With the end of the government fiscal year approaching, President Bush has criticized Congress, saying that they have "not sent a single appropriations bill to my desk, not one..." Appropriations provide funding for the governments day-to-day affairs.
"Congress needs to pass these annual spending bills. And if they need more time, I urge them to pass a clean continuing resolution," added the President. A continuing resolution would provide funding at current levels, without approving a new budget.
The apparent disparity in the current proposed budget is around $22 billion requested by Democrats, less than 1 percent of the current budget. Democrats struck back to the Presidents comments, pointing out Bush's 3 trillion dollars of new debt.
exactly... 33% of the national debt has been incurred under bush.
as i pointed out in another recent article's comments the US is only about $5 billion away from broke (again... this would make the 3rd time under bush). from august 31st to sept. 19th the US government was basically in overdraft... they exceded their borrowing limit of 9 trillion as much as $17.1 billion over on september 14th... on the 20th the debt was paid down $8.990 trillion, leaving $10... debt clock estimates $5 billion left... they are usually pretty accurate.. and they give links to debt to the penny at the bottom of the page:
Honey we are broke beyond your wildest dreams. We are so far in the hole we make countries like Swaziland look rich in comparison. Here’s what we have in the bank at the moment. Sorry, you’ll have to scroll to the bottom of the list to find the US.
http://en.wikipedia.org/ To make matters worse these damn wars are now costing US taxpayers $500,000 a minute.
"That's right, D*ck. Not until there's no more cash in the till, that is..." Were is this till you speak of located? Last time I checked we print paper whenever we like.
If the govt. prints more money, loans it to itself, then spends it. Wouldn't this cause inflation to sky rocket? I mean, it's spending lots of cash and paying contractors. The increased amount in circulation is surely bound to lead to inflation.
Is the fact China's sucking up all the spare dollars preventing this from happening.
PS: Who owns the Federal Reserve Bank? I've heard it's not bound to the government.
dilutes the economy. Now we print loads of money every day to replace the currency that we take out of circulation. When money is printed in addition to the currency that has been decommissioned that dilutes the system. It effectively makes the dollar worth less than it was before the printing took place.
If the govt. prints more money, loans it to itself, then spends it. Wouldn't this cause inflation to sky rocket? I mean, it's spending lots of cash and paying contractors. The increased amount in circulation is surely bound to lead to inflation.
Yep, see my previous example. The Italian government used to print a third of its budget, millions of Lira was worth a few £ or $
Is the fact China's sucking up all the spare dollars preventing this from happening.
Sort of, well, yes. Inflation in some things, mostly consumer durables, MP3 players, cameras, stuff like that, has been low, due to china mass producing them for pennies
Other items, Food, energy, industrial metals, have had massive inflation.
Now, what happens next is up for debate, Weimer (Germany between the Wilhelm II and Hitler) style inflation or 80/90's Japanese deflation.
PS: Who owns the Federal Reserve Bank? I've heard it's not bound to the government.
In theory, the bank owns itself. Its like a corporation, but with no shares or shareholders. Except the government can and does order it around, sometimes. The Fed essentialy brought down Bush senior.
He basically spent the money before he had it, and then blames congress for not actually giving him money that he was never automatically entitled to in the first place?
Why do you care about debt? All the social ist policies you give lip service to cost billions of dollars and would also put us in debt. A fiscally responsible government would NOT be a socialist one. I fail to see why you care.
"For the last time, The spending ceiling is an artificial construct the US limits itself too. It is not a case of "going broke" or being denied new credit."
Yeah, that's sounds great. Why even have a limit? Lets just print, borrow, and cut taxes for the rich... That savvy financial planning seems to be working wonders for us thus far.
We're certainly on the right track when one of our biggest foreign creditors is communist china and the feds are trying to keep our economy on life support by pumping billions into the banking market.
Hey, I know what we need to compliment this fine house of cards trick. How about another war?
That means more spending of money we don't have! Thats a great idea, that'll keep the Gross Domestic Product pumped up and we can say hey, look at how high GDP is! We're doing great. Just keep throwing on more cards!
"Yeah, that's sounds great. Why even have a limit? Lets just print, borrow, and cut taxes for the rich... That savvy financial planning seems to be working wonders for us thus far."
What would you rather we did, molested little girls.
See, I can come up with a rediculas alternative too.
I didnt say the limit was bad, I even have one myself, which you would know if you read my posts, I simply said its an artificial choice.
"We're certainly on the right track when one of our biggest foreign creditors is communist china and the feds are trying to keep our economy on life support by pumping billions into the banking market."
The only thing communist about China is the name. As for pumping billions into the credit market. The ECB pumped in more than you, Japan less, the UK the least. Who had a bank run? Only the UK as far as I'm aware.
"Hey, I know what we need to compliment this fine house of cards trick. How about another war? "
Funny you should mention that...
"That means more spending of money we don't have!"
And, I assume you think thats bad? So you've never borrowed money to fund a purchase, never lent money to buy a car or a house? Sometimes borrowing is good, thats why people do it. Sometimes its bad, thats why I think people are generaly retarded.
"Thats a great idea, that'll keep the Gross Domestic Product pumped up and we can say hey, look at how high GDP is! We're doing great. Just keep throwing on more cards!"
Well, thats hard to argue with.
@Daniel No not exactly (I think)
Every year, a budget is made, saying what departments will receive money and how much. Everything from foreign aid to the police force. Congress so far hasnt agreed to give any money to anyone next year.
I'm not really a fountain of knowledge on US budgeting procedures though...
"If a central bank wants to increase the amount of money in the economy, it buys bonds and pays for them by creating money. If it want to decrease the amount of money in the economy, it sells bonds, and it removes from circulation the money it receives in exchange for bonds. These actions are called open market operations, because they take in the "open market" for bonds."
"The assets of the central bank are the bonds it holds in its portfolio. It's liabilities are the stock of money in the economy. Open market operations lead to equal changes in assets and liabilities."
oh, please tell me your not that dense, they you don't know why debt esspecially debt spiralling out of control is concerning.
"All the social ist policies you give lip service to cost billions of dollars and would also put us in debt. A fiscally responsible government would NOT be a socialist one. I fail to see why you care."
as opposed to the over 3 TRILLION bush has swindled? namely on fighting people that posed no threat to the US and persistently lied to their own citizens to gains support for the wars.
3 trillion has been waste namely on war and facist policies cut taxes esspecially for the rich... and your concerned about program which cost monumentally less and actually benifit the people.
You pretend like I support the war and all the spending Bush has done. I do not support it and never have. I am against most government spending, however my issue with you is why you even care about my country's spending, as if spending 3 trillion dollars on saving poor people from themselves would be any better. I'd rather that 3 trillion go right back to who it belongs to; the tax payer who is forced to give up their money by threat of force.
"You pretend like I support the war and all the spending Bush has done. I do not support it and never have. I am against most government spending, however my issue with you is why you even care about my country's spending, as if spending 3 trillion dollars on saving poor people from themselves would be any better. I'd rather that 3 trillion go right back to who it belongs to; the tax payer who is forced to give up their money by threat of force."
or how about not borrowing it in the first place for frivelous wars for corporations... or if your going to borrow it funnel it to healthcare, education, infrastructure, social security, all of which are in bad conditions compared to where they should be... hell even generous tax breaks for incorperating green energies to vehicles and homes.
What are bonds? Another printed form to represent hard currency(gold, silver, etc) in holdings & future values?
Texas Republican Congressman - Dr. Ron Paul: "Printing money, which is literally inflation, is nothing more than a sinister and evil form of hidden taxation. It’s unfair and deceptive, and accordingly strongly opposed by the authors of the Constitution. That is why there is no authority for Congress, the Federal Reserve, or the executive branch to operate the current system of money we have today."
"A central bank and fiat money enable government to maintain an easy war policy that under strict monetary rules would not be achievable. In other words, countries with sound monetary policies would rarely go to war because they could not afford to, especially if they were not attacked. The people could not be taxed enough to support wars without destroying the economy. But by printing money, the cost can be delayed and hidden, sometimes for years if not decades. To be truly opposed to preemptive and unnecessary wars one must advocate sound money to prevent the promoters of war from financing their imperialism."
"A paper monetary standard means there are no restraints on the printing press or on federal deficits. In 1971, M3 was $776 billion; today it stands at $8.9 trillion, an 1100% increase. Our national debt in 1971 was $408 billion; today it stands at $6.8 trillion, a 1600% increase. Since that time, our dollar has lost almost 80% of its purchasing power. Common sense tells us that this process is not sustainable and something has to give. So far, no one in Washington seems interested."
"A debt of this sort always ends by the currency of the debtor nation decreasing in value. And that’s what has started to happen with the dollar, although it still has a long way to go. Our free lunch cannot last. Printing money, buying foreign products, and selling foreign holders of dollars our debt ends when the foreign holders of this debt become concerned with the dollar’s future value."
If you're using insane government spending to help people (especially Americans) it's moonbat socialist garbage, but if that same insane spending is used to kill people and make the rich richer, it's all good. I can't believe I didn't catch that sooner.
It is insane moonbat garbage for the government to do either. It is not morally justifiable to take something from someone and give it to someone else less fortunate if it is done by force, and that is essentially what wealth redistribution does. But it is also not justifiable to take someones money and use it for corporate welfare, illegal wars, ect.
Once again, instead of spending money on entitlements and wars, the money should be given back to the people it was STOLEN FROM. It is NOT justifiable for money to be taken from my paycheck under threat of jail to give to the less fortunate, fund corporate welfare, ect. Don't you get that THAT violates ones freedom as well?
"Once again, instead of spending money on entitlements and wars, the money should be given back to the people it was STOLEN FROM. It is NOT justifiable for money to be taken from my paycheck under threat of jail to give to the less fortunate, fund corporate welfare, ect. Don't you get that THAT violates ones freedom as well?"
oh i agree about the income tax thing... but 55-60% of the national debt is held by the privately... and if your an american that means you... if you have a credit card, a morgage, a loan (personal and business) or any financial debt or credit, you are contributing to the national debt... americans themselves; their lifesytle of lifelong debt is also a major contributing factor of the inevitable collapse of the economy, americans on average live above their means, canadians lives very much the same way... the war is the straw that is breaking the camels back.
Unlike a weak dollar - which does not preclude international trade, a trade deficit makes a country unable to trade with another nation for anyting meaningful.
Here:
Weak dollar, means international companies are more likely to invest in/trade with your nation. It gets more services for their 'riyal'. Internally, the country benefits from a stimulated economy while not suffering from the 'depressed' dollar if they remain within the US. A crushingly low dollar is not good either, because it inhibits us from importing some of the components that allow us to continue trading and generating wealth. A balance is needed.
A deficit sounds like a weak dollar. But while other nations are happy to deal with you, the increased trade will not draw any additional capital into the nation. At most, it's just cancelling out the debt that is already stacked against us.
In recent news, you've heard about the low dollar as being a bad thing. This is actually a case where the dollar is weak, but has not managed to stimulate exports/trade. There are a number of reasons for this but too subtle to describe in a linear explanation.
What is pertinent is; 1) we owe other nations and our exports weak 2) they are have not decided to increase trade with us - yet
Maybe it's time to put some brakes on our spending.
Lose your job, go and beg from a beurocrat who will pigeon hole you into a needieness group. More importantly, how much would that cost? The child support agency in the UK spends about half the money it takes from seperated parents on itself.
The simple fact is a government jobsworth cant have all the facts required to sort out the genuinly deserving from the time wasters, or the moral authority to make that choice.
All they can do is put you in a box and hope you fit.
Private charity can do all the above and more, which is why it works and benefits dont.
Research shows private charity generally comes from those who are less able to afford it. The rich will 'give' but only in so much that it's tax deductable or they're given recognition. True charity is rare, and more often found in the lower working classes.
I will not argue about specifics of Child Support with you on this thread.
Perhaps charity would be higher if tax was lower? The average american donates twice as much to charity as the average brit.
But your thinking of charity as a big institution like save the animals, but save the poor people.
When I say charity, I mean local the local community help the local community, not the independent republic of bono trying to feed africa. If my friend lost his job, I'd help out with whatever I could, whether its paying his mortgage or letting him stay at mine till he gets himself back on his feet.
Thats what I mean when I say charity. Not government benefits designed to keep you on them for life.
Some specifics. In the UK, theres a benefit if you work less than 4 hours, and one if you work more than 16. If you want to (or are only capable of) work 12, your lose your benefit.
If your in government housing, your not allowed savings of more than £3000. Since you need a 5% deposit, that limits you to a 60k house, you cant buy a 1 room studio flat in cracktown for 60k.
People dont need or want a measly pittance weekly, they want and need help to get back on their feet. The government cant do that, We can.
I like to trot this example out every now and again.
Guy I used to know from the pub, bit of an idiot, lost his job for turning up late and hungover a lot. Lost his job, flat, everything, homeless, staying in a shelter ect. Government gave him about £40 a fortnight and put him on a waiting list for a flat. I lent him £200, he bought a car, got a job got back on his feet and even paid me back. The government wouldnt have done that, couldnt have, but I could, and did.
I'm reliably informed he's done then same thing again, turned up late and drunk lost the job, lost his flat, lives on government handouts. I wont be helping him again. Neither will anyone else. The government will be giving him money and putting him up in shelters till he dies, unable to tell the difference between the one who made a mistake and wants another chance, and the idiot who should be left to rot.
Yes, I understand perfectly what bonds are. People seem to forget is the time factor involved. Are you trying to prove me wrong or something? I was merely pointing out that the central bank simply doesn't print money for the fun of it, there is a complex process involved.
Glad to see you quoting Ron Paul, if I were American I would most certainly vote for him.
We got jobs, saved money, increased our skills to become more competetive in the job market and didin't beg the government to save us. That's how we did it. I don't believe it is moral to force someone else to give up their money and give it to me just because they make more. That infringes on liberty, and if you can't see that you are another reason this country is going to straight to hell.
I think you do see many things. We would be eating out of dumpsters had Bush spent what he has without invading and saving our dollar by force.
But what happens when we leave, everyone? THEY HATE US. I JUST GOT BACK AND WILL HAVE TO RETURN IN 5 MONTHS. When we leave, AS WE WILL EVENTUALLY- FACT- the Iraqies then will go to the euro, I PROMISE YOU, and all we would have accomplished is putting it off for 3-5 years, only we will be _way_ worse off (3-6 tril reasons), those that did it will be safely out of office (most likely OUT OF THE COUNTRY) and now the dumpsters WILL BE EMPTY.
I SAY, make them the 52nd protectorate or 51st state! Put our heart where our guns are. NO ONE, not China (too much invested in us), European Union (they have MANY problems), Iran (they are busy doing catch up, need 5-10 years before they can face us on decent footing), or Russia (they will deal! We feed them now! They LOVE our grain prices! I don't think for a second they would fear our oil prices! Why not? We could supply them via PIPELINE, cheap! Iraq COULD NOT HATE US MORE, so make them US! Now. Tell them about HOW STATES IN THE US work semi-independantly- states rights you know! Let them know that we doubt IRAN would grant them as much, as broken a people they are, there IS NO WAY they could resist an eventual take-over by someone they HATE MORE THAN US- Iran.
Of course this is crazy, but use it as a start point for NEW POLICY THAT MIGHT WORK and keep us home AND have accomplished something.
" @havoc666 I think you do see many things. We would be eating out of dumpsters had Bush spent what he has without invading and saving our dollar by force."
saving your dollar... lol
the canadian dollar is on par with the US dollar... this hasn't happened in 31 years... saving the dollar... ok... if your iognorant enough to believe that, so beit.
"But what happens when we leave, everyone? THEY HATE US. I JUST GOT BACK AND WILL HAVE TO RETURN IN 5 MONTHS. When we leave, AS WE WILL EVENTUALLY- FACT- the Iraqies then will go to the euro, I PROMISE YOU, and all we would have accomplished is putting it off for 3-5 years, only we will be _way_ worse off (3-6 tril reasons), those that did it will be safely out of office (most likely OUT OF THE COUNTRY) and now the dumpsters WILL BE EMPTY."
the euro is stronger than the dollar... the USD is collapsing why trading with a dying currency of a dying economy?
saddam was going to trade oil in euro's that was a big reason for the war in the first place.
"I SAY, make them the 52nd protectorate or 51st state! Put our heart where our guns are. NO ONE, not China (too much invested in us), European Union (they have MANY problems), Iran (they are busy doing catch up, need 5-10 years before they can face us on decent footing), or Russia (they will deal! We feed them now! They LOVE our grain prices! I don't think for a second they would fear our oil prices! Why not? We could supply them via PIPELINE, cheap! Iraq COULD NOT HATE US MORE, so make them US! Now. Tell them about HOW STATES IN THE US work semi-independantly- states rights you know! Let them know that we doubt IRAN would grant them as much, as broken a people they are, there IS NO WAY they could resist an eventual take-over by someone they HATE MORE THAN US- Iran."
they hate iran for than the US... yeah... once upone a time that was before the US starting stirring up the hornets nests... iran and iraq now have a common enemy.
as for making iraq part of the US... i'm sure that will go over well... these are people thet will kill themselve to be rid of the plague of the western nations... and i say plague because thats all we (the west) have been in the middle east... with the US being at the forefront now for well over 40 years.
as for china... at any time china could but the US into depression by dumping their 1 trillion USD on the open market as well as any other monitary funds/bond they have. though china is being protective of iran not iraq.
as for russia, they are taking an aggressive stance in return to the US's persistently aggressive global stance, they too have a vested intrest in the region, but again, like china they are more vested in iran.
iran is the most vested in iraq of the locals, due to them being a neighbouring country, they already have a oil pipeline and trade deal in place betwen the two countries. also iran is supposed to be getting some more military equipment newer jets, newer Anti-ship missiles etc. fighting iran isn't the same as fighting iraq... iran actually has a military, iraq's was bisbanded before the US even got there.
i don't even want canada joining with the US and our societies are similar. joining iraq with the US is outlandishly stupid, look at the civil war the US has already caused by imposing themselves and their way of life on them.
Correct me if i'm mistaken but most of us have seen this coming for a few years already, don't even get me started on how much money we've spent on the Iraq war because with that money we could have paid 1/3 of that debt, for those of you who can't do the math, that's 1 trillion dollars spent in the war. Not to mention the 16 trillion dollar they've spent from Social Security. I'm heading to Canada, good luck.
"The government will be giving him money and putting him up in shelters till he dies, unable to tell the difference between the one who made a mistake and wants another chance, and the idiot who should be left to rot."
I know it's so annoying that the government does not offer an incentive to get back to work. A single mother I know wanted to go back to work cause she was sick of staying in watching everyone else she knew work hard. Turns out if she went out and got a job she would actually be earning less than if she just stayed in and took the money from the government. In the end she moved in with her boyfriend and went back to work.
At the moment the system seems to be about supporting people where they are rather then pushing them to where they should be.
