Budget Plan Likely to Show Huge Deficit

[PLC1]

Washington is drowning in red ink.

WASHINGTON - The budget President Bush unveils on Monday is likely to feature deficits reaching $400 billion this year and next, leaving his successor a fiscal ledger dripping with red ink.

Surprise, surprise. The feds are going in the red even more.

Such deficits would certainly create a challenge for Bush's successor, regardless of political party. A $400 billion deficit would approach the record $413 billion tallied in 2004, putting pressure on presidential candidates to promise to do something about it.

No kidding. The next pres better learn to veto Congressional spending appetites and soon. Another two years of this, and the debt will top 10 trillion, or about $100,000 for every taxpayer in the country.

Ready to pony up? If not, then check the candidates, Congressional and presidential alike, for fiscal conservatism, the only kind that really counts.

 

[Bunz]

Dont worry, we can just print more money.

Signed,
US Congress

 

[Andy]

Join AIM. Vote them all out, with the Anti Incumbent Movement. Vote out everyone.

Term limits would be nice, but... oh well.

 

[Bunz]

Andy,
This is something that I generally support, but could have some far reaching unintended consequences. Also, this will impact many states, well really most states greatly when it comes to the income of federal dollars. Which in my home state.

I got a pretty good kick out of the coverage on the SOTU and when any reference to earmarks were made, it immediatly flashed to Senator Stevens of Alaska.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

No kidding. The next pres better learn to veto Congressional spending appetites and soon. Another two years of this, and the debt will top 10 trillion, or about $100,000 for every taxpayer in the country.

Whew!! At least we can sleep better, each night, knowing our 1%er brothers-and-sisters are dodging any worst-case scenerio!!!

I guess that's one o' the benefits of banking with the Bank Of Bejing.

*

 

[Andy]

Who was in charge of congress Sham? What is your party doing to stop any of this? Give me a reason to vote for your side. Just saying Bush is bad, doesn't motivate anyone to see your views... actually what is your view? All you do is whine about the current president. You have yet to make a case for anything.

 

[USMC the Almighty]

Who was in charge of congress Sham? What is your party doing to stop any of this? Give me a reason to vote for your side. Just saying Bush is bad, doesn't motivate anyone to see your views... actually what is your view? All you do is whine about the current president. You have yet to make a case for anything.

You hit the nail on the head, Andy. Democrats are just anti-everything. Rarely do they propose serious ideas of their own.

As for the spending -- I agree that spending from 2000-2006 was out of control but keep in mind that Congress controls the funds ("power of the purse"). What have the Democrats done since 2006 with it?

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Join AIM. Vote them all out, with the Anti Incumbent Movement. Vote out everyone.

Term limits would be nice, but... oh well.

That also means Vote out the guys with Experience, let new people keep repeating the same mistakes. I Don't want my national Security based on a guy who has only been in office a few years, I want my top guys to have been around for a while and know what is going on..

I'm not going to vote out a good politician just to have new blood when the new blood is a idiot or not up to the job....just so I can have someone new to screw up. If you always do a good job doing what is right, what is needed, and what the people want....stick around for 25 years for all I care....If you suck I will vote you out no matter how long it has been.

 

[PLC1]

Who was in charge of congress Sham? What is your party doing to stop any of this? Give me a reason to vote for your side. Just saying Bush is bad, doesn't motivate anyone to see your views... actually what is your view? All you do is whine about the current president. You have yet to make a case for anything.

Actually, you're both right. The Democratic party is the party of big government. The Republican party is the party of big government. The only difference is that one wants to raise taxes, while the other wants to borrow and spend. Both parties are to blame for the current fiscal mess, and neither one has a plan to fix it.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

At least one side was paying the bills and getting the Debt down....the other side cut its income and said lets spend more....Thank you Republicans for your good economics...im going to try that at home, tell my jobs to pay me less...then buy a new ,million $ home, and some new cars.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

You hit the nail on the head, Andy. Democrats are just anti-everything. Rarely do they propose serious ideas of their own.

Yeah......all we can manage is Precedence.

"The basic fact is that people looked at the 1993 budget agreement and said there’d be a recession, the deficit would go way up and that tax collections would go way down," says Mr. Summers. "What has happened is there has been a boom, the deficit has gone way down and tax collections have gone way up." — WALL STREET JOURNAL, May 22, 1997

"Clinton is a victim of long memories, Reagan is a beneficiary of short ones."

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Actually, you're both right. The Democratic party is the party of big government. The Republican party is the party of big government. The only difference is that one wants to raise taxes, while the other wants to borrow and spend. Both parties are to blame for the current fiscal mess.........

Unfortunately, the stats don't back-up your contention.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

At least one side was paying the bills and getting the Debt down....the other side cut its income and said lets spend more....Thank you Republicans for your good economics...im going to try that at home, tell my jobs to pay me less...then buy a new ,million $ home, and some new cars.

BUSHCO Economics; ain't they grand?!!!

 

[Mr. Shaman]

At least one side was paying the bills and getting the Debt down....the other side cut its income and said lets spend more....Thank you Republicans for your good economics...im going to try that at home, tell my jobs to pay me less...then buy a new ,million $ home, and some new cars.

Just don't consider buying any MBA's the same place Daddy Bush bought one for his drunken Frat-boy!!

http://money.cnn.com/2008/02/01/news/economy/bush_economy.ap/index.htm?cnn=yes​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Actually, you're both right. The Democratic party is the party of big government. The Republican party is the party of big government. The only difference is that one wants to raise taxes, while the other wants to borrow and spend.

Yeah.....we wouldn't want to return to the prior tax-policies....and, risk having to deal with all o' that Prosperity, again!!

http://www.kellysite.net/taxes.html​