Deficit Spending

[teckmaster]

This just may be me being nieve, but how can we be billions upon billions of dollars in debt, come up with a budget that is in debt before its voted on, sign away 87 billion more to another country and still be the wealthiest nation on the planet. If Iraq wants up to help them rebuild, fine, we'll trade you our labor for your oil. Screw this sending tons of money. What are we ever going to get back out of it? We might be able to have a military base in Iraq like we do every other country. Whoopty doo.



Feels good to get that off my chest

 

[LunarRay]

Long term debt is used for financing Long term assets. To use it to finance current operations is wise too when you wish to boost the economy with tax cuts. Emergencies occur from time to time too. This is one of those times. Too bad it is bogus.

 

[glenn1]

This just may be me being nieve, but how can we be billions upon billions of dollars in debt, come up with a budget that is in debt before its voted on, sign away 87 billion more to another country and still be the wealthiest nation on the planet.

Because our status as the "wealthiest nation on the planet" is based upon GDP, not our government budget deficit/surplus or level of debt.

Think of it this way. I have no debt of any kind. Let's say Bill Gates has a $1,000,000 mortgage and $200,000 in credit card debt. Who's the richer person?

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: glenn1

This just may be me being nieve, but how can we be billions upon billions of dollars in debt, come up with a budget that is in debt before its voted on, sign away 87 billion more to another country and still be the wealthiest nation on the planet.

Because our status as the "wealthiest nation on the planet" is based upon GDP, not our government budget deficit/surplus or level of debt.

Think of it this way. I have no debt of any kind. Let's say Bill Gates has a $1,000,000 mortgage and $200,000 in credit card debt. Who's the richer person?

I think your first statement is incorrect, debt does matter in the equation, but your second statement is a very good analogy of the situation.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: glenn1

This just may be me being nieve, but how can we be billions upon billions of dollars in debt, come up with a budget that is in debt before its voted on, sign away 87 billion more to another country and still be the wealthiest nation on the planet.

Because our status as the "wealthiest nation on the planet" is based upon GDP, not our government budget deficit/surplus or level of debt.

Think of it this way. I have no debt of any kind. Let's say Bill Gates has a $1,000,000 mortgage and $200,000 in credit card debt. Who's the richer person?

How much are you worth vs. Bill Gates? Are you worth more, if so then you are richer.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: LunarRay

Originally posted by: glenn1

This just may be me being nieve, but how can we be billions upon billions of dollars in debt, come up with a budget that is in debt before its voted on, sign away 87 billion more to another country and still be the wealthiest nation on the planet.

Because our status as the "wealthiest nation on the planet" is based upon GDP, not our government budget deficit/surplus or level of debt.

Think of it this way. I have no debt of any kind. Let's say Bill Gates has a $1,000,000 mortgage and $200,000 in credit card debt. Who's the richer person?

How much are you worth vs. Bill Gates? Are you worth more, if so then you are richer.

Depends on his equitable holdings... both of them

CkG

 

[XZeroII]

We can't take oil from Iraq. All the Bush bashers will complain.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: XZeroII
We can't take oil from Iraq. All the Bush bashers will complain.

True dat.

CkG

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

The problem is we went into Iraq blowing crap up . . . including the infrastructure that was already falling apart. If we had gone in with the UN, we would still pay a disproportionate amount (b/c of our wealth). After the war we demanded official recognition as the Occupying Power in Iraq. Once that recognition was granted we became the "somewhat" legal controling authority, hence responsible for the condition of the nation . . . and control of its resources. Not only did we break it but then we claimed we wanted to rebuild it to a fine condition.

As for the rest of Bush fiscal policy, he's an idiot. I picked a copy of American Conservative off the rack last year. I loved it despite the fact Pat Buchanan is a raving, jingoist twit . . . he's right on occasion. The Neocons have distorted government for their own purposes in the same manner as Liberals. The difference is Liberals just cost money . . . they don't really want your guns, alcohol, tobacco, or unborn children . . . they just want to tax the crap out of it and give the proceeds to the UN. What has Bush done for America? He's cut taxes (although states have expanded them) while expanding the role of government in essentially every facet of American life . . . except for environmental protection. We are running record deficits so of course he starts two wars (you can argue about Afghanistan but clearly we started with Iraq). So not only will the entitlement programs strangling government continue to be a burden but now we've got a 51st state . . . the size of CA . . . that will give nothing to the Treasury but will extract $200B or so from Feb '03 to Oct '04!

 

[Miramonti]

Originally posted by: teckmaster
If Iraq wants up to help them rebuild, fine, we'll trade you our labor for your oil. Screw this sending tons of money. What are we ever going to get back out of it?

The bush admin was expecting to be pumping more oil by now to pay for the reconstruction, but the can't get the oil going and the country in order so they are turning to the UN for troops to help restore order. But the UN, i.e. countries like france and germany and others, are saying they won't authorize a resolution to deploy troups unless oil revenues are turned over to the UN to pay for its activities, including a bigger role in the reconstruction.

and bush only said this $87b would be for this "upcoming year" too.

 

[Gaard]

<<What are we ever going to get back out of it?>>

Surely, you're not suggesting that we expect/want anything in return for the liberation of the Iraqis. Afterall, you don't sell humanitarian efforts.

 

[sMiLeYz]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: XZeroII
We can't take oil from Iraq. All the Bush bashers will complain.

True dat.

CkG

If Bush actually listened to the Bush bashers, we wouldn't be in Iraq... having our brave men and women dying, it also wouldn't be a multi-billion dollar money pit like it is now.

George Bush, said all the "Iraqi oil would be used for Iraqi's" not us Bush bashers.

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: teckmaster
This just may be me being nieve, but how can we be billions upon billions of dollars in debt, come up with a budget that is in debt before its voted on, sign away 87 billion more to another country and still be the wealthiest nation on the planet. If Iraq wants up to help them rebuild, fine, we'll trade you our labor for your oil. Screw this sending tons of money. What are we ever going to get back out of it? We might be able to have a military base in Iraq like we do every other country. Whoopty doo.



Feels good to get that off my chest

Some misinformation. We are not billions of dollars in debt, we are trillions of dollar in debt. Last count of national debt was about 6.8 trillion. About 11% of our total budget is used to pay interest on those debt. Right now, we are running 400~500 billion deficit per year and guess what, we gotta borrow more money to pay for those deficit. And the more borrowing lead to more debt and to more interest payment, and that's gonna lead to even higher deficits. True that America economic output is number one in the world, but it doesn't mean we are the richest. We are like a company who have the highest total sales, but the net income is always negative because we spend too much.

So with Iraq, we are spending money on something that has no economic return. The only return on US investment is if Halliburton and Bush's oil buddy doesn't pocket all the money they got out of Iraq and pay some tax on those gains. But still those won't be significant compare to the money we spend on Iraq.

Anyway, what do you expect the Bush Admin to do when Bush himself ran a company to the ground. I hope you are not relying on him to return this country to sound financial health.