Our Federal 'budget'

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Brainactive, Apr 3, 2009.

  1. Brainactive
    Offline

    Brainactive Mr.

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    7
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +3
    Hey Washington, I've got a 4 year old daughter and a 2 year old son. When I read the garbage that you folks mistake for a 'budget', I get sick to my stomach , thinking about the economic reality that their generation will face. Let me educate you all. I just took out my Webster's dictionary and looked up the definition of budget. It reads:

    "a plan or schedule adjusting expenses during a certain period to the estimated or fixed income for that period"

    Let me ask you Washington, what part of this definition do you fail to understand? Can we at the very least stop calling this spending fiasco a budget? Lets call it what it truly is, maxing out the credit cards of our children and grandchildren.

    We are at the tail end of an era of peace and economic prosperity which spanned the most economically productive years of the boomer generation. During this period, have we stashed away a rainy day fund for future hard times? Have we invested heavily in the nations transportation, education, and energy infrastructure? Or have we simply pissed it away and run up a debt which now exceeds $30,000 per citizen? Now the new 'budget' plan proposes doubling this debt within the next 8 years.

    I don't know how this debt conundrum will unwind, but I do know it will be an extremely painful process. For years we all sat by and watched as sub-prime loans created an unsustainable bubble in the housing market. As time went on, the interest rates crept higher and the debt load grew too heavy for the market to bear. The result was a great crash which rattled the entire world economy. So now as I watch the national debt grow by billions of dollars each day, I ask this, what happens when the world comes to the realization that the US government is a sub-prime borrower with massive credit card balances and no plan to pay off their debt?
     
  2. WillowTree
    Online

    WillowTree Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    68,196
    Thanks Received:
    10,175
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +14,775
    I wish you had seen Bawney Fwank yesterday on c-span.. He waited till almost everybody had gone home.. Then demanded an hour's time to try and talk his way out of any involvment with the FM and FM debacle.. Ha! three Republicans stayed to put history in it's proper place. When they get back from yet another "break" I suspect the lies will fly once again from the Fwank!
     
  3. Brainactive
    Offline

    Brainactive Mr.

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    7
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +3
    Please don't reduce my rant to simple partisanship, there's plenty of blame to go around on both sides of the aisle. In fact if I had to blame 1 politician for this era in which fiscal responsibility vanished, I would blame Reagan.
     
  4. Iriemon
    Offline

    Iriemon VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    Messages:
    2,745
    Thanks Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Miami
    Ratings:
    +99
    Reagan changed the meaning of "conservative" from having a balanced budget to cutting taxes damn the consequences.

    And then you had the "Deficits don't matter" Cheney administration.

    I'm thrilled many folks are all of a sudden interested in the national debt. I only wish the pundits that are now raising this issue had been around in 2000, when we as a nation squandered a rare opportunity to do something about the debt.
     
  5. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,618
    I suspect we're going to have to hyperinflate our way out of this mess.

    The rest of the world will not be amused
     
  6. Brainactive
    Offline

    Brainactive Mr.

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    7
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +3
    I do hope fiscal conservativism makes a come back sooner rather than later. It also would be nice if it didn't have the baggage of all the moral conservatism that the populace seem to flock to. Remember, people were all fired up about the federal debt back in 1992. Then we decided Ross Perot's ears were too big for him to be taken seriously.

    Where are you now Ross, the public could use a few of your charts and graphs.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  7. auditor0007
    Offline

    auditor0007 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    12,566
    Thanks Received:
    2,255
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Toledo, OH
    Ratings:
    +3,218
    Why would you blame Reagan? He increased government revenues dramatically. The Dems, at the time, increased spending even more than the increased revenues. Bush did the same; he increased revenues but this time around, the Republican Congress increased spending even more. Congress, whether Dems or Reps, just can't seem to control their spending.
     
  8. auditor0007
    Offline

    auditor0007 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2008
    Messages:
    12,566
    Thanks Received:
    2,255
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Toledo, OH
    Ratings:
    +3,218
    I'll have to agree with you when it comes to moral conservatism. The worst thing about social conservatives is that a great many of them are really not fiscal conservatives, but they keep more liberal minded fiscal conservatives away.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. Brainactive
    Offline

    Brainactive Mr.

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    7
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +3
    I blame Reagan, because he started this era in which balanced budgets are optional. Do you remember all the dotcom companies of 1999 which would lose millions every quarter, but brag about growing revenues by 25% (their losses also grew by 25 or 30%). At the end of the day, the bottom line is what matters and most of those companies failed. Now is it ok to run a deficit in times of war or financial crisis? Yes, but you need to pay off that debt as soon as the crisis passes. WWII was a huge financial burden, but the debt was paid down very quickly. Reagan ran up the debt to stimulate the economy in the early 80s...........no problem with that. But then once the economy was humming, he should have started paying down that debt. Instead he doubled down and let the debt tick higher and higher. Shame on us for not calling him or his successors on it.
     
  10. Iriemon
    Offline

    Iriemon VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    Messages:
    2,745
    Thanks Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Miami
    Ratings:
    +99
    Total Debt:GDP is now about 70%; it was 120% immediately after WWII. The "greatest generation" paid high tax rates (top marginal rates up to 88%) and had politicals who thought "conservative" meant a responsible budget, and by 1981 the debt was only 33% of GDP. The the "pass the buck" generation elected politicians who pandered tax cuts while running up trillions of debt.

    We can work our way out of the debt. But it will take sacrifices on the revenue and spending side. I don't think we need put top tax rates at 88% yet, but they now need to be higher than the 40% we had in the 90s before we ran up another $5 trillion under the Bush administration.

    On the spending side we cannot continue to spend more than the rest of the world on the military, fight wars, and have the most expensive health care system in the world, and provide free retirement funds to the wealthiest.

    We could do it.

    But we now have one party that is unwilling to compromise one iota on the revenue side, or compromise on its pet programs on the spending side. And the other party, well we'll have to see what Obama does I guess. I'm not encouraged by his apparent willingness to maintain a certain level of deficits. I had supported Clinton because of the lot she seemed to be the one that was most focused on this issue and wasn't promising to cut taxes further.
     

Share This Page