I see your point, and it does have some merit (in fact, to be frank, I believe at 1st glance I would rather it were done that way!)...but, it isn't what The Founders intended. And that is really my 'issue' with it.
:chug:
More USA political questions
- Thread starter Keith1
- Start date
I see your point, and it does have some merit (in fact, to be frank, I believe at 1st glance I would rather it were done that way!)...but, it isn't what The Founders intended. And that is really my 'issue' with it.
:chug:
Eeeeeeeeh, he's just 'ticked off' because a certain foxy lady didn't sit next to HIM on a certain plane flight...trust me!
Regardless of where you fall politically, this is going to be an interesting game of brinksmanship. The House GOP have such a low approval rating that I honestly think they feel they have nothing to lose. You'd think Obama would learn his lesson regarding giving ultimatums to men with nothing to lose (Assad)!
The tea party seems to feel we're nearly marching off a cliff on the spending side so the threat of a default in 2013 isn't so scary if you think you're inevitably going to be facing one within 10 years anyway. I believe they feel the lack of spending restraint on the part of the Obama administration has placed us in such dire straits that they'll use whatever means necessary to force some action. They also view Obamacare as the proverbial straw that will break the camels back. Remember, spending estimates for Medicare were off by more than 1000% 25 years into the program. Obamacare dwarfs it in size and scope. Clearly the sequester, which has saved some 70 billion, did not result in any of the dire predictions of the Obama administration coming true. Spending cuts are politically difficult, so I'm presuming Obama is just kicking the can down the street to the next President. It could be too late by then.
The tea party seems to feel we're nearly marching off a cliff on the spending side so the threat of a default in 2013 isn't so scary if you think you're inevitably going to be facing one within 10 years anyway. I believe they feel the lack of spending restraint on the part of the Obama administration has placed us in such dire straits that they'll use whatever means necessary to force some action. They also view Obamacare as the proverbial straw that will break the camels back. Remember, spending estimates for Medicare were off by more than 1000% 25 years into the program. Obamacare dwarfs it in size and scope. Clearly the sequester, which has saved some 70 billion, did not result in any of the dire predictions of the Obama administration coming true. Spending cuts are politically difficult, so I'm presuming Obama is just kicking the can down the street to the next President. It could be too late by then.
Jim Craik
Lifetime Supporter
GOP In Grave Danger Of Losing House In 2014, PPP Polls Show:
Shutting down the government may end up costing Republicans control of the House of Representatives.
A series of polls released Sunday show just how damaging the shutdown has been for the GOP............
We can only hope these very clever Republicans keep up their unwinable stratagy right through the debt ceiling.................
Shutting down the government may end up costing Republicans control of the House of Representatives.
A series of polls released Sunday show just how damaging the shutdown has been for the GOP............
We can only hope these very clever Republicans keep up their unwinable stratagy right through the debt ceiling.................
you can wet yourself in anticipation Jim but we had all better hope whoever has control wakes up to the out of control spending problem in this country or we are all screwed. Just as a counterpoint from the bay area
Obamacare's winners and losers in Bay Area - San Jose Mercury News
Obamacare's winners and losers in Bay Area - San Jose Mercury News
Howard Jones
Supporter
Steve has it! Absolutely perfectly! He's SOOOOOOOOO dead on that I won't repeat him!
Jim none of that poll crap means a damn thing if the lifeboat is full of water, the water temp if 40F, the sharks are circling and you're polling which way to row. It's time to throw something/body out and BALE!
Pete, catch a cold? More like 1918 buddy.
Jim none of that poll crap means a damn thing if the lifeboat is full of water, the water temp if 40F, the sharks are circling and you're polling which way to row. It's time to throw something/body out and BALE!
Pete, catch a cold? More like 1918 buddy.
Jim Craik
Lifetime Supporter
Howie,
When it comes to Govenment spending, you are right, we just can't afford Republicans!
In my lifetime, by far the greatest increase in Govenment spending has come under Republican leadership.
Tim, when you spoke of control of spending, was something like this what you were looking for?
When it comes to Govenment spending, you are right, we just can't afford Republicans!
In my lifetime, by far the greatest increase in Govenment spending has come under Republican leadership.
Tim, when you spoke of control of spending, was something like this what you were looking for?
Last edited:
Thanks Howard. Jim's graphs are always obtuse at best, highly misleading at worst. The bottom line is that our national debt when Bush left office was 10.6Trillion (not an arguable point). It now stands at 16.8Trillion (not an arguable point). Obama will be on pace to increase the debt, by the time he leaves office in 2016, to 20Trillion (estimated by Forbes and Usdebtclock.org). That will be nearly more than all other previous presidents combined (also not an arguable point). All the other data, figures, subterfuge, etc is just pedantic chatter. Any idea what the interest payment will be on 20Trillion of debt? We are very lucky that interest rates are low now but that won't remain forever. So, when the debt reaches 20Trillion we will likely have higher interest rates, which will be absolutely crushing and resulting rapidly rising annual deficits + debt as projected by the CBO (supposedly nonpartisan) and most others. So, the shit really hits the fan after 2016 when, you guessed it, Obama is gone and only worried about where his library will be.
So, there are some in Congress who view the urgency to cut spending as immediate. Jim would prefer to focus on the polls, which are irrelevant when it comes to good policy. It does make him absolutely giddy to see the Republicans do the unpopular thing, even if it might be right.
So, there are some in Congress who view the urgency to cut spending as immediate. Jim would prefer to focus on the polls, which are irrelevant when it comes to good policy. It does make him absolutely giddy to see the Republicans do the unpopular thing, even if it might be right.
Liberal bloggers have been passing around a piece by Rex Nutting at Market Watch arguing that although “almost everyone believes that Obama has presided over a massive increase in federal spending,” in fact, “it didn’t happen.”
Except, well, it did.
Nutting’s evidence consists of the a chart showing that the annualized growth of federal spending from 2010-2013 is 1.4 percent, compared with 7.3 percent from 2002-2005 during George Bush’s first term and 8.1 percent from 2006-2009 during Bush’s second term.
Nutting has a half a point: Federal spending did rise considerably during the 2009 fiscal year: Between 2001 and 2008, federal outlays (spending) rose from $1.8 trillion to $2.9 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office’s historical spending data. That’s a steep enough rise. But it’s nothing compared to what happened during the next year: In 2009, outlays spiked, rising from the $2.9 trillion spent in 2008 to $3.5 trillion.
But what Obama did in subsequent budgets was stick to that newly inflated level of spending. Outlays in 2010 were just a hair short of $3.5 trillion. In 2011, they rose further, approaching $3.6 trillion.
So even if you absolve Obama of responsibility for the initial growth spike, he still presided over unprecedented spending that was out of line with the existing growth trend. Obama’s average spending is far higher than under Bush or Clinton on both adjusted dollar levels and as a percentage of the economy. James Pethokoukis of The American Enterprise Institute has a handy graphic comparing annual Obama’s spending as a percentage of the economy to George W. Bush’s average spending as a percentage of GDP:
Except, well, it did.
Nutting’s evidence consists of the a chart showing that the annualized growth of federal spending from 2010-2013 is 1.4 percent, compared with 7.3 percent from 2002-2005 during George Bush’s first term and 8.1 percent from 2006-2009 during Bush’s second term.
Nutting has a half a point: Federal spending did rise considerably during the 2009 fiscal year: Between 2001 and 2008, federal outlays (spending) rose from $1.8 trillion to $2.9 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office’s historical spending data. That’s a steep enough rise. But it’s nothing compared to what happened during the next year: In 2009, outlays spiked, rising from the $2.9 trillion spent in 2008 to $3.5 trillion.
But what Obama did in subsequent budgets was stick to that newly inflated level of spending. Outlays in 2010 were just a hair short of $3.5 trillion. In 2011, they rose further, approaching $3.6 trillion.
So even if you absolve Obama of responsibility for the initial growth spike, he still presided over unprecedented spending that was out of line with the existing growth trend. Obama’s average spending is far higher than under Bush or Clinton on both adjusted dollar levels and as a percentage of the economy. James Pethokoukis of The American Enterprise Institute has a handy graphic comparing annual Obama’s spending as a percentage of the economy to George W. Bush’s average spending as a percentage of GDP:
Attachments
You know whats funny? i got an email from MoveOn.org with this headline. The funny part is i never signed up for MoveOn.org because its contrary to pretty much everything i believe in.
Whats even more funny is how I then got emails thanking me for signing petitions that MoveOn.org sponsors.
Funny how when i went to their site and was able to retrieve my 'lost' password and logged in, I found that someone created a profile for my email that used a name that was obviously automatically generated; and I also found that I was not able to un-register from the site.
Clearly, MoveOn.org is a conduit for fraud.
So Jim, is this how your side operates? You have to provide false names for your petitions? Is this how you vote as well? Is that why your side is so against providing any kind of ID when voting?
Well said Steve.
Howie,
When it comes to Govenment spending, you are right, we just can't afford Republicans!
In my lifetime, by far the greatest increase in Govenment spending has come under Republican leadership.
Tim, when you spoke of control of spending, was something like this what you were looking for?
Jim As usual you are being misleading. You can clearly see that Obama is spending more in trillions of dollars than his predecessors. It's a percentage of a larger amount so the percentage is lower. He's still spending more. From $10.6 trillion of debt when he entered office to $16.8 trillion today, or $6.2 trillion in 5 1/2 years. Nice try though.
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/charts/united-states-gdp.png?s=wgdpus
You'll notice that for the first time in history our National Debt, $16.8 trillion, is higher than our GDP. Yup he's a frugal rascal!
You'll notice that for the first time in history our National Debt, $16.8 trillion, is higher than our GDP. Yup he's a frugal rascal!
Howard Jones
Supporter
Ya know Jim, I like ya, but I can do the math and I'm not gonna buy it........ period. George never had a veto/filibuster proof congress for two years so I'm not gonna put his spending record all on him. I do however wish he had vetoed at least one spending bill. The blue people held him hostage on his war priority's by demanding big spending increases the first term but he did pretty much go nuts the last year or so. He never was much of a conservative so I guess we got what we paid for.
However....BOB started out from scratch in year one borrowing more than twice as much as George did his last year and never looked back. I'm not going to look up charts for this because nobody honest disagrees.
Far more importantly, I'm worried about my daughter's America and even more worried about where we will go if he and the democrats succeed in a obviously traitorous plan to bankrupt America.
At this point it's really not necessary to convince lefties to see the reality of the dangerous path we are on as we are well past the point of debate on the issue. Now we can only stand up and fight for what we believe in. We'll see who is more committed.
I think for the sake of our friendship I will not reply on the subject again. God bless American.
However....BOB started out from scratch in year one borrowing more than twice as much as George did his last year and never looked back. I'm not going to look up charts for this because nobody honest disagrees.
Far more importantly, I'm worried about my daughter's America and even more worried about where we will go if he and the democrats succeed in a obviously traitorous plan to bankrupt America.
At this point it's really not necessary to convince lefties to see the reality of the dangerous path we are on as we are well past the point of debate on the issue. Now we can only stand up and fight for what we believe in. We'll see who is more committed.
I think for the sake of our friendship I will not reply on the subject again. God bless American.
(CNSNews.com) - The federal government raked in a record of approximately $2,472,542,000,000 in tax revenues through the first eleven months of fiscal 2013, which ran from Oct. 1, 2012 through the end of August, according to the Monthly Treasury Statement for August. That is up about $285 billion from the approximately $2,187,527,000,000 in taxes the government took in through August of fiscal 2012. Despite these record tax revenues, the federal government still accumulated a $755 billion deficit in the first eleven months of fiscal 2013. Total federal spending through the first eleven months of the fiscal year was $3.228 trillion. At the end of last year, the president struck a deal with Republicans in Congress to enact legislation that increased taxes. This included pushing the top income tax rate from 35 percent to 39.6 percent, increasing the top tax rate on dividends and capital gains from 15 percent to 20 percent, and phasing out personal exemptions and deductions starting at an annual income level of $250,000. An additional 3.8 percent tax on dividends, interests, capital gains and royalties--that was embedded in the Obamacare law--also took effect this year. The record of $2,472,542,000,000 in federal tax revenues through August is in non-inflation-adjusted dollars. However, even when adjusted for inflation, the $2,472,542,000,000 brought in through federal taxes in the first eleven months of fiscal 2013 exceeds the real federal tax revenue in any of the last 16 years except for 2007, when federal tax revenues were approximately $2,282,318,000,000 in 2007 dollars and $2,571,309,020,000 in 2013 dollars. The largest single bloc of federal tax revenue so far this year has come in the form of individual income tax payments, which were approximately $1,175,536,000,000 through the first eleven months of fiscal 2013. That is about $116.017 billion more than the approximately $1,015,419,000,000 in individual income taxes that was collected in the first eleven months of fiscal 2012. - See more at: $2,472,542,000,000: Record Taxation Through August; Deficit Still $755B | CNS News
Total federal spending through the first eleven months of the fiscal year was $3.228 trillion
The federal government raked in a record of approximately $2,472,542,000,000 in tax revenues through the first eleven months of fiscal 2013
See a problem here? We spent 756 billion more than we took in. Even the biggest credit card moron has a better grip on things than that. That's about 30% more than we make. Like making $100K a year and spending $130K. Still want to see the debt ceiling go up? We have a bunch of idiots with a print money card in Washington.
Total federal spending through the first eleven months of the fiscal year was $3.228 trillion
The federal government raked in a record of approximately $2,472,542,000,000 in tax revenues through the first eleven months of fiscal 2013
See a problem here? We spent 756 billion more than we took in. Even the biggest credit card moron has a better grip on things than that. That's about 30% more than we make. Like making $100K a year and spending $130K. Still want to see the debt ceiling go up? We have a bunch of idiots with a print money card in Washington.
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
So debt is 16.8 trillion, this may help put that amount in perspective. A great legacy to leave your grand children..not.
What's the difference between a million, a billion and a trillion?
A million seconds is 13 days.
A billion seconds is 31 years.
A trillion seconds is 31,688 years.
A million minutes ago was � 1 year, 329 days, 10 hours and 40 minute ago.
A billion minutes ago was just after the time of Christ.
A million hours ago was in 1885.
A billion hours ago man had not yet walked on earth.
A million dollars ago was five (5) seconds ago at the U.S. Treasury.
A billion dollars ago was late yesterday afternoon at the U.S. Treasury.
A trillion dollars is so large a number that only politicians
can use the term in conversation... probably because they
seldom think about what they are really saying. I've read that
mathematicians do not even use the term trillion!
Here is some perspective on TRILLION:
�Trillion = 1,000,000,000,000.
The country has not existed for a trillion seconds.
Western civilization has not been around a trillion seconds.
One trillion seconds ago � 31,688 years � Neanderthals stalked the plains of Europe.
What's the difference between a million, a billion and a trillion?
A million seconds is 13 days.
A billion seconds is 31 years.
A trillion seconds is 31,688 years.
A million minutes ago was � 1 year, 329 days, 10 hours and 40 minute ago.
A billion minutes ago was just after the time of Christ.
A million hours ago was in 1885.
A billion hours ago man had not yet walked on earth.
A million dollars ago was five (5) seconds ago at the U.S. Treasury.
A billion dollars ago was late yesterday afternoon at the U.S. Treasury.
A trillion dollars is so large a number that only politicians
can use the term in conversation... probably because they
seldom think about what they are really saying. I've read that
mathematicians do not even use the term trillion!
Here is some perspective on TRILLION:
�Trillion = 1,000,000,000,000.
The country has not existed for a trillion seconds.
Western civilization has not been around a trillion seconds.
One trillion seconds ago � 31,688 years � Neanderthals stalked the plains of Europe.
One thing it has taken me a long time to realise is that it doesn't matter who is in power at the moment, for the majority in the middle the outcome would be the same. It's like arguing who would it be worse living under Robert Mugabe or Kim Jong-2nd.
I know you guys don't like graphs but with reference to the one below the Conservatives / Liberals in the UK came to power in 2010, and austerity measures / spending cuts came in soon after that. That worked well didn't it!!!!
Although spending cuts seem to have been bypassed by some.
¬Former defence secretary Liam Fox successfully claimed 3p of taxpayers' cash for a car journey of fewer than 100 metres, expenses documents show.
The Conservative MP made the claim after travelling 0.06 miles, or approximately 96.5 metres, within his North Somerset constituency from a concrete firm to a constituency surgery in Yatton in October 2012.
The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (Ipsa) notes the claim was paid last December. Mr Fox also had another 15 claims of under £1 for car travel approved in 2012/13.
These included 24p for a 0.54-mile journey from a constituency surgery to a school competition in Clevedon and 44p for a 0.98-mile journey from a meet your MP event at Winford Manor to Winford School.
I know you guys don't like graphs but with reference to the one below the Conservatives / Liberals in the UK came to power in 2010, and austerity measures / spending cuts came in soon after that. That worked well didn't it!!!!
Although spending cuts seem to have been bypassed by some.
¬Former defence secretary Liam Fox successfully claimed 3p of taxpayers' cash for a car journey of fewer than 100 metres, expenses documents show.
The Conservative MP made the claim after travelling 0.06 miles, or approximately 96.5 metres, within his North Somerset constituency from a concrete firm to a constituency surgery in Yatton in October 2012.
The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (Ipsa) notes the claim was paid last December. Mr Fox also had another 15 claims of under £1 for car travel approved in 2012/13.
These included 24p for a 0.54-mile journey from a constituency surgery to a school competition in Clevedon and 44p for a 0.98-mile journey from a meet your MP event at Winford Manor to Winford School.
Attachments
Last edited:
