PDA

View Full Version : US Debt Jumped $54 Billion in 8 days!



Amos_with_goats
Apr 12th 2011, 12:06 AM
Just a little context for the current 'victory' in cutting the US debt.

US Debt Jumped $54 Billion in Week Preceding Deal to Cut $38 Billion (http://www.1776coalition.com/rise-up-2/us-debt-jumped-54-billion-in-week-preceding-deal-to-cut-38-billion)

It is astounding to me how oblivious the electorate is to the scope of this problem. :hmm:

Glad the Cowboy Poets (http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0311/Reid_Save_federal_funding_for_the_cowboy_poets.htm l)are still being looked after.. :B

RabbiKnife
Apr 12th 2011, 01:51 PM
An entitled generation will never understand that economic slavery to government is worse than physical slavery to a kind master.

Phish
Apr 12th 2011, 02:47 PM
I saw a bumper sticker a while back that stuck with me, but now more than ever I agree with it.

I love my Country, but fear my Government.

Liquid Tension
Apr 12th 2011, 06:44 PM
Hope and Change my friends.......Hope and Change.

Phish
Apr 12th 2011, 06:45 PM
Hope and Change my friends.......Hope and Change.

We went with change and looked how that worked out.:lol:

Hope, we need hope

Liquid Tension
Apr 12th 2011, 06:57 PM
We went with change and looked how that worked out.:lol:

Hope, we need hope

Well, with the debt jumping $54 billion in 8 days, and however much it jumped since Soetoro took office, we have no more change. Unfortunately, no one in the GOP gives me any sense of renewed hope, which could mean 4 more years of Barrynomics................oh dear.

mattlad22
Apr 12th 2011, 07:06 PM
Well, with the debt jumping $54 billion in 8 days, and however much it jumped since Soetoro took office, we have no more change. Unfortunately, no one in the GOP gives me any sense of renewed hope, which could mean 4 more years of Barrynomics................oh dear.

You guys could always come and try to take over Canada, we have alot of resources that can be sold for profit........seriously though, dont do it.

Vhayes
Apr 12th 2011, 07:07 PM
I have a question - is this the sort of thing that happens every year? The obfuscation of the numbers? Or is this unique to this year?

Fenris
Apr 12th 2011, 07:13 PM
The debt in February alone was higher than in all of 2007.

mattlad22
Apr 12th 2011, 07:16 PM
The debt in February alone was higher than in all of 2007.

Who exactly is the debt owed to?

Vhayes
Apr 12th 2011, 07:17 PM
I have a question - is this the sort of thing that happens every year? The obfuscation of the numbers? Or is this unique to this year?

Same question...

Fenris
Apr 12th 2011, 07:17 PM
Who exactly is the debt owed to?

Bondholders.......

Fenris
Apr 12th 2011, 07:18 PM
I have a question - is this the sort of thing that happens every year? The obfuscation of the numbers? Or is this unique to this year?
What obfuscation of numbers?

mattlad22
Apr 12th 2011, 07:24 PM
Bondholders.......

So whos the bonholders?
I realize it can be many many many...erm whos the majorities i guess.

RabbiKnife
Apr 12th 2011, 07:25 PM
I have a question - is this the sort of thing that happens every year? The obfuscation of the numbers? Or is this unique to this year?

Figures never lie and liars always figure.

Math is one topic that is not discussed in Washington, DC, as least not the math that you and I understand. For instance, if you say "I plan on raised actual cash outlays by $200B next year," and then the next week say "I am going to cut planned outlays by $100B next year," what you actually did was not a spending cut but an increase of actual cash outlay by $100B.

Sources are reported from the WH that part of the President's plan is to talk about "tax exenditure reductions", which sounds like a spending decrease, right? Wrong. It's actually a TAX INCREASE. You get there by classifying mortgage interest deductions as "tax expenditures", calculating the amount of tax revenue that the government does not get because of people using the tax deduction on Schedule A. Then, you call the "lost" revenue (which was never revenue to start with) as a "tax expenditure." THen, you "reduce" the amount of "tax expenditure," which is "reducing the amount of "lost" revenue" by modifying the tax code.

The bottom line is a tax increase.

Math is fundamental.

Vhayes
Apr 12th 2011, 07:25 PM
What obfuscation of numbers?

I thought that was the premise of the post. That the "debt reduction" was nothing more than an obfuscation of numbers.

RabbiKnife
Apr 12th 2011, 07:27 PM
I thought that was the premise of the post. That the "debt reduction" was nothing more than an obfuscation of numbers.

All it really means is that, when I have a budget for a grilled cheese sandwich, I "reduced my debt" by only buying the filet, the lobster, and the Dom Perignon on the credit card, while "sacrificing" and "cutting" the creme brule afterwards.

Vhayes
Apr 12th 2011, 07:28 PM
All it really means is that, when I have a budget for a grilled cheese sandwich, I "reduced my debt" by only buying the filet, the lobster, and the Dom Perignon on the credit card, while "sacrificing" and "cutting" the creme brule afterwards.

And that is unique to THIS year?

That is/was my question.

RabbiKnife
Apr 12th 2011, 07:32 PM
The math has been a bit more creative in the last two years than previously. For example, never before (as with Obamacare) did the CBO score the costs of a piece of legislation by using 10 years of tax revenue and only 6 years of expenditures.

Also, on the employment/unemployment rate, in December, miraculously, the total number of "jobs" was cut by administrative fiat, thus creating a lower unemployment rate.

Political mathematics has been an art for decades, but this administration and the 111th Congress did take it to new heights.

mattlad22
Apr 12th 2011, 07:32 PM
All it really means is that, when I have a budget for a grilled cheese sandwich, I "reduced my debt" by only buying the filet, the lobster, and the Dom Perignon on the credit card, while "sacrificing" and "cutting" the creme brule afterwards.

Wow you eat nice ^^

Phish
Apr 12th 2011, 07:34 PM
All it really means is that, when I have a budget for a grilled cheese sandwich, I "reduced my debt" by only buying the filet, the lobster, and the Dom Perignon on the credit card, while "sacrificing" and "cutting" the creme brule afterwards.

See, theres the problem right there, you can't cut the creme brule, it will crash the economy

RabbiKnife
Apr 12th 2011, 07:34 PM
Wow you eat nice ^^

Welcome to the Peoples Republik of New Amerika, Comraden Canuck....

RabbiKnife
Apr 12th 2011, 07:36 PM
See, theres the problem right there, you can't cut the creme brule, it will crash the economy

It's OK. We covered it in another appropriations bill under "CustardBasedConfectioners'GovernmentInducedRevenue Deficiency and Modification Subsidies."

Vhayes
Apr 12th 2011, 07:36 PM
So in other words, it's been done for years.

that's all I wanted to know.

mattlad22
Apr 12th 2011, 07:37 PM
It's OK. We covered it in another appropriations bill under "CustardBasedConfectioners'GovernmentInducedRevenue Deficiency and Modification Subsidies."

I've already lost interest......

RabbiKnife
Apr 12th 2011, 07:40 PM
So in other words, it's been done for years.

that's all I wanted to know.

Since FDR if not before.

Liquid Tension
Apr 12th 2011, 07:46 PM
The math has been a bit more creative in the last two years than previously. For example, never before (as with Obamacare) did the CBO score the costs of a piece of legislation by using 10 years of tax revenue and only 6 years of expenditures.

Also, on the employment/unemployment rate, in December, miraculously, the total number of "jobs" was cut by administrative fiat, thus creating a lower unemployment rate.

Political mathematics has been an art for decades, but this administration and the 111th Congress did take it to new heights.


That says it all.

Fenris
Apr 12th 2011, 07:48 PM
Wait wait how about the 500 billion dollar "spending cut" in Obamacare that goes and spends the money someplace else? And it still counts as a "savings".

When people in the private sector do that they go to jail.

Vhayes
Apr 12th 2011, 07:49 PM
Does memory serve me correctly that George W. Bush did NOT include the Iraq War in his budget?

RabbiKnife
Apr 12th 2011, 07:51 PM
That is correct.

Congress placed it in supplemental appropriation bills that were not included in the budget.

Sort of like forgetting you ordered an ice cream sundae after the waiter already brought the bill.

Vhayes
Apr 12th 2011, 07:52 PM
I'd call the cost of that more than just dessert. That would be dessert for a whole town.

Fenris
Apr 12th 2011, 08:00 PM
Ah, how I yearn for the deficits of the Bush era.

Vhayes
Apr 12th 2011, 08:04 PM
Ah, how I yearn for the deficits of the Bush era.

Ah, how I yarn for the period before Bush ran the deficits up with his own version of obfuscation and then set the housing market debacle in motion right before he exited the hot seat. Now there's a real champ for you. The buck stops... ah... over there.

Fenris
Apr 12th 2011, 08:06 PM
Ah, how I yarn for the period before Bush ran the deficits up with his own version of obfuscation and then set the housing market debacle in motion right before he exited the hot seat. Now there's a real champ for you. The buck stops... ah... over there.

Still, 400 billion <<< 1.6 trillion.

mattlad22
Apr 12th 2011, 08:08 PM
Ah, how I yarn for the period before Bush ran the deficits up with his own version of obfuscation and then set the housing market debacle in motion right before he exited the hot seat. Now there's a real champ for you. The buck stops... ah... over there.

Ok maybe this could be a thread all on its own, not sure but it does have to do with this topic, since we are accusing individuals of the outcomes.

How many of you are in debt/owe the bank for payments/own items/vehicles/toys (ie boats, quads ext, we call all those toys up here ^^) house/ schooling.
How many people do you know has debts?

Vhayes
Apr 12th 2011, 08:10 PM
Still, 400 billion <<< 1.6 trillion.

Move those goal posts. Yeeeeessssssss!!!

RabbiKnife
Apr 12th 2011, 08:25 PM
The housing debacle is a Barney Frank deal, not Bush. Straight up. Congress started that chaos back with Carter, then Clinton upped the ante, and no one ever stepped into slow down the train. When the Bush Admin did start poking around the issue, Barney Frank and his committee stonewalled any investigation.

Be careful before we start throwing rocks. There are plenty of rocks and no clean hands.

RabbiKnife
Apr 12th 2011, 08:26 PM
Ok maybe this could be a thread all on its own, not sure but it does have to do with this topic, since we are accusing individuals of the outcomes.

How many of you are in debt/owe the bank for payments/own items/vehicles/toys (ie boats, quads ext, we call all those toys up here ^^) house/ schooling.
How many people do you know has debts?

Having a debt secured by an asset of sufficient worth to exchange for the debt is not a problem.
Having debts that are unsecured by an asset of sufficient worth to exchange for the debt is a HUGE problem.

Vhayes
Apr 12th 2011, 08:28 PM
The housing debacle is a Barney Frank deal, not Bush. Straight up. Congress started that chaos back with Carter, then Clinton upped the ante, and no one ever stepped into slow down the train. When the Bush Admin did start poking around the issue, Barney Frank and his committee stonewalled any investigation.

Be careful before we start throwing rocks. There are plenty of rocks and no clean hands.
There are NO clean hands. That's the truth.

Phish
Apr 12th 2011, 08:30 PM
The housing debacle is a Barney Frank deal, not Bush. Straight up. Congress started that chaos back with Carter, then Clinton upped the ante, and no one ever stepped into slow down the train. When the Bush Admin did start poking around the issue, Barney Frank and his committee stonewalled any investigation.

Be careful before we start throwing rocks. There are plenty of rocks and no clean hands.

Thats not all they did either.

I feel the effects of the Frank Dodd act every stinkin day, what a mess

RabbiKnife
Apr 12th 2011, 08:32 PM
Let's not even talk about that one.

mattlad22
Apr 12th 2011, 08:35 PM
Having a debt secured by an asset of sufficient worth to exchange for the debt is not a problem.
Having debts that are unsecured by an asset of sufficient worth to exchange for the debt is a HUGE problem.

Yeah but we are allowed now and in recent history to just charge debt with no exchangable asset.
I know round these parts, if you had a miners job and were making 100k plus a year you could run all kinds of debt and it didnt matter if you have nothing but that job in compensation, and im just using that job as an example because i was part of it.
So if you lost that job you had 549837510934 things purchased through debt, that you didnt actually own, but now the banks do and they are still purchased.....doesnt that stink up the whole system in part also?

RabbiKnife
Apr 12th 2011, 08:38 PM
Greed destroys.

Yes, that is the problem in the whole system.

mattlad22
Apr 12th 2011, 08:48 PM
Greed destroys.

Yes, that is the problem in the whole system.

So then i refer back to that question i had for anyone and everyone.

Are you in debt in any or all of those ways i listed?
How many people do you know are?

Firefighter
Apr 12th 2011, 08:52 PM
Minus my house that I have equity in, and my car which I also have equity in, I owe nothing.

RabbiKnife
Apr 12th 2011, 08:54 PM
I have no debts except those that are secured by assets well in excess of the amount of the loan.

I have no debts except for a student loan ( I have enough cash/investment assets to pay all my debts, but I'm making a better return on my cash right now that the interest rate on the student loan or my house) and my house, which is worth significantly more than the mortgage. My wife's car is 11 years old, and my truck is 7 years old. No car payments.

I also give intentionally, invest for retirement and giving purposes, and live on significantly less than my take home pay.

It has taken many years to get to this place. Unfortunately, almost everyone I know is in debt far in excess of any assets they may have and use credit to fund their current lifestyle.

teddyv
Apr 12th 2011, 09:01 PM
Our mortgage is our only debt (and I guess a repayment plan for dipping into my wife's retirement savings when we made our first home purchase). Our cumulative assets, including the equity in the home, should surpass the total debt amount comfortably.

Like RK above, we include regular contributions to our church and other organizations and contribute to a retirement plan.

Our financial advisor says that maybe 1 in 5 people (in Canada at least) are in such a position.

mattlad22
Apr 12th 2011, 09:11 PM
Same for me i owe nothing to a bank. (I do however owe my dad a sum of money, for my lodgings in property he owns, i owe the cable/phone/internet company $ which will be paid by selling things i already own, which i require the internet and phone for a contact purposes in job searching so that i can pay back my dad, which is all i care about regarding $'s purpose.)

However like most of you I know alot of people that are in debt in those ways, which may or may not ever be able to pay off those debts.

Liquid Tension
Apr 13th 2011, 06:46 PM
I could be wrong here, but, wasn't much of the debt incurred by the Dubya Administration due to Bush giving in to the Dems. spending bills during the last 2 years??

Amos_with_goats
Apr 13th 2011, 06:55 PM
I could be wrong here, but, wasn't much of the debt incurred by the Dubya Administration due to Bush giving in to the Dems. spending bills during the last 2 years??

Some of it yes.

The rate of increase under Obama has been mind boggling... as Fenris said earlier;


Still, 400 billion <<< 1.6 trillion. :eek:

Think about this. The debt increase in 8 days (~ $54Billion) under Obama compared to the total under Bush.... 8 days

Liquid Tension
Apr 13th 2011, 07:05 PM
Some of it yes.

The rate of increase under Obama has been mind boggling... as Fenris said earlier;

:eek:

Think about this. The debt increase in 8 days (~ $54Billion) under Obama compared to the total under Bush.... 8 days

But remember, according to this regi.....err.....adminsitration, having to raise the debt this much is all BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH's fault. :P

bdh
Apr 13th 2011, 07:20 PM
us-debt-jumped-54-billion-in-week-preceding-deal-to-cut-38-billionInteresting how that happens isn't it.

RabbiKnife
Apr 13th 2011, 07:20 PM
I'm thinkin' we can pump a couple o' trillion dollars worth of crude out of southern Iraq and Kuwait and call it even-Steven.