haha..

those charts are from the exact same site.

they don't offer bar charts for older target dates..

maybe you should send them an email and complain..

haha..

in response to your 'and'

Fifty-five months after the recession started in July 1981, the Reagan recovery had created 7.8 million more jobs than when the recession started, and real per capita gross domestic product was up by $3,091. Fifty-five months after the recession that began in December 2007, there were four million fewer Americans working than when the recession started, and real per capita GDP was down $803.

The trajectory of household income is even more telling. According to Sentier Research analysis of monthly U.S. Census data, during the current recovery American households have lost more income than they lost during the recession. In December 2007, real median household income was $54,916. It had fallen to $53,508 when the recession ended 18 months later. But by June 2012, real median family income had fallen to $50,964.

During the Reagan recovery from 1981 to 1986, real median household income on an annualized basis rose by $3,380 or 7.7%.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444812704577609863412900388.html

liberal logic at it's finest...

Reagan- 2.8
-1.1 = 1.7 trillion dollars increase

barry- 11
-16 = 5 trillion dollars... 5,000 billion, or 50,000 million dollars...

your percentages are meaningless...

of course not, in these debates,, we always pick whatever figures seem to support our opinion

figures don't lie,, but liars figure


I guess, if someone was making 100 thousand per year and then got boosed to 300 thousand per year

they would not be as psyched as someone who made 1 million and got boosted to a million 5 per year,,,,lol


after all, the former only got 200 grand more and the latter got 500 grand more,,,,


context doesn't matter AT ALL with numbers,,,,if they 'prove' your point, I guess,,,

my point? my point is your a bit confused on your math skills...

considering I Was head of my CALC class in college at the age of 16,,, and presuming my BASIC math skills haven't deteriorated ,,,


I doubt its much worse than anyones here

but by all means, Im open for the correction of my 'math',,,,which equations did I get incorrect?

The Deficit is going down under this president.

your equations are fine, it's your understanding of percentages that are a bit off... your comparison to Reagan and barry was way out there

Reagan spends 2 trillion, and the national debt goes up 200%
obama spends 7 trillion, and the debt goes up 50%

which one of those seems better to you?

yeah,right!

It is.

when it comes to money,,I think its always better when we multiply money than it is when we add dollars,, if we are trying to make money

and its better that we don't multiply dollars when we are losing money






in other words,, the difference between seeing a half a mill lose my account and two mill leave,, depends very strongly on what was there to begin with

if both accounts begin at the same point, its equally disturbing

howver, if the latter STARTED OUT With TEN TIMES As much as the former (10 mill compared to 1 mill) ID be more upset about the former accounts losses (1 million losing 5000k would be more upsetting than 10 million losing 500 k or even 2.5 million,,,,,in other words)


we started out with a million and dug ourselves in the whole three times as deep once

now we are only in the whole 50 percent more than where we started,,,

I don't see how there is much comparison in terms of how 'bad' things are or have been before,,,where those figures are concerned,,,

U.S. Deficit Shrinking At Fastest Pace Since WWII, Before Fiscal Cliff
By Jed Graham
Posted 11/20/2012 11:18 AM ET
Email Print License Comment

inShare


View Enlarged Image

Believe it or not, the federal deficit has fallen faster over the past three years than it has in any such stretch since demobilization from World War II.

In fact, outside of that post-WWII era, the only time the deficit has fallen faster was when the economy relapsed in 1937, turning the Great Depression into a decade-long affair.

If U.S. history offers any guide, we are already testing the speed limits of a fiscal consolidation that doesn't risk backfiring. That's why the best way to address the fiscal cliff likely is to postpone it.

While long-term deficit reduction is important and deficits remain very large by historical standards, the reality is that the government already has its foot on the brakes.

In this sense, the "fiscal cliff" metaphor is especially poor. The government doesn't need to apply the brakes with more force to avoid disaster. Rather the "cliff" is an artificial one that has sprung up because the two parties are able to agree on so little.



Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/blogs-capital-hill/112012-634082-federal-deficit-falling-fastest-since-world-war-ii.htm#ixzz2g2Jl6nU8
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook

The Deficit is going down under this president.

no, your liberalness is getting in the way here...

if it didn't work for Reagan, as the national debt has went up some 1600% since his time in office, what makes you think barry's contribution of the 5-7 trillion he spent is going to work?

tangent much? its increased 8 times,,,from 2 trill when Reagan left

to 16 trill now

that's a period of 24 years though


if we had kept the rate of 200 percent every eight years,Reagans pace,,,our debt now would be,,

the first eight years....6 trill

the next eight years,,,,24 trill

the last eight years,,,72trill


,,, Im glad things actually SLOWED down their PACE,,,where the debt is concerned,,,

lol, keep thinking that, see what it does for ya...

the sad fact is, it should have never been in the trillions in the first place... what business would survive with that kind of dept?
barry is not helping by adding trillions upon trillions of dollars to it..