Comments on: Spend This, You *!!%$##!ers

By: The Reverend

The Reverend — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 21:38:27 +0000

It may be "blah, blah, blah" to you, larry…..to everyone else it's called 'the facts.'

By: Chris

Chris — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 18:12:47 +0000

Here's a scary chart.

http://www.comstockfunds.com/files/NLPP00000%5C292.pdf
Total Debt vs GDP
Personal + Corporate + Government

And note…this chart is 3+ years old….we're actually right around 375% right now….

This ain't gonna end well….

By: Da King

Da King — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 15:40:09 +0000

Chris,
You're exactly right. Neither party in D.C. has been fiscally responsible. In fact, partisan politics is one of the biggest reasons for the irresponsibility. The only way to get things to change is for the American people to rise up and demand it, and the people are beginning to see the light. More people are independents than belong to either of the broken parties. The Tea Party movement is one such popular uprising.

By: Da King

Da King — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 15:34:04 +0000

Jeff,
I agree with you that a certain amount of deficits and debt is not bad, but at the levels we're heading, it will certainly drive our country off the cliff. With the exception of national security, such as a terrorist getting his hands on wmd and detonating them inside the U.S., there is no bigger threat to our country's future. I heard Alan Greenspan say yesterday at a Senate hearing on the budget and debt (at least someone on Capitol Hill is noticing) that a debt level of 20-30% is tolerable. Unfortunately, we're at 85% of GDP right now, and heading towards 200% of GDP in a decade. At our current pace, the interest on the debt will soon be the largest federal expenditure, bigger than the defense budget or Medicare. That is money flushed down the toilet that serves no American interest.

By: larry d.

larry d. — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:21:31 +0000

Yes, Reverend–"blah blah blah" as Obama signs another trillion dollar spending bill and the dem congress raises the cap on deficit spending for the second time this year.

By: The Reverend

The Reverend — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 22:19:43 +0000

"…The events and policies that have pushed deficits to astronomical levels in the near term, however, were largely outside the new Administration’s control. If not for the tax cuts enacted during the Presidency of George W. Bush that Congress did not pay for, the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that began during that period, and the effects of the worst economic slump since the Great Depression (including the cost of steps necessary to combat it), we would not be facing these huge deficits in the near term…"

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3036

By: N. E. Frye

N. E. Frye — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 12:33:50 +0000

Agree with most of what most of you sez. The best of all possible conditions is when an opposition party controlls at least one house (preferably both) to keep the pres. in line. Looking at that 'DC' party the only guys I like are the two independent senators.

By: Chris

Chris — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 03:57:11 +0000

Yes. The spending is indefensible.

But where were you guys when GWB was starting illegal wars, expanding Medicare by trillions, and leaving no banker behind??

There is NO difference between the parties. If Obama was a Republican all the GOP congress critters would have happily voted YES.

There is only one party now. The DC party.
And they are not our friend.

By: Jeff

Jeff — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:20:17 +0000

I used to be one who did not think a federal deficit was a horrible thing, but that was in the days it was somewhat controlled. And controlled I mean that there were people (and nation) who were willing to give us credit on good terms, just like at home, a 8% credit card is ok, a 30% one is a killer, you have to examine your debt situation, but now we are looking at our nation not being able to finance their debt, but unlike you and I they (well most of us) can print money.

So the government gets to keep spending, (pissing off their creditors, as they pay for their debt with more and more worthless paper) and we get screwed with higher and higher prices. Has anyone ever seen a hyper inflation cycle that wages kept up with inflation.

So what happened in all the hyper inflation countries we have ever seen, a collapse of the government, (isnt that the Cloward Piven Strategy all along?) and rarely if ever when a government collapses do the people come out of it with their freedom and individual rights intact. Mostly some dictator takes total control, re-values the currency by ceasing all assets and tells the people what to do and what to think, and be grateful they are allowed to live, who cares if you are poor, just be happy.

The federal government needs to keep out of the economic cycle, prior to the "great depression" the government did nothing during recession, and the economy always and quickly recovered, then we get the progressives who used a minor recession and bubble burst in the stock market, to "take control" creating the worst economic calamity in history, and getting us into a war with Japan to boot. And we are facing just the same situation now, the economy is recovering, but the government keeps tinkering, and will bring create another depression, and then the progressives will try to pass the blame on capitalism, deflecting it from their marxist policies.

The 21st century was to be a brave new world, instead I see one more like Soylent Green.

By: Andrea

Andrea — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 13:33:50 +0000

Well you know to CREATE jobs you got to spend and even as Michelle whats her name
likes to point out the earmarks she thinks are wasteful they do create jobs even a tatto removal parlor creates jobs. Also a bit of a hypocrisy since republicans also create earmarks in fact Republican Sen. Thad Cochran of Mississippi tops the list, with $470 million in earmarks for himself and his colleagues. Next up is Cochran's seatmate—Republican Roger Wicker, hitting the scales at $390 million. Two Democrats—Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Tom Harkin of Iowa—come in at Nos. 3 and 4, before Republican David Vitter of Louisiana rounds out the top five. Of the top 10, six are Republicans ACCORDING TO http://www.taxpayer.net/resources.php?category=&type=Project&proj_id=2049&action=Headlines%20By%20TCS

But I do agree with you that it is NOT the time to be giving out raises to federal employees when private sector making cuts.

Also the GOP idea of tax cuts is laughable when been tried – only way to go it to target the tax cuts as Obama's proposing to do for small businesses.

You want jobs go spend – go fix up your home and use cash for chalkers so someone will be working

By: Andrea

Andrea — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 13:23:26 +0000

Well to create jobs you got to spend. Not all earmarks are bad . The republicans like to point out a couple of ear marks they feel are wasteful . But even a Tattoo removal program produces JOBS – HELLO isn't Jobs the objective here ?
Theres also a bit of hypocrisy out there since the Congressional Record shows that earmarks in the omnibus spending bill —three of the top five earmarking senators are Republicans. http://www.taxpayer.net/resources.php?category=&type=Project&proj_id=2049&action=Headlines%20By%20TCS
Republican Sen. Thad Cochran of Mississippi tops the list, with $470 million in earmarks for himself and his colleagues. Next up is Cochran's seatmate—Republican Roger Wicker, hitting the scales at $390 million. Two Democrats—Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Tom Harkin of Iowa—come in at Nos. 3 and 4, before Republican David Vitter of Louisiana rounds out the top five. Of the top 10, six are Republicans

But I do agree with you on raises federal employees should NOT be getting a raise now when private sectors cutting salaries.

And laughable that the GOP suggesting tax cuts around the board
as a way out as if hasn't been tried already – targeting tax cuts is the way to go as Obama proposes to do for small businesses.