Debt

eric lavine wrote: Bush and Obama went out for a steak and lobster dinner and Bush skated on the bill

Actually they charged the bill on a nearly maxed out credit card- and Obama has an obscenly HUGE house (3x the size of Bush's obscenly huge house) so he cannot make both the mortgage payment and the credit card payment with his income- And rather than downsizing to a more affordable house he is saying "If we dont increase my credit line I will not be able to pay my mortgage....or if I pay the mortgage then I will miss my credit card payment and either will show up on my credit score so I need to borrow more to preserve my credit score.....Oh, and I want to make some additions to my house so I need to borrow for that as well"
Time to downsize to a smaller house.......

ononewheel wrote: On the same issue the Bush tax cuts are set to expire and the Republicans are so busy doing nothing with the debt, have they forgotten about them? That alone will provide 4 trillion.

If this theory were true dairy queen could become instantly rich by charging ten bucks a cone, "lets see , we sell a million cones a year, we bump up our prices by 8 bucks a cone , and we are quareenteed to make an extra 8 million!" or will people go elsewhere for icecream or just give it up. The left convieniently forgets that the bush tax cuts for the "rich" resulted in a net increase of about 400 billion (This is from memory) in federal tax recievables. There is no direct corralation to increasing taxes and increasing revenue. Businesses and individuals change their behaviors based on tax rates. You dont get the kind of money the "rich" have by blindly making decisions. People look at the return on their investment and they think years ahead. If they are considering building a factory they look at what their money can earn from other sources,such as stocks,gold, bonds..., If they cannot exceed the rate of return from these sources they will not bother. If you increase the tax rates of profits from the evil business by a few percent and that drops the rate of return below other investments the factory does not get built, the govenment does not collect its cut and a few hundred jobs never get created. The same goes for how hard a company work to decrease its tax burden. If they feel they are unfairly burdrened by taxes it is easy to justify unfair tactics to lower them, or just plain moving the revenue centers to another country with lower tax and regulation burdens. Tax revenue has historically incresed everytime rates were lowered, it worked for Bush, for Reagen, and even Kennedy. If you want to punish the rich at the cost of lower government revenues you can raise taxes. if you want to increase government revenues you need to lower taxes, grow the economy and make it up on volume. It works every time.

Obama has spent money like a drunken sailor for the past 2 1/2 years. Then, in the month when we have the debt debate fight, he comes out for the cameras and says things like....."We must balance our budget" or "We must reduce spending". What a joke!! He flaps his jaws A LOT, but, does the absolute opposite.

Like Charles Krautheimer says...."Don't listen to what Obama says, watch what he does".

mike, that same procedure 10 years ago was 2 grand, if that

Is medicare medicaid not a federally funded program? i love the new birth control legislation...ones in charge a starting to see population increase...october we will surpass 7 billion on this rock

first off you set guidelines and make a catarac surgury a flat price, not whatever you feel, standardize these pracitces, for god sakes in other contries doctors are not put on a pedestal and considered next to god. a captain of a boat has more pull
i dont even know what the cost of these programs are, but at 9600.00 per surgery, i would imagine its in the trillions.....you guys yack about less spending but.............................you need the regulation,

what? are the doctors leaving their field to pursue a job at the 7-11. there are doctors all over this contry working for the VA hospitals below the 6 digit income

Bush spent in his last year 2.1 trillion, and this year alone Obama has spent over 6.0 trillion dollars and sking for more.


We want straight cuts across the board, way it should be, economy strives on that. Rich make more money, hhhhhhmmmmmmmm and they hire people.

Damb Obama rama almost got away with they wanted to cut Medicare, Medicade, Social security and Veterans pay for a month or 2 because we cant pay our bills. And now they want to borrow more... Geeezzzz


P.S You save money, you save money, you save money, U dont freeking borrow more to pay bills. Freeking igornant...

eric lavine wrote: Is medicare medicaid not a federally funded program? i love the new birth control legislation...ones in charge a starting to see population increase...october we will surpass 7 billion on this rock first off you set guidelines and make a catarac surgury a flat price, not whatever you feel, standardize these pracitces, for god sakes in other contries doctors are not put on a pedestal and considered next to god. a captain of a boat has more pull i dont even know what the cost of these programs are, but at 9600.00 per surgery, i would imagine its in the trillions.....you guys yack about less spending but.............................you need the regulation,

Eric, you have still not answered my question. We got more regulation than anyone ONE person can really comprehend with obama care, it was supposed to reduce costs but it was just realeased by the government that it will increase the costs at a greater rate than if it would have been left to the private sector. HOW DOES THIS NEW REGULATION HELP????

It looks like a plan to raise the debt ceiling is or has been passed. My $.02 here. We are in for some major economic pain. Pain like none we've felt in our lifetimes. We spend more than we make...period. Whether we are an individual, a small business, or a country, the income must exceed the outflow or we are doomed in the long run.

I think that as painful as it would be, we would've been better off to default, receive a credit downgrade suffer the consequences (I.e. late payments to SS, veterans, and all of the other obligations that we have etc.) and learn from this colossal mistake that we have been making for years. No, I'm not in support of screwing our seniors or veterans out of what they were promised. We've overpromised as a country and we will under deliver in the long run. I think it's better to suffer now than suffer a much more severe punishment a few years from now.

By raising the debt ceiling we are delaying the inevitable and that is a credit default which will result in horrible economic times. When the dust settles from this debt ceiling debacle, all will be forgotten until we max out the next credit card and we need more money and then we'll start seeing more political theatrics involving the need to balance a budget etc.

I'm in the 50% who pays taxes. The solution to this problem is real simple. Make every ablebodied American pay taxes (fairly) and then spend less than those Americans pay. Why can't those on Capitol hill figure this out?

Did you know that there is only one other country in the world that even has a debt ceiling? United States and Denmark. Interesting..

I'm not implying anything. I just find it both odd and interesting that we are the only two countries in the world with a debt ceiling. I haven't had a chance to look into it much but I think it may be worth while to understand why we actually have one when the rest of the first world countries do not. And this debt problem certainly spans both sides of the isle (Dems/Repubs). I don't think the blame can be placed solely on either party. Though most of us can agree where it started.


Check this article out by Fareed Zakaria.

Fareed Zakaria

I found this online, sorry, I did not document the source but it does not seem to controversial.

"The origins of the debt limit trace to World War One. For the first 125 years of the nation’s history, Congress authorized each sale of Treasury bonds to pay for specific projects, such as construction of the Panama Canal. The Treasury also faced restrictions on the kinds of debt it could issue. Yet the growing size of government at the onset of the war rendered the old manner of handling the public debt obsolete. In 1917, Congress gave the Treasury more flexibility on how much debt it sold and in what form. The law was further simplified in 1939 on the eve of World War Two. Congress gave the Treasury almost unlimited power to decide what securities to sell and how to best manage the nation’s debt, subject to an overall cap."

I cannot say why other countries would not have them. it seems to me that if you have a finite source of money you should have a debt limit calculated to determine what you can eventually pay off, or if you are responsible how much are willing to throw away on interest, in order to smooth out your finacial dealings. Who would loan money to someone without knowing what they can reasonably pay?

You can talk about who spent more money, Bush Vs. Obama, but that is like comparing apples to oranges.
Bush wars were not part of the budget, that money was allocated during special session.
It fell square on Obamas lap. and it is in his budget.

I do fall into the "we have a revenue problem" not a spending problem. But I do also think we have not had spending in check since the recession. Everybody wants all the benefits of a good economy but not pay for it. It has been a race to the bottom for a long time. Cheaper faster and easier at all costs. Yes, even the rich should pay too, even more than the middle, because the can and do use more than the middle and poor. Screw you trickle down economics...that never did work.

You can blither about taxes all you want. You will pay the tax in one way or another, even if it is not a tax today, it will be in the future.

When you cut social programs and those people fall and land in jail being a perfect example. Or the high cost of health care leading people into the ER and skating on the bill being another. We are f'ed up here in the United States.

While you may want to dismiss me as some bleeding heart liberal from Madison, go ahead. One only needs to look some other countries and compare the standard of living to here in the United States. It is legal here to own and shoot some high powered high capacity nearly automatic weapon, which I think should be, but for God's sake if I get busted with a joint I go to jail. WTF? The US is the ONLY country in the industrialized world that does NOT have Parental leave benefit.

The list goes on. But now in the end with the proposed debt deal it is you that is going to pay, not the rich and ultra rich. It's you, my friend and that is my point. You and I both see the need to curb spending and raise revenue, it is just that you think the rich should not have to pay for it as well.

ononewheel wrote: You can talk about who spent more money, Bush Vs. Obama, but that is like comparing apples to oranges. Bush wars were not part of the budget, that money was allocated during special session. It fell square on Obamas lap. and it is in his budget. I do fall into the "we have a revenue problem" not a spending problem. But I do also think we have not had spending in check since the recession. Everybody wants all the benefits of a good economy but not pay for it. It has been a race to the bottom for a long time. Cheaper faster and easier at all costs. Yes, even the rich should pay too, even more than the middle, because the can and do use more than the middle and poor. Screw you trickle down economics...that never did work. You can blither about taxes all you want. You will pay the tax in one way or another, even if it is not a tax today, it will be in the future. When you cut social programs and those people fall and land in jail being a perfect example. Or the high cost of health care leading people into the ER and skating on the bill being another. We are f'ed up here in the United States. While you may want to dismiss me as some bleeding heart liberal from Madison, go ahead. One only needs to look some other countries and compare the standard of living to here in the United States. It is legal here to own and shoot some high powered high capacity nearly automatic weapon, which I think should be, but for God's sake if I get busted with a joint I go to jail. WTF? The US is the ONLY country in the industrialized world that does NOT have Parental leave benefit. The list goes on. But now in the end with the proposed debt deal it is you that is going to pay, not the rich and ultra rich. It's you, my friend and that is my point. You and I both see the need to curb spending and raise revenue, it is just that you think the rich should not have to pay for it as well.

Couldn't agree more.

The same people going to the ER because of the high cost of health care have govt. provided cell phones and flat screen tv's bought with welfare checks.

C'mon. TV's and Cell phones? <sarcasm>Sounds like they are living the high life. I can't see why anyone wouldn't want to be on welfare</sarcasm>. How much do they get a month? Did you just compare tv's and cell phones to the cost of insurance?

ononewheel wrote: I do fall into the "we have a revenue problem" not a spending problem. But I do also think we have not had spending in check since the recession. Everybody wants all the benefits of a good economy but not pay for it. It has been a race to the bottom for a long time. Cheaper faster and easier at all costs. Yes, even the rich should pay too, even more than the middle, because the can and do use more than the middle and poor. Screw you trickle down economics...that never did work. You can blither about taxes all you want. You will pay the tax in one way or another, even if it is not a tax today, it will be in the future. When you cut social programs and those people fall and land in jail being a perfect example. Or the high cost of health care leading people into the ER and skating on the bill being another. We are f'ed up here in the United States. While you may want to dismiss me as some bleeding heart liberal from Madison, go ahead. One only needs to look some other countries and compare the standard of living to here in the United States. It is legal here to own and shoot some high powered high capacity nearly automatic weapon, which I think should be, but for God's sake if I get busted with a joint I go to jail. WTF? The US is the ONLY country in the industrialized world that does NOT have Parental leave benefit. The list goes on. But now in the end with the proposed debt deal it is you that is going to pay, not the rich and ultra rich. It's you, my friend and that is my point. You and I both see the need to curb spending and raise revenue, it is just that you think the rich should not have to pay for it as well.

Agree with some of what you said, however, I disagree that the problem is not spending, but revenue. Have the knuckleheads in charge ever even once attempted to significantly curb spending? We piss enough money away in foreign countries to have some impact on our debt. I can't recall a time in my life when significant government spending has been reduced or even attempted. The next time my wife spends too much money, I'll explain that it's not her spending that's the problem, it's her earning. Like the government, I'm sure her response will be something along the lines of me just needing to earn/pay more. Ha ha.

As for who needs to pay for all of these social programs....how about everybody pays? That's my beef. When I look at my pay stub, I see how much goes to federal and state and it makes me sick. If everybody paid a percentage close to mine AND the folks in Washington would buckle their belts a notch tighter then we wouldn't have financial issues.

As far as keeping up with many of these social programs, I can't see where that's helping society much at all. We reward people with food stamps, housing subsidies and healthcare as long as they behave themselves. To hell with encouraging them to make a change.

Don't we all benefit from national security, police/fire/ems protection, education? Shouldn't we all pay then? Shouldn't the government seek cost effective solutions? I'm doing my part. I'm just asking for everyone else to do theirs.