush bush!...

Yeah Obama spent some to stop our bleeding and going into a depression.. but at least that's a temporary measure. Compared to the tax cut republicans want to expand even further... look how much it already costs us... imagine what it would be if the republicans took back the white house.

 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,652
199
101
At this point, no, it doesn't matter.
And this is why we are $16 trillion in debt. Just spend away, it doesn't matter if we have it or not :rolleyes:

People seem to forget that we have to pay the money back, plus we have to pay interest. Even if the interest rate is low, the portion of our budget that has to go to just paying interest on the debt is staggering. In 2012 we will probably end up paying somewhere around $500 billion just in interest. Think about that for a second, think about what we as a country could do if we poured an extra $500 billion into our infrastructure, education, energy research per year.

But no, debt and deficits don't matter, that's what the idiots in DC have told us.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,652
199
101
Compared to the tax cut republicans want to expand even further.
So I'm assuming then that the first thing obummer did when he got into office was to get rid of the tax cut completely, since it is costing us so much. Oh wait, no, he didn't. He set up an annual dog and pony show of trying to raise taxes on the "rich" (which would not even be a rounding error on the deficit) without removing the enter tax cuts.

If it's Bush's fault (but but but booooooosh!) for enacting such a horrible cut, why hasn't the dear leader fixed it yet after 4 years?
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,897
638
126
At this point, no, it doesn't matter. Not that it's not potentially an issue, but until inflation starts running rampant, borrowing rates start going sky high, and folks start dropping the US dollar as a reserve currency any alarms of debt "crisis" are quite premature and politically motivated.
So if I've got my foot to the floor going 130 mph and up ahead the bridge is out, I'm not in trouble until the second I run out of roadway? As the car runs off the road and starts the downward plunge into the gulley, at that point I can simply stop and turn the car around?

Your statement sir, is politically motivated. Your president in in office and you want him to remain there. We are to ignore the signs that we're traveling at a much higher rate of speed than we were until now, ignore that we have now rapidly closed in on the bridge that no longer exists. Ignore that the man driving the car has exponentially increased our danger level. After all, we're not out of road - yet. This is the nature of our political system. Common sense is to be thrown out the window.

I am a fiscal conservative. I understand that our federal government does not have to be run the same as my household does. There are constraints on my borrowing put in place by lenders. They were greatly relaxed and we ended up with a crisis on our hands. I was not caught up in that. I did not suffer the loss of my home and the uncertain future that comes with that. I recognize when the federal government has ignored its constraints and is spending beyond it's ability to repay. $16 Trillion is our debt. Bonus points if you know the total of our unfunded liabilities here at home. You can't separate these two although far too many want to.
 

the DRIZZLE

Platinum Member
Sep 6, 2007
2,955
0
76
It's not like that debt is coming due soon, or ever. The debt-to-GDP ratio is not great right now and should be addressed long-term, but there's no immediate crisis that has to be solved NOW NOW NOW DAMN YOU OBAMA.

Considering interest rates are well below inflation and people are still eagerly buying government bonds, we're essentially borrowing money at a negative interest rate - that is, getting paid interest to borrow money. As long as there are meaningful ways to spend that money, such as building infrastructure, it would be criminally incompetent NOT to borrow more money right now.

The deficit could also be almost completely closed by letting the "temporary" Bush tax cuts expire. (But shouldn't be done during a recession. We should be deficit spending during a recession.)
Do you honestly think that we would have negative real interest rates if the fed wasn't implementing QE?

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
 

Dulanic

Diamond Member
Oct 27, 2000
9,773
375
136
So I'm assuming then that the first thing obummer did when he got into office was to get rid of the tax cut completely, since it is costing us so much. Oh wait, no, he didn't. He set up an annual dog and pony show of trying to raise taxes on the "rich" (which would not even be a rounding error on the deficit) without removing the enter tax cuts.

If it's Bush's fault (but but but booooooosh!) for enacting such a horrible cut, why hasn't the dear leader fixed it yet after 4 years?
We both know why. He needs the middle class vote. Same reason Republicans wouldn't go for removing it on the rich, they need their donations.

I have never said Obama is great or perfect. Just better than the alternative.
 
Last edited:

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,652
199
101
We both know why. He needs the middle class vote. Same reason Republicans wouldn't go for removing it on the rich, they need their donations.
So why then keep blaming boooooosh for something obummer hasn't fixed in 4 years? It's hypocrisy. Either own up to it and say "we don't want the tax cuts to expire", or "the deficit is mostly booooosh's fault", but not both. Blaming booosh at this point is stupid.
 

diesbudt

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2012
3,393
0
0
So? Do you have an argument to make here? A solution to propose? If not, then you are merely fishing for responses and contributing nothing. Numbers are meaningless without context. Perhaps I should ask you to put that number into scientific notation or give me the prime factorization of that number or something. It would be just about as useful. :/
1.6 x 10^13
 

Dulanic

Diamond Member
Oct 27, 2000
9,773
375
136
So why then keep blaming boooooosh for something obummer hasn't fixed in 4 years? It's hypocrisy. Either own up to it and say "we don't want the tax cuts to expire", or "the deficit is mostly booooosh's fault", but not both. Blaming booosh at this point is stupid.
And ignoring that Bush had any impact on the deficit is even more stupid. Bush's impact on the deficit under Obama is like Tanya Harding's on Nancy Kerrigan's career. To claim it has no impact is retarded.
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,321
2
0
We can keep ignoring the debt if we all want to. When interest rates go back up and we are paying close to $500 Billion just in interest alone, that's hard to ignore.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,652
199
101
And ignoring that Bush had any impact on the deficit is even more stupid.
obummer has had 4 years to change the things supposedly impacted the deficit. He hasn't done so. That's not boooosh, that on obummer. Either fix them or stop whining about them.
 
Oct 16, 1999
10,497
3
0
So if I've got my foot to the floor going 130 mph and up ahead the bridge is out, I'm not in trouble until the second I run out of roadway? As the car runs off the road and starts the downward plunge into the gulley, at that point I can simply stop and turn the car around?

Your statement sir, is politically motivated. Your president in in office and you want him to remain there. We are to ignore the signs that we're traveling at a much higher rate of speed than we were until now, ignore that we have now rapidly closed in on the bridge that no longer exists. Ignore that the man driving the car has exponentially increased our danger level. After all, we're not out of road - yet. This is the nature of our political system. Common sense is to be thrown out the window.

I am a fiscal conservative. I understand that our federal government does not have to be run the same as my household does. There are constraints on my borrowing put in place by lenders. They were greatly relaxed and we ended up with a crisis on our hands. I was not caught up in that. I did not suffer the loss of my home and the uncertain future that comes with that. I recognize when the federal government has ignored its constraints and is spending beyond it's ability to repay. $16 Trillion is our debt. Bonus points if you know the total of our unfunded liabilities here at home. You can't separate these two although far too many want to.
The early warning signs will be from market reactions in those areas I mentioned, not conservatives going [strokeface]OMG debt crisis!!!1[/strokeface] at some arbitrary number.

Edit: And by the way, "my guy" pushed for $4T in deficit reduction, while "your guys" balked at that, bragged they got 98% of what they wanted, and were specifically named by Moody's in the credit downgrade. So who is being politically motivated again?
 
Last edited:

berzerker60

Golden Member
Jul 18, 2012
1,233
1
0
You all know that interest rates going up doesn't impact debt we accrue right now, right? If someone buys a 20-year bond at 0.025%, then interest rates go up to 10%, the US is still just paying 0.025% on that bond. It's only new debt generated after the interest rate hike that gets more expensive.
 

woolfe9999

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2005
7,164
0
0
We (the voters) are responsible. We punish politicians who say anything about trying to reign in one of the big 3 drivers of the deficit (Medicare/Medicaid, SS, Military spending), and we reward those who overspend or promise to spend money on the things we like without explaining where that money will come from.

Ultimately, the voters are to blame. The two parties have shrewdly figured out that by having the voting public bicker about meaningless stuff and cheer on their team as if it were a football squad they can maintain power and control.

Until the voters say "that's enough" and take action by voting out irresponsible spenders, we're going to continue down this path.
I agree with this almost entirely. We send mix messages to our elected officials. These officials want to be re-elected, so do not expect any different behavior until we clarify said mixed messages.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY