Congress looking to raise Debt Limit AGAIN

[dabrockster]

Holy Hell.. It's time for Congress to cut the Credit Card and squeeze a little at the Federal level (i.e.: Lay people off like th rest of us)...

Requesting a raise of the debt limit another 1.9 trillion (Correction: It is 1.9 not 1.4 which is what I had put).. I do not see an end to this massive spending.. But what is even more surprising is the fact they are requesting it after the Mass. Election. I wold think that election would give them pause on such things. I understand they are having issues paying programs, but why not just cut the program?

This only weakens us more nationally and globally imo..

Link:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100120/..._debt_limit_11

[Moliere]

Holy Hell.. It's time for Congress to cut the Credit Card and squeeze a little at the Federal level (i.e.: Lay people off like th rest of us)...

Requesting a raise of the debt limit another 1.4 trillion.. I do not see an end to this massive spending.. But what is even more surprising is the fact they are requesting it after the Mass. Election. I wold think that election would give them pause on such things. I understand they are having issues paying programs, but why not just cut the program?

This only weakens us more nationally and globally imo..

Link:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100120/..._debt_limit_11

Very sad indeed, but necessary. The Obama administration bet on government spending to get us out of the hole we are in. That stimulus gave money to state governments to patch up budget holes for them. Instead of causing state and local governments to cut spending and trim the excess fat, the stimulus resulted in keeping government budgets bloated.

Now the administration is stuck. They can't just stop spending because that would show the stimulus didn't work as well as intended. They can't change courses because then it will look like they just blew through $1 trillion with nothing to show for it.

Granted, using the alternative approach of reducing taxes and limiting government spending probably would have resulted in the same budget deficit, it just wouldn'tn look so bad and probably would have turned the economy around at a faster pace. We would probably be adding jobs to the economy and reducing unemployment instead of letting unemployment just hover around 10%.

Obama's economic policy is absurd.

[Fiyero]

Which telemarketing firm calls the treasury every hour asking when they can schedule a $100 billion payment?

[dabrockster]

Very sad indeed, but necessary. The Obama administration bet on government spending to get us out of the hole we are in. That stimulus gave money to state governments to patch up budget holes for them. Instead of causing state and local governments to cut spending and trim the excess fat, the stimulus resulted in keeping government budgets bloated.

Now the administration is stuck. They can't just stop spending because that would show the stimulus didn't work as well as intended. They can't change courses because then it will look like they just blew through $1 trillion with nothing to show for it.

Granted, using the alternative approach of reducing taxes and limiting government spending probably would have resulted in the same budget deficit, it just wouldn'tn look so bad and probably would have turned the economy around at a faster pace. We would probably be adding jobs to the economy and reducing unemployment instead of letting unemployment just hover around 10%.

Obama's economic policy is absurd.

If these idiots ran a Corporation it would be closed and the windows would be boarded up.. Both Bush and Obama are such spending idiots..

This shows Mass Govt spending will NEVER.. EVER, turn the economy around...

[dabrockster]

I think one Senator had a good argument. Take back the TARP that has not been used and use it...

[wuapinmon]

This shows Mass Govt spending will NEVER.. EVER, turn the economy around...

WW2


dabrockster,

I will stop rolling my eyes at most everything you say if you'll take the time to explain precisely where and how you would cut the federal budget, and how you would justify the consequences of doing so. For example, if you decide to cut reduced-cost school lunches, please justify it by showing how eliminating the cost is more important than the net benefit to the people is maintains.

I would like to know how people, such as yourself, who rail against spending, would justify cutting and where you would cut.

If you don't want to take the time to answer, fine.

[cowboy]

Approximately 80% of government receipts come from individuals and families. If we were to pay 80% of the government's outlays, each individual would be required to fork over $9,421 per year, or $24,401 per household broken down below. This amounts to a whopping 44% of median household income, and it is obviously not sustainable.

As you can see, far and away our biggest outlays are entitlement spending. We can cut national defense, another biggie, but we have to get a reign on health care costs and figure out how to pay for the boomers' retirement if we are going to climb out of this mess.

[Fiyero]

Success! The senate approved the additional 1.9 tril today. The vote was 60-40, right down party lines. Note that 60 votes was the minimum to pass and Scott Brown hasn't been confirmed yet.