E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSFrom msnbc.com's Tom Curry
In its mid-year long-term budget forecast, the Congressional Budget Office on Wednesday renewed its previous warnings that the government faces an increasing risk of a fiscal crisis due its ever-greater borrowing.
The report comes as Vice President Joe Biden and congressional budget negotiators try to reach an accord that would cut spending enough for Republicans to agree to an increase in the government’s borrowing limit.
August 2 is the date on which the Treasury Department says it will exhaust its means of managing cash to avoid hitting the current debt limit.
As it did in a report last January, the CBO said publicly held debt as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP) would reach nearly 70 percent during the current fiscal year which ends on Sept. 30.
The CBO – in its “alternative fiscal scenario” -- predicted that if Congress does not raise taxes to their 2000 level and fails to impose Medicare spending cuts mandated by a 1997 law, by 2035 federal spending would account for more than a third of GDP, up from 24 percent of GDP this year.
Under that same scenario, by 2020 publicly held debt would reach nearly 90 percent of GDP.
CBO director Douglas Elmendorf said many budget analysts think the alternative fiscal scenario “is a more realistic picture of the nation’s underlying fiscal policies” than the “baseline” scenario which by law CBO must use to forecast spending and revenue.
The baseline, for example, assumes that current income tax rates will revert to their 2000 level at the end of 2012.
In Wednesday’s report, the CBO repeated earlier warnings about the risk of a sovereign debt crisis.
A rising level of debt, combined with an excess of spending over revenue “would increase the probability of a fiscal crisis for the United States,” the nonpartisan agency said, repeating a warning it made last July.
“In such a crisis, investors become unwilling to finance all of a government’s borrowing needs unless they are compensated with very high interest rates,” the CBO said, adding that “there is no way to predict with any confidence whether and when such a crisis might occur in the United States.”
But it said, “All else being equal, however, the larger the debt, the greater the risk of such a crisis.”
In his introduction to the report, Elmendorf identified health care costs and demographics as primary causes of the fiscal dilemma.
“Under current law, an aging population and rapidly rising health care costs will sharply increase federal spending for health care programs and Social Security,” he said. “If revenues remained at their historical average share of gross domestic product (GDP), such spending growth would cause federal debt to grow to unsustainable levels.”
Leave a Comment:
Argue over the what, the why and the wherefore, but whatever you believe in, this situation is real, serious and a greater threat to our nation than any outside our borders...
Too bad entitlements are set to equal all revenue received.
But, But, grandma....those bastard conservatives want to push her over the cliff!
But what is funny, in a very sad way is all this talk about budgets and budget analysis. What budget?
Harry Reid, where be the budget mister? Oh wait, Pelosi said we don't need no stinkin' budget. What is she up to these days?
Reid does not want to introduce a budget because there is an election coming up. Talk about your profiles in courage.
Biden's talking to five Senators because number six left- something about wasting a lot of hot air with no hope of results. Anybody shocked by that?
Here's a plan- we cannot get the stimulus back in toto, but how about demanding back monies from the companies that spent what they got in China?
Then, cut every single one of Obama's new programs. Cut HHS back to where it was in 2006. Cut DOE completely. Start working on reforming entitlements for those 55 and younger.
Next thing you know, it adds up to real money.
Well on a happy fun note - this clearly will be the thread where few libbies dare tread.
Feisty, Bev., Navy, Drive By, AM, Jody, Amy, Louis J? What's the matter, did the CBO just blow up evrything you all stand for, which of course is spending more money?
Like I said before insolvency sucks.
Too bad they remove the spines of our politicians as a prerequisite for becoming a member of Congress. Pathetic untrue partisan commercials (like the grandma going off a cliff) are exactly the kind of false propaganda that will push all of us off a cliff.
Spanky-
Too bad entitlements are set to equal all revenue received.
But, But, grandma....those bastard conservatives want to push her over the cliff!
But what is funny, in a very sad way is all this talk about budgets and budget analysis. What budget?
Harry Reid, where be the budget mister? Oh wait, Pelosi said we don't need no stinkin' budget. What is she up to these days?
Darling, Let's say the budget was not sitting in the GAO office do you think the patriotic GOP/T-baggers would pass it?
http://carper.senate.gov/press/record.cfm?id=331306
I think not they are too worried about the uncertainty of their getting in the White House.
Beverly...
Aside from missing the point entirely...your entire defense of the Democratic party's inaction on the subject is predicated on what the other side wouldn't do? LOL...seriously? You're killing me... How can anything you say (no matter how politely, darlin) be taken seriously when you include name calling as part of your statement? (T-baggers?) Perhaps someone needs another season of Charm School, darlin. ROFL!!!
dangerfield -- That's too simplistic.
The REAL danger to us in this situation DOES come from outside our borders, which is where we owe all this money, and where we're fighting the wars that are a big part of why we owe it.
Bev dear, I cannot decipher your comment.
What are the dems doing to pass a budget? Where's Harry? Heck, where's Obama? His budget was a joke, perhaps he should re-do it?
Just a thought. You know, leading and all.
And no AM, noone outside our borders made us spend all that money. No one.
Spanky...
Good points. How many votes did Ryan's budget get? 43 or so? How about Obama's budget plan? I think the grand total was a big fat 0...including the dem votes. So, instead of leading...he punts to the VP. Seriously? He punts the #1 threat facing our country to Biden?
Bev...
That's why we need a change in the WH. We need a LEADER...not Pat McBriar from the Cowboys.
Yep, Mr. Biden's group suggests cutting $ 100,000,000,000 over the next ten years ($ 10,000,000,000 per year) is not going to cut the mustard. Sheesh, that is only 1/6 of what Mr. Bernanke used for his QE2 which did nothing but add fuel to the inflation fire.
S&P remarks on downgrading the dollar and fear statements on defaulting, yet our elected officials cannot agree to balance the budget. Seems each side is waiting for the other side "to cave in" on their demands.
Wait, where is the approved National budget ? Oh, silence from the "daily" Progressive posters.
The wars are a proven fact to be a drop in the bucket of our total debt. Next talking point please.....
I find it funny that it is getting to be a crisis. it passed crisis mode a long time ago. There are people saying that our Debt is not something we can payback. That we should move to a debt service model.. IE just pay the intreast forever !
"Feisty, Bev., Navy, Drive By, AM, Jody, Amy, Louis J? What's the matter..."
Why the hell are you dropping my name in a post about a conversaton I was not part of, you little pr!ck?
(oops- can't call you that. A pr!ck's a part of a man....)
"Here's a plan- we cannot get the stimulus back in toto, but how about demanding back monies from the companies that spent what they got in China?"
Let us know if that works, NJ, and maybe we can do the same for the monies that went for tax breaks for all the Me First Folks.
Little prick?
Oh and now we are back to me not being a man, and next I'm sure you call me gay.
Why so grumpy this morning Drive BY? Quick say something funny. Even better say something glib and funny about the subject of this article.
Come on Drive by, turn that frown upside down. :)
Hey - you are soooo right on those terrible, horrible, no good OBAMA tax cuts.
Why Drive BY, why did he do that to you?
Say, you aren't getting all grumpy because this whole insolvency thing is starting to dawn on you? Oh No, libbie meme fail.
Hey Spanky,
whats wrong with being gay.. At least then you can claim you are in a minority whos rights are getting trampled on by the religious zelots. Hell you might even get some free Gubmnet money out of the deal. If you are black or mexican you are damn sure to get some Gubment money out of the deal. Hell lets make it a trifecta.. If you are a Gay black or mexican male between the ages of 18 and 25, there is no way on Obamas green earth that you would not qualify for at least SOME Gubment money..
Tax, Baby Tax.
"Oh and now we are back to me not being a man, and next I'm sure you call me gay."
Now Now, lil' fellow- no need to "pull a Palin"- THAT was THEN, this is NOW.
Um, drive by? It was my understanding the jill ions of dollars Obama handed out were to create jobs. Now, I admit, he never said WHERE, but most people inferred that they would be created HERE, not in China.
Given those facts, it would behoove Obama to request a repatriation of those funds. Just, you know, so people will not start asking unfortunate questions this close to an election.
Obama promised to fix the economy back in 2008. Not only has he failed in that promise, he's now gone into hiding on this issue! Open your eyes liberals! The country is going down the toilet yet all you can do is smear Republican candidates! What hypocrites!
Hey Spanky: If we hadn't bailed anyone out and hadn't spent any money on a stimulus program, we would already have been insolvent for quite some time now, as unemployment and foreclosures would have risen to a far higher level and consumer spending would have fallen to a much lower level too, causing even more corporate, industrial, and banking failures than we have had with President Obama and the Democrats in power. Remember that 60% of the electorate voted Democrat during the 2008 election, and even during the 2010 election, the US Senate remained Democrat by a 56-44 margin. As a lifelong Democrat perhaps it would have been smarter to not bail anyone out, just so that the default could have been entirely blamed on you conservatives and your fearless lying and cheating leadership. The problem that we Democrats have is that we have some degree of compassion for the plight of our fellow man, which is obviously viewed as some kind of a personal shortcoming by you conservatives.
I don't operate by talking points, but that sure sounds like one. In fact, it sounds just like something one would hear on Faux News.
How about some numbers to back up that canned comment. Or would you accept this?
http://huskytraders.com/correlation-wars-national-debt-gdp/
Or maybe this?
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3036
Wasn't it just a day or two ago that we had this big drawn out discussion about how people are not civil with each other here at FR.
DBO proves the point. Brother... don't get so defensive. Spanky was just soliciting your comments. Responding with the personal attacks like you did is no way to make friends.
NewDayDawning... do you see what I mean? (now this is just an observation.... but any time the 'regulars' out here can't post a rebuttal... they lash out.)
Pride, I agree. I also think Obama's prediction of just "one term" will soon become reality!
Last I heard Entitlement spending is far greater than defense spending. That is a huge statement because we are in 2+ wars right now. What the federal government needs to do is stop bailing out the states so much and let them go bankrupt. Things like multi-generational welfare families will quickly get booted off the state rolls as soon as the money stops coming in from the Fed. We need to teach states like California and New York that you can only be as liberal as you can afford. Why should tax money from someone in Texas be distributed to some welfare baby in Cali by way of the Federal Government? Bust the unions, reduce the pensions, raise the retirement age, and control the population growth. That's my suggestion!
If you think that's bad, why don't you mosey over to First Thoughts and read my links describing how both Governor Rick Perry and Governor Tim Pawlenty, after using stimulus money -- $6.6 billion in Perry's case -- to hide their state deficits, rather than to create jobs, are now running for President on their great records of balancing budgets, and blaming President Obama because the stimulus didn't work. Both of their states, of course, are now facing HUGE deficits because the two governors neglected to face the issue while they had a chance, electing instead to raid the funds that were supposed to create jobs.
Now there's something to be proud of. Why don't YOU open YOUR eyes?
The President has done a great job. However, the Republicans continue to block and play their games with the budget. Give the President what he wants and we as a nation will be back on top.
If you knew it, no joe, then why didn't Governor Perry or Governor Pawlenty know it? Why did they both use billions of dollars of stimulus money to hide their state deficits? Why didn't they use that money as it was intended -- to create jobs -- and find other ways to cut their state budgets?
Because it was way too good to pass up, that's why. But it doesn't DO any good, now does it?
You know -- give a man a fish, and he eats it; teach a man to fish and he feeds himself and his family for a lifetime. Using that money for job creation, as it was intended, would have pumped money into the economy in the RIGHT way, creating demand in the private sector, increasing tax revenue, and decreasing deficits correspondingly. Using it to temporarily hide the debt merely defers the debt while not solving the structural economic issue.
And of course both governors now claim that they created good economic environments in their state by balancing their budgets, when THEY in fact did no such thing, and they have left their respective states facing budget crises that are WAY out of proportion to the rest of the country.
So what do they do? Bail out and run for President and accuse the current President of failure. Classy.
Actuall AM... at least in the case of Pawlenty... HIS state's budget WAS balanced.
It is a state law that is has to be balanced. It just so happened that rather than cut state spending he and his state government elected to incorporate those federal funds into THEIR budget. Hence.... a balanced budget.
Now... you can debate all you want about how sound that strategy was, but the budget was balanced. And you can say that he was supposed to 'CREATE' jobs with that money... but isn't it just as effective to 'SAVE' those (government) jobs? The liberals here on this site are always parading around all the jobs that the stimulus money saved... perhaps those are some real examples of that.
Job1 - he had 2 years with a large majority in the house and close to a filibuster-proof majority in the senate. He got much of what he ran on.
If by doing a great job you mean 9.1% unemloyment, a looming fiscal crisis over the debt limit, $4.00/gal gas, housing still in a huge slump and an illegal war in Libya then yep - he's doing a great job.
That sarcasm. What would you call a bad job?
OldTimer Last election was like "pick one of the lesser of two evils". The McCain-Palin team seemed to be a continuation of Bush-Cheney policy. The 10-15% not loyal to either party decided they had had enough of the republican's giving Obama-Biden a victory. This 10-15% may be already unsupportive of Obama-Biden, not willing to wait out a second term and looking for a new horse to ride but no one has risen to the occasion.
Your intentions may be good, but with all due respect, you're missing DBO's point in favor of doing a little self-righteous lashing out of your own.
Spanky doesn't just "solicit" comments. Spanky baits. He incites. He invites.
He doesn't need any help from you.
As for response about Pawlenty, read my post above for what's wrong with it.
Instead of making tough choices, which is how both he and Perry are now trying to sell themselves, they actually sold out, leaving their huge structural, long-term deficits in place, but undiscovered, while we are now years behind in getting the economy moving again, but this time there's no more stimulus money to do it.
Ask Mixed Bag about that. He got it right. Check his post on the First Thoughts thread.
Why can't YOU see it?
How did we get to this Sad State: Bush the great Decider and the Republicans squandered A large part of this countries wealth with:
1) His 2 war that cost a trillian dollars with the scantiest of hersey evidence((Just Added to the Debt)
2) His prescription benefits that we couldnt afford and (Just Added to the Debt)
3) His tax cuts for the rich that we couldnt afford and ((Just Added to the Debt)
4) HIs Letting 2/3 of largest corporations that make 10s to 100s of Billions pay no taxes thru outsourcing of our jobs. (Billions of Dollars Not Collect Because People are out of Work) ((Just Added to the Debt)
Why wer'ent the Republican screeming Bloody Murder when Bush was laying the seeds to Trillions of Dollars In budget deficits? Remember Cheney "Deficits dont matter"
Ill tell you why? Because The Republicans only care about their Greedy selves & Hell with everyone else.
And how will we pay for this now? With YOUR social security \ medicare money, of course!(That You paid Taxes Into and Now the Govtment wants to tell us its an "Entitlement") And huge national debts for our children and grand children as for as the eyes can see. Wake up people.youve where Had!
The Great Decider Decided all right. He decided to scr@w us and this country !!!
Keep electing Republicans into the White house voting for the Rich and expect the same lame results
Well, well, well, lets see how the Left spins this, and actual CBO Report says that the Democrats, while in the Majority, ran through our economy like kids getting a half hour free run through the candy store. Yes there were Republicans, but in 2006, Pelosi and Ried took the majority with the Left making this a Democrat plunder.
Where were the Republicans? Well, sitting there and fighting for the correct thing to do, but with no power to slay the invading Left, and their Tax and Spend ways. Problem being, Clinton actualy put the ball in Motion when he Forced Lenders to make bad loans, under the threat of a FEDERAL investigation if they didn't, and it closed a Bonk trying to follow the rules set about by the Lenders to only allow loans to those that, historically by their credit reports, could afford to pay, and not to the Welfare and unemployed or deadbeats, at OVER the value of the existing collateral. Also, Dear Bill sent our Labor forces jobs overseas with NAFTA and GATT, it ain't ALL about the stimulus.
Do as the Left does in some States ( NC for one ) and that is to hold "Early voting" and not require a photo ID, only a Utility bill or Library card for ID, and make the period TWO (2) WEEKS prior to the Election. Why no photo ID? Well, according to the Left and NAACP, their anr Thousands of Minorities that "are afraid of authority, especially the States Motor Vehicle or Licencing(SP) Bureau that issues State approved ID" and to require it, as in some places, is Racist, as happend id the NC Supreme Court, and it worked as it allow's the Chicago style of Vote early, and Vote often style of twisting the ballot with the Dead and unregistered to vote in ANY Election. Know where your SS# goes when your ID is stolen? To one of those "Afraid" Voters and then some, as your credit score has nothing to do with Voting, but it sure raises the Dead.
Pure Leftist Democrat's Killing America as fast as Possible, and now, I'm afraid the Agenda they, the DNC and Soros Money, set in the 1960's is coming to be true.
The only thing I haven't seen yet is the Dancing in the Streeat by those on the DNC/Liberal side dancing in the streets as they have brought America to it's knees. Don't believe it? Read the EU News outlets where the American Left can't Censor, and they tell it like it is, and it isn't pleasant to be placed in the same category as the Greeks, total Failure.
How long before they admit they are wrong? And why was it in March 2010, Pelosi, backed by Ried, stood before to Congress and stated "We have to pass it before we can see whats in it" statement?
We find today that the Meical Plan that Obama and the DNC pushed through Congress in 2010, contains a section of "Waivers" for some select portions of the Nation, about Three(3) MILLION Middle class, mainly Union supporters of the Bill, are now Eligible for full Medicare, even though they work every day.
Why is it important? Because this Plan allows the Unions to use what was once "Union Medical Plan deductions" in they're Dues to use as Campaign support money by having the contracts with Companies, to use the Union Members name and SS# to make BIG Donations to the Left and the DNC.
Happy now Socialists and Communists? The only thing I can say here is to vote on Election Dayy, and just make sure you vote RIGHT.
Can't blame Bush, it all been the Democrats and Socialist/Communist Left since 2006, and now Obama has had THREE YEARS to make it closer to corrrect, but all we see is the Debt going above 14 TRILLION DOLLARS, and it isn't the Governments Money.....IT'S OURS, YOU AND ME AND OUR GRANDCHILDREN, that the Left has sold out.
Anna, I can't speak for Minnesota but Texas should consider the stimulus money as reparations for the federal government's refusal to enforce it's borders. Medicaid and food stamp programs have drained the states coffers.
AM... with all due respect... I fail to see how Spanky's comment baited or incited anything... he DID invite... and what he got was disrespect. (Sad)
I DID read your post above and my post regarding Pawlenty is factual and disproves your statements. (sorry)
Regarding tough choices... how many 'tough choices' are being made on Capital Hill these days? The Democrats can't even come up with a budget... let alone balance one. All I heard from the progressives out here for the first year of Obama's presidency was how the Republicans are the 'party of NO'... but who is saying NO now? At least the Republicans made a budget proposal... a start... a place to work from... but all they are hearing now is NO.
Go Figure.
"As it did in a report last January, the CBO said publicly held debt as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP) would reach nearly 70 percent during the current fiscal year which ends on Sept. 30."
Too bad they don't tell the WHOLE story. The total National Debt as a percentage of GDP is projected to be 98% by the end of this fiscal year.
By only counting the 'Public Debt', they conveniently ignore the $2.5 Trillion that the government 'borrowed and spent' from the Social Security 'Trust Fund'. Pretending that it doesn't count as money that has to be repaid is a ludicrous fiction.
Out here in CA we pay the price every day for Obama, and our Congress's incompetence, with porous borders and billions in costs to pay for their beliefs.
As far as a budget, the House passed a budget, so the Republicans did their job. The democrats are so screwed at this point due to the CBO realities that what we are going to see over the next 18 months is non-stop character attacks, because they have zero record to stand on.
It's sad really, as they had total control of the government for a couple of years, and simple did the wrong things. Had they waited on health care, chosen to work with Republicans, if the reps dug in, Dems could have won a super-majority and likely got everything they wanted - just before the biggest bankruptcy in the history of the world.
As it is, we do need to end these wars - it is simply not something we can afford any longer.
As to the risk of too much foreign debt, I would argue that the world still needs us more than we need them - should they turn on us, we could easily nationalize our resources and survive without any outside help at all.
Regarding the entitlements - we must change the paradigm, as our population growth pattern has changed. This is not arguable, and grandma can be accommodated. It is likely that many people who receive Social Security do not need it. Others that are surviving on it alone. This is not that difficult to manage - means testing is going to be the only way to properly manage the future.
Spanky-
Bev dear, I cannot decipher your comment.
That's because you have a bullsh!t detector. Perhaps you should not be so cheap and invest in some good books or try goggling instead of scouting young girls.
Well said, Paul! Well said! BRAVO!
NewDayDawning.... What do you say to this?
There are only a couple of 'regulars' that seem to be posting on this thread (I wonder why given the subject of the article)... But the couple that are here are in rare form!
Paul F
Interesting post, and for the most part, I agree with it. Means testing of entitlements is probably needed at this point, but I doubt that it will make a significant difference, and it will also be very difficult to enforce, and it will require an admission on the part of the government that Social Security is not what was represented for the last 70+ years - that it was an annuity plan where people made contributions during their working careers to build up a 'Trust Fund' to help pay for their retirement.
As for a 'bankruptcy' by the government, it will not take that form - my prediction is that the government will merely let inflation wipe out most of the National Debt. Here is how it will work;
Since about 86% of the National Debt is 'long term' (10+ years), allowing inflation to run at 15% per year for 5 years will reduce the REAL value of the long term debt by half. It is not unprecedented, since inflation got to about 15% under Jimmy Carter. It also has the advantage of not requiring Congress and the President to incorporate any 'austerity' measures - it will just 'happen', and our leaders will just wring their hands and say "it's Bush's fault".
Also, the Federal Reserve actually thinks a little inflation is good (who wouldn't, since it allows them to repay the debt with cheaper dollars).
wow
Pretty typical talking point there Anna, Bring in Fox News.. here is a hint for you.. since Fox News is NOT a network station, and I do not have Cable or Dish to get that station, how the hell can I watch it.
In your link, you say that the economic downturn, Bush's Tax cuts, and the wars can explain the deficit over the next ten years. Well thank you for proving you have no flippin clue what is really going on. Deficit and Debt are two different things.
BUT lets stick with facts here.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33110.pdf
Since 9/11 terror attacks Congress has approved 1.28 trillion ( that includes health care, base security and all that jazz) Like I said before, A drop in the bucket of our Debt total. Hell Obama borrowed more money THIS YEAR alone, then the entire war budget since 9/11. The Deficit for this year ( last I looked ) was hovering around 1.6 trillion dollars.
SO now do you really want to have a battle of facts, where you are clearly unarmed, with me? I actually have taken the time to look at BOTH sides of the coin, know what the hell I am talking about, and do not spout off talking points like you and others here.
Anna, you continue to spout the same tired talking points.
There WAS no deficit for Pawlenty. There IS a difference between what the government wants in Minnesota, and what it can afford. Same story in Texas. They are going to have to curb their wants to fit their budgets.
Now that we have, (once again), disposed of that, perhaps you would be so kind as to tell me how much stimulus money these governors sent to China?
That was the point of my post.
I am thinking it was nothing- unlike all those companies that got stimulus funds.
Three million jobs created- in China, it appears. No amount of slick talking is going to get Obama out of this one.
The other day a poster (Greg) did a survey of conservatives. One question was why do you come to MSNBC's forum instead of a conservative site and forum? I never go to FOX and waste my time swooping and pooping. This thread is mostly conservative garbage at this point.
We can talk about the budget. We ALL know it's a problem, though not at the level the right-wing would have us believe. Thank goodness GOP/TP leaders are starting to talk about REVENUE. All you conservatives conveniently ignore this part of the article above--tax revenues at levels prior to 2000. Let's talk about revenue, huh?
You have the audacity to talk about pushing grandma off a cliff, when it is true--vouchers would push grandma off the cliff. Some conservatives, like Santorum want to push grandma off the cliff NOW. Please do us a favor and read up on it (using credible sources). You will see the many efforts being made by Dems to control the cost of Medicare, beginning with an end to Bush's prescription drug fiasco so that Medicare can negotiate for lower drug costs.
You have the audacity to talk about President Obama's budget not getting votes. Try some intellectual honesty for a change (like you know what that is). And the wars are only a drop in the bucket? Really?
Republicans just BLOCKED another bill to end subsidies, and just blocked another jobs bill. Of course you don't mention this. Gees, you people are either trolls or very ill-informed.
Hey I would run for president if anyone would support my idea of making medical care cost less.Have you seen how much they charge these days!Thats the real problem.There greed has cost us this country.
Our President is doing a great job. he is doing preciselywhat liberals can do. Thank for keep our unemployment more then 9% , thanks for all the illegal wars we are fighting to help our Muslim brothers, thanks for bring the Dollar down , now the dollar has less value than the Canadian Dollar for the first time in history. Thanks for the excellent idea to give weapons to drug dealers to kill Americans. Thanks for allowed more illegal immigrants to this country, thanks for stop the drilling for oil and bring the price of oil up. Thanks for the health care reform, now my insurance went 20% higher thanks , thanks, thanks....
So to summarize - according to Anna Moly I am an big fat evil "inviter." Ouch, you got me AM.
And then there's my girl Bev. - I have a bullsh!t detector and therefore cannot decipher her comments.
Is the world upside down today? :)
You Americans are foolish! Kensyian economics work, so does socialism and redistribution of wealth! Obama recognized a long time ago that Americans need, no require, a strong central government that controls what you do and how you should live....! I think the photos on cigarette packages are a little much, but it is evident you people need direction. It is obvious from this blog that there is a great poloarization in America... this is evident in the newspapers and TV too!
Obama is succeeding in his dream of socialism.... just let him finish the job he started! Then you too can retire at 45 like we do in Argentina!
Okay. Then stop complaining that it didn't create any jobs.
But all states had similar issues with Medicaid, and not all states did the same thing. And it's not very creative to solve a deficit by borrowing more money -- this time federal money. Now Texas's deficit is laid off on to the rest of us.
Texas should really thank me for the tax dollars that I contributed to the stimulus.
You do thank me, don't you, Big B? Otherwise, I would say you're not a very courteous Southern gentleman.
Oh, pish, Spankster. Show me where I said "evil."
You can invite me anytime. I don't think it hurts that much. ;-)
No apologies necessary, but it does show that you don't know anything about economics. Pawlenty used BORROWED stimulus money to hold down his own short-term deficit. The stimulus money is nothing but BORROWED MONEY, SOTB, meaning that Pawlenty's actions merely laid Minnesota's debt off on the rest of us, including YOU, if you're not from Minnesota.
Minnesota's deficit is now part of the federal deficit.
In short, you've been snookered. What part of this don't you understand?
And then, to make matters worse, Pawlenty turns around and claims credit for balancing the budget, as if it were some magic trick. Any idiot could have done it, including me. And even you.
I owe Spanky a dollar, SOTB. Give me a dollar so I can pay him off. If you don't have a dollar, then you can borrow a dollar from DBO to give to me. I pay it to Spanky. There. My debt's paid and we're all done now. Aren't we? I don't owe you anything because the dollar you paid me was merely "reparations" for something. We're all square. Or do you still owe DBO a dollar?
Because, in a nutshell, that's YOUR argument, SOTB.
How is that Hopey changey working for us, And now the Democrats are speaking about another stimulus. Wow the first one did not work at all, and they want to spend more.
Thank goodness the country is waking up finally and the poll #s for the Pres. are showing it.
Hey Evaperon(post 1.48) not sure if you live in Argentina or live here, but you can take your dream of socialism under Obama and go back to Argentina! While your at it take Bev, feisty redwig, anna molly and the other posters here that think like that along with you.
Most Americans don't favor big government or redistribution. And most of us are very disappointed in the current administration and its agenda! Just like we've done with other 1 term liberals we will find a suitable replacement in 2012. Hopefully we will have time to undo the damage caused thus far!
Ana Molly & Jeremy
Claim - “The wars have been going on since 2001 and 2002 and we have spent $1.4 Trillion (or whatever) on them."
I see this argument often, and I feel compelled to challenge it.
The reality is that the vast majority of the costs of our military are 'allocated' to Iraq and Afghanistan because our troops are there. If they were located in Germany or other places, we would still incur most of the costs - they would merely be allocated elsewhere. There certainly are extra costs related to ordnance used, but nowhere near the $1.4 Trillion claimed.
So how do we determine the EXTRA cost of those wars? Perhaps the best way is to calculate total defense spending as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), which is the % of our income we allocate to Defense. The results are interesting;
Over the 40 years from 1969 through 2008, the average defense spending was 6.14% of GDP.
Over the 8 years under Bill Clinton, when we had virtually no military operations going on and defense spending was cut back significantly (some say too much), the average defense spending was 3.91% of GDP.
Over the 8 years under G W Bush, when both wars were started, the average defense spending (including the wars) was 3.64% of GDP.
It would appear that the claim of '$Trillions spent on the wars' is greatly exaggerated. I have to agree with Jeremy that the cost of the wars was closer to 'a drop in the bucket' than a major contributor to the debt/deficit (which are not the same). Interestingly, the average Deficit under G W Bush for all 8 of his fiscal years averaged only $251 Billion per year and included the cost of the wars.
Ana Molly & Jeremy
Claim - “The wars have been going on since 2001 and 2002 and we have spent $1.4 Trillion (or whatever) on them."
I see this argument often, and I feel compelled to challenge it.
The reality is that the vast majority of the costs of our military are 'allocated' to Iraq and Afghanistan because our troops are there. If they were located in Germany or other places, we would still incur most of the costs - they would merely be allocated elsewhere. There certainly are extra costs related to ordnance used, but nowhere near the $1.4 Trillion claimed.
So how do we determine the EXTRA cost of those wars? Perhaps the best way is to calculate total defense spending as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), which is the % of our income we allocate to Defense. The results are interesting;
Over the 40 years from 1969 through 2008, the average defense spending was 6.14% of GDP.
Over the 8 years under Bill Clinton, when we had virtually no military operations going on and defense spending was cut back significantly (some say too much), the average defense spending was 3.91% of GDP.
Over the 8 years under G W Bush, when both wars were started, the average defense spending (including the wars) was 3.64% of GDP.
It would appear that the claim of '$Trillions spent on the wars' is greatly exaggerated. I have to agree with Jeremy that the cost of the wars was closer to 'a drop in the bucket' than a major contributor to the debt/deficit (which are not the same). Interestingly, the average Deficit under G W Bush for all 8 of his fiscal years averaged only $251 Billion per year and included the cost of the wars.
Right Eva,
Take the Obama cheerleaders back to Argentina with you. Maybe show them how to tango. LOL
Silly Americans.... at least half the citizens of your country pay no taxes, nor want to... who do you think they'll vote for in the next election? It will be the guy who knows you will vote for him for that very reason! Talk, talk, talk all you want.... Obama will repeat because he knows where the votes come from. Once elected, he will have to increase taxes for the employed so he can support his followers who can't pay! Big government comes with big debt!
anna molly - rather than spout off with your myriad strawman arguments why not click on this....
http://costofwar.com/en/
There are more links as well relating to "total war costs in iraq and afganistan" since 2001. Perhaps you need to have your research assistant give you all the links.
Regardless, the $ cost of the wars (to date) are less than 10% of our current debt, less than 25% of the debt added by bush2 and perhaps about 200 billion more than the debt added by pres clinton.
BTW - Americas public debt figures are readily available on .gov sites or sites that ref. official government data.
No Joe
Er um, Reid doesn't want to introduce a budget because the Senate CANNOT originate budget bills. They must be introduced by the house.
Maybe you should try to learn something about your own government.
Jonathan-2055273 "No Joe Er um, Reid doesn't want to introduce a budget because the Senate CANNOT originate budget bills."
While it's normal for the House to originate bills, the Senate passes their own separate version, and then a 'Conference Committee' from both houses meets to reconcile their differences.
The House has already passed a budget bill, and now it's up to the Senate to do the same, and then meet to reconcile any differences. Harry Reid is just stalling in his responsibility to pass a Senate version so a reconciliation can proceed. He's obviously shirking his responsibilities.
Posted by Sane Science:
"The framers of the constitution were students of history and knew that democracies with strong federal governments frequently become filled with constituent electorates who's mission is to legislate as much money for their district and supporters as possible leading to unhealthy "financial competition".
Yes, it has seemed now ever since Richard Nixon was President that whatever political party is in power, that the constituency of the defeated political party gets reamed.
Back when the Republicans were in control during the Bush Jr years, and Republican-controlled parts of America had an economy that was just singing right along, much of it having to do with the production of advanced military weaponry, while the Democrat-controlled southern Great Lakes region, which had done quite well when Bill Clinton was in office, was falling off a cliff from an economic standpoint, ever since about 2002.
In fact. by a few weeks before Christmas of 2006, back when the Republicans still had control of both houses of Congress and urban Californians were still making billions of Dollars flipping houses, the unemployment rate in Detroit was nearing 30% and home values there were already down by more than half. Things weren't much better in Chicago, Cleveland, or Buffalo, or a lot of smaller cities and towns in that region either.
The same basic thing happened to the southern Great Lakes when Reagan and Bush Sr held the office too. Unemployment in Detroit in early 1982 was 25% and in the Fall of 1990 it was 20%. When LA was suffering through huge defense spending cutbacks and 18% unemployment under Bill Clinton, the Democrat-held areas of America were doing pretty well. The fact seems to be that there hasn't been enough of an economy here to float all boats equally for quite some time now.
I learned my lesson, and now I live in Colorado, which seems to do well no matter which political party is in power!!!
By the way Roy, Congress needs to pass a debt ceiling increase first, or the 2012 Federal budget is a moot point!!!
Anna
With regards to Pawlenty and his 'balanced' budget, if he is guilty of anything, he is guilty of a 'white lie'.
At the point that the stimulus was passed, it was obvious that this recession wasn't just a cyclical over in a few quarters and job growth resumed in a year or so. So he balanced the budget with stimulus money, which buy the way was what about a third of the stimulus bill was allocated to do, there is NOTHING wrong with that.
However, what he didn't do was add to that and come up with the obvious and start to deal with the problem for what it was, a SERIOUS financial crunch. He probably didn't do it for the obvious reason that he wouldn't be governor by that time so he ignored it. So what, haven't we come to expect that type of behaviour from our leaders?
and Roy
The house passed a budget, called the Ryan plan. The Senate voted on that budget. It didn't pass. Not sure what else you expect the Senate to do. The Senate can create a budget, pass it and what will that get you? Nothing because the house won't touch it, and rightly so. When you talk about reconciliation, that only happens with bills that have a financial implication (new taxes etc...) but are not the budget itself.
Whether the wars cost an EXTRA trillion or not, it is an uncontested fact that we spend half a trillion each year on "defense," and that the reason we do is to meddle all over the world in areas that don't relate at all to our actual defense.
If our soldiers hadn't been stationed in Saudi Arabia, then, as Al Qaeda themselves said, they'd never have had any reason to attack us (which makes sense--why WOULD they, if we weren't stationing soldiers there?). This doesn't argue for cutting and running--IF we can afford the expense of defending the whole world ourselves, delegating nothing to our allies but just keeping on saying "don't worry, we'll get the check." Plainly, though, we can no longer afford that.
We simply have no choice but to stop taxing and taxing and spending and spending on the ever-increasing military budget, unless we want our credit downgraded and the dollar to become worthless, as bond buyers stop buying our bonds, or demand interest payments on our bonds that become too high for us to pay. Tax and spend isn't a one-sided thing; democrats must reform Medicare (though still keeping their promise not to leave the elderly to die, and this can be done if waste is cracked down upon); and republicans, too, must stop pretending they can tax and spend on a military that's in every country in the world. Face it or don't, but if you don't, that debt restructuring after the coming crisis in Treasury bonds is going to be a bummer.
(Nor, as a liar elsewhere tried to float, does the fact that Al Qaeda carried out 9/11 because we were stationed in Saudi Arabia mean that we "deserved" 9/11. The people who died on 9/11 didn't deserve it, and I have never said that, in case anyone else wanted to try to float the same lie by saying I did.)
No kidding? Huh.
Really?! No Kidding? Thanks for pointing that out CBO.
I think CBO now stands for the Congressional Bureau of the Obvious.
From FR: The baseline, for example, assumes that current income tax rates will revert to their 2000 level at the end of 2012.
So this assumes the Bush Tax cuts will expire at the end of 2012. Wanna bet?
Revenue collected from taxes, they going up to? No way, cause with 9.1% unemployment, there's a whole lot of people out of work and not paying taxes. What is it 47? of Americans, get full refunds of taxes paid or don't make enough to pay taxes? No leap of faith there either.
I also remember Obama predicting GNP at over 4%. If you believe that, then explain it to me.
Bottom line, we're outta money and need to start cutting now.
Woim - them there is Obama's tax cuts. As you know Bush's expired by operation of law last December. Obama, like them so much, and believed them to be so needed, that he signed his own [albeit a carbon copy of Bush's] into law.
Plus Obama is about to enact more tax cuts, including, but not limited to more payroll tax cuts. This time for employers, god bless his heart.
As for GDP, it looks to be headed into negative territory.
But looks for a call for further "investments." If only we had say and extra $787 billion laying around.
Spanky,
Sorry, they are the Obama Tax cuts now. Apologies.
Yeah, love that 2% payroll tax cut. Gonna really stimulate the economy, don't you think?
Hey, you make 2% more, right? That's an extra trip to Arizona for you.
China is having some problems also so that $787 billion is going to be hard to come by.
Maybe we can get that from the Iraqi's from their oil production? Wait, forgot, those contracts went to Japan.
I got you Woim - and nice work on the earlier thread. It really is the simplest questions that baffle these fine folk. Thinking is hard sometimes.
It'll totally stimulate my economy, cause this ones going to the employer. ANd as Anna Molly will tell you, mine is the only economy that matters. :)
2% will add up to some real scratch.
Yep...Back in 2000 I still had a job and was paying more taxes, but things changed...was
laid-off just before I could receive my pension...Tried to find jobs, but none were to be had..?
Started drawing my SS asap..Have found a part-time job, but Wish I were back in 2000
and still working..Now I'm locked into a part-time job cause the government limits how much I can earn yearly..?
So is it safe to say that QE3 is dead in the water?
With the ending of QE2 and our country in stagnation, housing market down, stock market down, the pressure of inflation hovering and the possibility of a double dip become more likely then not. What else can Bernanke do?
Eveyrthing will be OK and things are turning around. The debt is minor and can be solved by taxing more.
If you don't believe me, ask Obama.
Whew, THAT'S a relief; I was starting to think I wouldn't be taxed enough. Time to get some foreign aid flying through the air; I hear the Yemeni economy could use a little stimulus.
Bush brought the deficit to more than 11 trillions, so I do not blame Obama at all for the disastrous situhation, he inherited. It takes money to repair a broken country just like it takes money to repair a car.
I wonder what would the republican party do, if they were in power... No more money to spend, how would THEY do it to repair the mess THEY created ?? That is my question.
There is no doubts in my mind that Republicans ARE the BIG SPENDERS and they bankruped the country, big time !
lucetmoi
You've got the solution. Let's ask the Republicans to get that money we spent on the wars back. Iraq produces oil, surely they can pay us back now. Wait, no, that contract went to Japan I think.
Stop blaming people as to why and figure out what we need to do to fix it.
Only in movies can we go back in time.
Oh, except for the $1T for health care "reform." Nothing will change on either side until the government is forced to match expenses to revenues, just as in many states. You can't starve the beast the way we need while the beast can print its own money. Say hello to the next Greece.
Hooray! There is at least one constant in the universe... the Bush blamer's!
I hope you're kidding with your comment about "I do not blame Obama". Seriously?
Sick...... but it IS Bush's fault... this is what you get when you elect a stupid, religious, ignorant moron ! Get it ??
8 long years of stupid policies got you where you are, today ! Sorry, I cannot change the facts.
lucet: Oh, yeah, and take a look at what followed GWB. Still in Iraq. Still in Afghanistan. Gitmo still open. Launched a new war (no, wait, he doesn't call it that) in Libya. Jokes about the failure of his stimulus. That's what happens when you elect an empty-suited, in-over-his-head, "Present"-voting, person to the most powerful position in the world.
So basically we're bickering about which President sucks worse?
People, in 2021 our debt will be more than our GDP...
Good Lord, the Obama boot lickers are just as bad as the Bush 43 boot lickers
jinsd: Yes, I suppose we are--but don't assume I'm a bootlicker, The 2012 election is perhaps the most critical election in my life (my first was Ford v. Carter in 76) for reasons that your post stated quite well.
Actually as the general public blames bush for the crisis and is in love with clinton for those prosperous times under him it reminds us that as president it is based to help oneself today at the determent of the country tomorrow. It's odd how democrats blame bush for the housing crisis, but say republicans hate and never help the poor and dems are for the poor. Isn't this an oxymoron, since the crisis was caused by the poor being able to get loans they couldn't afford. Of course this legislation was pushed by Dems to help the poor, and now they get to blame the repubs for it, what a dumb populace we have. Even the glass-seagal acts demise was pushed and signed by Clinton, which allowed banks to become mega finance enterprises, but somehow dems blame repubs for this too.
Dems, if you say repubs don't are and are out to get the poor, then you can't blame them for the housing crisis, it doesn't make any sense.
KJ - No worries
Yes, we are at critical mass...and that is beyond sobering
LUCETMOI - If you are broke and you are in debt up to your eyeballs,where are you going to get money to fix your car? Oh, I know - steal it from someone, just as the government steals it from the taxpayers.
Looks like everything Obama does is wrong, and is destroying the country. Looks too, like 'them's Obama's tax cuts'.
Sounds to me like some of our posters are fully supportive of him making them go away, then.
Hear that Mr President? Roll them taxes back to pre-2001, and you will have many more supporters. According to what I see on this blog, anyway.
Viet Sem Fi
"LUCETMOI - If you are broke and you are in debt up to your eyeballs,where are you going to get money to fix your car? Oh, I know - steal it from someone, just as the government steals it from the taxpayers."
No ,you don't steal it. You simply go to your employer and ask him to REDUCE your paycheck.
Sheesh.
I'm all for rolling back the tax breaks for everyone, unfortunately that was never on the table. The dems were just playing class warfare in order to buy votes. The payroll tax reduction from a reduction in social security payments was the dumbest thing ever. We already knew the program was unsustainable so we chose to cut funding to it even more. I guess that looks better on the balance sheet since it will show future deficits rather than current year deficits if it were taken from the income tax.
Gosh Drive By - given the last three articles posted it appears that your little gang's strategy sessions with our hosts are not going so well. You guys keeping the too far removed from the "loop?"
I really thought you all had more control than this. But to allow an article like this? I gotta wonder.
Man I wish I could be part of a secret gang like you, Feisty, Ron, Navy Clara, Newday and the rest.
All that work and NoJo still kicks you alls butt everyday. How pathetic. Gosh just think if us conservatives got all coordinate like you. But really where's the fun there, eh Drive By?
A real Brain trust. You all keep up the good work, you hear? Long live the DDI. Long live the libbie gang.
Enough. People please go back to FOX, please.
SOB
Just so your clear on where I fall in the 'spectrum' of Bush Blamers. Until the man does a full mea culpa with APOLOGY, I will continue to blame him.
And I'm not talking his trite little, "I'll be LONG gone before anyone figures out what happened in this (sic.. oval) office."
He was the WORST president in the last century and a simple acknowledgement that he screwed us over would go a long way.
Thanks for clearing that up, Clara. Now we all understand where you come from ;-)
Can't blame Bush for this! Look to the White House for the failure to solve this crisis. Vacations and golf take priority is seems! At what point will the liberals face the fact that Obama has avoided every important decision for 3 years now? They seem more interested in smearing Republican candidate rather than question Obama's actions.... or non-actions.
Obama Has Been “Mostly AWOL” On The “Big Ideological Budget Discussions.” “They're also talking about the big, ideological budget discussions that must occur in the future. ‘There are going to be I think very sharply contrasting visions in terms of where we should move the country,’ Obama said. ‘That's a legitimate debate to have.’ Really? So where has the president been in that debate? Mostly AWOL, so far as I can tell.” (Gloria Borger, Op-Ed, “Washington, We’re Done With High School,” CNN, 4/6/11)
Virtually all the pols, right and left, are to blame, including most recently GWB and BHO and the leadership on both sides. Nobody is willing to take on the tough choices, and their constituents talk tough until it comes to cutting their programs or raising their taxes, not the other guys'.
but it IS Bush's fault... this is what you get when you elect a stupid, religious, ignorant moron ! Get it ??
8 long years of stupid policies got you where you are, today ! Sorry, I cannot change the facts.
Why don't you stupid, google the facts on the 244 achievements of this president ??? EDUCATE YOURSELVES on the facts !!
You can't change the facts, but you're sure good at ignoring them. You know that Frank and Dodd's ridiculous housing bills are still forcing banks to give mortgage loans to people who will never pay them back, right?
Is there a Stupid Google? Is that the liberal search engine? Sounds like I've been getting all my facts from the wrong source.
Bush was a bad president because he started wars and spent too much. Obama is a worse president because he spent even more, has little to show for it, and started another war when we still aren't done with the others.
Wow lucetmoi, nothing like wearing out the old copy and paste mode is there? Try coming up with something new to bore the people with. It's like a broken record laced with political rhetoric.
What is the point of Obama being involved in the budget discussions when the two parties that are responsible for creating the budget (in the house) don't want to talk. It isn't a matter that there is something to discuss, they just don't want to talk.
Beleive me people, I rather be in my french shoes than yours... At least, I have universal health care, our infrastructures are in great shape, college education is free and job trainings are free. We get 4 to 5 weeks paid vacations and we have all the freedom possible.
Where has your money gone ??
What about health care for all your citizens, repair of your infrastructures, poor education, high poverty rates, high crime rates AND NO MONEY LEFT to give a better quality of life to your citizens.... WHAT ARE YOU, PEOPLE GOING TO DO ?
The biggest this you have going against you is the fact that you are French.
For one thing, we pay for the world's security. I think we should be done with that. No more US military bases guarding the French or anyone, unless they pay for it. No missile defense shields for our allies unless they pay for it.
Seriously, how could we afford universal health care, when 1 naval fleet has more firepower than the entire combined French military? We have to guard the world for some reason.
lucetmoie - The French are lazy and always want the govenment to give them more.... more vacation time, more free healthcare, retire at 40 instead of 45... etc, etc.....
Sorry lucetmoi, we don't want or need a big government to take care of us like sheep in a pen..... unlike you, we are willing to work for our keep!
Wait a damn minute.. Your FRENCH and you have the nerve to try and tell US what to do? The fact that you still think something is " FREE " says alot. you are either A) young or B) niave or C) Living off the Gvmnt instead of yourself.
IF I remember my history correctly, you were asked to hold out for a month against the German army and you lasted what a week and a half before you raised the white flag and bowed down to Germany.
The only good thing the french EVER gave the world was their food.
"The only good thing the french EVER gave the world was their food."
....and them toilets that wash your butt. (if you are too stupid to wash your own butt).
So are you righties going to just bash everything and everyone else in the world instead of buckling down and working TOGETHER to fix this?
fielden... now you want to work together... It's funny how the table has turned with this article. Normally the libbies are the 'bashers' at FR. Go figure.
Although it still takes a frenchman to look at a slimy snail and say "hmmm, this really looks good". They aren't much good for anything else and certainly are the most selfish country. They refuse to help anyone with "bad" accents when they all sound like they talk through their noses. In fact they do talk through their noses and look down at the rest of us from the tops of their noses. I've yet to see anything actually worthwhile come from that direction.
"Where has your money gone ??"
Well, let`s see. Could be some of it went into two war efforts to help save your sorry butts, so you can sit over there today and act like the North end of a South bound mule towards us. Any other questions there mon frère?
I agree that Europe should pay for its own defense, and it is crazy that Republicans have a tax-and-spend policy to micromanage the whole world's defense.
However, I for one remember that it was only with French assistance (as in the Marquis de Lafayette, for which Lafayette Streets all over America are named) that we won the American Revolution. Not to mention that several THOUSAND French troops came into the Afghan War, and stayed there for years, in more recent memory, while those who mouth off about "cowardly French" were safe in a nice, comfortable bed in America. Though one can't rate American knowledge of history very highly, if half our electorate thinks of Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann as some sort of history experts.
I might add, as well, that even though this is PARTLY due to French defense being assisted by America (though, as mentioned, French lives were on the line for years assisting OUR defense in Afghanistan), the French federal budget deficit was only around 3% of GDP, up until the economic downturn, and even after that, has never even been as high as 6%, according to The Economist magazine. While our budget, in America, has gotten up to 10% of GDP, that's like Greek disaster levels. So it looks as if we could learn something from France.
Now, watch this: they've just gotten done arguing "well you can balance your budget in France, because we pay so much for your defense! So we pay way too much!" But now they'll switch and say "wait! our defense budget in the US is smaller than it needs to be, so for God's sake, don't cut it! It should only ever grow!" Watch.
Those arguing that the world should pay for its own defense, instead of us picking up the check: great idea. We can't afford to do it for the entire world anymore. Cut the defense budget and make our military truly defensive once again.
andrew, that would cut the jobs in the military industrial complex BIG TIME!!!
It would indeed. The pain of that, and the knock-on effects on the economy, are real; however, although a man in debt goes hungry and complains "but I need to buy groceries with my credit cards!" after they're way over the limit, it doesn't argue that the bank shouldn't enforce its limit.
He shouldn't have gone over his limit, just as we shouldn't have gone stratospheric with half a trillion dollars a year for a military-industrial complex, like Eisenhower warned us about. It doesn't mean "well, forget it, we'll just keep spending more, and more, and more, raising the military budget every year." It means let's bring military spending down to where it makes sense, and to what we can afford.
In other news, CBO is planning to release a preliminary report next week cofirming their findings that the world is round, contrary to earlier reports that it may be flat...
"Dori" economics at work....
Just keep spending... Just keep spending... Just keep spending, spending, spending....
Yes, people republicans love to spend YOUR money on THEIR wars for profit so their friends at halliburton and blackwater CAN GET FILTHY RICH with your tax dollars, but they HATE to spend YOUR taxes on YOU.
And yes, Democrats may raise YOUR taxes because REPUBLICAN greed and warmongering have to be paid for. The war bill that republicans HAVE NOT PAID has to be paid off !
Now, who are you going to vote for in 2012 ???
Me? :) I will vote for President Obama !
I thought you were French?
We have a little rule here- you need to be a U.S. Citizen to vote here. You will have to be content to vote for whoever plans to lose against Sarcozy.
lucetmoi
Now, who are you going to vote for in 2012 ???
Me? :) I will vote for President Obama !
Me too; I also hope in 2012, after President Obama, wins he'll be in better position to prosecute Bush/ Cheney for crimes against humanity.
It's relly too bad Bush could not go to Sweden.
I think that's that big fat frog that raped that hotel maid, right Nojo.
Yep, the French, now there's a country that has got it all figured out. Oh my.
But hey I do loves me some snails, drench in garlic butter. Yum!
New Poll - Only 30% plan to vote for President Obama in 2012...as it stands now I wouldn't plan a trip to DC for a 2013 Obama innauguration
Was it a Fox poll; jinsd?
Everyone knows FOX LIES; including Jon Stewart.
No Bev. It was Bloomberg.
Take off your blinders Bev...there are other news outlets besides First Read
Bloomberg conducted the poll... a pretty reputable news organization I would say
Too bad Mr. Stewart was proven wrong by two independent fact checking websites.
Don't ass|u|me that I'm a Fox News zombie just because I mention a poll that runs counter to your position.
Bev, it's a Bloomberg poll, and contains a LOT of bad news for Obama.
66% see the country moving in the wring direction.
44% say they are worse off than when Obama was inaugurated. (they are right- the Misery Index was 7.73 when he took office. It's 12.6 today).
57% disapprove of Obama's handling of the economy. An equal number disapprove of his job creating abilities. And 61% disapprove of his handling of the budget deficit.
Among likely voters, 31% will definitely vote for Obama; 40% will definitely NOT vote for Obama, and 24% consider voting for another candidate.
Those are pretty bad numbers, Bev.
As to what the country can do about the current situation, 55% believe that by cutting spending and taxes, usiness will be spurred to create jobs.
Looks like Obama has lost the message war. He wants time to "finish the job"- that is what most people FEAR. He should have stuck to WTF- it is, truly, the way most people feel about this presidency.
Beverly,
Right...keep on believing that...
And just so you know...Obama is just as complicit in those "crimes against humanity" when he continues to keep troops in Iraq/Afghanistan... So who is the criminal now??
Polls?? Really?? We don't need no steenking polls! Yeah, a real cross section of the country, a little over 1,000 people?? Get serious already... over 150,000 people voted on here about Rep. Weiner resigning. If the state of the economy has had little or no detrimental affect on your life then you're only here to whine about any proposal that might increase your tax rate..yeah, what, another 1%? Big Deal..Here's an investment tip for you, too. I see popcorn and tin futures rising significantly in the next few months. Whine, anyone?
No poll is of any real use right now until there is a GOP candidate. It can be a pretty sure bet that if Palin was the candidate, that those Obama numbers would go up.
Cynthia, actually I see 'used condom' futures going up.
Tell us something we don't already know, the can has been kicked down the road by both parties until we've reached a dead end. Still the war machine continues with $nation building and reform as our border problem has been being basically ignored and danced around by our leaders in both parties. Yes, raise the debt ceiling and keep spending what we don't have as our fiat currency is about to face a rude awakening. The only option for now us to pay the interest only then actually start budgeting and cutting to start paying on the principle on an insurmountable amount of $debt.
Can you say Greece and Spain? They are the models of failure that have the same problems we do with high unemployment and debt with a failing currency. The Piper is calling in the loans but we can only pay the interest if even that much longer.
All the treasury has to do is service the debts first, and not finance other things until that is done. If they do, no debt crisis, no loss of bond-rating, no problems. Of course, some programs go unfunded, but what's the problem with that? That's what we want!
And let's say the beginning of this was Bush's fault. He spent too much, started wars, etc. What has Obama done? Spent even more, by a lot, and started another war without getting out of the first two! So... Bush is the villain and Obama isn't to blame because why?
Memo to the liberal/progressive dimwits in the audience. Raising the debt ceiling doesn't improve the ratio of debt to GDP so NO........simply raising the debt ceiling and going out and borrowing even more money is NOT an acceptable course of action.
Take a look at Greece. Their neighbors are themselves borrowing money again to lend it to Greece. Why are they doing that? Well for one thing they themselves are broke. A bunch of poor people borrowing from each other doesn't create wealth, lefties. See if you can understand that.
ken, actually one of greece's biggest problems is that most of the wealthy don't actually pay taxes because there is no IRS to enforce tax laws. So you have doctors that make 6 figure incomes that report income in the 4 figure range and therefore get a tax return.
No,it`s not entitlements. It`s protecting the rich and cleaning out the bank to fund our overbloated militry budget. There is no return on money banked or invested outside the US, and miltary money is mainly used for destruction. No return there either. Entitllements are spent in this country. If the entitlement people don`t get enough to pay taxes on, the people they spend with do. That is called return.
"The report comes as Vice President Joe Biden and congressional budget negotiators try to reach an accord that would cut spending enough for Republicans to agree to an increase in the government’s borrowing limit."
Hello? Is this thing on??? The CBO is WARNING us that our growing debt is at crisis levels and DC is worring about cutting "enough" so that they can spend MORE. WTF?
they will raise the debt limit otherwise the govt will shut down. everybody agrees that the debt limit needs to be raised. if they say they don't, they are lying.
I don't and I am not lying!
I for sure don't either. Call me a reactionary, but the debt ceiling of $1T circa 1981 is looking pretty good right now.
See if the gov't senario of raising the limit works the next time you go to the bank and need money. I already owe you more than I can pay back, but, please give me some more of what I already cannot repay. Let me know how that works for you.
Why should that be any different here. It didn't work in Greece, and other countries in the world.
The only thing that works is STOP SPENDING WHAT YOU DONT HAVE.
Raising taxes on people that are out of jobs? Let me know how that works for you.
Where were you when Bush spent over 11 trillion dollars, where did the money go ??? not to you, that's for sure.
Sorry Ken...even if you were to confiscate 100% of the the wealthiest incomes, you would still fall way short of solving this crisis.
Ken, please reply specifically with your plan to define "wealthy" and then tax same to alleviate this mess without cutting expenses.
Hey Ken, how about the 47% of Americans that pay NO Federal Income tax step up to the plate too. While I don't have a problem raising taxes on the rich if you define what rich is. You see living in the NYC metro area is FAR different than living in South Dakota. So 150k or 200k may be 'rich' in South Dakota but it is not rich in NYC. But lets move beyond that and get back to the 47% of Americans that don't pay a dime in Federal Income taxes while at least the rich pay SOMETHING. Seems your problem is not so much paying taxes but you should dictate that the rich should pay 95% or some unknown that you fail to describe. If you wish to break it down, there is NO one that should not be paying at least 15% in income taxes (Federal) then go up from there if necessary and get rid of ALL write-offs. Of course then we have to hear from the looney libs how the 'poor' people who probably get more in services than the rich will be hurt the most.
Please
Remember that Great Liberal Lie, you can have it all and never pay for any of it. Riots. Poverty. Great Depression II. Worthless currency. U.S. becomes China's "debt slave".
Unfortunately Republicans HAVE lied, beginning with Reagan, about "fiscal conservativism", which is way different than Country Club Socialism. THAT's what created the Tea Party.
Watch Frontline "The Warning" on youtube.
Tad-401841
Greece, portugua, ireland are failling for the same reasons your country is failling. Corporations and financial institutions greed !
Let make it clear, those countries are not failling because of their social programs, that is a lie by the right ! Businesses in europe are also outsourcing jobs in poor countries.
Now, countries like France, germany, switzerland have a credit rating of AAA+. Yes, people those countries are doing just fine. We have great quality of life and our middle class is large and we have many rich people.
another thing... all these countries that are doing fine are capitalist countries with GREAT SOCIAL PROGRAMS that have been established 30 or 40 years ago. So again our social programs are not the cause of our problems. Is that clear enough, for you ?
Well put, lucetmoi. If we could only get conservatives in the United States to understand this...
No,those countries and the USA are failing due to unchecked spending on social issues by liberal politicians.Unions are the biggest cause of the problems with unrestrained collective bargaining and their ME-ME-ME philosophy.
field, yeah but france and germany have stronger gun control laws, that makes any economic advantages that they may have moot and irrelevant.
I have even had people say to me that france and germany are dictatorships that have no freedoms because they don't have the 2nd amendment. Of course, they have never been there.
"Nearing dangerous levels"? In total we're around $100 trillon in debt - "dangerous" is a bit of an understatement.
The CBO is saying what many have said---it is a combination of revenues and spending. Revenues through the form of taxes HAVE to be increased---to their 2000 levels. It can't be done on spending cuts alone.
There is one government employee for every 13.5 American citizens.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2466363/posts
Since you are counting employed:
There were 139 million employed in 2009 and you show 22 million were government employees.
That's 1 in every 6.3 or 16% of employees already work for the government.
What product do they make and can we export it?
I want to know what our president is going to do to about this.
Umm...Ken, Democrats were in control of the Legislative branch from 2007 - 2011 and the Executive branch from 2009 to present
jinsd, your arguments have been debunked many times. Superior numbers in the legislative branches does NOT, thanks to rule bending by those same branches, translate into control.
This country is mismanaged by both parties. Admitting that and working together are the steps that will fix this.
I agree...that was the point of my reply...
I am with you, jinsd. Obama needs to own up that he screwed up!
That can't be right. Obama is just going to have to send the CBO back to recalculate it until the right values are achieved and prove there debt is no problem for his re-election.
It sure seems like when CBO numbers don't flatter Obama, they suddenly do a few weeks later.
And for the record, I believe these numbers are correct. I was being sarcastic above..