Les gauchistes sévissant au Québec aiment bien répéter que Bill Clinton, un démocrate, a pu enregistrer un surplus budgétaire alors que les présidents républicains ont multiplié les déficits.
La gauche québécoise devra se trouver un autre argument pour critiquer les républicains, car à sa toute première année comme président, Barack Obama a accouché d'un déficit éclipsant celui de ses prédécesseurs.
Voilà ce qui arrive quand on a un président, un congrès et un sénat démocrates.
Source:
Historical Budget Data
Come on, une bonne parti de ce deficit la a ete dessiner sous la presidence de Bush.
De toute façon, ils vont quand même trouver une raison louable au déficit d’Obama, sous prétexte que c’était pour relancer l’économie que les républicains avaient fait planter ou pour s’occuper des pauvres et des sans emplois. Souvenez vous! La vertue existe seulement à gauche!
Ça me fait rire. Quand les droitistes prennent le pouvoir ils semblent avoir comme stratégie d’endetter le pays au max. Ça leur permet de s’assurer que leurs adversaires seront embourbés dans le redressement des finances plutôt que dans des programmes sociaux qui font hurler la droite.
Ça leur permet aussi de faire passer l’autre camp pour des mauvais gestionnaires puisqu’ils doivent couper les services et augmenter les revenus pour arriver.
Autrement dit la droite détruit les finances publiques par pur oportunisme partisan. Des beaux salopards qui après viennent faire la leçon aux autres.
Avec les libéraux on avait des surplus, avec les conservateurs on se ramasse en déficit.
Rigueur body.
Une grosse partie de « son » déficit est là à cause des engagement de l’administration Bush et de la FED.
Non seulement çà, mais on peu se poser la question: sous Bush, nous dirigions nous dans une autre direction? (700 milliards en tarp, trillion en liquidité vec la FED, 300 milliards en plan de sauvetage minable, 14 milliards pour gm et chrysler, une coupe de centaine de milliards pour fannie et freddy).
C’est toi qui manque de rigueur.
Les plans de l’administration Bush ont été compté en 2008, pas en 2009.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123440436240475615.html?mod=djemITP
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123457407865686565.html
Qui a oblige Fannie May and Freddie Mac a accoder des hypotheques a tout le monde? Meme ceux qui ne pouvaient pas se les permettre?
Reponse: un certain B. Clinton
Sherwood
Bush a été au pouvoir pendant 8 ans. Il a eu le temps en masse pour corriger cette situation. C’était lui le boss, c’était donc à lui de prendre les bonnes décisions. En n’agissant pas il a avalisé les politiques à Clinton, de sorte qu’il est autant responsable que lui.
Ça me fait penser aux libéraux qui mettent encore leur impuissance sur le dos des péquistes même après tout ce temps. Pas fort comme leadership.
David: dans ce cas, ton graphique est pas bon, le plan de sauvetage de 700 milliards de Bush y est pas!
L’inflation des 37 dernieres années va se copier coller ….mais cette fois ci d’ici 2012 c’est a dire en 3 ans ….on sera loin de l’inflation en douceur qu’on connait depuis tout ce temps
imaginer le désorde que cette inflation va produire.
L’expression consacrée ici est « Pelleter par en avant ». Obama ramasse la marde des administration precedente.
Seulement le premier 350 milliards du TAPR a été voté sous Bush.
La 2e moitié (qui devait aussi être approuvé) a été annulé et remplacé par un plan de 1.2 trillion de Tim Geitner.
Désolé, mais Obama a vraiment battu a plat de couture tous les déficits des républicain et ce à sa première tentative.
Les gauchisets qui essayent de défendre les déficits monstre d’Obama.
Coudon, à force de lire Antagoniste avez-vous fini par réaliser que les déficits c’est une chose honteuse ?
Obama fait maintenant passer Bush pour un conservateur fiscal.
Obama est donc capable de faire des miracles!
Faux.
Bush ne peut rien faire contre les filibuster au sénat et dans les comités.
Pour le reste:
Just the Facts: The Administration's Unheeded Warnings About the Systemic Risk Posed by the GSEs
For many years the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of financial turmoil at a housing government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties. President Bush publicly called for GSE reform 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted. Unfortunately, these warnings went unheeded, as the President's repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems.
2001
April: The Administration's FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is "a potential problem," because "financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity."
2002
May: The President calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in his 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)
2003
January: Freddie Mac announces it has to restate financial results for the previous three years.
February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that "although investors perceive an implicit Federal guarantee of [GSE] obligations," "the government has provided no explicit legal backing for them." As a consequence, unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market. ("Systemic Risk: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Role of OFHEO," OFHEO Report, 2/4/03)
September: Fannie Mae discloses SEC investigation and acknowledges OFHEO's review found earnings manipulations.
September: Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact "legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises" and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.
October: Fannie Mae discloses $1.2 billion accounting error.
November: Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any "legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk." To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have "broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards" and "receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)
2004
February: The President's FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital, and called for creation of a new, world-class regulator: "The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore…should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator." (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)
February: CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to "not take [the financial market's] strength for granted." Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by "ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, "Keeping Fannie And Freddie's House In Order," Financial Times, 2/24/04)
June: Deputy Secretary of Treasury Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and called for reform, saying "We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system. Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System." (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)
2005
April: Treasury Secretary John Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying "Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America… Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system." (Secretary John W. Snow, "Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee," 4/13/05)
2007
July: Two Bear Stearns hedge funds invested in mortgage securities collapse.
August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying "first things first when it comes to those two institutions. Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options." (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, The White House, 8/9/07)
September: RealtyTrac announces foreclosure filings up 243,000 in August – up 115 percent from the year before.
September: Single-family existing home sales decreases 7.5 percent from the previous month – the lowest level in nine years. Median sale price of existing homes fell six percent from the year before.
December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying "These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. So I've called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission. The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start. But the Senate has not acted. And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon." (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, The White House, 12/6/07)
2008
January: Bank of America announces it will buy Countrywide.
January: Citigroup announces mortgage portfolio lost $18.1 billion in value.
February: Assistant Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, says "A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully." (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)
March: Bear Stearns announces it will sell itself to JPMorgan Chase.
March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and "move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages." (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)
April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation and "modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)
May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further.
"Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping their homes. Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08)
"[T]he government ought to be helping creditworthy people stay in their homes. And one way we can do that – and Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08)
"Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08)
June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying "we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac." (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)
July: Congress heeds the President's call for action and passes reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing.
J’ai pas besoin d’être un grand mathématicien pour regarder ton graphique, voir que le déficite 2008 et plus petit que 600 milliards de dollar, me rappeler que le « tarp » est chiffré à 700 milliards et déduire qu’une partie du déficite que tu pointe vient de Bush.
L’année fiscal commence le premier Octobre.
Dans sa dernière année, Bush a dépensé proche du ou encourager la dépense de presque un trillion.
Pas besoin d’être un mathématicien, t’as juste besoin de savoir lire.
Seulement le premier 350 milliards du TARP a été voté sous Bush.
La 2e moitié (qui devait aussi être approuvé) a été annulé et remplacé par un plan de 1.2 trillion de Tim Geitner.
Tout faux, va lire les 2 lien du WSJ, on montre les conséquences des plans de relance d’Obama par rapport à ceux de Bush.
C’est drôle de voir les gauchistes comme Honorius patiner pour maquiller le déficit d’Obama (qui n’est en poste que depuis 1 mois).
Le pire c’est que l’année n’est pas encore fini et qu’Obama a dit qu’il devrait probablement avoir un second plan de relance. Donc son déficit peut encore augmenter de beaucoup!