She did not come up with the projections, CBO did.
HTH, carry on
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
Hand picking a few numbers from the CBO does not make your goofy chart's source the CBO. The fact that those numbers were selected from multiple different points in time makes the chart completely dishonest. That and it misrepresents policies ratified by B.O. and his Dem controlled congress as if they had nothing to do with it.
Counting tax cuts as expenditures is satanist retardation at its finest. To even say as much necessarily presumes the Federal Govt has super priority to its citizens income, a frightening proposition in this so-called capitalist country and an affront on the due process rights articulated throughout the constitution (those due process rights that libs think only protect racial minority, abortions, and homosexuals).
Where the chart utterly fails is it is a completely one sided view of "spending" without accounting for the actual affects of said policy. Ever heard of a "cost/benefit analysis", well this is just a "cost conglomeration" (an incomplete one at that). For example, increased tax revenue, increased personal wealth, high levels of employment, capital investment etc. all attained historic highs during GWB's tenure yet are no where to be found on this chart, but certainly affect the size of the deficit (more employment equals more employment and income tax, more income equals more tax revenue, more capital investment equals more taxable spending, etc. etc.). This is what some refer to as "supply-side econcmics" a dirty word in liberal circles, although universally acknowledged by economists of all persuasions as effective government policy (the multiplier being what the great disagreement is about).
If you looked at this chart you would assume the Bush tax cuts cost the country $1,812 Billion, end of story. In fact, after the tax cuts all people in all brackets instantly paid less in taxes and therefore had more disposable income. What the government would have done with that money is unknown, but it sure as hell wasn't going to use it to balance the budget.
As I said, overly simple, awkward, and factually challenged. Teresa Tritch is in way over her head here, per usual.
All that being said, tortuga. I believe it was you that said
Fascinating, did not know Obama had the power to unilaterally budgets. Must be part of his redefinition of america everyone's been talking about. Congrats Hussein!
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk
I assume this logic applies to GWB, right? He didn't unilaterally pass all that legislature then fail to budget accordingly did he?
/thread
