Four Corners Media: US Debt

Showing posts with label US Debt. Show all posts

Sunday, March 18, 2012

Spending Money Because It's OPM

Spending Money Because It’s OPM

“I remember when liberals were liberal with their own money” is a quote attributed to Will Rogers. Modern day “spend & tax” liberals, such as President Obama are spending the US taxpayers money without restraint because it is “Other Peoples Money”. We’ll tax other people (especially the rich), because a) they have too much money (class warfare), b) we as liberals (in government) know how to spend it better than you, c) if we don’t have it in the US Treasury now, we’ll just borrow more for taxpayers to pay back later. Former US Senator Bill Armstrong (R-Colorado) stated the appetite for US government spending by Congress this way, “Congress is spending money like a drunken sailor, the trouble is, a sailor is spending his own money!”

Even the moderate to liberal Politico is noting the long term and large spending patterns by the Obama Administration. The federal debt held by the public would still nearly double again from $10.1 trillion at the end of 2011 to $18.8 trillion at the end of 2022. For the current fiscal year ending Sept. 30, CBO is now projecting a shortfall of $1.3 trillion. In fiscal 2013, the deficit will still hover near the $1 trillion mark — about $977 billion. And while it will fall to 2.5 percent of GDP by 2017, it then begins to grow again to 3 percent of GDP by 2022.

The Heritage Foundation has an excellent link, with the US government revenues and spending graphically portrayed in easy to understand charts:

http://www.heritage.org/budgetchartbook

Under the Obama Administration, Federal spending per household jumped from $25,000 per year (per household) to $30,000 per year. It had moderated under a GOP House of Representatives (where the spending bills originate) to $29,401 per household (per year).

The 30-year average tax burden (Federal tax rate) from 1981 to 2010 has been about 18%. The highest average rate was 20% (in year 2000), just prior to President Bush being elected. The projection for the next decade is for average Federal income tax rates to rise from the historical average of 18% to nearly 25%, if Federal spending and taxation are not constrained by Congress and the elected President.

Presently, the lower (bottom half) of US taxpayers only pay 2.7% of the total income taxes collected by Uncle Sam. Whereas the top 5% of income earner (US taxpayers earning over $159,000 per year) are paying nearly 60% of the income taxes collected. The top 1% of income producers (those who create jobs, wealth and economic activity for our country as a whole) are paying 40% of the income taxes collected.

So let’s tax the rich, as per the “class warfare” manta of President Obama! Not so fast. Our history in modern America would suggest the contrary:

“The most dramatic decline in the top individual income tax rate, from 70 percent to 28 percent, occurred during the Reagan Administration, during which tax receipts remained relatively constant as a share of the economy.” Heritage Foundation

http://www.heritage.org/budgetchartbook/income-tax-receipts

And what will be the result of this overspending, over the next 10 years? The Heritage Foundation projects that our US Federal deficit (if spending is unchecked) will reach 100% of our Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by 2022. Then it is “Hello Greece, or Portugal or Italy”! http://www.heritage.org/budgetchartbook/national-debt-skyrocket

What can we do? Tell Congress to stop the US government overspending. Back the Paul Ryan budget bills and policy changes. Vote for fiscal conservatives, who have voting records that actually show “stop the brutal spending” votes. President Obama’s budget numbers show the US debt as a percentage of GDP rising from 40.3% to to 87.4% from 2008 to 2020. Sit back and go with the “wasteful spending money” flow, and we’ll watch our beloved America go broke. Or stand up, and vote the "over spenders" out of office. Here’s the whole set of charts:

http://www.heritage.org/budgetchartbook/contents

Saturday, July 30, 2011

Senator Rubio plan talk about the Budget

Plain talk from US Senator Rubio (R-Florida), from the floor of the US Senate on July 30, 2011:

And here’s the way I would describe it the United States of America more or less -- these are rough numbers but they’re accurate – spends about $300 billion a month. It has $180 billion a month that comes to the federal government through taxes and other sources of revenue and that means that in order to meet its bills at the end of every month it needs to borrow $120 billion.

“Now, for much of the history of this country, there have been increases in the debt limit and the ability to borrow money. But what has happened over the last few years is that it's no longer a routine vote because the people who give us our credit rating are saying too much of the money that you spend every month is borrowed and we want you to show us how over the next ten years you are going to borrow less as a percentage of what you spend.

“And so that's why, for years, where the debt limit was routine vote, it no longer can be. It’s not something that was made up in some conservative think tank. But the reality that we cannot continue to borrow 40% to 41% of every penny that the government spends has brought us to this point.

“So you would think that seeing that, our government and our leaders here in both parties would react to that immediately and work on it.

“And I've heard lot of talk today about delaying tactics and delaying votes. I would argue to you that this issue has been delayed at least for the last two and a half years.

“In the two years before I even came here, this chamber neither proposed nor passed a budget. It is a startling figure that for the last two years this government has operated without a budget. So think about that. Two years have gone by without a budget. The first two years that the President was the president, no budgets.

Source: www.realclearpolitics.com

Thursday, March 4, 2010

Why I Took a Stand (Senator Bunning)

Why I took a Stand

By Jim Bunning US Senator R-Kentucky

I have been serving the citizens of Kentucky for nearly 24 years in Washington. During that time I have been a member of both the House of Representatives and the United States Senate. I have taken thousands of votes in relation to spending the taxpayers' money. I will be the first one to admit that I have cast some bad votes during my tenure, and I wish I could have some of them back. For too long, both Republicans and Democrats have treated the taxpayers' money as a slush fund that does not ever end. At some point, the madness has to stop.

Over a month ago, Democrats passed and President Obama signed into law the "Pay-Go" legislation. It calls on Congress to pay for bills by not adding to our debt. It sounds like a common sense tool that would rein in government spending. Unfortunately, Pay-Go is a paper tiger. It has no teeth. I did not vote for the Democrats' Pay-Go legislation because I knew it was just a political dog-and-pony show to get some good press after some political setbacks. Since the Pay-Go rule was enacted, the national debt has gone up $244,992,297,448.11 (as of Wednesday March 3^rd, that is).

Why now?

Last week, Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., asked to pass a 30-day extensions bill for unemployment insurance and other federal programs. Earlier in February, those extensions were included in a broader bipartisan bill that was paid for but did not meet Sen. Reid's approval, and he nixed the deal. When I saw the Democrats in Congress were going to vote on the extensions bill without paying for it and not following their own Pay-Go rules, I said enough is enough.

Many people asked me, "Why now?" My answer is, "Why not now?" Why can't a non-controversial measure in the Senate that would help those in need be paid for? If the Senate cannot find $10 billion to pay for a measure we all support, we will never pay for anything.

America is under a mountain of debt. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said in a hearing last month that the United States' debt is unsustainable. We are on the verge of a tipping point where America's debt will bring down our economy, and more people will join the unemployment lines. That is why I used my right as a United States Senator and objected.

Only in Washington

After four legislative days of impasse, I reached a supposed deal with Majority Leader Reid to have an up-or-down vote on a pay-for amendment that would fully fund the legislation and not add to the debt. Only minutes before the vote, Democrats used a parliamentary maneuver to set aside my amendment and not vote on the actual substance of it. Only in Washington could this happen. The Democrats did not want to vote on my amendment because they knew they were in the wrong and ignored their own rules. Hypocrisy again rules the day in Washington.

I have 40 grandchildren, and I want them to grow up in a country where they have all of the same opportunities I had as a child. I fear that they will not have those opportunities if Washington continues on its course of spending without paying for it. We are at over $12 trillion in debt. I know many Americans sit around their kitchen table and make the tough decisions. It is time for the politicians in Washington to do the same.

Jim Bunning is a Republican senator from Kentucky. Editorial in the USA Today, March 3^rd, 2010 www.usatoday.com

Sunday, February 21, 2010

Kudlow on Solving US Debt

Finally the gridlock in Washington is slowing down the Democrat majority and their spend, tax and debt raising ways. The spending binge that Obama and his Democrat “bigger government is better” allies in Congress have been on since January 2009 is beginning to slow, as recent elections (GOP governors in New Jersey and Virginia, plus the upset US Senate race victory in Massachusetts by Scott Brown) have changed the political landscape. The Tea Party Movement, quickly dismissed by the Main Street Media (MSM) and Democratic operatives, is gaining traction, as the American people sense something is very wrong with Washington DC: President Obama is proposing US Government overspending with no end in sight.

Well know supply-sider Lawrence Kudlow makes his case for a make over of the approach the Democrats are taking in Washington: Cut the spending, bring the deficit down to 2% or 3% of the GDP and bring taxes into line with pro-growth policies.

Here's the real problem: The Obama budget would take federal spending as a fraction of the economy to 25 percent, roughly a $1 trillion additional spending increase in the out-years. Publicly held federal debt would climb about $18.5 trillion by 2020, more than double what Obama inherited, rising to almost 80 percent of the economy. (FCM blogger note: Greece is on verge of default with 90% debt to GDP ratio).

Rather than tax hikes, I say stop the spending. Outside of defense and entitlements, why not roll back the discretionary budget to 2008?

Or take a look at Harvard professor Martin Feldstein's idea of putting an end to all the new Obama refundable tax credits, which really are nothing more than new spending and government-transfer programs. Feldstein estimates that putting an end to the new "tax expenditures" could save $1 trillion by 2020.

And I would add in the need for a congressional law that sets strict spending-limit rules based on population and inflation. And how about flat-tax reform -- ending all the unnecessary flotsam-and-jetsam tax credits and subsidies -- to broaden the tax base? Why not slash the top tax rate to 20 percent or less for a true flat tax?

Why not stop the multiple taxes on all forms of saving and investing, including capital gains, dividends and inheritances? And why not eliminate the business tax on profits in favor of a sales tax on net revenues that would deduct all investment expenses? That would leave us with a single-rate consumption-based income tax that would grow this economy by 7 percent to 8 percent in the years ahead, just as the economy should grow after a deep recession.

Going back to the debt-to-GDP ratio, I want to grow the denominator (the economy) and reduce the demand for the numerator (spending and borrowing). That means a combination of supply-side tax cuts and firm spending limits.

And we should add in some monetary reform for a stable King Dollar linked to gold or a commodity basket, along with an expansion of free trade, which itself is a tax cut.

In other words, I'm proposing a growth solution to the debt problem. Lower spending is pro-growth. So are lower tax rates. A program like this could get yearly budget deficits down to a manageable 2 percent to 3 percent in a couple of years. And getting the debt ratio back down to something like 50 percent also would be quite manageable. Lawrence Kudlow, 2.20.2010 in www.rasmussenreports.com

Some quick info, via www.wikipedia.com Just search: Lawrence Kudlow.

Thursday, April 9, 2009

The Other (GOP) Federal Budget

The Democrat Majority in the US House and US Senate passed the US Federal FY2010 budget, without one Republican member voting for it, and 20 “blue dog Democrats” voting against it. $3.6 Trillion of largess, earmarks (8,500 of them), increased social spending and decreased military spending. And a structural deficit in the US budget due to overspending by Congress of will be laid at the feet of our children and their children. And, despite promises of only “taxing the rich”, over time the Congress will raise taxes on all American’s, just to cover the new government programs, spending and interest on debt.

So what was alternative budget to the massive Democrat Federal budget, as put forth by the Republicans?

Answering President Obama's challenge for critics to present alternatives, the House Republicans have offered a responsible budget blueprint that:

+Borrows $3.6 trillion less than the President's budget;

+Would create $23,000 less debt per household than the President's budget;

+Keeps federal spending just above 20 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP)—the same level as before the recession;

+Avoids all tax increases and even simplifies the overly complex tax code;

+Includes a temporary moratorium on earmarks; and

+Begins reforming the unsustainable costs of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Budget/wm2377.cfm

The House Republican alternative rejects all tax increases. It would permanently extend the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, as well as the AMT patch. It would also finally reform the complex income tax code by allowing individuals the choice of opting into a simplified tax system with a 10 percent marginal tax rate on incomes below $100,000 and a 25 percent marginal tax rate on incomes above $100,000. It would also encourage economic growth by reducing the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent and suspending capital gains taxes through 2010. From the Heritage Foundation www.heritage.org

Let’s compare the sensible Republican alternative (that unfortunately was defeated by the Democrat majority in the US House in early April 2009) to what is being predicted by the Heritage Foundation of the US tax system in heading higher and by 2050 will be like the high tax countries in Europe:

According to the CBO’s long-run forecast in December 2005, federal taxes under current law will rise from 18.3 percent of GDP to nearly 19 percent within five years and reach almost 24 percent of GDP by 2050. This means that the federal tax burden on Americans, as a proportion of income, will increase by almost one-fourth. When state and local taxes are included, the U.S. tax burden will be comparable to the burden in today’s slow-growth Europe.

From the Heritage Foundation: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/bg1957.cfm

So while the Dems in Congress are claming to be moving to Pay-Go (paying for government programs as you go), what is really happening with a $3.6 Trillion budget and projected $1 Trillion deficits per year is this:

Expand US Government programs by spending money we don’t have, so we’ll borrow it from the rest of the world, to spend it on programs that expand the cost, scope and reach of government, which in turn will raise the public debt and desperate politicians in Congress looking to increase taxes on all Americans to pay for it.

Thus, we are heading towards being more like the country of Greece, whose debt as a country is forecast to exceed 100% of its Gross Domestic Product (the US public debt is $6.4 Trillion, which is about 42% of the US GDP). Greece’s financial problem is that their biggest economic burden is interest on their public debt. And Greece has been remanded by the European Commission to keep their continued deficit spending below 3% of GDP. The US budget deficit (just from the official FY 2010 budget) is 1.2 Trillion, or 8% of the US GDP. However, it is now projected at $1.8 Trillion, which is 12% of US GDP. No wonder France and Germany are lecturing the US on overspending, deficits and reining in government spending.

So where is Greece today? At a standstill, as a nationwide public strike over public sector pay and job losses has brought the country to a standstill Wall Street Journal, Page A11, April 3, 2009 As for a public stimulus by the Greek government? They can’t, as they ran out of money and the EU mandated “3% of GDP budget deficit spending cap” precludes the government from spending money.

Does the US want to become a permanent debtor nation, weakened by financial irresponsibility in Congress due to overspending, overreaching government programs and higher taxes? Under Obama and the Democrats in Congress, the US becoming subject to those countries, banks and individuals who hold US debt and leverage over us. Is that what a free, financially responsible and independent America should be doing? For more and more Americans, the answer is No!

Sunday, March 29, 2009

Obama Doubles Down on US Debt

Doubling Down on Government Debt

What does a $3.6 Trillion dollar budget buy? Well first you have to pay for it with increased taxes, increased debt and less charitable giving. For what? More government programs, oversight and overreaching from Washington, DC. President Obama is determined to double down on Government debt. In fact, at this rate, his budget proposals over the next 5 years will double the US Government debt, that took 200 years to accumulate.

From the www.weeklystandard.com “Well, it's about time. The Beltway is waking up to the realities of President Obama's budget plan, which taxes, spends, and borrows as far as the eye can see. The president's vast new commitments in the areas of health care, energy, and education have already spooked small-government Republicans and the foreign investors who help finance America's public debt. Now even some Democrats are beginning to realize that the president's fiscal policies are unsustainable in the long--and maybe medium--run. What took them so long?” Lead paragraph: A Big, Fat Failure Obama's budget makes a bad situation worse. by Matthew Continetti

US Senator Judd Greg (R-New Hampshire) is leading the loyal opposition as the US Senate is debating the FY2010 US Federal budget. http://budget.senate.gov/republican/

Here are the comments of Senator Greg (ranking Republican on the US Senate budget committee) regarding the proposed Obama FY2010 budget on March 28, 2009:

“But what concerns many of us are his proposals in the budget he recently sent to the Congress that dramatically grow the size and cost of government and move it to the left. It is our opinion that this plan spends too much, taxes too much and borrows too much.”

Senator Greg continues: “In the next five years, President Obama’s budget will double the national debt, in the next ten years it will triple the national debt. To say this another way, if you take all the debt of our country run up by all of our presidents from George Washington through George W. Bush, the total debt over all those 200 plus years since we started as a nation, it is President Obama’s plan to double that debt in just the first five years that he is in office. He is also planning to spend more on the government as a percentage of our economy than at any time since World War II.

“His budget assumes the deficit will average $1 trillion dollars every year for the next ten years and will add well over $9 trillion dollars in new debts to our children’s backs.

He also is proposing the largest tax increase in history, much of it aimed at taxing small business people who have been, over the years, the best job creators in our economy. And further, he is proposing a massive new national sales tax on your electric bill, so that every time you turn on a light switch in your house you will be hit with a new tax, and it averages over $3,000 per household.” US Senator Judd Greg, R-New Hampshire

President Obama and his Democrat supporters in Congress are preparing to double down on spending and government programs, thereby doubling the US debt. Now is the time to write or call your Congressman. And tell you friends that the overspending is out of control at the Federal level.

Monday, March 16, 2009

Is Barack Obama Competent to Govern?

Obama Cabinet appointees who haven’t paid their taxes. The Prime Minister of the most trusted US ally (Great Britain) is mis-handled by the White House. The pork-u-lus Federal Stimulus bill waits 4 days to be signed, as the President is out of town, even though the world is told that the bill should be urgently signed. The Dem operatives in the White House and DNC decide that Rush Limbaugh is public enemy #1. The economy continues to fade and struggle, despite the Obama administration attempts to fix it with new policies. Expanded health care, more government regulations, increased government spending, staggering Federal deficits, and questions from foreign governments on US debt. All of these actions (or inaction) seem to indicate that the new President may be in over his head when is comes to governing. Speaker Pelosi and Senate Leader Reid are known to be weak Congressional leaders, and combined with the rookie Obama administration, no one is quite in charge when it comes to really getting the economy back on track and for government to maintain supporting role that it has historically played.

Even the Democrats and Obama supporters appear to be worried. From the New York Daily News, in a column by Micheal Goodwin (March 15, 2009)

“Not long ago, after a string of especially bad days for the Obama administration, a veteran Democratic pol approached me with a pained look on his face and asked, "Do you think they know what they're doing?" The question caught me off guard because the man is a well-known Obama supporter. As we talked, I quickly realized his asking suggested his own considerable doubts. Yes, it's early, but an eerily familiar feeling is spreading across party lines and seeping into the national conversation. It's a nagging doubt about the competency of the White House.”

For a direct link to the NY Daily News editorial www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2009/03/15/2009-03-15_more_than_a_bad_day_worries_grow_that_ba.html

In an editorial in the Christian Science Monitor www.csmonitor.com , Linda Fieldmann writes on March 11, 2009:

“All the while, the nation remains gripped by its worst economic crisis in decades, and with no end in sight, the topic du jour has become: Is Obama trying to do too much? The Obama administration itself has not hidden the fact that it sees a limited window to enact its agenda, almost like a game of “beat the clock.” As long as Obama’s job approval ratings are comfortably high – currently in the 60s in major polls – he has the political capital to address the pent-up demand for change that is inevitable when the opposition party takes over from an unpopular previous administration. But, there’s only so much a White House and Congress can accomplish, given the deliberative nature of the process, and even members of Obama’s own party are raising warning flags about the magnitude of the new president’s agenda.”

For a direct link: http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2009/03/11/is-obama-taking-on-too-much/

Dave Krugman, Op-Ed columnist for the liberal NY Times www.nytimes.com writes on March 6, 2009: “Many analysts agree. But among people I talk to there's a growing sense of frustration, even panic, over Mr. Obama's failure to match his words with deeds. The reality is that when it comes to dealing with the banks, the Obama administration is dithering. Policy is stuck in a holding pattern.... Why do officials keep offering plans that nobody else finds credible? Because somehow, top officials in the Obama administration and at the Federal Reserve have convinced themselves that troubled assets, often referred to these days as "toxic waste," are really worth much more than anyone is actually willing to pay for them - and that if these assets were properly priced, all our troubles would go away.”

Finally, from the White House Press Corps web site www.whitehousepresscorps.org where the daily highlights between Mr. Gibbs (Obama press secretary) and the national press is featured daily. The question of Friday March 13, 2009:

Question (by Jake) “Just as a quick follow-up, you guys have obviously started a campaign of trying to build more confidence in the economy and in the decisions that you guys have made. Can you just walk us through a little bit how this decision was made -- for the President's new language and Larry Summers' new language, talking about the economy and the investments you guys are making?” Blogger translation: You guys in the White House keep trying to change the conversation or campaign rhetoric, in an attempt to get the economy rolling again? How did you decide? i.e. Does anyone know what they are doing at the White House?

What we are seeing is “on the job training” with an inexperienced President, confident in his public opinion polls and protected by the White House Staff, trying to get a handle on the economy, while pushing his left leaning agenda items all at the same time. And the result: mixed messages, a nervous business community, an American public that can see that their new President is in over his head, and a Congress that figures now is the time for the Majority (Democrats) to push every pet project, program and agenda they can.

The two times in recent US history a Democrat President tried to govern from the left, we experienced the policy fiascos of Jimmy Carter (gridlock, due to so many White House proposals) and a Republican resurgence in reaction to President Clinton’s health(s)care proposals and weakening of the US military. How will the American people respond to President Obama as he moves as fast as he can to the left, in terms of governance?

We are beginning to find out, as the national debt skyrockets, the US government rapidly expands and personal liberties are being infringed upon. A number of Americans are feeling uneasy and wondering just exactly what is going to happen next?

Blog Search on 4C Media