The Drive Toward Greater Debt

[GBFan]

President Barack Obama’s latest budget proposal includes decreased spending on military while pumping nearly $300 million dollars to the nation’s top abortion provider, Planned Parenthood.

He also wants $750 million spent on pre-school. Does the government need to fund preschool? According to the president, it is essential. He said “I am again calling on the Congress to make high-quality preschool available to every four-year-old child."

Turning the absurd into a complete charade, the White House is painting this as a victory over debt.

But perhaps most troubling is the continued march toward greater debt with no attempt to reign in the spending. Fox News reports “By 2024, the total national debt would rise from $17.4 trillion to nearly $25 trillion. By 2020, U.S. taxpayers would be paying more in interest on the debt than they would on the entire Defense budget. By 2017, those interest payments would be bigger than the budget for Medicaid.”

Turning the absurd into a complete charade, the White House is painting this as a victory over debt.

Fox News notes “Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., top Republican on the Senate Budget Committee, said the president's proposal will continue to inflict ‘an excruciating financial toll.’ According to White House budget documents, the proposal shows the interest on the debt rising from $223 billion this year to more than $800 billion a decade from now.”

So as the defense budget shrinks from $612 billion today to $583 billion in 2020, interest alone will surpass the cost to defend our nation.

To be fair, the story also notes “Many members of Congress, though, have been just as reluctant as members of the administration to take on tough long-term talks about tackling the debt. Past talks between Obama and Republican leaders like House Speaker John Boehner failed to produce a so-called ‘grand bargain,’ leaving both sides feeling burned by the effort. Republicans blame Democrats for pursuing tax increases and shielding some entitlement spending, while Democrats blame Republicans for their stalwart opposition to most tax hikes.”  

 

[dogtowner]

Im beginning to believe his aim is to implode the debt world and just declare it gone. because its funny money mumbo jumbo to him he actually thinks it would work. this is what you get electing an affirmative action bozo to a position of power.

 

[GBFan]

Unquestionably, Obama doesn't believe the debt matters. He is only interested in expanding his power base.

I would suggest, though, that he remember how we 'won' the Cold War - essentially, Reagan (via the Star Wars initiative) forced the Soviet Union into bankruptcy. There is no reason that the same strategy wouldn't work against us.

 

[dogtowner]

Unquestionably, Obama doesn't believe the debt matters. He is only interested in expanding his power base.

I would suggest, though, that he remember how we 'won' the Cold War - essentially, Reagan (via the Star Wars initiative) forced the Soviet Union into bankruptcy. There is no reason that the same strategy wouldn't work against us.

It is close to having done so if its not already. Thee is a reason the fed is printing money instead of the treasury writing ious. Remember Zimbabwe ?

 

[Cruella]

Reagan (via the Star Wars initiative) forced the Soviet Union into bankruptcy. There is no reason that the same strategy wouldn't work against us.

Bingo

 

[DeadCenter]

Im against both funding preschool and giving Planned parenthook cash and Im as much opposed to increases in unnecessary spending as I am cutting necessary funding.
The entire problem with getting nothing done is compromise is gone. Without compromise there will never be anything fixed. It will the old unstoppable force and unmoveable rock like we have right now.

Nancy Pelosi singlehandedly created this vitriole in congress and it annoys me when democrats wont own up to them doing the same thing when they had the house as the teaparty faction is doing right now.
Her ramming obamacare through and her jeering leering face everyday on TV telling us she didnt need republicans and we were going to have health care whether we liked it or not got this mess started.

Congress has to get together for the good of the country. They have to accept and take a give some take some approach. Neither side is going to get everything it wants and everyone knows that.

We have to cut the spending and we have to cut the corporate handouts, we have to cut subsidies and we have to close loopholes that allow the Richest corporations in this country to pay NOTHING in federal taxs while they outsource every american job they can.

The democrats fights for everything below middleclass, the republicans fight for everything above and neither fight for the middleclass which keeps the country moving and the rich getting richer. The middle class is being destroyed by the rich and corporate interests.

 

[GBFan]

We have to cut the spending and we have to cut the corporate handouts, we have to cut subsidies and we have to close loopholes that allow the Richest corporations in this country to pay NOTHING in federal taxs while they outsource every american job they can.

The democrats fights for everything below middleclass, the republicans fight for everything above and neither fight for the middleclass which keeps the country moving and the rich getting richer. The middle class is being destroyed by the rich and corporate interests.

1) I'm not opposed to corporate taxes, but I'm curious why you think corporations should pay taxes, particularly when you consider that every dollar paid in federal taxes is one dollar less that can create a job. We already have the highest corporate tax in the world - why should it go higher? Do you not see the connection between high corporate taxes and job outsourcing?

2) It is nonsensical to say that "The democrats fights for everything below middleclass, the republicans fight for everything above" - that type of generality serves no purpose. Particularly, when it isn't supported by facts.

 

[DeadCenter]

1) I'm not opposed to corporate taxes, but I'm curious why you think corporations should pay taxes, particularly when you consider that every dollar paid in federal taxes is one dollar less that can create a job. We already have the highest corporate tax in the world - why should it go higher? Do you not see the connection between high corporate taxes and job outsourcing?

2) It is nonsensical to say that "The democrats fights for everything below middleclass, the republicans fight for everything above" - that type of generality serves no purpose. Particularly, when it isn't supported by facts.

Corporations use more services than any average citizen, they use our roads directly or indirectly to recieve and ship their goods, our bridges all our infrastructure. They use police and fire when needed just like everyone else and when they have problems they are huge. Corporation owned the Towers in NY, how many public employees died responding.
All the conservative arguments and cheerleading would have held water 25 yrs ago and later, when corporations put self imposed limits on their greed and shared a little with their employees.
Your argument that every dollar they dont pay in taxs creates a job is pure nonesense, they create jobs for chinese, phillipinos and mexicans and more, not americans. Ge paid zero taxs in 2010 on 1 billion in profit, not gross but profit and rewarded us by sending its entire xray division to china.
The 1o largest corporations didnt pay a dime in taxs in 2010 not one dime in fed taxs.


It is nonsensical to say that "The democrats fights for everything below middleclass, the republicans fight for everything above" - that type of generality serves no purpose. Particularly, when it isn't supported by facts

I agree that statemen was made by me in general and I could site examples. They are for unions whos workers make an average of 30% more than non union and have better benefits. Democrats most recently fought to keep unemployment insurance which was voted down by the house. Democrats brought a bill forward saving 24 billion in 10 yrs by stopping subsidies to some of the richest corporations in the world, the house voted it down. Democrats want to raise minimum wage, the hosue does not. Ryan keeps propsing budgets that hurt working americans in retirement to benefit the rich with a handsome tax reduction. I could go on and on siting examples of how the right is against working americans.


You are right that my statement

 

[GBFan]

Corporations use more services than any average citizen, they use our roads directly or indirectly to recieve and ship their goods, our bridges all our infrastructure. They use police and fire when needed just like everyone else and when they have problems they are huge. Corporation owned the Towers in NY, how many public employees died responding.
All the conservative arguments and cheerleading would have held water 25 yrs ago and later, when corporations put self imposed limits on their greed and shared a little with their employees.
Your argument that every dollar they dont pay in taxs creates a job is pure nonesense, they create jobs for chinese, phillipinos and mexicans and more, not americans. Ge paid zero taxs in 2010 on 1 billion in profit, not gross but profit and rewarded us by sending its entire xray division to china.
The 1o largest corporations didnt pay a dime in taxs in 2010 not one dime in fed taxs.


It is nonsensical to say that "The democrats fights for everything below middleclass, the republicans fight for everything above" - that type of generality serves no purpose. Particularly, when it isn't supported by facts

I agree that statemen was made by me in general and I could site examples. They are for unions whos workers make an average of 30% more than non union and have better benefits. Democrats most recently fought to keep unemployment insurance which was voted down by the house. Democrats brought a bill forward saving 24 billion in 10 yrs by stopping subsidies to some of the richest corporations in the world, the house voted it down. Democrats want to raise minimum wage, the hosue does not. Ryan keeps propsing budgets that hurt working americans in retirement to benefit the rich with a handsome tax reduction. I could go on and on siting examples of how the right is against working americans.


You are right that my statement

When you play both sides of the ball, you'll always win, right?

Here, you complain that companies no longer have the self control to not abuse their employees, that they used to share with their employees ("... corporations put self imposed limits on their greed and shared a little with their employees", but elsewhere, you claim that unions are necessary because of the way companies treated their employees. I sure wish you'd make up your mind which side of the fence you want to be on ...

Now, you claim that union workers make 30% more than non-union members (it's not that high, but that's nit-picking), but you fail to acknowledge the increased cost of being a union worker (dues, etc.) ... nor do you quantify the cost impact of the increased wages. In short, is the increased wages more than offset by the increased cost of products in the union household?

Since you didn't bother to describe the magic Dem bill that saved $24 billion over 10 years, I assume you must be talking about the Farm Subsidy bill ... you're right, the conservatives in the House voted it down. BECAUSE THEY WANTED MORE IN SAVINGS!! The add-ons in the bill overrode the $24 billion in supposed savings ... in fact, the bill actually had a negative budgetary impact. So ... your $24 billion characterization is, simply, a lie. It addresses only one small portion of the bill, and ignores the rest. Nice try.

Now, as for Ryan proposing budgets that "hurt working americans in retirement to benefit the rich with a handsome tax reduction" ... this approaches the category of BALDFACED lie. Every one of the Republicans budget proposal has, in fact, tried to address the shortfalls in the entitlement programs, but not one - not a single one - hurt those 'Americans in retirement' - each one of them was grandfathered to allow a logical, and manageable transition to the new program. And ... just exactly what corrections have the liberal Democrats proposed for our entitlement programs? NONE! Nothing! ... well, that's really a lie ... they have proposed INCREASING them. They have totally ignored the reality. They have refused to face the problem .. instead, kicking it down the road to the next three generations. You should be ever so proud.

 

[Phoenix68]

The Drive Toward Greater Debt​

.

.
....Has NEVER been considered a stumbling-block for REPUBLICANS!!!!
.​

 

[mark francis]

.
View attachment 9998
.
....Has NEVER been considered a stumbling-block for REPUBLICANS!!!!
.​

Why Republicans are blocking Democrats from raising the debt ceiling

Why Republicans are blocking Democrats from raising the debt ceiling

news.yahoo.com

Why Republicans are blocking Democrats from raising the debt ceiling​