Tick. Tick. Tick........

Are you aware of what's been happening in Greece and Spain in the last year? You can see how well their austerity measures (contributes to their unemployment of 25% through loss of basic service govt workers) are working out for them? Do you mean cuts on national defense (Repubs cringe)? Originally Posted by Can I Play Too???

We are no longer going to be able to the world's police department; we can't afford it. We need to close a lot of bases all over the world and pull troups out of South Korea and obviously the Middle East. The austerity programs in Greece are being implemented because their creditors are forcing it. We still have a chance to avoid the kind of melt down scenario being experienced by the Greeks, but we are running out of time.

The inept government policies that got us here occured over decades. Putting in place unfunded future obligations and adding to them over the years on top of absurdly high spending is what got us here. To solve it those entitlement programs will have to be trimmed and the federal government dramatically shrunk in all areas. Until people realize that the shit has hit the fan and accept cuts in programs, not just reductions in increases, nothing will change. The pandering politicians will lie to keep their cushy jobs and status and when it all goes to hell they will already have the money to take care of themselves.

We are no longer going to be able to the world's police department; we can't afford it. We need to close a lot of bases all over the world and pull troups out of South Korea and obviously the Middle East. The austerity programs in Greece are being implemented because their creditors are forcing it. We still have a chance to avoid the kind of melt down scenario being experienced by the Greeks, but we are running out of time. Originally Posted by joe bloe

I was against building de fence ... but noooooooooooo.

Everything proposed by the Democrats to deal with the deficit is just window dressing. Most of what they call cuts are just reductions in the rate of increases. Bowles-Simpson was a modest proposal and Obama wouldn't even consider it. Bowels-Simpson did their study at the president's request. He clearly never had any intention of acting on there recommendations. It was just a political stunt.

We need to make major reductions in entitlement spending or the numbers just don't work. The real debt is the unfunded liabilities which are over 100 trillion dollars. That's the sum total of all the federal government's entitlement spending promises. Successfully dealing with that problem is going to require dramatic cuts in spending not reductions in the rates of increases.

. Originally Posted by joe bloe

And yet even a modest proposal would not make it through the WH nor Congress!

The GOP does not want to cut Defense spending and the Dems do not want to cut Social spending. Our form of government is outdated IMHO. That is why we are getting our ass kicked around the world, that and high oil prices and cheap labor. Hard to compete in that kind of business enviorment.

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-mone...bowles-simpson

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on Thursday explained why President Obama never fully embraced the 2010 report of his fiscal commission, headed by former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-Wyo.) and Erskine Bowles.

Geithner, under heavy fire from the Senate Budget Committee, said the Obama administration “did not feel” it could embrace it because the cuts to defense were too deep and the reforms to Social Security relied too much on benefit cuts.

. Real cuts in spending and keeping taxes low in order stimulate growth is the answer. Originally Posted by joe bloe

Really? Which politician will get elected cutting Defense, SS and Medicare?

Name me one muther fuc'er that would get elected on that platform.

Ron Paul sure hasn't even come close in the God Damn GOP primary! ...where all the Tea Fuc'ers are supposed to be!

We are no longer going to be able to the world's police department; we can't afford it. We need to close a lot of bases all over the world and pull troups out of South Korea and obviously the Middle East. The austerity programs in Greece are being implemented because their creditors are forcing it. We still have a chance to avoid the kind of melt down scenario being experienced by the Greeks, but we are running out of time. Originally Posted by joe bloe

Again, who wins an election on that platform?

It got nowhere in the GOP primary, if not there, where?

its the Ryan budget in a nutshell

LMAO

Here are a few cheery thoughts to ponder for those who think that dawn's on the horizon and there's not really a lot to worry about:

http://www.theburningplatform.com/?p=32482

That was part three.

Here's part one:

http://www.theburningplatform.com/?p=32217

And part two:

http://www.theburningplatform.com/?p=32480

I recently got that blog post from a hedge fund manager friend who's been around the block more than a few times. He told me he sent it to every investment professional and quant analyst he knows, as well as a number of affluent clients, asking whether any of them had any fundamental quibbles with the writer's observations and assessments.

As far as I know, no one did.

hedge fund mgrs are a big part of the reason for the bailout ...


Bear Stn's GE Cap come to mind

hedge fund mgrs are a big part of the reason for the bailout ... Originally Posted by CJ7

Some are, but I suggest that you refrain from painting with too broad a brush. Some provide excellent services for their clients.

Some are, but I suggest that you refrain from painting with too broad a brush. Some provide excellent services for their clients. Originally Posted by CaptainMidnight

like everything else, theres good and bad

my brush

like everything else, theres good and bad

my brush Originally Posted by CJ7

Understood!

I just think it's important for people to avoid reflexive compartmentalization.

Would you state categorically that bankers are weasels and bad guys? Sure, a lot are! But many provide invaluable services without which a modern, technologically advanced economy could never function.

Now, more to the point, does anyone have any fundamental disagreement with the blog to which I posted a link?

Thanks for the links Captain! I'm going to use this quote in my signature:

“Sometimes people don’t want to hear the truth because they don’t want their illusions destroyed.”

Boy, isn't that the truth!!

the debt itself grows with every president ... we never pay down the debt per se'

we pay the interest on the debt.

that interest has been paid down every year Obama has been in office


thats the truth

“Sometimes people don’t want to hear the truth because they don’t want their illusions destroyed.”

Boy, isn't that the truth!! Originally Posted by Likinikki

Exactly right, ain't that the truth!

As I said in another thread, we've had politicians telling us for many years that we can have all the free ice cream we want, and that the fat kid down the street will eat our broccoli for us.

I think it's interesting that although the deficit challenges we faced in 1992 were miniscule compared with today's looming train wreck, Ross Perot gained quite a following after announcing that, as a nation, we needed to do a fair amount of broccoli-eating. What do think would happen if a Perot-type candidate were to propose any such thing today? A glib politician from one of our two free-lunch parties would eat his lunch!

the debt itself grows with every president ... we never pay down the debt per se'

we pay the interest on the debt.

that interest has been paid down every year Obama has been in office


thats the truth Originally Posted by CJ7

Huh??

The truth is that approximately $5 trillion in new debt has been accumulated over the last four years.

And no one is making anything remotely approaching a serious decision to reverse the trendline. You're OK with that?

At the end of fiscal 1980, four months before Reagan was inaugurated, the federal debt held by the public was $711.9 billion, according to CBO. At the end of fiscal 1989, eight months after Reagan left office, the federal debt held by the public was $2.1907 trillion. That means that in the nine-fiscal-year period of 1980-89--which included all of Reagan’s eight years in office--the federal debt held by the public increased $1.4788 trillion.


anyone want to adjust $1.4788 trillion dollars for inflation and compare that figure to the amount the current president has raised the public debt?