3 ms·

1. I agree that Obama inherited the financial crisis, but he failed to implement unpopular financial decisions (balancing the budget, etc.), choosing instead to

by jazzyk 10y ago

1. I agree that Obama inherited the financial crisis, but he failed to implement unpopular financial decisions (balancing the budget, etc.), choosing instead to kick the can down the road. You may argue about the first year, etc. but he has been in office for 8 years now (he did nothing to prosecute people responsible for the crisis on Wall Street, either, despite fiery rhetoric). Also, for the first 2 years, his party controlled the House and the Senate, they could overturn any republican legislation they wanted. 2. The debt has never been higher during peace-time (shot higher during WW2 and came down quickly) 3. The widely accepted red-alarm level of debt is 60% of GDP (some countries have "circuit breakers" around that level). Crowing that there are worse offenders out there does not change the fact that we are (fast) approaching disaster. Financial engineering is not working for Japan, you can't force people to take on more debt, even if it is cheap. 4. As you can see from the graph referenced, the US debt stayed around 60% of GDP since 1955-ish until 2008. Only after 2008 it started ballooning. 5. I am not saying Republican legislatures were saintly, Bush clearly put us through a lot of financial pain due to unnecesssary wars, but the numbers are clear (see the link below) http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-debt-to-gdp http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-deb...

tptacek 10y ago
No, it's a conservative talking point that there's a "red-alarm level of debt at 60% of GDP". By that definition, the following countries are all "red-alarm": Finland, Israel, The Netherlands, Brazil, India, Germany, Hungary, Austria, the UK, Canada, France, Singapore, Belgium, and Japan. (I'm leaving out lots of smaller countries, of course). But: once again: it is not my argument that there is no valid criticism of Obama's management of the economy and the financing of the government. I probably won't agree with most of those criticisms, but there are plenty of sound ones. What I reject is the idea that you can compare the raw dollar amount of the debt in 2008 and that number in 2016 and draw those kinds of conclusions. No, you have to do better.
- jazzyk 10y ago
  Yes, two numbers may not be enough - that's why I followed up to show the debt/GDP _ratio_ over the years to show historical context, which disproves a couple of your points.

by jazzyk 10y ago

tptacek 10y ago

No, it's a conservative talking point that there's a "red-alarm level of debt at 60% of GDP". By that definition, the following countries are all "red-alarm": Finland, Israel, The Netherlands, Brazil, India, Germany, Hungary, Austria, the UK, Canada, France, Singapore, Belgium, and Japan. (I'm leaving out lots of smaller countries, of course). But: once again: it is not my argument that there is no valid criticism of Obama's management of the economy and the financing of the government. I probably won't agree with most of those criticisms, but there are plenty of sound ones. What I reject is the idea that you can compare the raw dollar amount of the debt in 2008 and that number in 2016 and draw those kinds of conclusions. No, you have to do better.

jazzyk 10y ago
Yes, two numbers may not be enough - that's why I followed up to show the debt/GDP _ratio_ over the years to show historical context, which disproves a couple of your points.