Closing in on a trillion dollars

[2cool4us]

Totally outrageous!! This President is spending us into a hole we will never climb out of. No wonder such items as Social Security are on the ropes. Also McCain has publicly stated that the debacle in Iraq is ALL ABOUT OIL. Thank God the Republicans don't have a chance in hell for winning the Presidency. :mad:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24428337/

[Mr Bill]

Well I guess it's really a wash because the Dems will still spend our money also probably the same amount, but just on programs and free be's for the worthless folks that won't work, so I guess your right debt is debt but why not spend here rather than Iraq. :D

[r404a]

2cool

You are right to point out to the Bushbots here what is going on. They do not care, though. They are too busy listening to Savage and hating immigrants to worry about the fact that the President is a knucklehead who has us in a serious blunder. They just want to hear O'Reilly tell them they are good Americans and to support numbskull Bush as he spends money on a war that is of great detriment to the U.S. But keep reminding them, maybe if the wake up from the Limbaugh induced coma they are in they will get it.

r404a

[wallynut]

"They just want to hear O'Reilly tell them they are good Americans and to support numbskull Bush

Maybe you and I watch a different O'reilly. He supports
conservative views but is not a Bush lover.

Try being a little more honest.

[scrogdog]

Totally outrageous!! This President is spending us into a hole we will never climb out of. No wonder such items as Social Security are on the ropes. Also McCain has publicly stated that the debacle in Iraq is ALL ABOUT OIL. Thank God the Republicans don't have a chance in hell for winning the Presidency. :mad:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24428337/

Really? So it's the president who submits the budget to the... um... president?

Sounds like someone badly needs a civics class; hardly surprising for a dimocrat.

[k-fridge]

Scrog is correct. Congress appropriates money, not the executive branch.

I guess they don't teach them that over at Democratic Underground.

Let's see...who's in charge of congress? Oh yeah, the Democrats.

[whec720]

Right you are, kfridge. Hey air, go cry your eyes out to Botox Nancy and Dingy Harry!:p

Or maybe, lighten up and share a drink with your bud, Ted.
Cheers!;):D

[bluestone]

I love liberals, no drilling in Anwar, no drilling in the Gulf, no drilling on consevation lands, and while we are at it let's move more land into conservation, no protection of democratic ideals in the middle east, lets caress Iran and Al quida and they will like us and not f**c with our oil, and by the way, "what's up with the high cost of oil? it must be Bush and Cheney"

You folks ( libbie wienie wacko commie US haters) need to uncork you heads from your butts and get some oxygen.

Sorry, too harsh I know, but I feel better now:p

[whec720]

As stated before, Democrats control both the House and the Senate......so how well are they doing their "jobs"..??:rolleyes:

Here are the Congressional approval ratings and it ain't just Fox News.....so you can cool your jets on ol' Rup:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/congressional_job_approval-903.html

[Andy Schoen]

An interesting graph showing debt as a percentage of GDP. http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

Of course, some debt must be allowed, e.g., infrastructure. But it's not clear to me where the "ideal" level of debt should be.

[whec720]

An interesting graph showing debt as a percentage of GDP. http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

Of course, some debt must be allowed, e.g., infrastructure. But it's not clear to me where the "ideal" level of debt should be.

Interesting. However, it should be noted, during Reagan/Bush the House was controlled by the Democrats, as was the Senate for much of Reagan's eight years in office. As stated before, Congress appropriates the money....err in this case, the debt.

[justinhvac]

Interesting. However, it should be noted, during Reagan/Bush the House was controlled by the Democrats, as was the Senate for much of Reagan's eight years in office. As stated before, Congress appropriates the money....err in this case, the debt.

It wasn't all Reagan, but he did have a big part of it. With the income tax cuts there was less money. With Reagan's Peace Through Strength there was a huge push for an increase in military spending, even though less tax income.

It wasn't all him though. Congress was also pushing for a lot of new spending. And with Paul Volcker's policy of targeting inflation, there was less new money being printed (but there was still more spending). So inflation went from 12-13% down to about 3% (around what it is today) but the government got less new money to spend.

That's why bond rates were so ridiculously high at that time period and US debt grew so much. Whether Reaganomics was good or bad is controversial.

With Bush it's a lot more complicated, but again, not all his fault.

[2cool4us]

Really? So it's the president who submits the budget to the... um... president?

Sounds like someone badly needs a civics class; hardly surprising for a dimocrat.The budgetary needs are compiled by the various cabinet level agencies who in this case are appointed by Bush. His "Good ole Boys".:eek:

[k-fridge]

With the income tax cuts there was less money.

Not exactly. The tax cuts stimulated the economy and increased revenues. In fact, tax revenues almost doubled in his 8 years.

The problem was spending, it grew at a much faster rate than revenues. Reagan had a deal with the then speaker of the house, tip O'Neil. The deal was that for every one dollar of tax cuts there would be 2 dollars of spending cuts. Someone didn't keep their end of the bargain.

I will admit that Reagan should have used his veto pen more, Dubya should have too.

[mrs reb77]

The budgetary needs are compiled by the various cabinet level agencies who in this case are appointed by Bush. His "Good ole Boys".:eek:

:p You still need a civics class. The President of the United States don't have the check book bud, Congress does.
Guess what? The President submits his budget, congress reworks it and ADDS MORE PORK. Just like this little ole' stimulus deally. What was a fairly small thing was blown into rather large by both the House and Senate before they would pass it.

[justinhvac]

In fact, tax revenues almost doubled in his 8 years.

Got a source for that one? I find that hard to believe, and have read before that it was 1-2% net decrease in tax revenue over his 8 years. The tax cuts did help the economy though, along with other factors.

And Reagan did push for a lot of new military spending. Yeah I know he how it works with congress and all. But he did push for it, and spending did go up a lot.

The plan for Reaganomics was to increase tax income by cutting taxes, but it doesn't exactly work like that.

[2cool4us]

This will suffice as a Civics 101 for the Republican minded. Notice particulary the "Department headings" which are cabinet level positions. You are part right Mrs. Reb about congressional members adding their own pork. My reference at the start of this thread was targeting the Defense Department spending which is escalating and compounding yearly to the trillion dollar milepost. :eek::cool:

http://origin.www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy09/browse.html

[k-fridge]

Got a source for that one? I find that hard to believe, and have read before that it was 1-2% net decrease in tax revenue over his 8 years. The tax cuts did help the economy though, along with other factors.

And Reagan did push for a lot of new military spending. Yeah I know he how it works with congress and all. But he did push for it, and spending did go up a lot.

The plan for Reaganomics was to increase tax income by cutting taxes, but it doesn't exactly work like that.

From Wikipedia

the tax cuts did lead to a near doubling of tax receipts ($517 billion in 1980 to $1,032 billion in 1990),

Also good reading

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m4070/is_n97/ai_16320048

[Andy Schoen]

Thinking again...

Let's say we wanted the U.S. government to pay off its debt. And let's compare this effort to an individual who wants to take out a home mortgage.

Too keep the math simple; let's say U.S. GDP is 100. That means the national debt is about 65.

Long term treasuries yield about 4.5 percent. So let's say the national debt is costing the U.S. government 65 * 0.045 or let's call it 3 per year.

But we want to pay off the debt. Let's say we want to pay it off in 16 years so that the new administration in 2024 can start with a clean slate. We'll need to add 65 / 16: 3 + 65 / 16 or call it 7

Tax revenue as a percentage of GDP is around 18 percent. http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/81xx/doc8116/05-18-TaxRevenues.pdf So: 7/ (0.18 *100) gives us a debt payment to income percentage of 39. Probably ok for a FHA loan. :D

[justinhvac]

k_fridge, you have to look at the real rate. Of course tax income money as a total will always go up as inflation, gdp, etc increase. Whether you cut or increase taxes, the dollar figure over time will increase (unless you do some drastic cutting). But as a percentage of GDP, that is different.

Sorry if I was being unclear before, I was still half asleep. Basically what I meant is that tax income as a percentage of GDP went down (but not a lot), and tax spending went up as a percentage of GDP (both due to congress's spending and Reagan's push for military spending). As GDP goes up, obviously tax income will be going up with it. But if the spending is going up faster than the rise in income, there is going to be a lot of debt. Add in the target of lowering inflation, and you have a BIG problem. Also there was more to stimulating the economy than just the tax cuts. Reagan would have had a hard time without Volcker. And I meant there was a lot more to the debt than Reagan. The debt was pretty bad and taxes would have to be raised later, which they were (good luck getting congress to cut back). That's what I was trying to say.

Compare 1980's GDP with that of 1990... and then look at today's. In terms of GDP, tax income fell during Reagan's term. Perhaps if he hadn't pushed for so much military spending, and congress actually kept their word of not spending more, the results would have been even better economically.

I'm not saying Reagan was bad, he was a good president. Reagan led the way to a very important boom. I'm just not a huge fan of Reaganomics. You can find a lot's of articles for and against it, and I've read a lot on it. I support lower income tax, but not because of him. I would rather have taxes and government spending even less.

[royc]

The American public not only needs a civic lesson, they need a world policy lesson. Considering most of us have computers, we have all the information at out finger tips, and dont seem to use it.

So lets look at this in a common sense way.

Who supplies our money first of all, its a private banking operation called the (non) Federal Reserve. Now have any of you ever heard of any bank loaning money without collateral ?? So what is the collateral we have that would want a bank to borrow us in to a trillion dollar dept ??

So, the next question is, what item that we all need has increased in price exponentialy with our goverments spending spree in Iraq and other places ??

Everytime you fill up your gas tank, your paying for the money that the Fed's, the IMF and the World Bank loaned us, thats the collateral. Our (non) Federal Reserve is part and parcel of the world banking operation named above, and they dont borrow any money, unless they have assurance of a return.

Now I'm not privey to what we pay the Arabs for their oil, my guess its in the range of $20 to $40 a barrel, the advertised price of crude today, IS NOT the price that the Saudies and company get, the difference of what they get, and whats priced in the open market for a barrel of oil, is what funds the dept, period. They have by contract agreed to get payed with the dollar, and by doing so, are buying our dept.

Its also the main reason Iraq got invaded the first time and reinvaded the second time. And its also why WE WILL invade Iran, and maybe even Venezuela. Those entities did not agree to sell their oil in dollars, and if they sold their oil for the price of what the Saudies get, would flood the market with cheap oil, which would collaps the dollar.

Just to make it clear, despite what lies you hear from the controlled MSM, there is no shortage of oil, matter of fact we have enough oil in Alaska thats not being openly disclosed, to last us, America, for the next 200 years. But it will not be tapped, because it would drive the price of oil down to a level, that would also collaps the price. The IMF and the World Bank which included the Fed's, would not be able to collect the trillion dollar dept we have incured.

It used to be that the dollar and gold was the money standard of the world, it is no longer so, the standard of money is oil today, and whomever has control over oil, has control of the wealth in this world, this world is totally dependend on oil, we can no longer survive without it, and they know it.

Roy

[2cool4us]

The American public not only needs a civic lesson, they need a world policy lesson. Considering most of us have computers, we have all the information at out finger tips, and dont seem to use it.

So lets look at this in a common sense way.

Who supplies our money first of all, its a private banking operation called the (non) Federal Reserve. Now have any of you ever heard of any bank loaning money without collateral ?? So what is the collateral we have that would want a bank to borrow us in to a trillion dollar dept ??

So, the next question is, what item that we all need has increased in price exponentialy with our goverments spending spree in Iraq and other places ??

Everytime you fill up your gas tank, your paying for the money that the Fed's, the IMF and the World Bank loaned us, thats the collateral. Our (non) Federal Reserve is part and parcel of the world banking operation named above, and they dont borrow any money, unless they have assurance of a return.

Now I'm not privey to what we pay the Arabs for their oil, my guess its in the range of $20 to $40 a barrel, the advertised price of crude today, IS NOT the price that the Saudies and company get, the difference of what they get, and whats priced in the open market for a barrel of oil, is what funds the dept, period. They have by contract agreed to get payed with the dollar, and by doing so, are buying our dept.

Its also the main reason Iraq got invaded the first time and reinvaded the second time. And its also why WE WILL invade Iran, and maybe even Venezuela. Those entities did not agree to sell their oil in dollars, and if they sold their oil for the price of what the Saudies get, would flood the market with cheap oil, which would collaps the dollar.

Just to make it clear, despite what lies you hear from the controlled MSM, there is no shortage of oil, matter of fact we have enough oil in Alaska thats not being openly disclosed, to last us, America, for the next 200 years. But it will not be tapped, because it would drive the price of oil down to a level, that would also collaps the price. The IMF and the World Bank which included the Fed's, would not be able to collect the trillion dollar dept we have incured.

It used to be that the dollar and gold was the money standard of the world, it is no longer so, the standard of money is oil today, and whomever has control over oil, has control of the wealth in this world, this world is totally dependend on oil, we can no longer survive without it, and they know it.

RoyThe global currency of the day is OIL!! :eek::cool::eek:

[justinhvac]

I understand what you mean about oil being so important... but...

There are 3 sources of income for a government - taxes, borrowing, & printing.

You know how taxes work.

The Treasury creates money. It is just paper. They can create as much as they want. But printing too much creates inflation (higher prices). They try to keep this low.

When the government borrows, it borrows it through Treasury Bonds. Who buys those bonds? People and banks. The government pays the interest to you. You are the one with the bond that is backed by US word.

The Federal Reserve isn't a normal bank with a ton of cash it lends to the government. They don't lend to the government to spend directly. The money in the Federal Reserve Banks is owned by private banks (they need to keep a certain percentage in the Fed Bank). This money is lent out to banks when they are in a bind to keep them from failing.

And if it isn't disclosed, how do you know there is 200 years of oil in Alaska?

[whec720]

And if it isn't disclosed, how do you know there is 200 years of oil in Alaska?
Reply With Quote

He doesn't. Roy is a strange fella. He moves here to to U.S. years ago but has this ax to grind against this country. I guess he is one of those "global" guys.
On the plus side, at least his posts are interesting and thought provoking.

Justin, you seem to have a good grasp of economics. I enjoy your posts as well. Keep em' coming.:)

[justinhvac]

He doesn't. Roy is a strange fella. He moves here to to U.S. years ago but has this ax to grind against this country. I guess he is one of those "global" guys.
On the plus side, at least his posts are interesting and thought provoking.
Heh true. It may be a bit crazy to me, but I liked reading it still.


Justin, you seem to have a good grasp of economics. I enjoy your posts as well. Keep em' coming.:)

thanks :) I was an economics major in college though

[royc]

He doesn't. Roy is a strange fella. He moves here to to U.S. years ago but has this ax to grind against this country. I guess he is one of those "global" guys.
On the plus side, at least his posts are interesting and thought provoking.

Justin, you seem to have a good grasp of economics. I enjoy your posts as well. Keep em' coming.:)

First of all, I'm not at all strange, I consider myself to be an American foremost. I came to this country because I wanted to be free of Facism, Socialism and Communism. I came here in 1959 which is close to fifty years now, I'am an American, there is nothing forign or global within me, exept that I still speak a little german. I'm a believer and fighter for the constitution, which was the reason I came here in the first place. I love this country of my rebirth, and I will fight to the end to keep it free.

I dont have too many years left, but I owe it to this country to at least talk about why we are being marginalized, why we are being lied to, why what we work so hard for is being taken away from us. Give me one reason why this country with all the resources, is made dependend on China and eastern countries, why do we need NAFTA, CAFTA and all the other alphabet soup agencies. We dont need any of them, including the globalist robber banking system. We are being robbed of the very thing that made this country great, our sovereignty and recourcefullness. No country can survive without its manufactoring base, and no country ever has.

Listen to people like Ross Perot, Ron Paul and many others, who have for years warned us of what was happening, remember Perot's sucking sound....well look around you...the sucking sound is diminishing, why....cause its pretty much all gone. How often do you see a product anymore that say's

MADE IN THE USA

For crying out loud people..


WAKE UP

Roy

[whec720]

First of all, I'm not at all strange, I consider myself to be an American foremost. I came to this country because I wanted to be free of Facism, Socialism and Communism. I came here in 1959 which is close to fifty years now, I'am an American, there is nothing forign or global within me, exept that I still speak a little german. I'm a believer and fighter for the constitution, which was the reason I came here in the first place. I love this country of my rebirth, and I will fight to the end to keep it free.

I dont have too many years left, but I owe it to this country to at least talk about why we are being marginalized, why we are being lied to, why what we work so hard for is being taken away from us. Give me one reason why this country with all the resources, is made dependend on China and eastern countries, why do we need NAFTA, CAFTA and all the other alphabet soup agencies. We dont need any of them, including the globalist robber banking system. We are being robbed of the very thing that made this country great, our sovereignty and recourcefullness. No country can survive without its manufactoring base, and no country ever has.

Listen to people like Ross Perot, Ron Paul and many others, who have for years warned us of what was happening, remember Perot's sucking sound....well look around you...the sucking sound is diminishing, why....cause its pretty much all gone. How often do you see a product anymore that say's

MADE IN THE USA

For crying out loud people..


WAKE UP

Roy

I stated you were a "strange fella" not unpatriotic. Your alright in my book, Roy. I have to be honest, IMO your a little weird....but that is cool. I believe you are an honest man and actually believe in what you say. We just disagree on a lot of things.
Sorry to offend you but I want to be honest too...and have.
I meant what I said about your posts.

[royc]

Here is a little taste of what is happening to honest hard working Americans....any goverment that lets this happening is evil, and doesnt deserve our backing.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87YlWo8xxjA


Roy

[whec720]

Here is a little taste of what is happening to honest hard working Americans....any goverment that lets this happening is evil, and doesnt deserve our backing.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87YlWo8xxjA


Roy

See what I mean. You go Roy!!:D

[The Doctor]

Do you realize that our country's taxpayers pay over one billion dollars, $1.4 billion per day according to Ron Paul's new book) a day just in interest alone?

Do you realize that in less than 1000 days that will be a trillion dollars?

That's a little under 3 years. Interest only.

And if the Department of Defense is doing its job, why do we even need a Department of Homeland Security?

[Jesse Miller]

Can you imagine what this country would look like if the 1trillion dollars that has been spent on this occupation was instead spent on the people of this country? The roads would be nice and smooth and the bridges would be sturdy and not falling down. Everybody would have good health care. If the government spent 1 trillion dollars on finding cures for the most nasty of the diseases like cancer and aids, everybody would be living the good life.

[wallynut]

Just think of all the nice roads and stuff we could have had, IF


The United States entered the War on December 7, 1941, the day that the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. By the end of the War, more people were killed, more property destroyed, more people's lives were disrupted, and probably more far-reaching consequences were caused than any other war in history.

[Snapperhead]

Can you imagine what this country would look like if the 1trillion dollars that has been spent on this occupation was instead spent on the people of this country? hey now .... dont forget Spitzer .... that man did indeed spend the money on the people of the country .... those common hard working women .