U.S. Total Debt....60 Trillion

[Lumpy 1]

.
.

By the end of 2013 the U.S. Total Debt will be over 60 trillion...


That's around $ 190,000.00 per U.S. citizen....dayamn


Just...(A trillion dollars would be a stack of thousand-dollar bills 67 miles high)...just......



U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

 

[Cowman]

.
Just...(A trillion dollars would be a stack of thousand-dollar bills 67 miles high)...just......

If it's not expressed in terms of how many times it can reach the moon and back, I don't give a fuck.

 

[Lumpy 1]

.
Just...(A trillion dollars would be a stack of thousand-dollar bills 67 miles high)...just......

If it's not expressed in terms of how many times it can reach the moon and back, I don't give a fuck.

..mmm..I'd guess 4 & 1/2 times back and forth

 

[editec]

By the end of 2013 the U.S. Total Debt will be over 60 trillion...

Really?

Show me the math.

 

[Lumpy 1]

By the end of 2013 the U.S. Total Debt will be over 60 trillion...

Really?

Show me the math.

I guesstimated conservatively... and I gave you a link..

what's your guesstimate..?

I suppose we could squabble if you'd like...

 

[The Rabbi]

.
Just...(A trillion dollars would be a stack of thousand-dollar bills 67 miles high)...just......

If it's not expressed in terms of how many times it can reach the moon and back, I don't give a fuck.

..mmm..I'd guess 4 & 1/2 times back and forth

No, as long as the welfare checks keep coming he doesn't give a fuck at all. Most people don't. That's how Obama got re-elected.

 

[rightwinger]

Obama plans on borrowing 44 trillion dollars next year so that he can buy everyone free stuff. But he will offset it with a hundred trillion dollar tax increase on the wealthy

 

[Lumpy 1]

Obama plans on borrowing 44 trillion dollars next year so that he can buy everyone free stuff. But he will offset it with a hundred trillion dollar tax increase on the wealthy

I think we should just sell New York, the Great Lakes and New England Regions to the Canadians...

 

[uscitizen]

Isn't it nice that we started an economy that runs on debt back under Reagan?

 

[HUGGY]

.
.

By the end of 2013 the U.S. Total Debt will be over 60 trillion...


That's around $ 190,000.00 per U.S. citizen....dayamn


Just...(A trillion dollars would be a stack of thousand-dollar bills 67 miles high)...just......



U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

HMMMmmm..... And the sun still rises...


Should we all do a "Jones Town"?

I'm not gonna pull my hair out Lumpy... The chicks dig it.

 

[Lumpy 1]

.
.

By the end of 2013 the U.S. Total Debt will be over 60 trillion...


That's around $ 190,000.00 per U.S. citizen....dayamn


Just...(A trillion dollars would be a stack of thousand-dollar bills 67 miles high)...just......



U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

HMMMmmm..... And the sun still rises...


Should we all do a "Jones Town?

I feel ripped off, your smart-assery is just not up to snuff.. have a coffee and try again..

 

[Lumpy 1]

Isn't it nice that we started an economy that runs on debt back under Reagan?

I suppose, if that's what bumps your libido...

 

[The Rabbi]

Isn't it nice that we started an economy that runs on debt back under Reagan?

Obama's deficits are bigger than Reagan's entire budgets.

 

[rightwinger]

Isn't it nice that we started an economy that runs on debt back under Reagan?

Obama's deficits are bigger than Reagan's entire budgets.

And I bought a new car for $4500 in 1980

 

[HUGGY]

.
.

By the end of 2013 the U.S. Total Debt will be over 60 trillion...


That's around $ 190,000.00 per U.S. citizen....dayamn


Just...(A trillion dollars would be a stack of thousand-dollar bills 67 miles high)...just......



U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

HMMMmmm..... And the sun still rises...


Should we all do a "Jones Town?

I feel ripped off, your smart-assery is just not up to snuff.. have a coffee and try again..

I feel shamed.... I will take your advice and endeavor to persevere.

 

[Lumpy 1]

HMMMmmm..... And the sun still rises...


Should we all do a "Jones Town?

I feel ripped off, your smart-assery is just not up to snuff.. have a coffee and try again..

I feel shamed.... I will take your advice and endeavor to persevere.

 

[Wry Catcher]

The great paradox of our time - and one which I cannot fathom - is this: Cutting spending and taxes will reduce the debt.

By my way of thinking, on the micro level of course, if we only cut spending the debt - since debt incurs interest and creates more debt - is that such a plan is doomed if one is to believe cutting costs alone will resolve the problem.

I have failed to notice the great thinkers of our time - Paul Ryan and Grover Norquist - explain their theory that less is more, though I suspect Winston Smith could explain it to me if he were not a fictional character (after his reeducation, of course).

In the Macro sense, debt is a bother but not a stage four malignancy. Not all of our debt is held by China or other foreign interests; many Americans hold US Bonds and Treasury Bills as a safe form of investment. In fact safety is the great selling point for these instruments and why they continue to sell even as fear mongering continues unabated, as seen in the OP.

Notice too how the fear mongers' never speak of paying down the debt. They have no plan (at least expressed) on how such a thing could be done. No member of Congress, for example, has to my knowledge ever offered to cut his/her salary and benefits and demanded those dollars be used to buy down the debt.

Paradoxes aside, taxes and fees must rise if the debt is to be reduced, and spending needs to be reduced where it can, for some spending cuts will result in greater outlays - a concept alien to the minds of some of the great thinkers of our time.

 

[The Rabbi]

The great paradox of our time - and one which I cannot fathom - is this: Cutting spending and taxes will reduce the debt.

By my way of thinking, on the micro level of course, if we only cut spending the debt - since debt incurs interest and creates more debt - is that such a plan is doomed if one is to believe cutting costs alone will resolve the problem.

I have failed to notice the great thinkers of our time - Paul Ryan and Grover Norquist - explain their theory that less is more, though I suspect Winston Smith could explain it to me if he were not a fictional character (after his reeducation, of course).

In the Macro sense, debt is a bother but not a stage four malignancy. Not all of our debt is held by China or other foreign interests; many Americans hold US Bonds and Treasury Bills as a safe form of investment. In fact safety is the great selling point for these instruments and why they continue to sell even as fear mongering continues unabated, as seen in the OP.

Notice too how the fear mongers' never speak of paying down the debt. They have no plan (at least expressed) on how such a thing could be done. No member of Congress, for example, has to my knowledge ever offered to cut his/her salary and benefits and demanded those dollars be used to buy down the debt.

Paradoxes aside, taxes and fees must rise if the debt is to be reduced, and spending needs to be reduced where it can, for some spending cuts will result in greater outlays - a concept alien to the minds of some of the great thinkers of our time.

I told you to lay off the cocksucking. Put your head into a book instead of the next guy's crotch and you might learn something.
The FedGov is taking in more money in revenue now than they did in 2009. But the deficit is larger. More money in but larger deficit indicates a LOT more money is going out. That is your spending problem.
If you cannot see that spending more than you take in, a lot more, is detrimental, I'd suggest looking at the cities around you in Californicatia. The ones that are declaring bankruptcy because they can't pay their blls because they spend more than they take in.

 

[Wry Catcher]

The great paradox of our time - and one which I cannot fathom - is this: Cutting spending and taxes will reduce the debt.

By my way of thinking, on the micro level of course, if we only cut spending the debt - since debt incurs interest and creates more debt - is that such a plan is doomed if one is to believe cutting costs alone will resolve the problem.

I have failed to notice the great thinkers of our time - Paul Ryan and Grover Norquist - explain their theory that less is more, though I suspect Winston Smith could explain it to me if he were not a fictional character (after his reeducation, of course).

In the Macro sense, debt is a bother but not a stage four malignancy. Not all of our debt is held by China or other foreign interests; many Americans hold US Bonds and Treasury Bills as a safe form of investment. In fact safety is the great selling point for these instruments and why they continue to sell even as fear mongering continues unabated, as seen in the OP.

Notice too how the fear mongers' never speak of paying down the debt. They have no plan (at least expressed) on how such a thing could be done. No member of Congress, for example, has to my knowledge ever offered to cut his/her salary and benefits and demanded those dollars be used to buy down the debt.

Paradoxes aside, taxes and fees must rise if the debt is to be reduced, and spending needs to be reduced where it can, for some spending cuts will result in greater outlays - a concept alien to the minds of some of the great thinkers of our time.

I told you to lay off the cocksucking. Put your head into a book instead of the next guy's crotch and you might learn something.
The FedGov is taking in more money in revenue now than they did in 2009. But the deficit is larger. More money in but larger deficit indicates a LOT more money is going out. That is your spending problem.
If you cannot see that spending more than you take in, a lot more, is detrimental, I'd suggest looking at the cities around you in Californicatia. The ones that are declaring bankruptcy because they can't pay their blls because they spend more than they take in.

Well, you didn't achieve profound, but got close - at least with several letters - and reached profane. The best one might expect from a not so bright liar.

That said, you didn't respond to the point (BTW, do you understand that a point has magnitude too?). Your first vulgar sentence aside, let's now examine the rest of your ... ah ... comments.

You second sentence lacks magnitude. Of course knowing how you 'think' it's clear you believe all spending is equal; it is not. Example: We spend lots of money preventing the first domino from falling (Vietnam). Well, after years of spending we left the job unfinished and the domino never fell. I might also point out the war of choice in Iraq - how much was spent off budget and what are the benefits? Now, you may say such is hindsight, and of course it is. But, hindsight provides the magnitude in which I wrote above and that is way beyond your ability to comprehend.

Next, you point out that cities in the Bay Area are declaring Bankruptcy. I can't speak for Vallejo, which was a mess, but the new City Manager (Phil Batchelor) hired in 2010 has pulled that city back from bankruptcy and the rest of the Bay Area is doing quite well now that the Great Bush Recession is over.

So, explain again how a debt can be reduced by simply cutting spending. Do the tax cuts to the wealthy magically trickle down to pay off debt?

Once again, spending must be cut, but not all spending is equal; and, taxes and fees must be increased with monies collected directed toward debt reduction. A concrete example (concrete 'cause that describes your thinking process) may help you understand:

A city has broken sidewalks creating a hazard. Rabbi, the new city manager, fires most of the public works personnel and the few he keeps are busy redoing his office at the city hall.

Joe and Joan Smith and little Mitt are walking home from church when Joe step on a crack and breaks his back. Joe is out of work for months and without health insurance his bills grow and grow. Soon Joe's house is in foreclosure and little Mitt's dream of playing Little League are bashed even before he can try out.

Joe sues the city and the city pays both actual and punitive damages in an amount five times the annual salary and benefits of the five city employees fired by Rabbi. Of course by then Joe and Joan's credit rating has suffered, little Mitt is heart broken, and their house, purchased by Snidley Wiplash is now rented and some other kid is enjoying the batting cage Joe had built for young Mitt.

 

[The Rabbi]

Do you have any capacity to debate an issue or do you just throw whatever garbage occurs to you and hope some of it sticks?
We are taking in more than ever. Our deficit is larger than ever. Therefore the problem is not taxes or revenue but spending. What part of "quit spending so much damn money" do you not understand?