>> >> >> Why "net" outlays, isn't that what is budgeted
>> >> >> rather than what is spent?
>> >> >no
>> >> >That is what was spent into the economy. It does not include
>> >> >the money transferred from one govt fund to another.
>> >> Then it doesn't really show if debt increased
>> >> or not, isn't a lot of the debt what the treasury
>> >> owes the SS trust fund?
>> >No one claimed it showed whether debt increased.
>> >It shows what was added to private sector bank
>> >accounts and what was removed from private bank
>> >accounts in a given year.
>> You better check your link above, see the
>> word "federal" there before "outlays" and "receipts"?
>Maybe you are just not bright enough to comprehend.
>Federal Outlays means the funds the US govt deposits in
>private bank accounts when it spends. The bank account
>might be owned by a military contractor or SSI recipient.
>Federal Receipts means the money that is removed from >private bank accounts when it collects revenue.
>When the government outlays exceed receipts then the
>amount of money in private bank accounts increases. When
>the receipts are larger then the outlays the total amount >of money in private bank accounts decreases.
>The discussion is about the economic effect of federal >spending and taxation on the economy. There is a legitimate >argument made that the current depression started in 1998 when >the federal govt took way too much money out of the economy and >thus forced the private sector into deficit spending. It was
>only by borrowing $25 trillion over the next ten years that the >private sector provided its own stimulus spending that kept the >depression hidden until it all came crashing down in 2008.
Nice try, from the national debt spin master.
The IRS takes credit cards, don't they? :-)
For some reason suddenly your discussion
is different than mine which had nothing going
about private bank accounts.
>> Tell that to the people with upside down mortgages Any time you borrow
>> more tha you can reasonably pay back THAT IS BAD DEBT.
>that is correct. And mortgages are not the government's debt.
>Right now 25% of US mortgages are underwater.
>When Congress attempts to balance the federal budget
>that will soon become 50% of the mortgages underwater. >And when congress tries to balance the budget there will be
>a huge increase in the number of foreclosures and bankruptcy.
>Mortgages are only 30% of private sector debts.
>There is a lot more of private enterprise that is
>teetering on the brink of debt disaster than just those
>who got mortgages from 2001 to 2008.
>The simple fact that the govt is taking less >money out of the economy in taxes than it puts back
>in spending is allowing the private sector to slowly >pay off debt and build up savings.
>> Our government
>> has no clue as to how to pay back debt at levels we have without
>> bankrupting the entire nation
>The federal debt is not going to be paid down. That debt has
>not been reduced in 200 years and paying down the debt isn't >going to start now.
>OTOH
>the private debt does have to be paid down. Unlike the >federal govt people grow old and retire and die. People
>can't just roll over debt forever like the govt always has.
But Obama said he wants congress to help
mortgage victims save $3000, is that every year,
my mortgage is only $290 a month. :-)
>>>>>>>>>>>> Debt was a bad Idea Under Bush and the the 110th dem
>>>>>>>>>>>> controlled congress when it shot up dramatically , Itwas bad
>>>>>>>>>>>> before that, It's gotten far, far worse
>>>>>>>>>>> Nevertheless when the time comes you will embrace the
>>>>>>>>>>> federal debt.
>>>>>>>>>> You do even begin to know who or what I am. But we know what
>>>>>>>>>> your are Just by the FACT that you edit out reference to you
>>>>>>>>>> hero and his saying ho wbad the debt was before HE RAN UP $5
>>>>>>>>>> TRILLION worth of debt in less than 4 years NOW be a good
>>>>>>>>>> little liberal HYPOCRITE AND ERASE THAT BEFORE YOU REPLY and
>>>>>>>>>> that will cofirm all doubt of what a HYPOCRITE you are
>>>>>>>>> More of a complete idiot than a hypocrite considering the goof
>>>>>>>>> believes that the federal debt is irrellevant to anything and
>>>>>>>>> means nothing. Yeah yeah, sure sure, he preaches that the
>>>>>>>>> government debt doesn't matter as long as his liberal messiah
>>>>>>>>> is in office but watch his opinion change after the election
>>>>>>>>> and a Republican sits in the whitehouse.
>>>>>>>> Yeah it like that oft misattributed remarks "a billion here, a
>>>>>>>> billion there ans soon your talking real money" No debt is good
>>>>>>>> debt unless it something you can reasonably pay back whether it
>>>>>>>> be personal , business , state of national debt. Problem is with
>>>>>>>> so many sucking at the federal teat
>>>>>>>> deficit spending has become a peramnent thing. Imagine if you
>>>>>>>> lived you personal always borrowing more than you can pay back
>>>>>>>> where would you be, Thats where we are headed as a nation if
>>>>>>>> thing don't change Speaking of change remember thos promises of
>>>>>>>> and slogans of 4 years ago, Change Hope and Transparency. we got
>>>>>>>> none in fact we got almost the opposite, now the sloagn is
>>>>>>>> Forward. If past is prolog we a need to be very
>>>>>>>> concerned.
>>>>>>> Please, please take an English class.
>>>>>> Clair's logic and economics are bad, too.
>>>>> Wrong
>>>>>> Home schooled?
>>>>> Wrong
>>>>>> Went to school in a state of the former confederacy?
>>>>> Wrong
>>>>>> ALL debt is NOT bad.
>>>>> To quote Polonius to his son Laertes
>>>>> Neither a borrower nor a lender be,
>>>>> For loan oft loses both itself and friend,
>>>>> And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry.
>>>>> National debt at the levels of the last foive years is very bad
>>>>> Ever since the begining of the 110th congress the debt has been
>>>>> rising at a
>>>>> runaway rate
>>>>> Only a horses ass would defend what the 110th and 111th congresses
>>>>> and Obama have done to the debt And before you go off on bush rant
>>>>> he was in part resposible for letting the dems of the 110th run up
>>>>> the tab
>>>> Debt and deficits are crises only when a Democrat is in the White
>>>> House.
>>>> These were just fine when St Reagan of the spend and borrow school
>>>> was president
>>>> These were just fine when bush,jr had two unfunded wars (off budget)
>>>> What a bunch of hypocrites!
>>> Massive debt is bad no matter who is the Whitehouse but lets not
>>> forget who controls writing budgets, the congess and who was in
>>> control of congress During the recent upward movement of the debt the
>>> dems held both or one house of congess when the republicsn cotrolled
>>> both houses under clinton and bush the Debt to GDP ration trended
>>> down. Since the start of 110Th, through the 112th(no budget congress)
>>> the dems controlled both houses now the control the senate. The same
>>> senate that refused to bring the budget to the floor for a vote.
>> .
>> .
>> .
>> "Massive debt is bad no matter who is the Whitehouse" is nonsense.
>> That's a knee jerk reaction and a demonstration of a lack of knowledge
>> about what debt is all about.
> Tell that to the people with upside down mortgages Any time you borrow
> more tha you can reasonably pay back THAT IS BAD DEBT. Our government
> has no clue as to how to pay back debt at levels we have without
> bankrupting the entire nation
>> Much of the debt represents assets of the United States government.
>> There is good debt and there is bad debt.
> Got bad news for you We dropped the gold standard some 40years ago and
> our government does not have assets worth what the debt is
>> Borrowing to build the interstate highway system is good debt since it
>> provides an asset.
> That was 60 years ago in the post war boom years and the debt was held
> mostly by US citizens.
>> Borrowing to fund an unneeded war destructive to American interests is
>> bad debt.
> Forgot what happened when we let our guard down in the years leading up
> to 911 I guess you would have been happy to let the terrorist continue
> to come here and kill our fellow citizens BTW how's that Gitmo shutdown
> going But at least Obama personally killed Osama... non...no that was
> the navy seals, Obama just took all the credit for it
>> Incurring debt during a recession is good.
> Go out and max out you credit cards the go apply for more and max them
> out Then tell us how good that debt is on your fixed income
>> Incurring debt, the way bush,jr did it is bad.
> Debt rose dramatically when the dems took over congress Congress writes
> and authorizes the budget. not the dems had 2 years with no budget and
> the dems controlled senate won't even vote on the budget, Obama is
> president while the debt has increased by almost 50% So by YOUR
> Standards that make the way Obama did it is extremely bad.
> Our government both dems and republicans have really let thing get out
> of control
>> It's not a party issue, it's an economic issue that transcends party
> The way you only blame one party shows that you are either lieing,
> stupid or just plain have no idea what your fingers are type.
>> You RRRs love to slap your silly labels on things without regard to
>> the meaning of the words.
.
.
Another display of your ignorance about debt.
Personal debt is not the same as government debt.
Just because they use the same word does not mean they have anything in common.
Call back when you learn something about debt and difference between personal and government debt.
> >Maybe you are just not bright enough to comprehend.
> >Federal Outlays means the funds the US govt deposits in
> >private bank accounts when it spends. The bank account
> >might be owned by a military contractor or SSI recipient.
> >Federal Receipts means the money that is removed from
> >private bank accounts when it collects revenue.
> >When the government outlays exceed receipts then the
> >amount of money in private bank accounts increases. When
> >the receipts are larger then the outlays the total amount
> >of money in private bank accounts decreases.
> >The discussion is about the economic effect of federal
> >spending and taxation on the economy. There is a legitimate
> >argument made that the current depression started in 1998 when
> >the federal govt took way too much money out of the economy and
> >thus forced the private sector into deficit spending. It was
> >only by borrowing $25 trillion over the next ten years that the
> >private sector provided its own stimulus spending that kept the
> >depression hidden until it all came crashing down in 2008.
> Nice try, from the national debt spin master.
> The IRS takes credit cards, don't they? :-)
> For some reason suddenly your discussion
> is different than mine which had nothing going
> about private bank accounts.
the reason you think the current economic problems have nothing
to do with banks and the banking system is because you have your head buried deep in the sand.
>> >Maybe you are just not bright enough to comprehend.
>> >Federal Outlays means the funds the US govt deposits in
>> >private bank accounts when it spends. The bank account
>> >might be owned by a military contractor or SSI recipient.
>> >Federal Receipts means the money that is removed from
>> >private bank accounts when it collects revenue.
>> >When the government outlays exceed receipts then the
>> >amount of money in private bank accounts increases. When
>> >the receipts are larger then the outlays the total amount
>> >of money in private bank accounts decreases.
>> >The discussion is about the economic effect of federal
>> >spending and taxation on the economy. There is a legitimate
>> >argument made that the current depression started in 1998 when
>> >the federal govt took way too much money out of the economy and
>> >thus forced the private sector into deficit spending. It was
>> >only by borrowing $25 trillion over the next ten years that the
>> >private sector provided its own stimulus spending that kept the
>> >depression hidden until it all came crashing down in 2008.
>> Nice try, from the national debt spin master.
>> The IRS takes credit cards, don't they? :-)
>> For some reason suddenly your discussion
>> is different than mine which had nothing going
>> about private bank accounts.
> the reason you think the current economic problems have nothing
> to do with banks and the banking system is because you have your
> head buried deep in the sand.
.
.
His head is not buried in the sand at all.
He's arguing on a subject of which he is totally ignorant.
>> >Maybe you are just not bright enough to comprehend.
>> >Federal Outlays means the funds the US govt deposits in
>> >private bank accounts when it spends. The bank account
>> >might be owned by a military contractor or SSI recipient.
>> >Federal Receipts means the money that is removed from
>> >private bank accounts when it collects revenue.
>> >When the government outlays exceed receipts then the
>> >amount of money in private bank accounts increases. When
>> >the receipts are larger then the outlays the total amount
>> >of money in private bank accounts decreases.
>> >The discussion is about the economic effect of federal
>> >spending and taxation on the economy. There is a legitimate
>> >argument made that the current depression started in 1998 when
>> >the federal govt took way too much money out of the economy and
>> >thus forced the private sector into deficit spending. It was
>> >only by borrowing $25 trillion over the next ten years that the
>> >private sector provided its own stimulus spending that kept the
>> >depression hidden until it all came crashing down in 2008.
>> Nice try, from the national debt spin master.
>> The IRS takes credit cards, don't they? :-)
>> For some reason suddenly your discussion
>> is different than mine which had nothing going
>> about private bank accounts.
>the reason you think the current economic problems have nothing
>to do with banks and the banking system is because you have your >head buried deep in the sand.
The subject is Federal tax receipts, why should
private debt be mentioned.
The current economic problems are the result
of people not having anything the want or need,
that should be obvious, name something new
that hit the market after 2001.
You aren't even consistent, you claim banks
and people have oddles of money in the bank,
emoney that is, but the private sector is in debt.
>>> >Maybe you are just not bright enough to comprehend.
>>> >Federal Outlays means the funds the US govt deposits in
>>> >private bank accounts when it spends. The bank account
>>> >might be owned by a military contractor or SSI recipient.
>>> >Federal Receipts means the money that is removed from
>>> >private bank accounts when it collects revenue.
>>> >When the government outlays exceed receipts then the
>>> >amount of money in private bank accounts increases. When
>>> >the receipts are larger then the outlays the total amount
>>> >of money in private bank accounts decreases.
>>> >The discussion is about the economic effect of federal
>>> >spending and taxation on the economy. There is a legitimate
>>> >argument made that the current depression started in 1998 when
>>> >the federal govt took way too much money out of the economy and
>>> >thus forced the private sector into deficit spending. It was
>>> >only by borrowing $25 trillion over the next ten years that the
>>> >private sector provided its own stimulus spending that kept the
>>> >depression hidden until it all came crashing down in 2008.
>>> Nice try, from the national debt spin master.
>>> The IRS takes credit cards, don't they? :-)
>>> For some reason suddenly your discussion
>>> is different than mine which had nothing going
>>> about private bank accounts.
>> the reason you think the current economic problems have nothing
>> to do with banks and the banking system is because you have your
>> head buried deep in the sand.
>.
>.
>His head is not buried in the sand at all.
>He's arguing on a subject of which he is totally ignorant.
I am talking about federal deficits and debt,
and jim wants to talk about the private sector
debt and he is beginning to sound as goofy
as the rest of you leftists liberal spin doctors.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Debt was a bad Idea Under Bush and the the 110th dem
>>>>>>>>>>>>> controlled congress when it shot up dramatically , Itwas bad
>>>>>>>>>>>>> before that, It's gotten far, far worse
>>>>>>>>>>>> Nevertheless when the time comes you will embrace the
>>>>>>>>>>>> federal debt.
>>>>>>>>>>> You do even begin to know who or what I am. But we know what
>>>>>>>>>>> your are Just by the FACT that you edit out reference to you
>>>>>>>>>>> hero and his saying ho wbad the debt was before HE RAN UP $5
>>>>>>>>>>> TRILLION worth of debt in less than 4 years NOW be a good
>>>>>>>>>>> little liberal HYPOCRITE AND ERASE THAT BEFORE YOU REPLY and
>>>>>>>>>>> that will cofirm all doubt of what a HYPOCRITE you are
>>>>>>>>>> More of a complete idiot than a hypocrite considering the goof
>>>>>>>>>> believes that the federal debt is irrellevant to anything and
>>>>>>>>>> means nothing. Yeah yeah, sure sure, he preaches that the
>>>>>>>>>> government debt doesn't matter as long as his liberal messiah
>>>>>>>>>> is in office but watch his opinion change after the election
>>>>>>>>>> and a Republican sits in the whitehouse.
>>>>>>>>> Yeah it like that oft misattributed remarks "a billion here, a
>>>>>>>>> billion there ans soon your talking real money" No debt is good
>>>>>>>>> debt unless it something you can reasonably pay back whether it
>>>>>>>>> be personal , business , state of national debt. Problem is with
>>>>>>>>> so many sucking at the federal teat
>>>>>>>>> deficit spending has become a peramnent thing. Imagine if you
>>>>>>>>> lived you personal always borrowing more than you can pay back
>>>>>>>>> where would you be, Thats where we are headed as a nation if
>>>>>>>>> thing don't change Speaking of change remember thos promises of
>>>>>>>>> and slogans of 4 years ago, Change Hope and Transparency. we got
>>>>>>>>> none in fact we got almost the opposite, now the sloagn is
>>>>>>>>> Forward. If past is prolog we a need to be very
>>>>>>>>> concerned.
>>>>>>>> Please, please take an English class.
>>>>>>> Clair's logic and economics are bad, too.
>>>>>> Wrong
>>>>>>> Home schooled?
>>>>>> Wrong
>>>>>>> Went to school in a state of the former confederacy?
>>>>>> Wrong
>>>>>>> ALL debt is NOT bad.
>>>>>> To quote Polonius to his son Laertes
>>>>>> Neither a borrower nor a lender be,
>>>>>> For loan oft loses both itself and friend,
>>>>>> And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry.
>>>>>> National debt at the levels of the last foive years is very bad
>>>>>> Ever since the begining of the 110th congress the debt has been
>>>>>> rising at a
>>>>>> runaway rate
>>>>>> Only a horses ass would defend what the 110th and 111th congresses
>>>>>> and Obama have done to the debt And before you go off on bush rant
>>>>>> he was in part resposible for letting the dems of the 110th run up
>>>>>> the tab
>>>>> Debt and deficits are crises only when a Democrat is in the White
>>>>> House.
>>>>> These were just fine when St Reagan of the spend and borrow school
>>>>> was president
>>>>> These were just fine when bush,jr had two unfunded wars (off budget)
>>>>> What a bunch of hypocrites!
>>>> Massive debt is bad no matter who is the Whitehouse but lets not
>>>> forget who controls writing budgets, the congess and who was in
>>>> control of congress During the recent upward movement of the debt the
>>>> dems held both or one house of congess when the republicsn cotrolled
>>>> both houses under clinton and bush the Debt to GDP ration trended
>>>> down. Since the start of 110Th, through the 112th(no budget congress)
>>>> the dems controlled both houses now the control the senate. The same
>>>> senate that refused to bring the budget to the floor for a vote.
>>> .
>>> .
>>> .
>>> "Massive debt is bad no matter who is the Whitehouse" is nonsense.
>>> That's a knee jerk reaction and a demonstration of a lack of knowledge
>>> about what debt is all about.
>> Tell that to the people with upside down mortgages Any time you borrow
>> more tha you can reasonably pay back THAT IS BAD DEBT. Our government
>> has no clue as to how to pay back debt at levels we have without
>> bankrupting the entire nation
>>> Much of the debt represents assets of the United States government.
>>> There is good debt and there is bad debt.
>> Got bad news for you We dropped the gold standard some 40years ago and
>> our government does not have assets worth what the debt is
>>> Borrowing to build the interstate highway system is good debt since it
>>> provides an asset.
>> That was 60 years ago in the post war boom years and the debt was held
>> mostly by US citizens.
>>> Borrowing to fund an unneeded war destructive to American interests is
>>> bad debt.
>> Forgot what happened when we let our guard down in the years leading up
>> to 911 I guess you would have been happy to let the terrorist
continue
>> to come here and kill our fellow citizens BTW how's that Gitmo shutdown
>> going But at least Obama personally killed Osama... non...no that was
>> the navy seals, Obama just took all the credit for it
>>> Incurring debt during a recession is good.
>> Go out and max out you credit cards the go apply for more and max them
>> out Then tell us how good that debt is on your fixed income
>>> Incurring debt, the way bush,jr did it is bad.
>> Debt rose dramatically when the dems took over congress Congress writes
>> and authorizes the budget. not the dems had 2 years with no budget and
>> the dems controlled senate won't even vote on the budget, Obama is
>> president while the debt has increased by almost 50% So by YOUR
>> Standards that make the way Obama did it is extremely bad.
>> Our government both dems and republicans have really let thing get out
>> of control
>>> It's not a party issue, it's an economic issue that transcends party
>> The way you only blame one party shows that you are either lieing,
>> stupid or just plain have no idea what your fingers are type.
>>> You RRRs love to slap your silly labels on things without regard to
>>> the meaning of the words.
> .
> .
> Another display of your ignorance about debt.
> Personal debt is not the same as government debt.
> Just because they use the same word does not mean they have anything in > common.
> Call back when you learn something about debt and difference between > personal and government debt.
> ....and what about the type of fingers I have?
Oh so you are saying debt was bad under Bush but debt being run up at double that rate under Obama is good. You gotta love liberal logic. You should try to accuse Bush and give Obama a pass You should get a job with MSNBC
>>>>>>>> Debt was a bad Idea Under Bush and the the 110th dem controlled
>>>>>>>> congress when it shot up dramatically , Itwas bad before that,
>>>>>>>> It's gotten far, far worse
>>>>>>> Nevertheless when the time comes you will embrace the
>>>>>>> federal debt.
>>>>>> You do even begin to know who or what I am. But we know what your
>>>>>> are Just by the FACT that you edit out reference to you hero and
>>>>>> his saying ho wbad the debt was before HE RAN UP $5 TRILLION worth
>>>>>> of debt in less than 4 years NOW be a good little liberal
>>>>>> HYPOCRITE AND ERASE THAT BEFORE YOU REPLY and that will cofirm all
>>>>>> doubt of what a HYPOCRITE you are
>>>>> More of a complete idiot than a hypocrite considering the goof
>>>>> believes that the federal debt is irrellevant to anything and means
>>>>> nothing. Yeah yeah, sure sure, he preaches that the government debt
>>>>> doesn't matter as long as his liberal messiah is in office but
>>>>> watch his opinion change after the election and a Republican sits
>>>>> in the whitehouse.
>>>> Yeah it like that oft misattributed remarks "a billion here, a
>>>> billion there ans soon your talking real money" No debt is good debt
>>>> unless it something you can reasonably pay back whether it be
>>>> personal , business , state of national debt. Problem is with so
>>>> many sucking at the federal teat
>>>> deficit spending has become a peramnent thing. Imagine if you lived
>>>> you personal always borrowing more than you can pay back where would
>>>> you be, Thats where we are headed as a nation if thing don't change
>>>> Speaking of change remember thos promises of and slogans of 4 years
>>>> ago, Change Hope and Transparency. we got none in fact we got almost
>>>> the opposite, now the sloagn is Forward. If past is prolog we a need
>>>> to be very
>>>> concerned.
>>> Please, please take an English class.
>> Clair's logic and economics are bad, too.
> Wrong
>> Home schooled?
> Wrong
>> Went to school in a state of the former confederacy?
> Wrong
>> ALL debt is NOT bad.
> To quote Polonius to his son Laertes
> Neither a borrower nor a lender be,
> For loan oft loses both itself and friend,
> And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry.
> National debt at the levels of the last foive years is very bad
>>>>>>>>> Debt was a bad Idea Under Bush and the the 110th dem controlled
>>>>>>>>> congress when it shot up dramatically , Itwas bad before that,
>>>>>>>>> It's gotten far, far worse
>>>>>>>> Nevertheless when the time comes you will embrace the
>>>>>>>> federal debt.
>>>>>>> You do even begin to know who or what I am. But we know what your
>>>>>>> are Just by the FACT that you edit out reference to you hero and
>>>>>>> his saying ho wbad the debt was before HE RAN UP $5 TRILLION worth
>>>>>>> of debt in less than 4 years NOW be a good little liberal
>>>>>>> HYPOCRITE AND ERASE THAT BEFORE YOU REPLY and that will cofirm all
>>>>>>> doubt of what a HYPOCRITE you are
>>>>>> More of a complete idiot than a hypocrite considering the goof
>>>>>> believes that the federal debt is irrellevant to anything and means
>>>>>> nothing. Yeah yeah, sure sure, he preaches that the government debt
>>>>>> doesn't matter as long as his liberal messiah is in office but
>>>>>> watch his opinion change after the election and a Republican sits
>>>>>> in the whitehouse.
>>>>> Yeah it like that oft misattributed remarks "a billion here, a
>>>>> billion there ans soon your talking real money" No debt is good debt
>>>>> unless it something you can reasonably pay back whether it be
>>>>> personal , business , state of national debt. Problem is with so
>>>>> many sucking at the federal teat
>>>>> deficit spending has become a peramnent thing. Imagine if you lived
>>>>> you personal always borrowing more than you can pay back where would
>>>>> you be, Thats where we are headed as a nation if thing don't change
>>>>> Speaking of change remember thos promises of and slogans of 4 years
>>>>> ago, Change Hope and Transparency. we got none in fact we got almost
>>>>> the opposite, now the sloagn is Forward. If past is prolog we a need
>>>>> to be very
>>>>> concerned.
>>>> Please, please take an English class.
>>> Clair's logic and economics are bad, too.
>> Wrong
>>> Home schooled?
>> Wrong
>>> Went to school in a state of the former confederacy?
>> Wrong
>>> ALL debt is NOT bad.
>> To quote Polonius to his son Laertes
>> Neither a borrower nor a lender be,
>> For loan oft loses both itself and friend,
>> And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry.
>> National debt at the levels of the last foive years is very bad
>> Ever since the begining of the 110th congress the debt has been rising
>> at a
>> runaway rate
>> Only a horses ass would defend what the 110th and 111th congresses and
>> Obama have done to the debt And before you go off on bush rant he was in
>> part resposible for letting the dems of the 110th run up the tab
> Debt and deficits are crises only when a Democrat is in the White House.
"Reagan taught us that deficits don't matter." -- Dick Cheney
> These were just fine when St Reagan of the spend and borrow school was
> president
> These were just fine when bush,jr had two unfunded wars (off budget)
>>> Fact is both parties are culpable when it comes to our debt mess but
>>> it has gotten much worse since January 2009 the have added nearly 50%
>>> to the debt
>> Actually you have it all backwards.
>> US debt was out of control BEFORE 2008
>> US debt grew at a rate of 10%/year from WW2 until 2008
>> while the economy only grew at 3%/year. That was clearly
>> unsustainable and was a train wreck waiting to happen
>> In 2008 the train wreck caused by private debt did happen.
> Most of that time who controlled congress where budget are made and passed
> on to the Whitehouse.
>> http://comstockfunds.com/files/NLPP00000/530.pdf
>> Since 2008 the US total debt has been declining relative to
>> US economic growth. The current path is sustainable.
> What planet are you live on The economy has been in a free fall since the
> realestate bubble burst
Simply a lie. GDP has been growing since June of 2009.
>> >> > Since 2008 the US total debt has been declining relative to
>> >> > US economic growth. The current path is sustainable.
>> >> What planet are you live on The economy has been in a free fall
>> >> since the realestate bubble burst
>> > The problem is a lot more than residential real estate.
>> > Home Mortgages were only 30% of the private sector debt that
>> > brought down the economy and created a depression
>> > The problem is private debt not the federal debt
>> Comstock Partners issued a report this year in which they found
>> almost exactly the same evidence I am presenting -- that it is
>> PRIVATE DEBT that is the villain, and the cause of our collapse. And
>> Public Debt is now growing as it takes on the burden of absorbing the
>> Private Toxic Debt accrued from 2001-2008, mainly caused by the
>> Housing Bubble
> Private debt has been growing at 10% for 60 years
> the housing bubble was just the last hurrah before > it collapsed.
>> OOPS you cited an article that disproves your premise. Perhaps you
>> should read waht you cite
> The facts that the article presents are correct.
> It is private debt not the federal debt that is > the bigger problem.
> And more important - the federal debt will continue to
> grow regardless of what Congress tries to do. When Congress
> tries to balance the budget the huge private debt will cause a
> full blown depression and that means the federal revenues > will plummet and the effort to balance the budget will be > self defeating.
You said "Home Mortgages were only 30% of the private sector debt" as if that was not the cause of the collapse and your cite.said it was "mainly caused by the Housing Bubble" You can't have it both ways Either the bubble was or was'nt the main cause your caite said it was you say it was'nt.
>>>> >Maybe you are just not bright enough to comprehend.
>>>> >Federal Outlays means the funds the US govt deposits in
>>>> >private bank accounts when it spends. The bank account
>>>> >might be owned by a military contractor or SSI recipient.
>>>> >Federal Receipts means the money that is removed from
>>>> >private bank accounts when it collects revenue.
>>>> >When the government outlays exceed receipts then the
>>>> >amount of money in private bank accounts increases. When
>>>> >the receipts are larger then the outlays the total amount
>>>> >of money in private bank accounts decreases.
>>>> >The discussion is about the economic effect of federal
>>>> >spending and taxation on the economy. There is a legitimate
>>>> >argument made that the current depression started in 1998 when
>>>> >the federal govt took way too much money out of the economy and
>>>> >thus forced the private sector into deficit spending. It was
>>>> >only by borrowing $25 trillion over the next ten years that the
>>>> >private sector provided its own stimulus spending that kept the
>>>> >depression hidden until it all came crashing down in 2008.
>>>> Nice try, from the national debt spin master.
>>>> The IRS takes credit cards, don't they? :-)
>>>> For some reason suddenly your discussion
>>>> is different than mine which had nothing going
>>>> about private bank accounts.
>>> the reason you think the current economic problems have nothing
>>> to do with banks and the banking system is because you have your
>>> head buried deep in the sand.
>>.
>>.
>>His head is not buried in the sand at all.
>>He's arguing on a subject of which he is totally ignorant.
> I am talking about federal deficits and debt,
> and jim wants to talk about the private sector
> debt and he is beginning to sound as goofy
> as the rest of you leftists liberal spin doctors.
"That kid’s about as sharp as a pound of wet liver" Funny how these guys now sound like something once said by Dick Cheney:
"Debt does'nt matter" at least now that it's the dems and Obama running it up
It was bad during the last years of Bush and far worse now. Either debt is bad or it is'nt. Blame who you will but at least be consistant that goes for left and right in the debate. I honestly hoped Obama would do a better job even though I did not vote for him but....
>>>>> >Maybe you are just not bright enough to comprehend.
>>>>> >Federal Outlays means the funds the US govt deposits in
>>>>> >private bank accounts when it spends. The bank account
>>>>> >might be owned by a military contractor or SSI recipient.
>>>>> >Federal Receipts means the money that is removed from
>>>>> >private bank accounts when it collects revenue.
>>>>> >When the government outlays exceed receipts then the
>>>>> >amount of money in private bank accounts increases. When
>>>>> >the receipts are larger then the outlays the total amount
>>>>> >of money in private bank accounts decreases.
>>>>> >The discussion is about the economic effect of federal
>>>>> >spending and taxation on the economy. There is a legitimate
>>>>> >argument made that the current depression started in 1998 when
>>>>> >the federal govt took way too much money out of the economy and
>>>>> >thus forced the private sector into deficit spending. It was
>>>>> >only by borrowing $25 trillion over the next ten years that the
>>>>> >private sector provided its own stimulus spending that kept the
>>>>> >depression hidden until it all came crashing down in 2008.
>>>>> Nice try, from the national debt spin master.
>>>>> The IRS takes credit cards, don't they? :-)
>>>>> For some reason suddenly your discussion
>>>>> is different than mine which had nothing going
>>>>> about private bank accounts.
>>>> the reason you think the current economic problems have nothing
>>>> to do with banks and the banking system is because you have your
>>>> head buried deep in the sand.
>>>.
>>>.
>>>His head is not buried in the sand at all.
>>>He's arguing on a subject of which he is totally ignorant.
>> I am talking about federal deficits and debt,
>> and jim wants to talk about the private sector
>> debt and he is beginning to sound as goofy
>> as the rest of you leftists liberal spin doctors.
>"That kid? about as sharp as a pound of wet liver" > Funny how these guys now sound like something once said by Dick Cheney:
>"Debt does'nt matter" at least now that it's the dems and Obama running >it up
>It was bad during the last years of Bush and far worse now. Either debt >is bad or it is'nt. Blame who you will but at least be consistant that >goes for left and right in the debate. I honestly hoped Obama would do a >better job even though I did not vote for him but....
Any patriotic person would have hoped he would be able to make things better, I did until
he said the SS checks might not go out if
congress doesn't act. :-)
But in the 1980s there was a couple of
problems worse than now, deficits were smaller
and being smaller they didn't matter as much,
and the bad of the debt had to be weighed
against the good of the federal spending.
Federal spending can help the economy
if the borrowing doesn't suck money out of
the economy.
If a Trillion is borrowed, and the interest
paid out is $200 Billion, that means $800
Billion is sucked out of the economy (if
all the borrowing is domestic).
Under Reagan if the borrowing was
$200 Billion and the interest paid out
was $300 Billion, no money was sucked
out of the economy.
I saw a check IRS sent to a contractor
in 1980 returning an overpayment on his
quarterly estimated tax, with 20% interest
added.
That kind of nonsense had to stop
some way some how.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Debt was a bad Idea Under Bush and the the 110th dem
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> controlled congress when it shot up dramatically , Itwas
> bad
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> before that, It's gotten far, far worse
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nevertheless when the time comes you will embrace the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> federal debt.
>>>>>>>>>>>> You do even begin to know who or what I am. But we know what
>>>>>>>>>>>> your are Just by the FACT that you edit out reference to you
>>>>>>>>>>>> hero and his saying ho wbad the debt was before HE RAN UP $5
>>>>>>>>>>>> TRILLION worth of debt in less than 4 years NOW be a good
>>>>>>>>>>>> little liberal HYPOCRITE AND ERASE THAT BEFORE YOU REPLY and
>>>>>>>>>>>> that will cofirm all doubt of what a HYPOCRITE you are
>>>>>>>>>>> More of a complete idiot than a hypocrite considering the
> goof
>>>>>>>>>>> believes that the federal debt is irrellevant to anything and
>>>>>>>>>>> means nothing. Yeah yeah, sure sure, he preaches that the
>>>>>>>>>>> government debt doesn't matter as long as his liberal messiah
>>>>>>>>>>> is in office but watch his opinion change after the election
>>>>>>>>>>> and a Republican sits in the whitehouse.
>>>>>>>>>> Yeah it like that oft misattributed remarks "a billion here, a
>>>>>>>>>> billion there ans soon your talking real money" No debt is
> good
>>>>>>>>>> debt unless it something you can reasonably pay back whether
> it
>>>>>>>>>> be personal , business , state of national debt. Problem is
> with
>>>>>>>>>> so many sucking at the federal teat
>>>>>>>>>> deficit spending has become a peramnent thing. Imagine if you
>>>>>>>>>> lived you personal always borrowing more than you can pay back
>>>>>>>>>> where would you be, Thats where we are headed as a nation if
>>>>>>>>>> thing don't change Speaking of change remember thos promises
> of
>>>>>>>>>> and slogans of 4 years ago, Change Hope and Transparency. we
> got
>>>>>>>>>> none in fact we got almost the opposite, now the sloagn is
>>>>>>>>>> Forward. If past is prolog we a need to be very
>>>>>>>>>> concerned.
>>>>>>>>> Please, please take an English class.
>>>>>>>> Clair's logic and economics are bad, too.
>>>>>>> Wrong
>>>>>>>> Home schooled?
>>>>>>> Wrong
>>>>>>>> Went to school in a state of the former confederacy?
>>>>>>> Wrong
>>>>>>>> ALL debt is NOT bad.
>>>>>>> To quote Polonius to his son Laertes
>>>>>>> Neither a borrower nor a lender be,
>>>>>>> For loan oft loses both itself and friend,
>>>>>>> And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry.
>>>>>>> National debt at the levels of the last foive years is very bad
>>>>>>> Ever since the begining of the 110th congress the debt has been
>>>>>>> rising at a
>>>>>>> runaway rate
>>>>>>> Only a horses ass would defend what the 110th and 111th
> congresses
>>>>>>> and Obama have done to the debt And before you go off on bush
> rant
>>>>>>> he was in part resposible for letting the dems of the 110th run
> up
>>>>>>> the tab
>>>>>> Debt and deficits are crises only when a Democrat is in the White
>>>>>> House.
>>>>>> These were just fine when St Reagan of the spend and borrow school
>>>>>> was president
>>>>>> These were just fine when bush,jr had two unfunded wars (off
> budget)
>>>>>> What a bunch of hypocrites!
>>>>> Massive debt is bad no matter who is the Whitehouse but lets not
>>>>> forget who controls writing budgets, the congess and who was in
>>>>> control of congress During the recent upward movement of the debt
> the
>>>>> dems held both or one house of congess when the republicsn
> cotrolled
>>>>> both houses under clinton and bush the Debt to GDP ration trended
>>>>> down. Since the start of 110Th, through the 112th(no budget
> congress)
>>>>> the dems controlled both houses now the control the senate. The
> same
>>>>> senate that refused to bring the budget to the floor for a vote.
>>>> .
>>>> .
>>>> .
>>>> "Massive debt is bad no matter who is the Whitehouse" is nonsense.
>>>> That's a knee jerk reaction and a demonstration of a lack of
> knowledge
>>>> about what debt is all about.
>>> Tell that to the people with upside down mortgages Any time you
> borrow
>>> more tha you can reasonably pay back THAT IS BAD DEBT. Our government
>>> has no clue as to how to pay back debt at levels we have without
>>> bankrupting the entire nation
>>>> Much of the debt represents assets of the United States government.
>>>> There is good debt and there is bad debt.
>>> Got bad news for you We dropped the gold standard some 40years ago
> and
>>> our government does not have assets worth what the debt is
>>>> Borrowing to build the interstate highway system is good debt since
> it
>>>> provides an asset.
>>> That was 60 years ago in the post war boom years and the debt was
> held
>>> mostly by US citizens.
>>>> Borrowing to fund an unneeded war destructive to American interests
> is
>>>> bad debt.
>>> Forgot what happened when we let our guard down in the years leading
> up
>>> to 911 I guess you would have been happy to let the terrorist
> continue
>>> to come here and kill our fellow citizens BTW how's that Gitmo
> shutdown
>>> going But at least Obama personally killed Osama... non...no that was
>>> the navy seals, Obama just took all the credit for it
>>>> Incurring debt during a recession is good.
>>> Go out and max out you credit cards the go apply for more and max
> them
>>> out Then tell us how good that debt is on your fixed income
>>>> Incurring debt, the way bush,jr did it is bad.
>>> Debt rose dramatically when the dems took over congress Congress
> writes
>>> and authorizes the budget. not the dems had 2 years with no budget
> and
>>> the dems controlled senate won't even vote on the budget, Obama is
>>> president while the debt has increased by almost 50% So by YOUR
>>> Standards that make the way Obama did it is extremely bad.
>>> Our government both dems and republicans have really let thing get
> out
>>> of control
>>>> It's not a party issue, it's an economic issue that transcends party
>>> The way you only blame one party shows that you are either lieing,
>>> stupid or just plain have no idea what your fingers are type.
>>>> You RRRs love to slap your silly labels on things without regard to
>>>> the meaning of the words.
>> .
>> .
>> Another display of your ignorance about debt.
>> Personal debt is not the same as government debt.
>> Just because they use the same word does not mean they have anything
> in
>> common.
>> Call back when you learn something about debt and difference between
>> personal and government debt.
>> ....and what about the type of fingers I have?
> Oh so you are saying debt was bad under Bush but debt being run up at
> double that rate under Obama is good. You gotta love liberal logic.
> You should try to accuse Bush and give Obama a pass You should get a
> job with MSNBC
"So you are saying"????
My words are clear.
Anything after "So you are saying" are your words, not mine.
>>>>>>>>> Debt was a bad Idea Under Bush and the the 110th dem controlled
>>>>>>>>> congress when it shot up dramatically , Itwas bad before that,
>>>>>>>>> It's gotten far, far worse
>>>>>>>> Nevertheless when the time comes you will embrace the
>>>>>>>> federal debt.
>>>>>>> You do even begin to know who or what I am. But we know what your
>>>>>>> are Just by the FACT that you edit out reference to you hero and
>>>>>>> his saying ho wbad the debt was before HE RAN UP $5 TRILLION worth
>>>>>>> of debt in less than 4 years NOW be a good little liberal
>>>>>>> HYPOCRITE AND ERASE THAT BEFORE YOU REPLY and that will cofirm all
>>>>>>> doubt of what a HYPOCRITE you are
>>>>>> More of a complete idiot than a hypocrite considering the goof
>>>>>> believes that the federal debt is irrellevant to anything and means
>>>>>> nothing. Yeah yeah, sure sure, he preaches that the government debt
>>>>>> doesn't matter as long as his liberal messiah is in office but
>>>>>> watch his opinion change after the election and a Republican sits
>>>>>> in the whitehouse.
>>>>> Yeah it like that oft misattributed remarks "a billion here, a
>>>>> billion there ans soon your talking real money" No debt is good debt
>>>>> unless it something you can reasonably pay back whether it be
>>>>> personal , business , state of national debt. Problem is with so
>>>>> many sucking at the federal teat
>>>>> deficit spending has become a peramnent thing. Imagine if you lived
>>>>> you personal always borrowing more than you can pay back where would
>>>>> you be, Thats where we are headed as a nation if thing don't change
>>>>> Speaking of change remember thos promises of and slogans of 4 years
>>>>> ago, Change Hope and Transparency. we got none in fact we got almost
>>>>> the opposite, now the sloagn is Forward. If past is prolog we a need
>>>>> to be very
>>>>> concerned.
>>>> Please, please take an English class.
>>> Clair's logic and economics are bad, too.
>> Wrong
>>> Home schooled?
>> Wrong
>>> Went to school in a state of the former confederacy?
>> Wrong
>>> ALL debt is NOT bad.
>> To quote Polonius to his son Laertes
>> Neither a borrower nor a lender be,
>> For loan oft loses both itself and friend,
>> And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry.
>> National debt at the levels of the last foive years is very bad
>>>>>>>>>> Debt was a bad Idea Under Bush and the the 110th dem
>>>>>>>>>> controlled congress when it shot up dramatically , Itwas bad
>>>>>>>>>> before that, It's gotten far, far worse
>>>>>>>>> Nevertheless when the time comes you will embrace the
>>>>>>>>> federal debt.
>>>>>>>> You do even begin to know who or what I am. But we know what
>>>>>>>> your are Just by the FACT that you edit out reference to you
>>>>>>>> hero and his saying ho wbad the debt was before HE RAN UP $5
>>>>>>>> TRILLION worth of debt in less than 4 years NOW be a good
>>>>>>>> little liberal HYPOCRITE AND ERASE THAT BEFORE YOU REPLY and
>>>>>>>> that will cofirm all doubt of what a HYPOCRITE you are
>>>>>>> More of a complete idiot than a hypocrite considering the goof
>>>>>>> believes that the federal debt is irrellevant to anything and
>>>>>>> means nothing. Yeah yeah, sure sure, he preaches that the
>>>>>>> government debt doesn't matter as long as his liberal messiah is
>>>>>>> in office but watch his opinion change after the election and a
>>>>>>> Republican sits in the whitehouse.
>>>>>> Yeah it like that oft misattributed remarks "a billion here, a
>>>>>> billion there ans soon your talking real money" No debt is good
>>>>>> debt unless it something you can reasonably pay back whether it be
>>>>>> personal , business , state of national debt. Problem is with so
>>>>>> many sucking at the federal teat
>>>>>> deficit spending has become a peramnent thing. Imagine if you
>>>>>> lived you personal always borrowing more than you can pay back
>>>>>> where would you be, Thats where we are headed as a nation if thing
>>>>>> don't change Speaking of change remember thos promises of and
>>>>>> slogans of 4 years ago, Change Hope and Transparency. we got none
>>>>>> in fact we got almost the opposite, now the sloagn is Forward. If
>>>>>> past is prolog we a need to be very
>>>>>> concerned.
>>>>> Please, please take an English class.
>>>> Clair's logic and economics are bad, too.
>>> Wrong
>>>> Home schooled?
>>> Wrong
>>>> Went to school in a state of the former confederacy?
>>> Wrong
>>>> ALL debt is NOT bad.
>>> To quote Polonius to his son Laertes
>>> Neither a borrower nor a lender be,
>>> For loan oft loses both itself and friend,
>>> And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry.
>>> National debt at the levels of the last foive years is very bad
>>> Ever since the begining of the 110th congress the debt has been
>>> rising at a
>>> runaway rate
>>> Only a horses ass would defend what the 110th and 111th congresses
>>> and Obama have done to the debt And before you go off on bush rant he
>>> was in part resposible for letting the dems of the 110th run up the
>>> tab
>> Debt and deficits are crises only when a Democrat is in the White
>> House.
>> These were just fine when St Reagan of the spend and borrow school was
>> president
>> These were just fine when bush,jr had two unfunded wars (off budget)
>> What a bunch of hypocrites!
> Massive debt is bad no matter who is the Whitehouse but lets not forget > who controls writing budgets, the congess and who was in control of > congress During the recent upward movement of the debt the dems held > both or one house of congess when the republicsn cotrolled both houses > under clinton and bush the Debt to GDP ration trended down. Since the > start of 110Th, through the 112th(no budget congress) the dems > controlled both houses now the controol the sente. The same senate that > refused to bring the budget to the floor for a vote.
The debt in 1941 was a combination of things including savings
bonds..... It was NOT just a bunch of crazy over spending by
GOVERNMENT POLITICIANS and people were readily using their own money to
help the Nation. Today it's the government stealing from people and
telling them it isn't their money. The difference is about as wide a
chasm as the Grand canyon.
> >the reason you think the current economic problems have nothing
> >to do with banks and the banking system is because you have your
> >head buried deep in the sand.
> The subject is Federal tax receipts, why should
> private debt be mentioned.
The subject is private debt that caused the current depression.
> On Sat, 12 May 2012 01:55:29 -0400, emoneyjoe <emoney...@iglou.com>
> wrote:
>> On Sat, 12 May 2012 00:59:15 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty
>> <ThenDestroyEveryth...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:
>>> On 5/11/2012 9:50 PM, Lamont Cranston wrote:
>>>> On 5/11/2012 3:04 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 10 May 2012 13:08:46 -0700, Lamont Cranston
>>>>> <EOTWM...@Penumbra.org> wrote:
>>>>>> On 5/10/2012 2:51 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, 09 May 2012 18:00:08 -0600, Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 09 May 2012 16:01:14 -0400, emoneyjoe<emoney...@iglou.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I suppose congress is going to wait until they
>>>>>>>>> have no choice to create emoney to pay the bills,
>>>>>>>>> instead of doing something now to prevent being
>>>>>>>>> forced to.
>>>>>>>> Since the wealth class owns 70% (and growing) of ALL wealth In
>>>>>>>> America---where in fuck do you think capital and money to buy things
>>>>>>>> with will come from?
>>>>>>> Obviously Yorgort hasn't noticed that his money (if he has any that
>>>>>>> is) buys much less than it used to. Inflation hurts EVERYONE.
>>>>>> Actually, inflation helps people who are in debt.
>>>>> How exactly?
>>>> They are able to repay their debt with dollars that are worth less than
>>>> the dollars that they borrowed.
>>> As their loan is perceived as less expensive their gas and food costs
>>> went up.... Their taxes on the house were re-assessed and the Millage
>>> rate went up, now they will lose their house due to taxes and other
>>> inflation costs because they are retired and on a fixed income.
>>> ;(
>>> Too bad. Soo Sad.
>> Most fixed incomes (the number of, not type)
>> are tied to a COLA, making inflation less of a problem.
That's nice but as the COLA hits they also need to raise taxes to pay
for it and that drags down the economy. You end up with cost of
living raises actually running up the cost of living, and we start to
get HYPER INFLATION.
So the workers are being gouged by government to pay for the NON
workers, and in turn the workers need more and so the cycle begins to
snowball.
>>> Since 2008 the US total debt has been declining relative to
>>> US economic growth. The current path is sustainable.
>> What planet are you live on The economy has been in a free fall since the
>> realestate bubble burst
> The problem is a lot more than residential real estate.
> Home Mortgages were only 30% of the private sector debt that
> brought down the economy and created a depression
> The problem is private debt not the federal debt
The problem is Federal debt is growing.... and if you look, you might
find that private debt is falling, but mostly due to bankruptcy and
foreclosures.
>> On Fri, 11 May 2012 06:45:11 -0500, jim <"sjedgingN0Sp"@m@mwt,net>
>> wrote:
>>> NoBody wrote:
>>>>>> Obviously Yorgort hasn't noticed that his money (if he has any that
>>>>>> is) buys much less than it used to. Inflation hurts EVERYONE.
>>>>> I have noticed that:
>>>>> My dollars buy more gasoline today then they did on
>>>>> this date four years ago.
>>>> And yet it buys less than three years ago.
>>> that price collapse we saw in late 2008 may well
>>> happen again
>> And yet it hasn't happened as of yet so that doesn't change the
>> current situation.
> It happened 3 years ago and may well happen again.
>>>>> I can buy a house today for $150,000 that cost
>>>>> $250,000 four years ago.
>>>> If you can get a mortgage that is....
>>> Anyone not already deep in debt can get a mortgage.
>>>> Do you eat, buy anything, or heat your home? Food suppliers have
>>>> raised prices and reduced the size of their products to the point
>>>> that it's mostly container now.
>>> the price of corn was $2.50/bu in 1971. It is now $6.00/bu
>>> If the price of corn and other food had kept up with
>>> the rest of the economy food prices would be more than double
>>> what they are.
>> Supposition?
> In 1971 a bushel of corn would buy 8
> gallons of gasoline. today it won't buy you even 2 gallons.
Quit buying gasoline.
-- *He has the most who is most content with the least* -Diogenes-
“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America 's debt limit
is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government
cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing
financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's
reckless fiscal policies. Increasing America 's debt weakens us
domestically and internationally. Leadership means that, "the buck stops
here.' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today
onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt
problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.”
*Senator Barack H. Obama, March 2006*
>>>>>>>>>>> Debt was a bad Idea Under Bush and the the 110th dem
>>>>>>>>>>> controlled congress when it shot up dramatically , Itwas bad
>>>>>>>>>>> before that, It's gotten far, far worse
>>>>>>>>>> Nevertheless when the time comes you will embrace the
>>>>>>>>>> federal debt.
>>>>>>>>> You do even begin to know who or what I am. But we know what
>>>>>>>>> your are Just by the FACT that you edit out reference to you
>>>>>>>>> hero and his saying ho wbad the debt was before HE RAN UP $5
>>>>>>>>> TRILLION worth of debt in less than 4 years NOW be a good
>>>>>>>>> little liberal HYPOCRITE AND ERASE THAT BEFORE YOU REPLY and
>>>>>>>>> that will cofirm all doubt of what a HYPOCRITE you are
>>>>>>>> More of a complete idiot than a hypocrite considering the goof
>>>>>>>> believes that the federal debt is irrellevant to anything and
>>>>>>>> means nothing. Yeah yeah, sure sure, he preaches that the
>>>>>>>> government debt doesn't matter as long as his liberal messiah is
>>>>>>>> in office but watch his opinion change after the election and a
>>>>>>>> Republican sits in the whitehouse.
>>>>>>> Yeah it like that oft misattributed remarks "a billion here, a
>>>>>>> billion there ans soon your talking real money" No debt is good
>>>>>>> debt unless it something you can reasonably pay back whether it be
>>>>>>> personal , business , state of national debt. Problem is with so
>>>>>>> many sucking at the federal teat
>>>>>>> deficit spending has become a peramnent thing. Imagine if you
>>>>>>> lived you personal always borrowing more than you can pay back
>>>>>>> where would you be, Thats where we are headed as a nation if thing
>>>>>>> don't change Speaking of change remember thos promises of and
>>>>>>> slogans of 4 years ago, Change Hope and Transparency. we got none
>>>>>>> in fact we got almost the opposite, now the sloagn is Forward. If
>>>>>>> past is prolog we a need to be very
>>>>>>> concerned.
>>>>>> Please, please take an English class.
>>>>> Clair's logic and economics are bad, too.
>>>> Wrong
>>>>> Home schooled?
>>>> Wrong
>>>>> Went to school in a state of the former confederacy?
>>>> Wrong
>>>>> ALL debt is NOT bad.
>>>> To quote Polonius to his son Laertes
>>>> Neither a borrower nor a lender be,
>>>> For loan oft loses both itself and friend,
>>>> And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry.
>>>> National debt at the levels of the last foive years is very bad
>>>> Ever since the begining of the 110th congress the debt has been
>>>> rising at a
>>>> runaway rate
>>>> Only a horses ass would defend what the 110th and 111th congresses
>>>> and Obama have done to the debt And before you go off on bush rant he
>>>> was in part resposible for letting the dems of the 110th run up the
>>>> tab
>>> Debt and deficits are crises only when a Democrat is in the White
>>> House.
>>> These were just fine when St Reagan of the spend and borrow school was
>>> president
>>> These were just fine when bush,jr had two unfunded wars (off budget)
>>> What a bunch of hypocrites!
>> Massive debt is bad no matter who is the Whitehouse but lets not forget
>> who controls writing budgets, the congess and who was in control of
>> congress During the recent upward movement of the debt the dems held
>> both or one house of congess when the republicsn cotrolled both houses
>> under clinton and bush the Debt to GDP ration trended down. Since the
>> start of 110Th, through the 112th(no budget congress) the dems
>> controlled both houses now the control the senate. The same senate that
>> refused to bring the budget to the floor for a vote.
> .
> .
> .
> "Massive debt is bad no matter who is the Whitehouse" is nonsense.
> That's a knee jerk reaction and a demonstration of a lack of knowledge
> about what debt is all about.
So the worse the Federal debt gets and the worse the economy gets are
NOT in any way correlated?
But the Global temperature is correlated to Co2 because they both were
going up?
> >> >> > Since 2008 the US total debt has been declining relative to
> >> >> > US economic growth. The current path is sustainable.
> >> >> What planet are you live on The economy has been in a free fall
> >> >> since the realestate bubble burst
> >> > The problem is a lot more than residential real estate.
> >> > Home Mortgages were only 30% of the private sector debt that
> >> > brought down the economy and created a depression
> >> > The problem is private debt not the federal debt
> >> Comstock Partners issued a report this year in which they found
> >> almost exactly the same evidence I am presenting -- that it is
> >> PRIVATE DEBT that is the villain, and the cause of our collapse. And
> >> Public Debt is now growing as it takes on the burden of absorbing the
> >> Private Toxic Debt accrued from 2001-2008, mainly caused by the
> >> Housing Bubble
> > Private debt has been growing at 10% for 60 years
> > the housing bubble was just the last hurrah before
> > it collapsed.
> >> OOPS you cited an article that disproves your premise. Perhaps you
> >> should read waht you cite
> > The facts that the article presents are correct.
> > It is private debt not the federal debt that is
> > the bigger problem.
> > And more important - the federal debt will continue to
> > grow regardless of what Congress tries to do. When Congress
> > tries to balance the budget the huge private debt will cause a
> > full blown depression and that means the federal revenues
> > will plummet and the effort to balance the budget will be
> > self defeating.
> You said "Home Mortgages were only 30% of the private sector debt"
That is correct.
> as if
> that was not the cause of the collapse and your cite.said it was "mainly
> caused by the Housing Bubble"
The article said:
"PRIVATE DEBT that is at astronomical levels vis-a-vis GDP.
Private Debt in America was at 240% of GDP in 1929, before the global economy crashed then; and Private Debt in America was at 300% of GDP in 2009 -- and is still at 260% of GDP now, higher still than in 1929."
That part of the article is not quite correct, also. Private
debt was 170% of GDP in 1929. it rose to 240% of GDP by 1933.
this was not because the debt increased but because from 1929-1933
gdP fell by that much. That is what will happen today if Congress
tries to balance the budget like Hoover tried. When Congress tries
to balance the budget gDP will fall and the burden of private debt will increase enormously.
> If a Trillion is borrowed, and the interest
> paid out is $200 Billion, that means $800
> Billion is sucked out of the economy (if
> all the borrowing is domestic).
No it doesn't. that is just your stupid ignorance of accounting.
>>>>>>> Since 2008 the US total debt has been declining relative to
>>>>>>> US economic growth. The current path is sustainable.
>>>>>> What planet are you live on The economy has been in a free fall
>>>>>> since the realestate bubble burst
>>>>> The problem is a lot more than residential real estate.
>>>>> Home Mortgages were only 30% of the private sector debt that
>>>>> brought down the economy and created a depression
>>>>> The problem is private debt not the federal debt
>>>> Comstock Partners issued a report this year in which they found
>>>> almost exactly the same evidence I am presenting -- that it is
>>>> PRIVATE DEBT that is the villain, and the cause of our collapse. And
>>>> Public Debt is now growing as it takes on the burden of absorbing the
>>>> Private Toxic Debt accrued from 2001-2008, mainly caused by the
>>>> Housing Bubble
>>> Private debt has been growing at 10% for 60 years
>>> the housing bubble was just the last hurrah before
>>> it collapsed.
>>>> OOPS you cited an article that disproves your premise. Perhaps you
>>>> should read waht you cite
>>> The facts that the article presents are correct.
>>> It is private debt not the federal debt that is
>>> the bigger problem.
>>> And more important - the federal debt will continue to
>>> grow regardless of what Congress tries to do. When Congress
>>> tries to balance the budget the huge private debt will cause a
>>> full blown depression and that means the federal revenues
>>> will plummet and the effort to balance the budget will be
>>> self defeating.
>> You said "Home Mortgages were only 30% of the private sector debt"
> That is correct.
>> as if
>> that was not the cause of the collapse and your cite.said it was "mainly
>> caused by the Housing Bubble"
> The article said:
> "PRIVATE DEBT that is at astronomical levels vis-a-vis GDP.
> Private Debt in America was at 240% of GDP in 1929, before > the global economy crashed then; and Private Debt in America > was at 300% of GDP in 2009 -- and is still at 260% of GDP now, > higher still than in 1929."
Private debt is encouraged by the Income tax system.... Change to a
"NEW ITEM" sales tax and repeal the income tax amendment and you will
set us back on the correct path.
