Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Umm. Actually, we've been "deficit spending our asses off" for a bit more than four years. Do the words "Iraq War" ring a bell?
Reagan doubled the deficit over his two terms. No one noticed.
Bush almost doubled the deficit over his two terms. A few eyebrows were raised.
And the collective inherited baggage arrived by special delivery in 2008.
Oh yeah, the oldest baby boomers began turning 65 in 2011. 10,000 more will continue to do so every day for the next 20 years. It was announced in 2001 that there were no assets in the SS Trust Fund.
40% of Medicare costs come out of general revenue as deficit spending. This subsidy is expected to increase to 50% by the end of this decade.
Some days, I think that Obama won in 2008 and 2013, by design. Why would the GOP want to take the front row center heat of this accumulated mess?
And the Average Joe continues to think all we need to do is cut off welfare mama and her kids and all will be well. Funny how we don't hear the elected GOP mass singing that song or making a difference in their own states.
What an idiotic statement. Do you have any idea how much private sector companies such as defense contractors, IT contractors, universities, research hospitals, consulting companies etc. are dependent on federal spending pretty much as a sole source of income?
Take that away and watch even more private companies go out of business.
The problem is government budgets are typically "expenses". Since we have a capital centric accounting system expenses are considered bad since they are not a profit center. For example a bridge is an expenses and ruins the profits of car companies who could have made more cars to replace the ones the fell into the water. The hospitals and cemeteries would have all benefited without the bridge.
Expenses are usually the more sound investment. For example a web site was considered an investment in the 1990s and now that it is basically essential, it is no longer on the completive edge. So now its like a telephone expense which is ironically the stamp of proven technology. However now one should be paid for selecting it.
That does no mean the government does all these things well, but the zero sum arguments are rather stupid; but its typical of American microeconomic thought applied in all the wrong places.
What an idiotic statement. Do you have any idea how much private sector companies such as defense contractors, IT contractors, universities, research hospitals, consulting companies etc. are dependent on federal spending pretty much as a sole source of income?
Take that away and watch even more private companies go out of business.
That so many are dependant on government spending is one of our largest problems.
Reagan doubled the deficit over his two terms. No one noticed.
Bush almost doubled the deficit over his two terms. A few eyebrows were raised.
And the collective inherited baggage arrived by special delivery in 2008.
Oh yeah, the oldest baby boomers began turning 65 in 2011. 10,000 more will continue to do so every day for the next 20 years. It was announced in 2001 that there were no assets in the SS Trust Fund.
40% of Medicare costs come out of general revenue as deficit spending. This subsidy is expected to increase to 50% by the end of this decade.
Some days, I think that Obama won in 2008 and 2013, by design. Why would the GOP want to take the front row center heat of this accumulated mess?
And the Average Joe continues to think all we need to do is cut off welfare mama and her kids and all will be well. Funny how we don't hear the elected GOP mass singing that song or making a difference in their own states.
Why? Why, why, why?
Why do all you people think the worst problem is the fiscal one?
I mention that the banks cranked out nearly 30T during the housing bubble where the most valuable part, the ground, can't expand and add supply and no one bats an eyelash. That's debt and money printing at twice the national debt in 7 years with little added to supply. Yet every one keeps babbling about the deficit which is mostly just fake debt from the same issuer of the currency.
What is wrong with all of you? Barring debt write downs, deficits are the only way to get out of the bank credit death trap.
What spin? We cut spending and it slowed growth. Is that hard to understand?
Yes, the economy is pretty hard to understand. Let's take a look at the numbers in a vaccuum.
Defense spending was cut 22% at an annual rate and is around 20% of the federal budget. In a vaccuum, where all else is stable in federal spending, that means government spending fell .22 X 20% or 4.4% because 20% of the federal budget was cut 22%.
Federal spemding is about 20% of GDP (just federal, not state/local). So basically 20% of what constitutes GDP was cut by ~4%.
That means these defense cuts contributed to about ~0.8% of a decline in GDP, so all the other factors of GDP calculation were growth of 0.7% of GDP.
Don't worry though, Winter_Sucks, at the end of the day, I believe GDP growth to be a stupid metric in and of itself, easily manipulated for political points. Personally, I would take 10 years of negative GDP growth if the only reason was due to government spending cuts. So I'll say no more.
Yes, the economy is pretty hard to understand. Let's take a look at the numbers in a vaccuum.
Defense spending was cut 22% at an annual rate and is around 20% of the federal budget. In a vaccuum, where all else is stable in federal spending, that means government spending fell .22 X 20% or 4.4% because 20% of the federal budget was cut 22%.
Federal spemding is about 20% of GDP (just federal, not state/local). So basically 20% of what constitutes GDP was cut by ~4%.
That means these defense cuts contributed to about ~0.8% of a decline in GDP, so all the other factors of GDP calculation were growth of 0.7% of GDP.
Don't worry though, Winter_Sucks, at the end of the day, I believe GDP growth to be a stupid metric in and of itself, easily manipulated for political points. Personally, I would take 10 years of negative GDP growth if the only reason was due to government spending cuts. So I'll say no more.
It will accomplish nothing if they keep bailing out the banks who can fearlessly maximize our debt levels to the brink of defaults and debt service which is the new era of insanity and creditor worship we are now in. Until you see the dead carcass of big finance and banks , which is your real shadow government, only our veins will be cut.
Well 4 years of government spending to prop up the economy and "jumpstart" the recovery.
How many more years should we give it before trying something else ?
It took 10+ years and WW2 to turn things around during the last BIG blowout.
Recovery during the 50's occured for unique reasons that cannot be duplicated.
Europe is not dependent on the U.S. to rebuild their infrastructure, due to war.
We don't operate in a closed market anymore.
There is no shortage of manpower for jobs.
Europe and parts of Asia are now educated.
There is no appitite to increase the max federal tax rate to 90+% to pay off accumulated depression spending and wars.
The tax code has evolved over 60 years to favor big corporations, ultra wealthy and low income earners.
What spending was cut? Spending is NEVER cut with regards to the government. They might spend less than they anticipated, which is ALWAYS more than the year before. But cuts? Did not happen.
So spending less is not cutting spending?
That's the dumbest thing I've heard today.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
