Big Louie Explains the Budget

"If the US Government was a family, they would be making $58,000 a year, they spend $75,000 a year, & are $327,000 in credit card debt. They are currently proposing BIG spending cuts to reduce their spending to $72,000 a year. These are the actual proportions of the federal budget & debt, reduced to a level we can understand." - Dave Ramsey

Let me just add one more thing:

President Bush presided over the largest overall increase in inflation-adjusted federal
spending since Lyndon B. Johnson. Even after excluding spending on defense and homeland security, Bush is still the biggest-spending president in 30 years. His 2006 budget didn't cut enough spending to change his place in history, either. Total government spending grew by 33 percent during Bush’s first term. The federal budget
as a share of the economy grew from 18.5 percent of GDP on Clinton’s last day in office to 20.3 percent by the end of Bush’s first term. The Republican Congress enthusiastically assisted the budget bloat. Inflation-adjusted spending on the combined budgets of the 101 largest programs they vowed to eliminate in 1995 has grown by 27 percent. The GOP was once effective at controlling nondefense spending. The final nondefense budgets under Clinton were a combined $57 billion
smaller than what he proposed from 1996 to 2001. Under Bush, Congress passed budgets that spent a total of $91 billion more than the president requested for domestic programs. Bush signed every one of those bills during his first term. In Bush’s budget exactly as proposed, not a single cabinet level agency was smaller than when Bush assumed office. Republicans could reform the budget rules that stack the deck in favor of more spending. Unfortunately, senior House Republicans are fighting the changes. The GOP establishment in Washington today has become a defender of big
government.

Don't believe anything ANY party says about cutting spending. No one ever has and no one ever will.

Let me just add one more thing:

President Bush presided over the largest overall increase in inflation-adjusted federal
spending since Lyndon B. Johnson. Even after excluding spending on defense and homeland security, Bush is still the biggest-spending president in 30 years. His 2006 budget didn't cut enough spending to change his place in history, either. Total government spending grew by 33 percent during Bush’s first term. The federal budget
as a share of the economy grew from 18.5 percent of GDP on Clinton’s last day in office to 20.3 percent by the end of Bush’s first term. The Republican Congress enthusiastically assisted the budget bloat. Inflation-adjusted spending on the combined budgets of the 101 largest programs they vowed to eliminate in 1995 has grown by 27 percent. The GOP was once effective at controlling nondefense spending. The final nondefense budgets under Clinton were a combined $57 billion
smaller than what he proposed from 1996 to 2001. Under Bush, Congress passed budgets that spent a total of $91 billion more than the president requested for domestic programs. Bush signed every one of those bills during his first term. In Bush’s budget exactly as proposed, not a single cabinet level agency was smaller than when Bush assumed office. Republicans could reform the budget rules that stack the deck in favor of more spending. Unfortunately, senior House Republicans are fighting the changes. The GOP establishment in Washington today has become a defender of big
government.

Don't believe anything ANY party says about cutting spending. No one ever has and no one ever will. Originally Posted by BigLouie

Good thread. If the GOP doesn't change big time it will be the third party soon.

Don't believe anything ANY party says about cutting spending. No one ever has and no one ever will. Originally Posted by BigLouie

Let me just add one more thing:

President Bush presided over the largest overall increase in inflation-adjusted federal
spending since Lyndon B. Johnson. Even after excluding spending on defense and homeland security, Bush is still the biggest-spending president in 30 years. His 2006 budget didn't cut enough spending to change his place in history, either. Total government spending grew by 33 percent during Bush’s first term. The federal budget
as a share of the economy grew from 18.5 percent of GDP on Clinton’s last day in office to 20.3 percent by the end of Bush’s first term. The Republican Congress enthusiastically assisted the budget bloat. Inflation-adjusted spending on the combined budgets of the 101 largest programs they vowed to eliminate in 1995 has grown by 27 percent. The GOP was once effective at controlling nondefense spending. The final nondefense budgets under Clinton were a combined $57 billion
smaller than what he proposed from 1996 to 2001. Under Bush, Congress passed budgets that spent a total of $91 billion more than the president requested for domestic programs. Bush signed every one of those bills during his first term. In Bush’s budget exactly as proposed, not a single cabinet level agency was smaller than when Bush assumed office. Republicans could reform the budget rules that stack the deck in favor of more spending. Unfortunately, senior House Republicans are fighting the changes. The GOP establishment in Washington today has become a defender of big
government.

Don't believe anything ANY party says about cutting spending. No one ever has and no one ever will. Originally Posted by BigLouie

I hear ya, ya can add this to your list, when more money is needed to meet the demands they just warm up the mint and make more money. The U.S. Treasury is suppose to regulate how money is handled and manufactured in this country how much and how often. It seems we aren't making money on our products and services. It's starting to look like our country is running a big elaborate Ponzi scheme.

The only thing I disagree with so far in this thread is "just warm up the mint". I doubt they ever shut them down.

"If the US Government was a family, they would be making $58,000 a year, they spend $75,000 a year, & are $327,000 in credit card debt. They are currently proposing BIG spending cuts to reduce their spending to $72,000 a year. These are the actual proportions of the federal budget & debt, reduced to a level we can understand." - Dave Ramsey Originally Posted by BigLouie

Did you calculate this yourself? Or was it someone who also didn't calculate it him/herself? Did you check it? If not, you might add the source for better understanding.
Different sources tend to make very funny different calculations.

The only thing I disagree with so far in this thread is "just warm up the mint". I doubt they ever shut them down. Originally Posted by Jackie S

What you are missing is that it would be better to do that than having the Treasury borrow from the Federal Reserve AND for "Casino-like" profits to be our only measure of wealth or profit. Unlike smart nations, we have picked apart and fed on what is left of our infrastructure in the name of stockholder profits instead of continuing to build it like the Chinese and other, smarter nations are continuing to do.

Try looking at Wall Street profits and compare them to feeding off the already-grown crops and the already-slaughtered animals we eat.

Next, add CEO over-achievement and stockholders' glee at earnings! They realized we could reap even more profits by feeding off the very seeds we would set aside to grow the crops we ate. Only stupid to a point, they also realized that zealously slaughtering the very brood animals we use to reproduce the meat we ate made even more money in the present!

Now, you're catching on.

You're beginning to understand the basic plan hatched from those who permanently changed it on August 5th, 1981.

If we didn't have to water the crops or feed the brood animals, food production would cost nothing, especially if we could eat the seedlings and brood animals aka known as infrastructure.

So we closed the factories and sent the jobs overseas and imported what those jobs and factories once produced. I mean many of them were over-paid lazy Unions, right? Why pay $400 for a TV when we could buy one from Japan for $299? As long as YOU are working, your neighbor's job is of really no consequence, or so we thought. Besides, why should he be able to bargain for higher wages or safer working conditions? Employers are inherently fair, right?

That is why the stock market alone is not a good indicator of the health of the economy nor of its ability to grow the GDP and create jobs.

That is, unless you think cleaning the toilets for the eventual owners of the U.S., the Chinese, is a job on which to bet your future.

The very wealthiest will not be affected. We farm and ranch hands who used to grow the seedlings and herd the cattle will be.

You can thank the Senile One for being the one to eventually give in to the CEO's. The last 30 years has simply been an exercise for them on how best to get there.

They have even created a grassroots movement to help carve up and sell off what is left of American greatness.

They tell us we must figure out new, more technologically-advanced ways to create jobs. Maybe we can be programmers for the electronic games Chinese children play. No... they've got a slave class of programmers.

Maybe we can translate the instructions into English. No... they've already got programs to do that and the American market is shrinking with the dollar.

I'm afraid I had it right the first time. We can clean their toilets after they buy all our real estate here in the good old U.S.A.

Thanks, Tea Party "Patriots"! Your progeny fell for it a long time ago and you didn't pay enough attention to see what was happening. That includes the totally-orchestrated debt ceiling hostage crisis! Add to that, Citizens United, the Wars, the War on Terror, and even Fox News, Rush and the fake front groups like Americans for Prosperity and Focus on the Family, etc., etc., etc., and there you have the divisively foolish politics that took the country under.

Oh, we have a way to go yet but it will be as futile as a baby wrestling a 15-foot python. Eventual suffocation is inevitable without help.

Nothing short of a repeal of Citizens United, a rejection of the fake candidates in the Tea Party, a disenfranchisement of K Street, banishment of PAC's, removing big money from politics, term limits, a unified realization that only a government big enough to fight those who would dismantle the way it protects the little guy, and probably an outright revolution will stop what started on August 5th 1981!

The scene when they have Charlton Heston tied up in the original "Planet of the Apes" and they are taking him down the beach and he suddenly recognizes the decaying remains of pieces of the Statue of Liberty partially buried in the sand he realizes he is seeing what eventually happened to the U.S. You have enough evidence to draw those conclusions now!

He shouts in anguish as he laments the probable nuclear holocaust that ended human life and replaced it with centuries of apes in control.

Just substitute economic destruction for nuclear annihilation and you'll understand the plan they "sold" you.

Consider yourselves owned or "pwned" as the avant guard like to say as they live their lives paying attention to all the wrong things.

What you are missing is that it would be better to do that than having the Treasury borrow from the Federal Reserve AND for "Casino-like" profits to be our only measure of wealth or profit. Unlike smart nations, we have picked apart and fed on what is left of our infrastructure in the name of stockholder profits instead of continuing to build it like the Chinese and other, smarter nations are continuing to do............. Originally Posted by Little Stevie

Actually, Goldman Sachs buys form the Fed and sells them to the Treasury Department. Pretty sickening if you ask me.

And the Chinese financial institutions are beginning to crater. I don’t think the jury is still out on the Chinese Century. They’ll crumble from within from overspending and social turmoil as the government controls any hope of actual freedoms for all casts.

............................So we closed the factories and sent the jobs overseas and imported what those jobs and factories once produced. I mean many of them were over-paid lazy Unions, right? Why pay $400 for a TV when we could buy one from Japan for $299? As long as YOU are working, your neighbor's job is of really no consequence, or so we thought. Besides, why should he be able to bargain for higher wages or safer working conditions? Employers are inherently fair, right?...... Originally Posted by Little Stevie

Unions went to far. It is evident. Although I will say that after the union dam was breached, now companies are moving jobs offshore for a few pennies more. The jobs are starting to leave China and move to even greener labor pastures. Maybe one day the jobs will come back, but not anytime soon.

...................The very wealthiest will not be affected. We farm and ranch hands who used to grow the seedlings and herd the cattle will be.

You can thank the Senile One for being the one to eventually give in to the CEO's. The last 30 years has simply been an exercise for them on how best to get there.

They have even created a grassroots movement to help carve up and sell off what is left of American greatness.......... Originally Posted by Little Stevie

The People will eventually tire of the fascist (As in the real definition of fascism: industry's control of the State not the adopted and morfed definition of jack boot fascism) state of affairs. We can take our Republic back.

..........They tell us we must figure out new, more technologically-advanced ways to create jobs. Maybe we can be programmers for the electronic games Chinese children play. No... they've got a slave class of programmers.

Maybe we can translate the instructions into English. No... they've already got programs to do that and the American market is shrinking with the dollar.

I'm afraid I had it right the first time. We can clean their toilets after they buy all our real estate here in the good old U.S.A............ Originally Posted by Little Stevie

They won’t for long. As we farm our jobs out to socially and financially less fortunate nations, their standards of living and expectations of liberty have risen along with the national cash flow. It will happen in China too. That is it will happen in China too if they aren’t beaten and slaughtered again like they were in Tiananmen Square. We couldn't sustain our growth; Rome couldn't sustain their growth; and neither will the Chinese and their anticipated Chinese Century.

.........Nothing short of a repeal of Citizens United, a rejection of the fake candidates in the Tea Party, a disenfranchisement of K Street, banishment of PAC's, removing big money from politics, term limits, a unified realization that only a government big enough to fight those who would dismantle the way it protects the little guy, and probably an outright revolution will stop what started on August 5th 1981!..................... Originally Posted by Little Stevie

In other words, you want to take our Republic back. Now, you’re preaching to the choir.