Let me help you. go to this USAToday article for an easy to read overview

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-05-28-federal-budget_N.htm

Excerpt from the article:

Bottom line: Taxpayers are now on the hook for a record $59.1 trillion in liabilities, a 2.3% increase from 2006. That amount is equal to $516,348 for every U.S. household. By comparison, U.S. households owe an average of $112,043 for mortgages, car loans, credit cards and all other debt combined.

Unfunded promises made for Medicare, Social Security and federal retirement programs account for 85% of taxpayer liabilities. State and local government retirement plans account for much of the rest.

+++

The unfunded liabilities og government are set to explode as the demographic trends of the retirement & aging of baby boomers takes hold.

You may not like the war in Iraq and think — like I do — that it is far too costly. But be that as it may, the real financial time bomb that the U.S. is sitting on is not the Defense budget but social entitlements which both parties — but especially your Dims — are bound & possessed to expand.

So, you're suggesting that the defense budget is smaller than Medicare? I'll check on that, but I think you're wrong there too.

Exactly true.

"How about that defense budget? You know, the one larger than all other nations' budgets combined?"

Do the numbers. Entitlements dwarft all else.

Without a strong, large middle-class, we as a nation are doomed===that is a fact. The poor will starve (and revolt), the rich will starve (and hide) because there will be no one left to purchase what the rich have to sell, nor anyone left willing to work for nearly nothing.

We poorer Americans are tired of working without getting ahead, but falling behind and watching as hog-humans pig out and don't share prosperity. If we don't become more kind toward each other, "There will be Blood".

How about that defense budget? You know, the one larger than all other nations' budgets combined?

How about that American Occupied Territory of Iraq? Occupations ain't cheap.

And you're right too, King, in your implied call for cutting the amount of money we squander on the U.N., the most dysfunctional organization of the face of the earth, including even worse than the Dimocrat Party.

But still, such disgressionary spending — as foolish as it is — is not our main problem. What is bankrupting the country is out of control entitlements, something both political parties are responsible for. And on this score, there is, sadly, no end in sight.

[Yes, both political parties are responsible for uncontrolled entitlements. However, let's be clear. It is liberal [leftwing] ideology that promotes this pseudo-socialism while it is the conservatives & libertarians who oppose it.

The GOP is responsible for uncontrolled entitlements — like Bush's prescription medicine plan — to the extent that they are not conservatives …. or even constitutionalists.

So the nut of the problem is really one of ideology than partisanship.]

However, I'm not sure politicians can get elected in this country anymore by advocating financial responsibility. "Free (fill-in-the-blank)" sells better. We tend to pick the guy offering us the lollipop.

A while ago, Comrade Hillary proposed billions to fund education throughout the world. You'd think she would have focused on the dismal public schools in Akron, Cleveland and other American cities first, but that's a story for another time.

What I'm against is paying a unconstitutional global tax to the corrupt UN (remember the Oil-For-Food program ?). I thought I made that clear. I'm not against charity. In fact, judging from the Obamas tax returns from the last several years, I believe in charity much more than they do (but in their defense, they DID have that big fancy house to pay for, not to mention those tap dancing lessons). The US is the most charitable country in the world to begin with. Your hero Obama is WAAAYYY off the mark here. I didn't think you'd have a coherent response. Maybe you should have just called me a racist instead. That non-argument is always good for you in a pinch.

King: Calm down. You don't want to be against helping folks who are starving….do ya'?

The only use BO and his leftwing ilk have for this great country is to put it at the service of a dysfunctional organization like the U.N.

BO wants the American taxpayer to "serve mankind" by turning the Third World — like his Keyna, no doubt — into accepted welfare recipients like what the Dims have done to the Negroes here.

One of the reasons why B. Hussien Obama is so reckless in throwing around other people's money is because he never created anything of value himself in his entire life.

As a result, he looks around and sees all the commerce, industry, inventions, advancements in the U.S. and just figures that it either 1) just sprung up out of the ground naturally or 2) America 'stole' it from others.

Instead of trying to meddle in things they know nothing about, lefties like Obama and Comdade Hillary should go out and get a real job or better yet, try to run a business.

But based on their economic ignorance and complete lack of real managerial experience, it is safe to say that neither of these two could even run a McDonald's franchise without destroying it.

And they squawk about 18 cents of gas relief? "It wouldn't equate to much", as spoken by a true elitist…………BO. It may not be enough to purchase his caviar, but it may mean something to many.

I've engaged in this arguement since my high school days, while combatting liberal profs. More money does not erradicate famine and poverty. It only encourages it! When people realize that they do not have adequate resources to sustain a reasonable quality of life, maybe they'll quit condemning new life to this plight. It amazes me how famines have existed for centuries, or more in certain areas, yet they continue to churn out children? Is common-sense regionally confined?

I'm not one to look down on charity because I happen to be quite generous. When we continue to overlook the root causes, and throw gas on a fire, I must question our elected officials. This is not the kind of charity, or redistribution, that is in the best interest of our hard-working citizens. This is nothing more than a backroom socialist agenda, sliding through the cracks.