How much will the National Debt be in 2016?

[imbondz]

$20 Trillion or is that too liberal?

I want to see people's projections so in 4 years we can look back and see who's drinking the most kool-aid here.

[Gilly]

20-25 minimum... It will be interesting to see if china keeps fronting us the cash..

The second they don't our economy rivals Greece....

[OpIv37]

Lmao- and what do you think it would have been with Romney in there? Remember, Bush outspent his tax-and-spend liberal predecessor. Republicans say one thing when they're running and do something else entirely once they are elected.

And I'm not defending Obama for racking up the national debt. I'm simply pointing out that we were screwed either way and some of you are allowing your hatred for Obama to cloud your assessment of reality.

[sukie]

It will have to be high to pay for the ACA... What will the CBO estimates be for that in 2013,14,15,16 ? Needless to say I believe the CBO will be upping the cost estimates annually... without apology

[imbondz]

Lmao- and what do you think it would have been with Romney in there? Remember, Bush outspent his tax-and-spend liberal predecessor. Republicans say one thing when they're running and do something else entirely once they are elected.

And I'm not defending Obama for racking up the national debt. I'm simply pointing out that we were screwed either way and some of you are allowing your hatred for Obama to cloud your assessment of reality.

I don't hate Obama, just don't think he's done anything to deserve a 2nd term other than get Osama. If we're screwed either way, then let's not even discuss anything political anymore.

[Marcala12]

bush = proven to add to the debt and deficit at a totally destructive rate
obama = proven to add to the debt and deficit at a totally destructive rate
Romney = may or may not have added to the debt or deficit.

Obama is a proven failure in this category just as bush was; kind of silly to assume that Romney would have done the same as Bush years and years later. Romney hand picked Ryan because Ryan had real cutting plans to work with. I can't say for sure if Romney would have made the deep cuts that really need to be made, just as you can't say for sure that he wouldn't have. We know that Bush and Obama did the opposite and we know that any president who can't get the s**t in check under their watch will go down as a massive failure.

[OpIv37]

I don't hate Obama, just don't think he's done anything to deserve a 2nd term other than get Osama. If we're screwed either way, then let's not even discuss anything political anymore.

I never said anything about not discussing it.

I just want the discussion to be honest regarding the nature of the supposed "choice" we had.

[mysticsoto]

Alot of people around here need to read this carefully and take their partisan glasses off while doing so:

http://www.billszone.com/fanzone/sho...=1#post3705764

[sukie]

So he added 2 trillion? Cool.

[Muktar al-Portlandi]

I was expecting Obama to reduce debt during the Bush ****storm. Weren't you?

[mysticsoto]

So he added 2 trillion? Cool.

...while averting a depression!

[chernobylwraiths]

There is no way the Republican held House will allow it to go much higher!

[DraftBoy]

I think its an interesting question, if we can all put away the partisan jerking off. Does anybody think the debt will fall over the next four years?

[Gilly]

Spend one million dollars per day since the birth of Christ and you would not have spent a trillion yet...

Just some perspective on what obummer needs to beg china to loan us this year...


Dow down 300+ so far today. So that's looking promising.....

- - - Updated - - -

I think its an interesting question, if we can all put away the partisan jerking off. Does anybody think the debt will fall over the next four years?

Not a snowball's chance...

[DraftBoy]

Spend one million dollars per day since the birth of Christ and you would not have spent a trillion yet...

Just some perspective on what obummer needs to beg china to loan us this year...


Dow down 300+ so far today. So that's looking promising.....

That is quite possibly the dumbest analogy Ive seen in a while.

Dow was going to fall no matter who won last night.

[notacon]

$20 Trillion or is that too liberal?

I want to see people's projections so in 4 years we can look back and see who's drinking the most kool-aid here.

Do you have any idea why the debt is at the level it is and increasing??? Do you???

[notacon]

bush = proven to add to the debt and deficit at a totally destructive rate
obama = proven to add to the debt and deficit at a totally destructive rate
Romney = may or may not have added to the debt or deficit.

Obama is a proven failure in this category just as bush was; kind of silly to assume that Romney would have done the same as Bush years and years later. Romney hand picked Ryan because Ryan had real cutting plans to work with. I can't say for sure if Romney would have made the deep cuts that really need to be made, just as you can't say for sure that he wouldn't have. We know that Bush and Obama did the opposite and we know that any president who can't get the s**t in check under their watch will go down as a massive failure.

100% false. Obama did not "add to the deficit".

Period.

This is one of the major reasons these problems are so hard to resolve We have a large part of the population that does not even know the truth about what's happening, or what the result would have been under proposed solutions.

The idea that Romney "may or may not have added to the debt or deficit" is so blind to reality that it is really pretty sad.

[sukie]

...while averting a depression!

It has become a common refrain at the White House and among administration supporters that President Obama's aggressive efforts to stimulate growth prevented an economic catastrophe.
"We had to hit the ground running and do everything we could to prevent a second Great Depression," Obama told supporters last week.
Politically, the claim makes sense. Casting the challenge Obama faced as immense can help explain the economy's lackluster performance in the two years since the recession officially ended.
But is it an accurate portrayal of what really happened?
IBD reviewed records of economic forecasts made just before Obama signed the stimulus bill into law, as well as economic data and monthly stimulus spending data from around that time, and reviews of the stimulus bill itself.
The conclusion is that in claiming to have staved off a Depression, the White House and its supporters seem to be engaging in a bit of historical revisionism.
Economists weren't predicting a Depression.
White House economists forecast in January 2009 that, even without a stimulus, unemployment would top out at just 8.8% — well below the 10.8% peak during the 1981-82 recession, and nowhere near Depression-era unemployment levels.
The same month, the Congressional Budget Office predicted that, absent any stimulus, the recession would end in "the second half of 2009." The recession officially ended in June 2009, suggesting that the stimulus did not have anything to do with it.


Read More At IBD: http://news.investors.com/062011-575...#ixzz2BYkw4tR1

[notacon]

In any event...I have been asking for literally, years.

Why is a big federal debt harmful to today's economy?

Why are big deficits harmful to to today's economy?

A hint....they are not. I have not had one person who is able to present a reasonable argument otherwise. I invite anyone to try.

But, don't come here with platitudes or GOP bull****. Not going to fly.

[DraftBoy]

In any event...I have been asking for literally, years.

Why is a big federal debt harmful to today's economy?

Why are big deficits harmful to to today's economy?

A hint....they are not. I have not had one person who is able to present a reasonable argument otherwise. I invite anyone to try.

But, don't come here with platitudes or GOP bull****. Not going to fly.

Just to be clear you mean today's as in right now on 11/7, not today as in modern America correct?