Numbers are Staggering

Reply

  #1  
Old 03-02-13, 10:50 AM
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: New England
Posts: 9,806
Numbers are Staggering

We hear all of the screaming about how bad these cuts will hurt our economy, but the current cuts being proposed, $85,000,000,000 are only 8% of this year's deficit. We need to cut 12 times that just to balance this years budget and 200 times that (plus interest) to repay our national debt over the next 10 years. Yet congress goes merrily along its way handing out more benefits to this group and that.

Teddy Roosevelt said: "The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life."
Theodore Roosevelt Quotes - BrainyQuote

We all need to be building our financial fallout shelters.

Bud
 
Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 03-02-13, 12:15 PM
the_tow_guy's Avatar
Group Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: SW Fla USA
Posts: 11,517
Just goes to show you why he's up on Mt. Rushmore.

A good start would be to stop increasing all the government agency budgets by more than the rate of inflation and then when the increase is reduced calling it a budget reduction.
 
  #3  
Old 03-02-13, 01:24 PM
Forum Topic Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 43,037
It boggles my mind. If one of us were to run a company they way the gov't is run and spend that kind of money [reduced for scale] we'd stand a good chance of being locked up, if we run our personal finances that way - we'd be under the poor house. Yet the politician's pay/benefits never misses a beat
 
  #4  
Old 03-02-13, 03:41 PM
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: New England
Posts: 9,806
This is just my opinion, but everyone who receives a check in any form, SS, food stamps, school subsidies, medicare, from state or federal gov, had better start planning on receiving a lot less. We either need to borrow more money to maintain the current spending, which is insane, or spend so much less that we will think we are in one of those 3rd world countries we are used to pointing our finger at.

Call our current budget 4 Trillion and that is 1 Trillion over what we take in. We (our government) needs to reduce its spending by 25% TODAY, that's 1,000 billion dollars, and they are crying about 85 Billion. And that just balances one year. Why does the crash of 29 come to mind?

Bud
 
  #5  
Old 03-02-13, 05:13 PM
Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 2,446
I agree unfortunately everyone is going to have to sacrifice in order for the deficit to go down. What we need is another president like Reagan remember the $200.00 toilet seat he pointed out in his state of the union? That is unfortunately the kind of spending that is going on now only now it isn't just over spending on toilet seats.
 
  #6  
Old 03-02-13, 05:52 PM
Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wet side of Washington state.
Posts: 18,349
Another Ronald Reagan is exactly who we DON'T need. He may have pointed out the $200 toilet seat but he did nothing to curtail the various agencies (many of them military) from making up ridiculously detailed specifications for ordinary products. Fact is, Reagan spent this country into permanent debt by outspending the Soviet Union. THAT is the real reason why the USSR collapsed, Reagan forced them into bankruptcy and set the US up for the same fall. ALL of the presidents that have followed RR have intensified the problem.
 
  #7  
Old 03-02-13, 09:19 PM
Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 2,446
At the time Reagan was in office I know my personal economy was better I had much better interest going into my bank account than I do now. It has been the other clowns in office including Republicans who have messed the economy up since then. As for the USSR collapsing over our spending more on the military some of that is true but the USSR was headed towards collapse long before Reagan even set foot in office. All the USSR had was unhappy people including military officers who had had enough and finally it collapsed. Before Reagan came along the USSR wasn't thinking about reducing arms and that is what Reagan accomplished through the S.T.A.R.T treaty. S.T.A.R.T came into being as a treaty shortly after Reagan left office. Here is a link to a Wikipedia article START I - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia .
 
  #8  
Old 03-02-13, 11:43 PM
Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wet side of Washington state.
Posts: 18,349
During the Reagan administration the US went from being the world's largest creditor nation (lending money to others) to the largest debtor nation. While you personally may have done well the country as a whole did not.
 
  #9  
Old 03-03-13, 12:18 AM
Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 2,446
I actually believe myself that everyone had more money then than they do now and before Reagan there was Carter and while I didn't drive I heard from my father who owned a gas station first hand about the lines waiting for gasoline during the Carter administration. Reagan changed that and many other things for the better and some of that military spending later on paid off in the private sector too. I will concede to one thing that I thought was foolish spending and that was the star wars project as it was never fully funded and the people working on the project didn't seem to know what they were doing.

Other things too such as firing air traffic controllers for not doing their job I would have done myself if I was in his position as that was causing a dangerous situation. Reagan wasn't perfect but he knew better than most presidents in how to run things and in how to cut wasteful spending.
 
  #10  
Old 03-03-13, 01:18 AM
Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wet side of Washington state.
Posts: 18,349
I remember all the way back to the Eisenhower administration. If you think that RR was a great president then you are either suffering from a case of selective memory or you are just plain deluded. For my money the ONLY positive thing that RR did was to prove that we could have a moron in the White House and the country would still survive. GW Bush made that eminently clear.

And no, I am not any booster of Democrats that have sat as president. I think that Eisenhower was truly the last of the "good" presidents we have had. Kennedy was terrible despite his ratings and good looks. Carter, while I think he is perhaps the most ethical president of the 20th century was a victim of the times as much as anything. While I have the utmost respect for Carter as a man I rate him as a mediocre president. Gerald Ford was a decent man and a decent president. Nixon was a very intelligent man but his own paranoia prevented him from being a good president. Johnson (Lyndon, not Andrew) was a terrible president. Clinton had both high points and very low points. I rate him as one of the better presidents although by no means a good president. Personally, Clinton disgusts me. The elder Bush I found as trustworthy as a cobra and his son as an idiot worse than Reagan.

Oh, it really isn't how much money one has that is important. It is how much your money will buy that is important. The purchasing power of all Americans has been on a downhill slide since at least Kennedy and perhaps since Truman. The greatest growth of the middle class took place under Eisenhower and THAT, my friend, is what really counts. Although the convoluted method used today to ascertain the rate of inflation shows it as being quite low the TRUTH is that for the everyday items that we all need the rate of inflation is many points higher than the official numbers.
 
  #11  
Old 03-03-13, 04:51 AM
Forum Topic Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 43,037
I also agree Reagan was one of our better presidents BUT we don't want to get in a heated discussion on the forums about politics - so tread lightly
 
  #12  
Old 03-03-13, 07:31 AM
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,188
Part of the problem is that the current administration has done little to put people back to work in non government jobs. People working pay taxes and they spend money that ends up in the pockets of other workers.

Your tax dollars at work - Wasteful government spending LINK

Also I saw on the news yesterday a $700,000 government grant to help finance a musical about global warming.

This sort of stuff is just the tip of the tip of the iceberg. I worked for the government for almost 40 years. The waste is absolutely mind boggling.
 
  #13  
Old 03-03-13, 08:28 AM
Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 4,940
Reagan was borrowing a ton of money to cover government shortfalls. Of course things were good then. We got a lot and didn't have to pay for it. Then the bill came in and things went to crap. Bush Sr. paid the price for it when he was office. Same thing happened with GW. He cut taxes and increased spending while borrowing to cover the short falls. Then things want to crap.
 
  #14  
Old 03-03-13, 03:15 PM
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: New England
Posts: 9,806
Going back to Teddy's quote about the things that can destroy America, he said "peace-at-any-price". It is difficult to think of where we would be if we didn't get involved if all of the recent conflicts, but try to imagine where the world would be if we had stayed out of WW1 and WW2.

But it has had a price and the problem I see is getting America to understand we MUST stop borrowing and we MUST start paying back the money we owe. America has to become financially secure.

Here is a positive thought. When we spend a dollar inside America, it ends up turning four to seven times before the government gets it back. If we teach Americas to buy made in America and we get our government started on the tremendous amount of infrastructure repair/improvement we need, then we will be putting millions of people back to work and the spending and re-spending of those wages will stir our economy like never before.

We have a windfall, the current abundance of energy. We need to take advantage of becoming energy independent and stop importing ALL energy. It's that balance of trade that at some point MUST reverse to where we export more than we import.

The solution is out there, IMO, we just need the right leader to take us down that road.

bud
 
  #15  
Old 03-03-13, 05:27 PM
Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 2,446
My memories of presidents start at Kennedy and I think he could have been a great president and from what I have read about his first term and the Cuban Missile crisis I know if he had lived he would have been a greater president than what is written. Those were tense times and he did a great job. Kennedy along with Ford and Reagan all knew how to talk to the other party. So despite whatever anyone might think of their policies as presidents they along with congress at the time talked to each other.

Each of the presidents I mentioned did as good a job as they could at the current time to balance the safety of the nation while still trying as hard as they could to keep within a budget. Going back even further though another of our better presidents was Theodore Roosevelt as he took our economy out of depression and as history says mainly through military spending. Roosevelt knew this country would need to go to war so he sold the war to congress. Reagan like many others wanted an end to the cold war as did the rest of the nation.

Because of Roosevelt,Kennedy and Reagan we can all breathe a little easier as we don't have as many enemies as we did. We still need to be vigilant though and maybe more so now because of terrorism and unfortunately some of our enemies are now within and linked to terrorists overseas.

The sequester though is going to hurt some of that vigilance and our current president has to learn that he is not going to get everything he wants just because he is president. At the same time the Republicans in the house need to understand that they can't get everything they want either. As I see it both parties need to grow up and be more understanding of each other. The last time I really saw congress and the white house work well was during the Reagan administration. Both Reagan and then speaker of the house Tip O'Neal had an understanding with each other even though they were of different parties and acted like adults instead of the children we now have running things.
 
Reply

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Display Modes
'