Obama admin's parting gift: 9 trillion in additional debt

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/08/21/us/politics/AP-US-Obama-Budget.html

9 trillion in additional debt over 10 years would bring the total debt outstanding to around 20 trillion.

I would like to find one liberal Obama supporter give a honest answer to the debt Obama's administration is piling on future generations of Americans. And, don't mention Bush - Bush is no longer the president and he didn't spend this much is 8 years.

Thank God that Bush warmed us up to our Fed Gov't spending more and more.

Here is the thing that so many fail to see -- Regardless of which party is in control of the White House, Gov't feeds off of itself, and it will not get smaller on it's own. Not until the wealthy get so tired of paying taxes, that they live off their savings for a few years, will anything change in Federal spending. Money will be spent, just on different things depending on which party is in the Office.

Assume I come close enough to that description for you.

I don't like the amount of debt we are racking up. I didn't like it under previous administrations (of both parties) and I don't like it now. I think balancing budgets, cutting waste and bureaucracy, planning for the future, and paying off debt should be a priority at all levels - of the government and the private sector.

However, desperate times call for desperate measures, so I am more sympathetic to the idea of a deficit when the money is being spent to sustain people during hard times and rebuild our country. (And yes, I know that a great deal of the money spent and being spent is not for "emergency" or "bailouts." A lot of it goes to sustaining the juggernaut that is our government and that has been in the red and spending like a drunken sailor for decades.)

I also think there is a great deal of hypocrisy/political motivation behind many of the complaints about the money being spent or the deficit - as if a deficit or national debt is a new thing - but am glad that people are at least focusing on the issue (even tangentially).

However, I actually have a solution - a certain percentage of campaign funds will go directly to paying off the national debt. 5% of local races, 7.5% of state level races, 10% of national campaigns. Politicians and wannabe politicians will be taxed until they solve the problem!

Assume I come close enough to that description for you.

I don't like the amount of debt we are racking up. I didn't like it under previous administrations (of both parties) and I don't like it now. I think balancing budgets, cutting waste and bureaucracy, planning for the future, and paying off debt should be a priority at all levels - of the government and the private sector.

However, desperate times call for desperate measures, so I am more sympathetic to the idea of a deficit when the money is being spent to sustain people during hard times and rebuild our country. (And yes, I know that a great deal of the money spent and being spent is not for "emergency" or "bailouts." A lot of it goes to sustaining the juggernaut that is our government and that has been in the red and spending like a drunken sailor for decades.)

I also think there is a great deal of hypocrisy/political motivation behind many of the complaints about the money being spent or the deficit - as if a deficit or national debt is a new thing - but am glad that people are at least focusing on the issue (even tangentially).

However, I actually have a solution - a certain percentage of campaign funds will go directly to paying off the national debt. 5% of local races, 7.5% of state level races, 10% of national campaigns. Politicians and wannabe politicians will be taxed until they solve the problem!

generally though, you're willing to accept obama's debt as needed; somthing we'll have to deal with in ten years but not now due to desperate times?

generally though, you're willing to accept obama's debt as needed; something we'll have to deal with in ten years but not now due to desperate times?

I wish I could remember the name of the economic theory I read about yesterday, so I could link to something referencing it. Maybe a more well-versed econ guru could fill in with more detail.

As the theory goes, in a recession w/ significant job loss the deficit automatically grows dramatically, because of the one-two punch of income tax and other tax collections dropping fast, and the fact that the government automatically ends up spending more to bridge gaps. So I don't think we can call this "Obama's" deficit entirely, or even Bush's.

The flip side of this is that the recession also has a natural and automatic "floor," which seems to be what we are hitting now, with or possibly without the Obama administration's input (though I think both Obama and Bush made some good moves). Anyway it was an interesting little non-political, entirely economical item, but since it was a link within a link I have no idea where I saw it. It did make sense to me though.

I do think that the gravity of the situation is being considered. Whether it will be dealt with properly is another matter. That has been the issue with Obama as I see it. He is GREAT at explaining and attacking problems, but not sure yet whether he will have the leadership to really find the best solutions.

generally though, you're willing to accept obama's debt as needed; somthing we'll have to deal with in ten years but not now due to desperate times?

Yes, I accept this debt as needed, and REALLY wish that we had reserves to draw upon during these hard times instead of a pile of debt and red ink to add it to.

But I don't think the consequences are something we won't have to deal w/ for 10 years - obviously it has more immediate consequences than that.

Assume I come close enough to that description for you.

I don't like the amount of debt we are racking up. I didn't like it under previous administrations (of both parties) and I don't like it now. I think balancing budgets, cutting waste and bureaucracy, planning for the future, and paying off debt should be a priority at all levels - of the government and the private sector.

However, desperate times call for desperate measures, so I am more sympathetic to the idea of a deficit when the money is being spent to sustain people during hard times and rebuild our country. (And yes, I know that a great deal of the money spent and being spent is not for "emergency" or "bailouts." A lot of it goes to sustaining the juggernaut that is our government and that has been in the red and spending like a drunken sailor for decades.)

I also think there is a great deal of hypocrisy/political motivation behind many of the complaints about the money being spent or the deficit - as if a deficit or national debt is a new thing - but am glad that people are at least focusing on the issue (even tangentially).

However, I actually have a solution - a certain percentage of campaign funds will go directly to paying off the national debt. 5% of local races, 7.5% of state level races, 10% of national campaigns. Politicians and wannabe politicians will be taxed until they solve the problem!

Great idea, but why not tax them at the normal marginal rates.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/08/21/us/politics/AP-US-Obama-Budget.html

9 trillion in additional debt over 10 years would bring the total debt outstanding to around 20 trillion.

so obama is serving a ten year term

It is past time for Republicans to accept responsibility for the last 8 years, which will go down as a dark time fiscally for this nation. The congressional republicans would rather support a man just because of the letter beside his name than support principle and stick to a course that would have led to strengthening the long term stability of our nation.

Unfortunately, the democrats have decided that the last eight years gives them the right to spend even more instead of working to change back to fiscal responsibility. I am afraid that Bush's term will go down in history as the 2nd worst fiscal policy period in American history and Obama will be the worst.

Thanks for the good conversation. I still believe a lot of the money spent is being wasted on pet projects - pork barrel spending - that Obama said he would not allow. I am very concerned, too, about the money promised to Brazil for their off-shore drilling. This does not make sense to me, but I guess it should since George Soros has tremendous holdings in the company that will benefit from this drilling. Any comments on this?

Obama's parting gift? Dear SBJ, is he planning on resigning already in the manner that the trail was blazed by Palin? Joe Biden -- my theory is that he is in early stages of dementia as evidenced by his frontal lobe not being able to filter out what he should not say. Don't want him as Pres. Then there's Plastic Surgery Victim Pelosi. OMC -- not her as President, unless she rules that every female gets a discount on designer bags, shoes, and aesthetic plastic surgery.

Who's next? Michelle Obama? Coolio with the style. Jeez, she wasn't wearing Daisy Dukes. Give a woman with a brain and in shape a break.

Thanks for the good conversation. I still believe a lot of the money spent is being wasted on pet projects - pork barrel spending - that Obama said he would not allow. I am very concerned, too, about the money promised to Brazil for their off-shore drilling. This does not make sense to me, but I guess it should since George Soros has tremendous holdings in the company that will benefit from this drilling. Any comments on this?

I did not know about this. It's kind of interesting, but I say if the Brazillian government (govt owns more than half of Petrobras) wants to drill off their own coast and reap both the benefits AND deal with the environmental consequences, they can choose to do this. However at this point I have no desire to see our beaches suffer for the benefit of U.S. private companies ... we need to put this off as long as possible. Our beaches are among the most beautiful in the world!

Can you imagine what would happen to Florida's economy if all of a sudden on the Gulf coast, people started tracking tar balls into their hotel rooms?

As for the U.S. involvement, the Import-Export Bank is loaning money to U.S. companies to compete for the job, which of course would create American jobs and benefits.

Ex-Im defends Brazil loan - Ben Smith - POLITICO.com

Yes, I accept this debt as needed, and REALLY wish that we had reserves to draw upon during these hard times instead of a pile of debt and red ink to add it to.

But I don't think the consequences are something we won't have to deal w/ for 10 years - obviously it has more immediate consequences than that.

but these numbers aren't just during hard times, Obama is projecting that his budget framework will take a loss every year over the next ten. you're still ok with this??

i see it as proof that Obama overpromised during the campaign, he simply can't deliver all the legislation he promised without borrowing trillions to pay for it. i find this unacceptible personally.

but these numbers aren't just during hard times, Obama is projecting that his budget framework will take a loss every year over the next ten. you're still ok with this??

i see it as proof that Obama overpromised during the campaign, he simply can't deliver all the legislation he promised without borrowing trillions to pay for it. i find this unacceptible personally.

Our problem is what do we cut? The major drags on the budget going forward are social security and medicare/medicaid. What the democrats are getting in the town ahll meetings IMHO has less to do with healthcare reform and more to do with the threatened cuts to Medicare. For us to get our financial house in order is going to involve a fair amount of pain. The Republicans showed they did not have the political courage to do it when they were in charge and Obama/Pelosi and company have thus far been even weaker.

Our problem is what do we cut? The major drags on the budget going forward are social security and medicare/medicaid. What the democrats are getting in the town ahll meetings IMHO has less to do with healthcare reform and more to do with the threatened cuts to Medicare. For us to get our financial house in order is going to involve a fair amount of pain. The Republicans showed they did not have the political courage to do it when they were in charge and Obama/Pelosi and company have thus far been even weaker.

Something tells me that if they really wanted to find something to cut, the target list would be very long... Was the government spending enough in 1995? Let's start by taking spending levels back to where we were then.

i see it as proof that Obama overpromised...

In other cultures, they don't call it overpromised, but a word that roughly translates to , "lied"

Look for mandatory spending to continue at a brisk uptick as no politician dare talk about peeling away some social security and medicare dollars.

Look for mandatory spending to continue at a brisk uptick as no politician dare talk about peeling away some social security and medicare dollars.

And therein lies the problem.

drink the kool-aid

YouTube - Hey There Obama (Drink the Kool Aid)

And therein lies the problem.

And BOTH political parties are to thank for scaring the bejeezum out of senior citizens, aka they who actually vote, in an effort to maintain political advantage.

And BOTH political parties are to thank for scaring the bejeezum out of senior citizens, aka they who actually vote, in an effort to maintain political advantage.

Problem #2 for sure.