What's 9.8 trillion among friends?

[Fear No Evil]

http://money.cnn.com/2010/03/05/news/economy/cbo_obama_budget/index.htm?hpt=T2

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- If President Obama's 2011 budget were put into effect as proposed, the U.S. federal government would add an estimated $9.8 trillion to the country's accrued debt over the next decade, according to a preliminary analysis from the Congressional Budget Office.
Of that amount, an estimated $5.6 trillion will be in interest alone.

By 2020, the agency estimates debt held by the public would reach $20.3 trillion, or 90% of GDP. That's up from 53% of GDP in 2009.

The 9.8 trillion was 1.2 trillion higher than the Obama Administration claimed. Whats 10 trillion among friends anyway? Nope, no problems here at all.. 90% of GDP.. 20 trillion+.. This is just stimulus spending.. this is GOOD spending not like Bush. I'm sure the #'s from Healthcare will be spot on as well, as a matter of fact the savings will probably be so good that we can drop trillions from these estimates. 🙄

WTF is going on in this country? Even Bush wasn't this stupid. This NEEDS to stop. And don't hand me the bullshit of Bush, the economy, or whatever. This is 2020 and we still haven't stopped spending. If we are still in this recession in 2020 spending this kind of money we may as well just nuke ourselves because its all over.

 

[DesiPower]

You didnt get his whole plan... His budget will also create "Green Jobs" that cant be "outsourced" and then he will make US the "leader in green energy" and that in turn will produce so much "green" that we will never have to worry about money again

 

[werepossum]

You didnt get his whole plan... His budget will also create "Green Jobs" that cant be "outsourced" and then he will make US the "leader in green energy" and that in turn will produce so much "green" that we will never have to worry about money again

That's one horrible thing about progressives, they really don't understand about wealth generation versus wealth consumption. If only the number of jobs produced mattered then we could all get jobs patting each other on the back and have zero unemployment. Employing two million to produce what one million previously produced is a net drain on society, not a net gain, no matter how new and politically correct the technology. I can't imagine the export royalties on that technology would be worth much either.

 

[Craig234]

I think FNE is typically very irrational and more a force for evll, but we have some agreement on this issue.

The debt is a serious problem, and while short-term massive stimulus is needed, we need to slash debt.

$5.6 trillion in interest is handing over massive sums of money from the public to lenders, not a transfer of wealth good for the people.

 

[Hacp]

You didnt get his whole plan... His budget will also create "Green Jobs" that will be "outsourced" and then he will make US the "leader in green energy" and that in turn will produce so much "green" that we will never have to worry about money again

Fixed

 

[heyheybooboo]

Yes.

Bush was that stupid.

Tell me again how Bush and the Republicans paid for their tax cuts, 2 on-going wars, a Big Pharma Give-A-Way, a 70% increase in baseline DoD spending and NCLB ?

Oh. I get it. Bush and the CONS break the gov't (and economy) and don't want to take responsibility for it.

Typical.




--

 

[Fear No Evil]

I think FNE is typically very irrational and more a force for evll, but we have some agreement on this issue.

The debt is a serious problem, and while short-term massive stimulus is needed, we need to slash debt.

$5.6 trillion in interest is handing over massive sums of money from the public to lenders, not a transfer of wealth good for the people.

Can we just hug it out?

 

[Fear No Evil]

Yes.

Bush was that stupid.

Tell me again how Bush and the Republicans paid for their tax cuts, 2 on-going wars, a Big Pharma Give-A-Way, a 70% increase in baseline DoD spending and NCLB ?

Oh. I get it. Bush and the CONS break the gov't (and economy) and don't want to take responsibility for it.

Typical.




--

Ok, thats fine. What Bush did was WRONG. Must of us agree. Now triple the spending Bush did.. continue the wars.. continue the payouts to big-pharm and add payouts to big banks, big auto makers, and big mortgage companies.. And what do you get? Is it BETTER than Bush and Co?

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Ok, thats fine. What Bush did was WRONG. Must of us agree. Now triple the spending Bush did.. continue the wars.. continue the payouts to big-pharm and add payouts to big banks, big auto makers, and big mortgage companies.. And what do you get? Is it BETTER than Bush and Co?

You do realise that the war on terrorism would have been finished in '03 if we had been allowed to finish it?

So both wars are not Obamas fault and he's trying to handle that as best he can with the help of some people that are not too fucking bright.

Is spending an appropriate thing to get the market going? Well it's the extreme rights way of doing it which is exactly what Obama is doing right now.

The truth is... we up the ante until it's too high and then we are surprised when it is actually going for the price it's worth, which is a tenth of the appraised value.

It's like communism but the inflation lies in the market value.

Corporatism, communism, all the same sheit, about time you boys learned that.

 

[Fear No Evil]

You do realise that the war on terrorism would have been finished in '03 if we had been allowed to finish it?

So both wars are not Obamas fault and he's trying to handle that as best he can with the help of some people that are not too fucking bright.

Is spending an appropriate thing to get the market going? Well it's the extreme rights way of doing it which is exactly what Obama is doing right now.

The truth is... we up the ante until it's too high and then we are surprised when it is actually going for the price it's worth, which is a tenth of the appraised value.

It's like communism but the inflation lies in the market value.

Corporatism, communism, all the same sheit, about time you boys learned that.

I never said the wars were Obama's fault. I said he was continuing them. And then tripling Bush's spending, and ramping up the corporate handouts. If people are going to suggest it was wrong for Bush to do these things, certainly Obama doing it at a massively higher pace is bad as well.

There's no end in sight to Obama's 'progressive' spending. We'll soon be spending more in interest than the entire war on terror.

 

[DesiPower]

Yes.

Bush was that stupid.

Tell me again how Bush and the Republicans paid for their tax cuts, 2 on-going wars, a Big Pharma Give-A-Way, a 70% increase in baseline DoD spending and NCLB ?

Oh. I get it. Bush and the CONS break the gov't (and economy) and don't want to take responsibility for it.

Typical.
--

OK, Stop the Bush bashing already, if America wanted another Bush they would have voted for McCain. One of the reason Obama was elected was that he promised "Change" and noone figured he was talking in terms of money...

 

[Jiggz]

This is exactly what happens when you elect an "Harlem" politician to run the economy! Or is it Chicago politician? Either way, they're all the same.

 

[OrByte]

This is exactly what happens when you elect an "Harlem" politician to run the economy! Or is it Chicago politician? Either way, they're all the same.

and we can't trust "them" right?

 

[ranmaniac]

If we're going to go into debt, we should at least get some new infrastructure out of it that will create decent jobs, like building nuclear power plants, maglev rail, improved broadband etc.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

I never said the wars were Obama's fault. I said he was continuing them. And then tripling Bush's spending, and ramping up the corporate handouts. If people are going to suggest it was wrong for Bush to do these things, certainly Obama doing it at a massively higher pace is bad as well.

There's no end in sight to Obama's 'progressive' spending. We'll soon be spending more in interest than the entire war on terror.

Well, i'm not American so i really don't give a sheit but yeah, this is probably the sanest post you have ever made and yeah, you will.

Do you seriously think the situation would be different with McCain?

It wouldn't and it's not because he's not right enough, in reality, the US president doesn't have control over the US market, he is a part of it, nothing more.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

If we're going to go into debt, we should at least get some new infrastructure out of it that will create decent jobs, like building nuclear power plants, maglev rail, improved broadband etc.

if you are GOING into debt? heh, you have to be sheiting me?

 

[ranmaniac]

if you are GOING into debt? heh, you have to be sheiting me?

Going into more debt I mean. What's sad is that China will actually have more modern nuclear power plants than the US at the rate things are going. They're building one of the largest state of the art maglev rail lines in the world, while we got shitty Amtrak.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Going into more debt I mean. What's sad is that China will actually have more modern nuclear power plants than the US at the rate things are going. They're building one of the largest state of the art maglev rail lines in the world, while we got shitty Amtrak.

I'm not going to argue about your piss poor power or railroads.

Living in Sheffield i really don't need a car, if i should miss one bus to the rails there comes another one within five minutes.

An investment on infrastructure like that should come during good times though, but some twat was preoccupied with a war that probably cost as much to sell based on bought lies as it does to fight it.

I'd pity you but you voted for the twat TWICE!

 

[Hacp]

I'm not going to argue about your piss poor power or railroads.

Living in Sheffield i really don't need a car, if i should miss one bus to the rails there comes another one within five minutes.

An investment on infrastructure like that should come during good times though, but some twat was preoccupied with a war that probably cost as much to sell based on bought lies as it does to fight it.

I'd pity you but you voted for the twat TWICE!

Investment in infrastructure is a waste if it costs an arm and a leg. You get this infrastructure money and the first place it goes is into union coffers. How many union workers did China hire to build its new high speed rail? Not many I assume.

 

[sandorski]

Bask in the glory of the Bush legacy.

 

[XZeroII]

Bask in the glory of the Bush legacy.

Get over Bush already. This is Obama's work that we're talking about.

Or to be more precise, this is the Democrat's work since they have actually been in power for the past few years in congress. Remember, Congress is responsible for spending.

You can try to blame Bush all you want, but wishing won't make it true.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Bask in the glory of the Bush legacy.

So Bush is still responsible for Obama's debt in 2020? 🙄 Its interesting that there is basically no sane response from any lefties in this thread.. stick their heads in the sand... say But Bush 20 times, and hope this debt all magically disapears.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Get over Bush already. This is Obama's work that we're talking about.

Or to be more precise, this is the Democrat's work since they have actually been in power for the past few years in congress. Remember, Congress is responsible for spending.

You can try to blame Bush all you want, but wishing won't make it true.

You are deluding yourself. Not surprising.

All this BS is from page one of the GOP Block and Blame Handbook.

If you guys would cut the hyperbole and propaganda we could have a reasonable discussion (we know that will never happen) but I'm going to try, anyway.

Using FY 2000 as a baseline (when there was a $200+ billion surplus in the Unified Budget) Federal receipts as a percentage of GDP were around 20%.

Federal receipts as a percentage of GDP might be a little over 14% this year. Federal expenditures as a percentage of GDP will approach 25% this year.

I suspect (using FY 2000 as our baseline) we need to 'converge' around 19%. I know you guys won't agree with that but at least we have a start.

The 'elephant in the room' is we cannot snap our fingers and get there. Believe it or not, the left in this country realizes in times of economic peril taxes cannot be arbitrarily jacked up. It took 10 years to create the mess we are in ---- it will take 10 years (at least) to get out of it if we are lucky.

That is why troll threads like this are a joke. If you want to balance the FY2011 budget, please feel free to explain to the members of ATP&N where you will cut $1.5 trillion from the budget.

I look forward to that.




--

 

[Fear No Evil]

You are deluding yourself. Not surprising.

All this BS is from page one of the GOP Block and Blame Handbook.

If you guys would cut the hyperbole and propaganda we could have a reasonable discussion (we know that will never happen) but I'm going to try, anyway.

Using FY 2000 as a baseline (when there was a $200+ billion surplus in the Unified Budget) Federal receipts as a percentage of GDP were around 20%.

Federal receipts as a percentage of GDP might be a little over 14% this year. Federal expenditures as a percentage of GDP will approach 25% this year.

I suspect (using FY 2000 as our baseline) we need to 'converge' around 19%. I know you guys won't agree with that but at least we have a start.

The 'elephant in the room' is we cannot snap our fingers and get there. Believe it or not, the left in this country realizes in times of economic peril taxes cannot be arbitrarily jacked up. It took 10 years to create the mess we are in ---- it will take 10 years (at least) to get out of it if we are lucky.

That is why troll threads like this are a joke. If you want to balance the FY2011 budget, please feel free to explain to the members of ATP&N where you will cut $1.5 trillion from the budget.

I look forward to that.
--

Really.. We're SO lean in the federal budget there is NOTHING we can cut? NOTHING? How about we stop bailing out GM? How about the 400 billion in unused TARP funds to start? How about we stop giving Fannie and Freddie hundres of billions? How about we stop giving AIG 100's of billions and letting them hand out massive bonuses. And we're not talking about balancing the budget THIS YEAR, we're talking about doing it in 10 years. In 10 years its STILL not REMOTELY close to balanced. The economy is SO bad that we need to spend 10 TRILLION MORE than we take in over the next 10 years to fix it?

Obama needs to pull his head out of his ass and get back to basics. We don't need 'green jobs' we need JOBS. Mandating Healthcare isn't going to fix the economy its going to add trillions more to our debt.

Ok, since 10 years apparently isn't enough to fix the economy. How long? 15? So that will put us 25 trillion in debt and probably 100% of our GDP. 20 years? 30+ trillion and 105% of our GDP? 40? 50? The Great Depression only lasted 10-11 years, and since Obama AVOIDED that, surely we can get out of this RECESSION in 10?

Where does the spending stop? When will you lefties finally say no? 50 trillion in debt? Whats the #? Where do YOU draw the line? When our interest on the debt is equal to our GDP? Don't give me this bullshit that we can't cut.. We can't sustain this, WE HAVE TO.. Clinton's last budget was 1.9 Trillion. Obama and Bush have brought that to 3.8 trillion. Are you really suggesting the level of services from 2001 until 2011 have DOUBLED from our government.. That there is absolutely NO waste or non-critical services that have been added in 1.9 trillion in additional spending that could be cut?

We're doomed..

 

[Slew Foot]

You are deluding yourself. Not surprising.

All this BS is from page one of the GOP Block and Blame Handbook.

If you guys would cut the hyperbole and propaganda we could have a reasonable discussion (we know that will never happen) but I'm going to try, anyway.

Using FY 2000 as a baseline (when there was a $200+ billion surplus in the Unified Budget) Federal receipts as a percentage of GDP were around 20%.

Federal receipts as a percentage of GDP might be a little over 14% this year. Federal expenditures as a percentage of GDP will approach 25% this year.

I suspect (using FY 2000 as our baseline) we need to 'converge' around 19%. I know you guys won't agree with that but at least we have a start.

The 'elephant in the room' is we cannot snap our fingers and get there. Believe it or not, the left in this country realizes in times of economic peril taxes cannot be arbitrarily jacked up. It took 10 years to create the mess we are in ---- it will take 10 years (at least) to get out of it if we are lucky.

That is why troll threads like this are a joke. If you want to balance the FY2011 budget, please feel free to explain to the members of ATP&N where you will cut $1.5 trillion from the budget.

I look forward to that.




--

Problem with FY 2000 is that it was the peak of the internet bubble. Almost like saying real estate was reasonable in 2006.