Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
It's quite simple. If by the next election, there is still a deficit and more deficit spending, then we once again vote out those who haven't fixed it. And we keep voting them out until we get a group in there who will and can fix it.
There will always be a deficit. As I noted in an earlier post, by 2013 the gov revenues (tax) will only be equal to what is spent under "Mandatory Spending" (SS, Medicare, gov pensions, interest on debt, VA, disability, e.g.). There will be no room for "Discretionary Spending" (military, EPA, DOE, DOJ, Homeland Security, Dept of Ed. and many more) if the Federal budget is balanced. The goal is to get the deficit to a manageable number, comparable to the deficits of the countries rest of the world. Right now the US deficit spending is outpacing the rest of the world exponentially.
I like Chris Christie. That man can take some heat.
It's quite simple. If by the next election, there is still a deficit and more deficit spending, then we once again vote out those who haven't fixed it. And we keep voting them out until we get a group in there who will and can fix it.
There will always be a deficit. As I noted in an earlier post, by 2013 the gov revenues (tax) will only be equal to what is spent under "Mandatory Spending" (SS, Medicare, gov pensions, interest on debt, VA, disability, e.g.). There will be no room for "Discretionary Spending" (military, EPA, DOE, DOJ, Homeland Security, Dept of Ed. and many more) if the Federal budget is balanced. The goal is to get the deficit to a manageable number, comparable to the deficits of the countries rest of the world. Right now the US deficit spending is outpacing the rest of the world exponentially.
I like Chris Christie. That man can take some heat.
There cannot "always be a deficit" If there is then each year we simply go further into debt. You may as well surrender now. We have to get the deficit down to zero and start paying what we owe. If it means giving up some programs then that is what we have to do, there is no such thing as a free ride for the country and that is all deficit spending is.
The Republicans talk a good line by trying to brand their opposition as "tax and spend" Democrats!President Ronald Reagan is the first President to increase the National Debt by more than $100 Billion in one year!
President Ronald Reagan is the first President to increase the National Debt by more than $200 Billion in one year!
President George H.W. Bush is the first President to increase the National Debt by more than $300 Billion in one year!
President George H.W. Bush is the first President to increase the National Debt by more than $400 Billion in one year!
President George W. Bush is the first President to increase the National Debt by more than $500 Billion in one year!
President George W. Bush has increased the National Debt by more than $500 Billion AGAIN! Almost hits $600 Billion!
President George W. Bush has increased the National Debt by more than $500 Billion a THIRD time!
President George W. Bush has increased the National Debt by more than $500 Billion a FOURTH time!
President George W. Bush has increased the National Debt by more than $500 Billion a FIFTH time!
http://www.lafn.org/gvdc/Natl_Debt_Chart.html
If I were Harry Reid, I would be looking for a wait to steal the show from the Republicans in the House by adding another billion or so in cuts. The bill would have to go back to House. The Republicans would in the end have to go along with the Democrats, a bitter pill swallow.Yep.I read in the paper today that the GOP has given up (already) on the $100 billion for FY 2011. The new target number? Thir-ty......bil-lion.....dollars!!! That's right folks, $30 billion or ONE THIRTIETH of the projected 2011 budget DEFICIT. Holly smokes, what a cutting extravaganza! Of course the article confirmed that no cuts will come from the pentagon, security, policing, spying, war, (non-existent) terrorist defense. The cuts will probably come from silly agencies like education and health/human resources.
They are getting very close to what the Democrats are proposing. The two parties will fight over it for several months, both will claim a great victory, that will have very little effect on the deficit.
Here is yesterday's NYT article ridiculing the $32 billion. Why even bother? Is it just just a token gesture?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/04/us/politics/04budget.html?_r=2&hp
And when they stop buying bonds, we offer higher and higher interest rates until our bonds look better than those offered by other nations. The most important factor to consider in offering bonds to investors, is how do they compare with the competition.The process ends with painful cuts in government spending, increases in taxes, or both. I look at the issue as a pay me now or pay me later decision.
If we are lucky it ends this way. If we are unlucky bond vigilantes (buyers of large amounts of sovereign dept) stop buying bonds. This lead to a loss of confidence in the dollar which leads to high inflation or even hyperinflation. Inflation is just an indirect tax. If you add together high inflation, to high unemployment (don't be fooled by yesterday's 9% report, U6 is around 18%), high commodity costs (fuel, food, e.g.), and lack of confidence in government; you get Egypt. Now add to Egypt, 200,000,000 guns and you will the US (in a few years).
How bout cutting the Dept of Education and the IRS completely. Or the EPA.
Imagine how much we'd save.
Well, let's start and stop talking about it! Where's Congress? Where's the Administration? We need cuts and everyone is sittting on their thumbs!
Here are a few agencies (defiantly not all) Take your pick.
I agree we need to reduce the deficit. But why do we need to reduce the debt?There will always be a deficit. As I noted in an earlier post, by 2013 the gov revenues (tax) will only be equal to what is spent under "Mandatory Spending" (SS, Medicare, gov pensions, interest on debt, VA, disability, e.g.). There will be no room for "Discretionary Spending" (military, EPA, DOE, DOJ, Homeland Security, Dept of Ed. and many more) if the Federal budget is balanced. The goal is to get the deficit to a manageable number, comparable to the deficits of the countries rest of the world. Right now the US deficit spending is outpacing the rest of the world exponentially.
I like Chris Christie. That man can take some heat.
There cannot "always be a deficit" If there is then each year we simply go further into debt. You may as well surrender now. We have to get the deficit down to zero and start paying what we owe. If it means giving up some programs then that is what we have to do, there is no such thing as a free ride for the country and that is all deficit spending is.
The chances of getting US deficits down to zero and finding a new planet to live on are just about the same. Congress is proving this to be true right now.
Remember if the gov sold off all of its (estimated) $13.4 trillion in assets (Nation parks, buildings, lands, gold, dams, etc,) to pay for public debt if wouldn't be enough to cover the $15 trillion that is owed. That doesn't even consider the $41 trillion in unfunded liabilities such as SS, medicare, pensions, e.g.
The best bet is massively cut spending and try to directly stimulate growth (on the human capital level). This would allow GDP growth to outpace deficit spending. What the Fed is doing now is only creating bubbles. Bubbles not only in emerging markets (where much of the capital is going) but on a domestic level as well. The combination (domestically) of deleveraging, inflation (in a year or two), high commodities, shrinking dollar, financing (unwanted) war/security and increasing income disparity is very, very dangerous. Sooner or later the taxpayer will realize what's going on as his (her) standard of living continues to diminish. Maybe not, Americans (as a whole) seem to have great confidence in their government.
The Republicans talk a good line by trying to brand their opposition as "tax and spend" Democrats!President Ronald Reagan is the first President to increase the National Debt by more than $100 Billion in one year!
President Ronald Reagan is the first President to increase the National Debt by more than $200 Billion in one year!
President George H.W. Bush is the first President to increase the National Debt by more than $300 Billion in one year!
President George H.W. Bush is the first President to increase the National Debt by more than $400 Billion in one year!
President George W. Bush is the first President to increase the National Debt by more than $500 Billion in one year!
President George W. Bush has increased the National Debt by more than $500 Billion AGAIN! Almost hits $600 Billion!
President George W. Bush has increased the National Debt by more than $500 Billion a THIRD time!
President George W. Bush has increased the National Debt by more than $500 Billion a FOURTH time!
President George W. Bush has increased the National Debt by more than $500 Billion a FIFTH time!
Increases in the National Debt Chart
The problem with the Republicans is that not only do they continue to spend at record levels - but they then preceed to cut taxes (particularily for the rich who already control most of the nation's wealth).
The net result is that the Republicans provide "tax-cuts" - using borrowed money!
And when they stop buying bonds, we offer higher and higher interest rates until our bonds look better than those offered by other nations. The most important factor to consider in offering bonds to investors, is how do they compare with the competition.The process ends with painful cuts in government spending, increases in taxes, or both. I look at the issue as a pay me now or pay me later decision.
If we are lucky it ends this way. If we are unlucky bond vigilantes (buyers of large amounts of sovereign dept) stop buying bonds. This lead to a loss of confidence in the dollar which leads to high inflation or even hyperinflation. Inflation is just an indirect tax. If you add together high inflation, to high unemployment (don't be fooled by yesterday's 9% report, U6 is around 18%), high commodity costs (fuel, food, e.g.), and lack of confidence in government; you get Egypt. Now add to Egypt, 200,000,000 guns and you will the US (in a few years).
Treasuries are backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government. The risk of default on these fixed-income securities is nil. Not even the safest corporate bond in the world can make that claim.
As evidence of the faith that the world has that our government will pay back the money we owe, there is no collateral that backs our debts, just the faith in our government. I think that's pretty remarkable that we can borrow 15 trillion dollars with nothing more than an IOU.
And when they stop buying bonds, we offer higher and higher interest rates until our bonds look better than those offered by other nations. The most important factor to consider in offering bonds to investors, is how do they compare with the competition.The process ends with painful cuts in government spending, increases in taxes, or both. I look at the issue as a pay me now or pay me later decision.
If we are lucky it ends this way. If we are unlucky bond vigilantes (buyers of large amounts of sovereign dept) stop buying bonds. This lead to a loss of confidence in the dollar which leads to high inflation or even hyperinflation. Inflation is just an indirect tax. If you add together high inflation, to high unemployment (don't be fooled by yesterday's 9% report, U6 is around 18%), high commodity costs (fuel, food, e.g.), and lack of confidence in government; you get Egypt. Now add to Egypt, 200,000,000 guns and you will the US (in a few years).
Treasuries are backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government. The risk of default on these fixed-income securities is nil. Not even the safest corporate bond in the world can make that claim.
As evidence of the faith that the world has that our government will pay back the money we owe, there is no collateral that backs our debts, just the faith in our government. I think that's pretty remarkable that we can borrow 15 trillion dollars with nothing more than an IOU.
I think this thread is to funny. It exposes just how out of Touch liberals are. They say the GOP is proposing Massive cuts, like it is a horrible thing to do that must be stopped.
They still do not understand that we can not continue to spend 2 times what we take in each year.
All right. Maybe they could cut enough to force another trillion dollar tax cut for millionaires and billionaires.
Oops, seems they are too busy redefining rape. Oh well, maybe next year.
Lies.
Since when has making $250k made anyone a millionaire or a billionaire?
Explain that one dip-shit.
The problem is when we spend more than we bring in. Basic math. Unfortunately too many Republicans spend like Democrats, unable to distinguish need from want. We need to learn to live within our means. The World is watching, and imitating.
...Idiot!Well, let's start and stop talking about it! Where's Congress? Where's the Administration? We need cuts and everyone is sittting on their thumbs!
Here are a few agencies (defiantly not all) Take your pick.
I really think we go about cutting the budget the wrong way. There is no way Congress can determine just what all of those agencies do and what effect a budget cut will have on their work. Couple that with lobbyist and supporter payoffs to guarantee certain programs are not touched, the entire process is a joke. Imagine the Board of Directors at General Electric which has dozens of subsidiaries with dozens of departments operating all over the world would try to reduce it's budget in the way the Congress does. It would be ridiculous. Congress should decide on a percentage to cut the budget, say 3%, pass a law requiring the President to cut 3%. The President decides which activities are not to be touched and instruction the departments to make the required cuts. The heads of Departments, bureaus, and agencies, know where the waste is and what can be cut without jeopardizing their mission.
I agree we need to reduce the deficit. But why do we need to reduce the debt?There cannot "always be a deficit" If there is then each year we simply go further into debt. You may as well surrender now. We have to get the deficit down to zero and start paying what we owe. If it means giving up some programs then that is what we have to do, there is no such thing as a free ride for the country and that is all deficit spending is.
The chances of getting US deficits down to zero and finding a new planet to live on are just about the same. Congress is proving this to be true right now.
Remember if the gov sold off all of its (estimated) $13.4 trillion in assets (Nation parks, buildings, lands, gold, dams, etc,) to pay for public debt if wouldn't be enough to cover the $15 trillion that is owed. That doesn't even consider the $41 trillion in unfunded liabilities such as SS, medicare, pensions, e.g.
The best bet is massively cut spending and try to directly stimulate growth (on the human capital level). This would allow GDP growth to outpace deficit spending. What the Fed is doing now is only creating bubbles. Bubbles not only in emerging markets (where much of the capital is going) but on a domestic level as well. The combination (domestically) of deleveraging, inflation (in a year or two), high commodities, shrinking dollar, financing (unwanted) war/security and increasing income disparity is very, very dangerous. Sooner or later the taxpayer will realize what's going on as his (her) standard of living continues to diminish. Maybe not, Americans (as a whole) seem to have great confidence in their government.
The Republicans talk a good line by trying to brand their opposition as "tax and spend" Democrats!President Ronald Reagan is the first President to increase the National Debt by more than $100 Billion in one year!
President Ronald Reagan is the first President to increase the National Debt by more than $200 Billion in one year!
President George H.W. Bush is the first President to increase the National Debt by more than $300 Billion in one year!
President George H.W. Bush is the first President to increase the National Debt by more than $400 Billion in one year!
President George W. Bush is the first President to increase the National Debt by more than $500 Billion in one year!
President George W. Bush has increased the National Debt by more than $500 Billion AGAIN! Almost hits $600 Billion!
President George W. Bush has increased the National Debt by more than $500 Billion a THIRD time!
President George W. Bush has increased the National Debt by more than $500 Billion a FOURTH time!
President George W. Bush has increased the National Debt by more than $500 Billion a FIFTH time!
Increases in the National Debt Chart
The problem with the Republicans is that not only do they continue to spend at record levels - but they then preceed to cut taxes (particularily for the rich who already control most of the nation's wealth).
The net result is that the Republicans provide "tax-cuts" - using borrowed money!
The problem is when we spend more than we bring in. Basic math. Unfortunately too many Republicans spend like Democrats, unable to distinguish need from want. We need to learn to live within our means. The World is watching, and imitating.
The problem is when we spend more than we bring in. Basic math. Unfortunately too many Republicans spend like Democrats, unable to distinguish need from want. We need to learn to live within our means. The World is watching, and imitating.
Omg...
If Republicans are the ones spending us into oblivion, that why the fuck are they "Spending like Democrats?" Nah, Nah, they're just spending... Or, if you like, "Spending like Republicans."
