Spending
 

Very basic question - how would your representative respond?

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/marc...ore-eight-time

Excerpt: "This problem is going to happen, like the former chairman of the Fed said, or the Moody's said, this is a problem we're going to have to face up,” he said. “It may be two years, you know, maybe a little less, maybe a little more. But if our bankers over there in Asia begin to believe that we're not going to be solid on our debt, that we're not going to be able to meet our obligations, just stop and think for a minute what happens if they just stop buying our debt."

By the way -- option "1" -- spending whatever they want without concern for what the "math" is, is exactly what ALL recent Congresses have done, and I'm talking about the last 100 years, give or take a couple.

I'm not just trying to jab the Democrats. But whatever the source of this madness, it's time for it to end.

Why don't you have some logical, realistic choices? Rather than bumper stickers?

:zz: No it's not. That's simply factually incorrect.

What could be more logical than spending less than you take in?

because it's a push poll.

Shusssssh! ;)

Not getting yourself into that position in the first place, by deliberately giving away income earnings when you know you owe alot of money ;)

"Damn! I owe $20,000 on my credit card! What should I do?
1) Cancel the luxury cable channels and stop eating out
2) Stop buying food and paying rent
3) Tell my boss I'm going from 40 hours a week to 30 hours a week

"Wow! I think Numbers 2 & 3 are the best answers!", said the Republican Party

Six months later ....

"Oh, crap! Now I owe $30,000 on the credit card bill due to interest! What should I do? Well, I'm only working 30 hours a week - so the best thing would probably be to start giving away 5 hours a week in earnings to my rich brother".

:zz: No it's not. That's simply factually incorrect.







both parties are great at that. no need to single out the right

Not getting yourself into that position is in practical effect not spending money that exceeds your earnings year after year.

Not spending it on supporting illegal aliens that shouldn't be here in the first place, for example.

Not making welfare a way of life. A couple months or some other finite duration and then that's it.

Not giving away foreign aid.

Not forgiving loans to other countries like Haiti.
Not doing nation building.
Not paying both to blow something up and then to rebuild.
Not staying in other countries like South Korea for 60 YEARS after the war is over.
Not shipping jobs around the world instead of here in the United States, which means the government cannot overly regulate or overly tax those businesses.

Your beloved liberals are the ones mostly responsible over the years for running up that credit card bill. Not entirely, but mostly, especially FDR's "New Deal" and that Lyndon Johnson and his "Great Society" bullshiat.

The things you mention, above, contribute next to nothing to our deficit. Illegals? Seriously? Piddling, tiny percentages within an annual budget.

Clinton left us with a surplus. What happened then, Joey? A reminder of what composes our deficit, today: unfunded wars, unfunded Medicare Part D giveaway, unfunded tax cuts (giving away our income)

If you give away your income, you won't be able to pay your bills. The largest part of our deficit is George W. giving away our income. Then worrying about cutting spending, when the problem is that you've cut your income markedly, isn't going to get you solvent very quickly.

again stop with your made up chart. It's not a BOP graph. Obama's budget is larger than George W's ever was and we're supposedly now out of Iraq?

BTW Check out CBPP.org, the cartoonist of Riot's graph, and see who they really are.

The poster child for bi-polar disorder!

Baloney. You keep saying it's made up, yet it's a perfectly valid and accurate graph, using perfectly true and valid numbers, it's appeared in multiple publications, and nobody - least of all you - has ever disproven it's validity.

First of all it was created over a year ago and projects deficit numbers going foward into 2019 w/o even taking into consideration the mega budgets Obama has put through.

No mention of Obamacare as well so that graph you posted might as well be three times higher with socialized medicine towering over anything represented in the CBPP graph. And BTW Huffington and Salon do not make up 'numerous publications.'

Sorry, Dell. You can keep attacking the messenger, (which I find funny, as you can't attack the data), but the fact remains that the chart and the figures within it, originally published on the website with multiple verifiable references as to where the numbers came from, if you'd bother to check - clearly show the majority of our deficit is from the unfunded Bush Tax Cuts, and the unfunded wars.

What references, exactly, on the CBPP website that went into the chart do you think are not accurate?

Obama "mega budgets" - have you missed what happened this week? We just finished the current budget? What "mega budgets" do you think have been "put through"? (as we are far behind on budgets)

And you clearly have no idea the financial impact of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care act upon the deficit. You might try looking that up. You'd be pleasantly surprised.

In fact, you can look at the very recent CBO estimates, of what would happen to the deficit if the Republicans repealed the PPACA.

Bush's budget in his last year, 2008 was 2.982 Trillion (800 Billion for the wars.)

Obama's first year budget 2009 was 3.517 trillion and 2010 3.37 trillion so that's roughly 800 billion MORE over 2 years w/o the Iraq war and now we're going to cut 35 billion? LMAO. Add those budgets to the graph and project to 2016.

A budget is not a deficit. A budget is what you spend every year. A deficit is what you owe, in total. They are not the same thing.

Nobody, except the Govt., makes a budget that includes a deficit!