$53 Trillion and Growing

[bamacre]

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.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

This is not new...

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

Life will go on...

 

[bamacre]

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.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

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]

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]

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]

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.

 

[Jinru]

Heres Glenn Beck speaking with the head of Government Accountability Office, David Walker, a couple days ago on his show.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=btCmQJXTyTw

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Jinru
Heres Glenn Beck speaking with the head of Government Accountability Office, David Walker, a couple days ago on his show.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=btCmQJXTyTw

Thanks.

 

[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.

 

[novasatori]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Jinru
Heres Glenn Beck speaking with the head of Government Accountability Office, David Walker, a couple days ago on his show.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=btCmQJXTyTw

Thanks.

:thumbsup:

 

[spittledip]

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]

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]

Tax cuts, conducting a war, and growth in government, (for example homeland security), add up to big federal government deficits.

 

[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!

 

[heyheybooboo]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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