$53 Trillion and Growing

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,030
2
61
USA Today link

$53 TRILLION AND GROWING


Glenn Beck interview with David Walker, our nation's top government accountant...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=btCmQJXTyTw

More on this (David Walker trying to get the message out)...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OS2fI2p9iVs

"Fiscal Cancer"

Unless we put our federal government on a much-needed diet, our country is doomed, it WILL go bankrupt. We must act, congress doesn't even want to talk about this. If we want to save the country, we will have to do it ourselves. We must vote for people who will commit to solving this problem and saving our country.

:(
 
Jun 27, 2005
19,251
1
61
This is not new...

Nobody running for prez can fix it... (assuming they even intended to)

Life will go on...

 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,030
2
61
No one president could fix this mess. But all of them seem to be making it bigger. Like this talk of "free" health care, and I'm sure the Republicans would like to start another unnecessary war.
 
Jun 27, 2005
19,251
1
61
Originally posted by: bamacre
No one president could fix this mess. But all of them seem to be making it bigger.

Making it bigger is what gets them elected.

Everyone wants to go to heaven, nobody wants to die.

Everyone wants to fix the budget/deficit/debt but nobody wants to give up anything to make that happen. (entitlements OR tax cuts) So... As long as the electorate understands that it can "vote itself largess from the public treasury" this will continue.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,122
5,654
126
The problem comes when people want details as to how to fix it. "Cut Costs" will win some votes, "Lower Spending" will win some votes, and "Raise Taxes" will lose all the other vote gains plus many more. Anyone who thinks this can be solved without raising Taxes is out of touch with reality. So, instead of dealing with Political Suicide, some would rather wait until they gain power before letting the cat out of the bag or just put off doing anything until the next guy/gal has no choice, but to deal with the situation.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,030
2
61
Originally posted by: sandorski
The problem comes when people want details as to how to fix it. "Cut Costs" will win some votes, "Lower Spending" will win some votes, and "Raise Taxes" will lose all the other vote gains plus many more. Anyone who thinks this can be solved without raising Taxes is out of touch with reality. So, instead of dealing with Political Suicide, some would rather wait until they gain power before letting the cat out of the bag or just put off doing anything until the next guy/gal has no choice, but to deal with the situation.

We're already taxed to death.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,122
5,654
126
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: sandorski
The problem comes when people want details as to how to fix it. "Cut Costs" will win some votes, "Lower Spending" will win some votes, and "Raise Taxes" will lose all the other vote gains plus many more. Anyone who thinks this can be solved without raising Taxes is out of touch with reality. So, instead of dealing with Political Suicide, some would rather wait until they gain power before letting the cat out of the bag or just put off doing anything until the next guy/gal has no choice, but to deal with the situation.

We're already taxed to death.

Prepare to be revived and Taxed again.
 

Capitalizt

Banned
Nov 28, 2004
1,513
0
0
Ron Paul is the only one talking about the solution to this problem...REDUCING THE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT.

Unfortunately, the American people are rejecting this idea.
 

spittledip

Diamond Member
Apr 23, 2005
4,480
1
81
So with this in mind, which candidate do people think is the worst for the deficit and debt? I assume HRC with all her plans to spend money on all types of crazy crap. I think she will completely destroy the country. Does anyone think other candidates will do worse?
 

Noobtastic

Banned
Jul 9, 2005
3,721
0
0
Originally posted by: Capitalizt
Ron Paul is the only one talking about the solution to this problem...REDUCING THE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT.

Unfortunately, the American people are rejecting this idea.

Yes, way too much government. Billions of dollars being thrown at worthless departments and civil servants who end up being screwed anyways.

I don't understand how the Agriculture department has a bigger budget than Veteran's Affairs. It's just stupid.

Underfunding essential military resources while shouting "support our troops" is unfortunate irony to the max.

 

Siddhartha

Lifer
Oct 17, 1999
12,502
1
81
Tax cuts, conducting a war, and growth in government, (for example homeland security), add up to big federal government deficits.

 

babylon5

Golden Member
Dec 11, 2000
1,363
1
0
No President/Congress will fix it, politically most Americans will not make the sacrifice. We want keep delaying it until it's too late.

We will sail our Titanic until it hit the ice and put a hole in our economy. And that is just the way most Americans-Like-It!
 

heyheybooboo

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2007
6,278
0
0
Originally posted by: bamacre

For example, the government reports that its deficit for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2007 was $162.8 billion ... Total federal debt during the past fiscal year actually grew from $8,530.4 billion in 2006 to $9,030.6 billion in 2007, which is a $500.2 billion increase ? or more than three-times the reported deficit.

If you visit the search application for the US Treasury Federal Debt To The Penny and compare the Federal Debt for the dates of September 30, 2007 (end of FY) and October 2, 2007, you will find that the debt increased over $62 Billion on the first day of the 2008 fiscal year.

So as incredulous as bamacre's numbers may seem ...

They are worse and The Bushies will continue their raping of the US Taxpayer with new levels of incompetence.



 

lozina

Lifer
Sep 10, 2001
11,709
8
81
It won't be a willing fix, but our day of reckoning is coming. Some day, maybe soon, the house of cards is going to come crashing down.

So just sit back and enjoy the free lunches while you still can :) And hope your kids won't suffer a miserable fate if this all comes crashing down on them
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,095
513
126
Originally posted by: Noobtastic
Originally posted by: Capitalizt
Ron Paul is the only one talking about the solution to this problem...REDUCING THE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT.

Unfortunately, the American people are rejecting this idea.

Yes, way too much government. Billions of dollars being thrown at worthless departments and civil servants who end up being screwed anyways.

I don't understand how the Agriculture department has a bigger budget than Veteran's Affairs. It's just stupid.

Underfunding essential military resources while shouting "support our troops" is unfortunate irony to the max.

I havent verified this but heard the ag dept has more workers than the ag sector. More people work in govt than do working the fields. Typical govt right there.
 

FoBoT

No Lifer
Apr 30, 2001
63,089
12
76
fobot.com
Originally posted by: bamacre
Not to worry, I'm sure Obama has a plan. Right? Right?

:(

no, Obama is running on "change", but not THAT kind of change

there is no one willing to fix that and there are mitigating issues that make it not quite as bad as it seems

i am MUCH more worried about the Social Security situation than the National Debt itself
 

Nitemare

Lifer
Feb 8, 2001
35,466
4
76
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: sandorski
The problem comes when people want details as to how to fix it. "Cut Costs" will win some votes, "Lower Spending" will win some votes, and "Raise Taxes" will lose all the other vote gains plus many more. Anyone who thinks this can be solved without raising Taxes is out of touch with reality. So, instead of dealing with Political Suicide, some would rather wait until they gain power before letting the cat out of the bag or just put off doing anything until the next guy/gal has no choice, but to deal with the situation.

We're already taxed to death.

Prepare to be revived and Taxed again.

Why not have the government stop wasting our tax money instead?
 

RY62

Senior member
Mar 13, 2005
864
98
91
Originally posted by: babylon5
No President/Congress will fix it, politically most Americans will not make the sacrifice. We want keep delaying it until it's too late.

We will sail our Titanic until it hit the ice and put a hole in our economy. And that is just the way most Americans-Like-It!

Just curious...when was the last time our government had a balanced budget and who was president at the time? Who controlled congress?
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,122
5,654
126
Originally posted by: Nitemare
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: sandorski
The problem comes when people want details as to how to fix it. "Cut Costs" will win some votes, "Lower Spending" will win some votes, and "Raise Taxes" will lose all the other vote gains plus many more. Anyone who thinks this can be solved without raising Taxes is out of touch with reality. So, instead of dealing with Political Suicide, some would rather wait until they gain power before letting the cat out of the bag or just put off doing anything until the next guy/gal has no choice, but to deal with the situation.

We're already taxed to death.

Prepare to be revived and Taxed again.

Why not have the government stop wasting our tax money instead?

Even if they did, it wouldn't fix the problem.
 

lozina

Lifer
Sep 10, 2001
11,709
8
81
Originally posted by: RY62
Originally posted by: babylon5
No President/Congress will fix it, politically most Americans will not make the sacrifice. We want keep delaying it until it's too late.

We will sail our Titanic until it hit the ice and put a hole in our economy. And that is just the way most Americans-Like-It!

Just curious...when was the last time our government had a balanced budget and who was president at the time? Who controlled congress?

Basically, we only started getting persistent debt after the Federal Reserve was formed. Before that we had short term debts for wars. Then on top of that, since 1971 when the gold standard was abolished- well... just take a look at this chart to see for yourself:

http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm

Oh but Ron Paul and his economic ideas are crazy. :roll:
 

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
Originally posted by: lozina
Originally posted by: RY62
Originally posted by: babylon5
No President/Congress will fix it, politically most Americans will not make the sacrifice. We want keep delaying it until it's too late.

We will sail our Titanic until it hit the ice and put a hole in our economy. And that is just the way most Americans-Like-It!

Just curious...when was the last time our government had a balanced budget and who was president at the time? Who controlled congress?

Basically, we only started getting persistent debt after the Federal Reserve was formed. Before that we had short term debts for wars. Then on top of that, since 1971 when the gold standard was abolished- well... just take a look at this chart to see for yourself:

http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm

Oh but Ron Paul and his economic ideas are crazy. :roll:

Yes, because the Fed controls Congress....

Keep your theories in scope.
 

lozina

Lifer
Sep 10, 2001
11,709
8
81
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: lozina
Originally posted by: RY62
Originally posted by: babylon5
No President/Congress will fix it, politically most Americans will not make the sacrifice. We want keep delaying it until it's too late.

We will sail our Titanic until it hit the ice and put a hole in our economy. And that is just the way most Americans-Like-It!

Just curious...when was the last time our government had a balanced budget and who was president at the time? Who controlled congress?

Basically, we only started getting persistent debt after the Federal Reserve was formed. Before that we had short term debts for wars. Then on top of that, since 1971 when the gold standard was abolished- well... just take a look at this chart to see for yourself:

http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm

Oh but Ron Paul and his economic ideas are crazy. :roll:

Yes, because the Fed controls Congress....

Keep your theories in scope.

No, because Congress has to indirectly borrow from the Federal Reserve instead of just issuing it's own money like it used to and the Constitution prescribed