Obama's budget plans = massive deficit

[lamexican]

Originally Posted by ViewFromThePeak

Actually, back when it was won by people who didn't have a political axe to grind.

When did it change?

[Valley Native]

Originally Posted by oberon_1

I am not sure what the best solution might be, but didn't we already try your medicine in the last 8 years? Why not see how something different works?

Certainly, you're not speaking of Bush, are you? He certianly didn't try to reduce the size of the debt, or cut back on unnecessary programs. I was NO FAN of the past eight years under Bush's economic policies ... and the reason was that during his run in office, he actually increased the size of the federal government more than any other President since FDR. His administration gave us a little bit of tax relief, but federal spending kept increasing. That's what caused the massive deficit we currently have.

We need a much more fiscally prudent budget plan than Bush's or Obama's. As far as I'm concerned, the only political party which might be able to achieve cutting the waste from government, turning most things over to local (or private) control, wiping out the deficit, and eliminating the tax burden would be the Libertarian party. However, their chances of winning the White House (or seats in Congress) are, unfortunately, slim to none.

[lamexican]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

federal spending kept increasing. That's what caused the massive deficit we currently have.

I posted clear refuting evidence yet you repeat false rhetoric. The tax cuts are the main reason for the defecits.

[oberon_1]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

Certainly, you're not speaking of Bush, are you? He certianly didn't try to reduce the size of the debt, or cut back on unnecessary programs. I was NO FAN of the past eight years under Bush's economic policies ... and the reason was that during his run in office, he actually increased the size of the federal government more than any other President since FDR. His administration gave us a little bit of tax relief, but federal spending kept increasing. That's what caused the massive deficit we currently have.

We need a much more fiscally prudent budget plan than Bush's or Obama's. As far as I'm concerned, the only political party which might be able to achieve cutting the waste from government, turning most things over to local (or private) control, wiping out the deficit, and eliminating the tax burden would be the Libertarian party. However, their chances of winning the White House (or seats in Congress) are, unfortunately, slim to none.

I am not sure about anything. But can you please explain (in detail) how reducing the deficit will jump-start the economy? I understand and agree that future generations will have less of a burden to carry. I also agree that in the future, it may result in decreased tax rates (which I also like). So far so good. However, having millions of unemployed, hungry people today (by cutting off their welfare and unemployment checks) or the 40 million uninsured, will jump-start the economy today?

[Valley Native]

Originally Posted by oberon_1

I am not sure about anything. But can you please explain (in detail) how reducing the deficit will jump-start the economy? I understand and agree that future generations will have less of a burden to carry. I also agree that in the future, it may result in decreased tax rates (which I also like). So far so good. However, having millions of unemployed, hungry people today (by cutting off their welfare and unemployment checks) or the 40 million uninsured, will jump-start the economy today?

I never said that only reducing the deficit would jump start the economy. Other factors play a part in an economic stimulus ... such as lowering (or eliminating) the tax burden across the board. If all this wasteful, unnecessary federal spending was done away with, it would not only wipe out the deficit, but create a surplus ... therefore, all the taxes that went to pay for the numerous federal programs that really aren't needed could be refunded to every taxpayer & business.

Clearing out all the waste from the departments that need to be in tact would also help greatly in this matter. For instance, it was reported a few years ago that the Department of Defense purchased approximately 270,000 commercial airline tickets at a total cost of $100 million, but left them unused and unclaimed. There is too much mis management at the federal level, and a good share of fraud happening.

As for the ones who are unemployed, uninsured, etc., they could still receive temporary relief. I'm not opposed to helping these people, so long as it's not on a permanent basis. The economy is in the tank right now for different reasons, but a lot of it stemmed from the real estate market: the people who were stupid enough to purchase homes via sub prime loans/ARMs, and the lending institutions that were greedy enough to lend money to many unqualified applicants. The bailouts were a huge mistake because they're nothing more than a reward for bad behavior and poor choices.

I believe that even without the stimulus package & bailouts, the economy is going to turn itself around on its own. The mis managed institutions such as AIG should have been ALLOWED to fail. Same with GM! These companies that failed to keep their heads above water only have themselves to blame. Same goes for the idiots who didn't manage their own finances properly & foreclosed on their homes or filed for bankruptcy. As I said before, I don't mind a little bit of temporary government aid for those who are down & out ... but overall it's everybody for him/herself. Survival of the fittest! Those of us who saved & didn't overspend will come out ahead, and those who splurged & ran themselves in deep debt for frivolous items will pay the price!

[oberon_1]

Originally Posted by Valley Native

I never said that only reducing the deficit would jump start the economy. Other factors play a part in an economic stimulus ... such as lowering (or eliminating) the tax burden across the board. If all this wasteful, unnecessary federal spending was done away with, it would not only wipe out the deficit, but create a surplus ... therefore, all the taxes that went to pay for the numerous federal programs that really aren't needed could be refunded to every taxpayer & business.
Clearing out all the waste from the departments that need to be in tact would also help greatly in this matter. For instance, it was reported a few years ago that the Department of Defense purchased approximately 270,000 commercial airline tickets at a total cost of $100 million, but left them unused and unclaimed. There is too much mis management at the federal level, and a good share of fraud happening.

Unfortunately, the government of a country the size of the US, cannot be compared to a grocery store and can never focus on every $ like a shop-owner. There will always be inefficiencies, waste, etc. That is true for every government on the globe, whatever their orientation may be. The real question is if the government cares for the citizens and acts in a way that benefits most people.

As for the ones who are unemployed, uninsured, etc., they could still receive temporary relief. I'm not opposed to helping these people, so long as it's not on a permanent basis.

That's what the stimulus plan is about.

The economy is in the tank right now for different reasons, but a lot of it stemmed from the real estate market: the people who were stupid enough to purchase homes via sub prime loans/ARMs, and the lending institutions that were greedy enough to lend money to many unqualified applicants.

Institutions can't be greedy, only people can. However, these institutions (believe me, I am not their fan) needed to exist and thrive in a market characterized by fierce competition. The problem is that our society (trough congress and administration) allowed them to play without rules (neocons believe that's good for the economy). So, in the lack of rules, they made up rules that suited them at the moment.

The bailouts were a huge mistake because they're nothing more than a reward for bad behavior and poor choices.

You may be right, but I don't think in terms of "rewarding". These guys graduated already from middle school. The problem is that since the US and global economy is so interwoven, the fall of these giants could be like the collapse of the twin towers on 9/11. Today, after almost 8 years, there is still no tower in place.

I believe that even without the stimulus package & bailouts, the economy is going to turn itself around on its own.

You may be correct about that as well. Economies have cycles and they eventually rebound. The question is when and at what cost.

The mis managed institutions such as AIG should have been ALLOWED to fail. Same with GM! These companies that failed to keep their heads above water only have themselves to blame. Same goes for the idiots who didn't manage their own finances properly & foreclosed on their homes or filed for bankruptcy. As I said before, I don't mind a little bit of temporary government aid for those who are down & out ... but overall it's everybody for him/herself. Survival of the fittest! Those of us who saved & didn't overspend will come out ahead, and those who splurged & ran themselves in deep debt for frivolous items will pay the price!

Another problem of financial markets is the size of these companies. AIG was an insurance company. At one point they decided to be everything, everywhere. We (you and I) allowed that. Why? AIG, the insurer would not be such a problem if we kept it smaller. The same with citi group. Does America need these giants or are we better of with many (yet smaller) corporations?

[KRAMERCAT]

We are in fact paying off the rich, who have already pocketed the proceeds from these toxic debts. Since the Wall streets bankers are getting off scott-free, no wonder they are cheering.