National Debt exceeds $12,000,000,000,000.00

[Genx87]

No. No I don't - not at this level anyway. Care to link the lefties march on DC or 'teabagger' events?

No events because the left didnt *really* care about it enough except to write a bunch of vitriol knowing full well when their party does it they will cheer it on.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Obama has essentially frozen discretionary spending which is effectively what Clinton and the GOP did in the 1990s --- but we still end up with a $500 billion deficit in 2018.

That's really the projection? Gee, I hope there aren't any catastrophes that have to be funded during the next seven years.

IIRC, there is $230 billion estimated expense over the term based upon 'the statistical probability of natural disasters'.

I thought it was pretty slick the budget writers thought of it in projecting future budgets and debt projections.

-
-
-

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Bullshit and you know it. The timing and level of outrage over government spending is absolutely hypocritical because it is not new. GWB ran up record deficits and national debt year after year and you barely heard a peep during his term. Now that Obama took office the deficit and debt are suddenly important? Where were the small government libertarians before 2009? Where were the tea baggers? Where were the rallys to take back our country? Where was Fox News?

Simple question...is deficit spending at these levels good or bad?

 

[StageLeft]

I thought it was pretty slick the budget writers thought of it in projecting future budgets and debt projections.

What about wars and recession stimuli? Those seem to cost a hell of a lot more than natural disasters. We've now had several of these in the last eight years alone.

 

[Genx87]

We've put ourselves in this position and there is just no easy way to work through it.

Obama has essentially frozen discretionary spending which is effectively what Clinton and the GOP did in the 1990s --- but we still end up with a $500 billion deficit in 2018.

And no one really wants to discuss 'saving' $1 trillion by cutting troop strength in Iraq and Afghanistan to 30k by 2013 --- it becomes a political hot potatoe (note the Dan Quayle spelling - LOL).

I think we will see somewhat of a 'surge' in Afghanistan over the next few years with a quick reduction in troop strength to around 75k in Iraq and Afghanistan.

That might cut around $650 billion off the debt over the next ten years --- only another $4.5 trillion or so to go to keep it somewhat manageable (rolling eyes)
-
-
-

Well with the situation in Afghanistan we should be able to find a way out of it. If we eliminated our massive military campaign against the terrorists in the mountains and worked more covertly. I think it would cost a lot less in material, money, and manpower.

But discretionary spending only accounts for 1/3rd of the budget now. We have to tackle our massive entitlement programs. And right now it doesnt appear we are going in the right direction by adding in a health care program.

 

[Robor]

Where were you? Look at the CBO numbers during the Bush presidency... sure he and congress spent like drunken sailors... but up until the Dems took over congress the deficit was trending back down after the 9/11 spike. There was a glimmer of hope and reason because at least a balanced budget was forecast by 2012. Likely that would have never happened... since Bush and congress raided the treasury on his way out.

But now... it is over the top. the CBO is projecting trillion dollar deficits for the next decade. Obama is pushing for government run health care, cap and trade, amnesty... any one of which will burden the taxpayer even further. Social Security is nearing the end of its ability to pay out... medicare is insolvent... etc.

But hey I guess there is a glimmer of hope... GM is paying back $6.7 billion ahead of schedule. Even though it is paying back a government loan with government money... it still sounds good doesn't it?

I wasn't at rallies protesting against GWB's borrow and spend budgets. I'm not saying it's good when it's done by either side. I'm pointing out the hypocrisy. Remember, the D's are the 'tax and spend' liberals and the R's are the 'fiscal conservatives'. :sneaky:

 

[totalnoob]

What does ONE TRILLION dollars look like? <--click to see

 

[BassBomb]

so how much did the war cost?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

I wasn't at rallies protesting against GWB's borrow and spend budgets. I'm not saying it's good when it's done by either side. I'm pointing out the hypocrisy. Remember, the D's are the 'tax and spend' liberals and the R's are the 'fiscal conservatives'. :sneaky:

Yes...by all means...attack the hypocrisy while ignoring your own.

 

[Robor]

Your outrage and your rant do nothing more than prove my point. However I'm certain you don't see it that way.

The answer to your post is that finally, enough became enough. You couple that with our dear leader repeatedly telling us that he was going to change things then not doing so and the final nail got driven home. The revolt began.

But you can continue the war cry of the extreme left. It's based on nothing more than the Utopian dream of school yard fairness. But real life doesn't work that way.

Looks like the sun is up.

You liken Obama to Hitler and say I'm in the extreme fringe. Whatever...

 

[Robor]

No events because the left didnt *really* care about it enough except to write a bunch of vitriol knowing full well when their party does it they will cheer it on.

That's pretty much my point.

 

[Robor]

Yes...by all means...attack the hypocrisy while ignoring your own.

Where?

 

[ayabe]

It is just a silly number with a bunch of zero's. It will have no bearing on our lives... assuming we die pretty quickly.

It's been growing steadily for more than 40 years. Go ahead and tell me how it being 12 trillion is significantly different than it being 6 trillion as it relates to your life?

It's not a good thing, but next year it'll be 13+ trillion most likely. It's an abstract number which doesn't really represent anything other than to rally the hooples.

Edit - A balanced budget cannot be achieved at this time, and a surplus is just crazy talk.

 

[ElFenix]

debt figure in a vacuum is meaningless.

 

[MotF Bane]

with our dear leader repeatedly

You liken Obama to Hitler and say I'm in the extreme fringe. Whatever...

Dear leader != Hitler.

 

[blackangst1]

Bullshit and you know it. The timing and level of outrage over government spending is absolutely hypocritical because it is not new. GWB ran up record deficits and national debt year after year and you barely heard a peep during his term. Now that Obama took office the deficit and debt are suddenly important? Where were the small government libertarians before 2009? Where were the tea baggers? Where were the rallys to take back our country? Where was Fox News?

Actually most talking heads on Fox railed Bush and the GOP for spending like drunken sailors. Not that you would know. You just parroting the left talking points?

(nevermind, that was a rhetorical question)

 

[BoberFett]

You've got to remember that a significant portion of the country has been brainwashed to think that Republican debt = bad and Democratic debt = good.

Instead of debt = bad.

Many of these people have yet to work for a living and many that are working pay no federal taxes as has already been pointed out. It's easy to just plod along with blinders on waiting for the next round of government cheese to fall in their laps. They're getting promised plenty these days.

When the sun gets higher in the sky, they'll be showing up in droves explaining why monumental debt is meaningless. Be patient, because they don't like to get up until the sun is warm.

Debt is not inherently bad. Debt can be used as an investment. No debt is preferable, but if the ROI is greater than the interest then debt is useful for moving ahead.

What's bad is the way the US uses debt. We're not using it to move ahead. There are no massive, capital intensive infrastructure projects happening which will give us that high ROI. What we're doing is using debt to pay for regular operating expenses.

 

[Robor]

Dear leader != Hitler.

Sorry... Got my Obama dictator comparisons confused.

 

[BoberFett]

Where were the small government libertarians before 2009?

Seriously? Are you blind or stupid? Or maybe both?

 

[Robor]

Actually most talking heads on Fox railed Bush and the GOP for spending like drunken sailors. Not that you would know. You just parroting the left talking points?

(nevermind, that was a rhetorical question)

Oh yeah, now I remember those Fox News sponsored and heavily publicized teabagger and 9/12 protest events every past year. Not.

 

[Robor]

Seriously? Are you blind or stupid? Or maybe both?

Just stupid. I should have said faux libertarians (as in voted for GWB twice but are too ashamed of the (R) party to side with them anymore). Sorry.

 

[MotF Bane]

Sorry... Got my Obama dictator comparisons confused.

Yeah, get it right man. He's a crazy motherfucking Korean, not a crazy motherfucking German. That he happens to be black... well, there's a monkey in the wrench. Wrench in the monkey? Whatever, he's clearly a dictator.

:beer;

 

[heyheybooboo]

What about wars and recession stimuli? Those seem to cost a hell of a lot more than natural disasters. We've now had several of these in the last eight years alone.

The 'overseas contingency operations' were projected over $2 trillion at 2011 troop levels and 'expensed' down to $1.7 trillion over the term. I don't recall what the troop levels were but will guess something in the range of 120-130k for both Iraq and Afghanistan.

Further reduction to 75k troops by 2013 knocked $650 billion off that $1.7 trillion --- 30k troop level by 2013 knocked $1 trillion off.

As far as the recession/TARP stuff I think all that is on the books as a 'loan' account that is reported as part of the Federal debt. It seemed to me that they fully expect those funds to be paid back with interest - hope they can pull that trick off.

Since this is a thread about "$12 TRILLION DEBT!" I don't want to deflect from that point too much but more than 1/3 of that debt is not publicly held - 1/3 of the debt is the gov't IOUs we owe ourselves. I only point this out because I think there is around $1.5 trillion or so that we are going to 'borrow' from the trust funds over the next 7 or 8 years (I can't remember if that is simply principle or both principle and interest).

The cost to continue the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts was around $2.6 trillion. I believe the budget knocked $600 billion off that. IIRC Obama at one time had proposed an additional $700 billion in tax cuts and credits but I think that got 'wacked' to something in the $200-250 billion range. I'll whip out an 'ass-fact' and hope we can recover around $1.25 trillion in this mess to cut the debt.

The cost to index the AMT to inflation is approaching $600 billion if I recall correctly, and that number is reflected in the projected debt figures.

As far as playing 'weatherman' on the natural disasters, who knows if it will be $150 or $350 billion? At least they did acknowledge expenses we will most likely incur in the future and not play 'rosey scenario' with the projections.

Well with the situation in Afghanistan we should be able to find a way out of it. If we eliminated our massive military campaign against the terrorists in the mountains and worked more covertly. I think it would cost a lot less in material, money, and manpower.

But discretionary spending only accounts for 1/3rd of the budget now. We have to tackle our massive entitlement programs. And right now it doesnt appear we are going in the right direction by adding in a health care program.

I think they have a pretty good idea what needs to done on the mandatory side. One thing for sure - they won't be doing it in an election year BUT we all need to know where the prospective candidates stand. Maybe by 2011 they can get down to serious business (possibly by reaching a gentleman's agreement to not 'skewer' each other on raising the retirement age, means-testing, etc. ...)

so how much did the war cost?

In principle only I think we are approaching $1 trillion and the DoD recently asked for a 'supplemental' this fiscal year of another $60-80 billion (not even six weeks into the budget year!)

-
-
-

 

[Robor]

Yeah, get it right man. He's a crazy motherfucking Korean, not a crazy motherfucking German. That he happens to be black... well, there's a monkey in the wrench. Wrench in the monkey? Whatever, he's clearly a dictator.

:beer;

It's hard to keep up... Hitler, Marx, Stalin, Chevez, Lil' Kim. Am I forgetting anyone?

 

[MotF Bane]

It's hard to keep up... Hitler, Marx, Stalin, Chevez, Lil' Kim. Am I forgetting anyone?

I think that's all of them. He must have some severe schizophrenia issues.