congress and the debt ceiling..

[ruffryder]

What does this have to do with the topic at hand?

just curious if some peoples expectation of the amount of waste in government are consistent with the amount of waste that is in large businesses. Should we really expect the government to have less waste then businesses?

As for the topic at hand, what people don't understand is the debt limit must be raised to pay for items already purchsed, not for the future.

agreed

 

[winter brew]

What does this have to do with the topic at hand?

As for the topic at hand, what people don't understand is the debt limit must be raised to pay for items already purchsed, not for the future.

The ceiling only needs to be raised because govt is careless and wasteful with our money much like big business but they don't have stockholders to satisfy

 

[swampwater]

The amount of waste is unknown...a guessing game. I have heard many estimates between 10-50%. Think of what it takes for a dollar of yours to work it's way through the IRS and by the time it works its way back to some program it passes through MANY hands that all take their piece of the pie. ANY program that can be handled at the state, county or local level has the potential to be more efficient based solely on the fact there will be fewer people eating from the pie.

Here's a fun article, may have posted it before??

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/07/the_debt_ceiling_charade.html

Well as it happens there was one serious effort to discover the actual amount of waste in the federal government. Shortly after being elected Reagan requested Industrialist Peter Grace to make a determination as to where the waste was and how much. Peter formed the Grace commission and without using any government money completed the report in 1984. The report probably has over 600 pages but I will post a link to a compiled packet of about 16 pages. At the time of the study the deficit was running at about 195 billion. The report showed about there was about 424 billion in government waste over a 3 year period and recomended 2,478 cost cutting measures and estimated the 2000 deficit would be 37 billion if the measures were implemented. The deficit had dropped to 152 billion by 1988. Here is a link to the report. I would think that only the numbers have changed and the ratios have actually grown as the government gets bigger the waste would also grow. Swampy

Grace Commission Compilation

 

[diamonddave]

just curious if some peoples expectation of the amount of waste in government are consistent with the amount of waste that is in large businesses. Should we really expect the government to have less waste then businesses?

That's a whole different topic, start a new thread.

 

[milehighassassin]

 

[swampwater]

Great comparing a 2 year record with an 8 year record, kind of misleading isn't it. Maybe you should look at the facts. Swampy

Year Nominal Dollars Inflation Adjusted
1940 2.9 Billion Dollar Deficit 43.935 Billion Deficit
1941 4.9 Billion Dollar Deficit 70.707 Billion Deficit
1942 20.5 Billion Dollar Deficit 266.705 Billion Deficit
1943 54.6 Billion Dollar Deficit 669.396 Billion Deficit
1944 47.6 Billion Dollar Deficit 574.056 Billion Deficit
1945 47.6 Billion Dollar Deficit 561.204 Billion Deficit
1946 15.9 Billion Dollar Deficit 172.992 Billion Deficit
1947 4 Billion Dollar Surplus 38.08 Billion Surplus
1948 11.8 Billion Dollar Surplus 103.958 Billion Surplus
1949 0.6 Billion Dollar Surplus 5.346 Billion Surplus
1950 3.1 Billion Dollar Deficit 27.311 Billion Deficit
1951 6.1 Billion Dollar Surplus 49.776 Billion Surplus
1952 1.5 Billion Dollar Deficit 12.015 Billion Deficit
1953 6.5 Billion Dollar Deficit 51.675 Billion Deficit
1954 1.2 Billion Dollar Deficit 9.468 Billion Deficit
1955 3 Billion Dollar Deficit 23.76 Billion Deficit
1956 3.9 Billion Dollar Surplus 30.42 Billion Surplus
1957 3.4 Billion Dollar Surplus 25.67 Billion Surplus
1958 2.8 Billion Dollar Deficit 20.552 Billion Deficit
1959 12.8 Billion Dollar Deficit 93.312 Billion Deficit
1960 0.3 Billion Dollar Surplus 2.148 Billion Surplus
1961 3.3 Billion Dollar Deficit 23.43 Billion Deficit
1962 7.1 Billion Dollar Deficit 49.913 Billion Deficit
1963 4.8 Billion Dollar Deficit 33.264 Billion Deficit
1964 5.9 Billion Dollar Deficit 40.415 Billion Deficit
1965 1.4 Billion Dollar Deficit 9.436 Billion Deficit
1966 3.7 Billion Dollar Deficit 24.235 Billion Deficit
1967 8.6 Billion Dollar Deficit 54.61 Billion Deficit
1968 25.2 Billion Dollar Deficit 153.72 Billion Deficit
1969 3.2 Billion Dollar Surplus 18.496 Billion Surplus
1970 2.8 Billion Dollar Deficit 15.316 Billion Deficit
1971 23 Billion Dollar Deficit 120.52 Billion Deficit
1972 23.4 Billion Dollar Deficit 118.638 Billion Deficit
1973 14.9 Billion Dollar Deficit 71.222 Billion Deficit
1974 6.1 Billion Dollar Deficit 26.23 Billion Deficit
1975 53.2 Billion Dollar Deficit 209.608 Billion Deficit
1976 73.7 Billion Dollar Deficit 274.901 Billion Deficit
1977 53.7 Billion Dollar Deficit 187.95 Billion Deficit
1978 59.2 Billion Dollar Deficit 192.4 Billion Deficit
1979 40.7 Billion Dollar Deficit 118.844 Billion Deficit
1980 73.8 Billion Dollar Deficit 190.404 Billion Deficit
1981 79 Billion Dollar Deficit 184.07 Billion Deficit
1982 128 Billion Dollar Deficit 281.6 Billion Deficit
1983 207.8 Billion Dollar Deficit 442.614 Billion Deficit
1984 185.4 Billion Dollar Deficit 378.216 Billion Deficit
1985 212.3 Billion Dollar Deficit 418.231 Billion Deficit
1986 221.2 Billion Dollar Deficit 429.128 Billion Deficit
1987 149.7 Billion Dollar Deficit 279.939 Billion Deficit
1988 155.2 Billion Dollar Deficit 277.808 Billion Deficit
1989 152.5 Billion Dollar Deficit 260.775 Billion Deficit
1990 221.2 Billion Dollar Deficit 358.344 Billion Deficit
1991 269.3 Billion Dollar Deficit 420.108 Billion Deficit
1992 290.4 Billion Dollar Deficit 438.504 Billion Deficit
1993 255.1 Billion Dollar Deficit 374.997 Billion Deficit
1994 203.2 Billion Dollar Deficit 290.576 Billion Deficit
1995 164 Billion Dollar Deficit 227.96 Billion Deficit
1996 107.5 Billion Dollar Deficit 145.125 Billion Deficit
1997 22 Billion Dollar Deficit 29.04 Billion Deficit
1998 69.2 Billion Dollar Surplus 89.96 Billion Surplus
1999 125.6 Billion Dollar Surplus 159.512 Billion Surplus
2000 236.4 Billion Dollar Surplus 290.772 Billion Surplus
2001 127.3 Billion Dollar Surplus 152.76 Billion Surplus
2002 157.8 Billion Dollar Deficit 186.204 Billion Deficit
2003 374 Billion Dollar Deficit 430.1 Billion Deficit
2004 413 Billion Dollar Deficit 462.56 Billion Deficit
2005 319 Billion Dollar Deficit 347.71 Billion Deficit
2006 248 Billion Dollar Deficit 260.4 Billion Deficit
2007 162 Billion Dollar Deficit 165.24 Billion Deficit
2008 455 Billion Dollar Deficit 455 Billion Deficit
2009 1416 Billion Dollar Deficit 1416 Billion Deficit
2010 1294 Billion Dollar Deficit 1294 Billion Deficit
2011 1650 Billion Dollar Deficit 1650 Billion Deficit

I think 2009 thru 2011 looks pretty dismal. By the way do you realize the lowest spending per gnp over the last 50 years was guess who. GWB

 

[milehighassassin]

It includes projections...

Take it how you like.

Also note, these are "policies" not actual money spent or budget.

 

[ruffryder]

I think 2009 thru 2011 looks pretty dismal. By the way do you realize the lowest spending per gnp over the last 50 years was guess who. GWB

Don't policy changes have years of ramifications? They don't just end when another president comes into office, do they?

 

[swampwater]

Don't policy changes have years of ramifications? They don't just end when another president comes into office, do they?

Well if you consider that to be the deciosive factor that surely shows the complete ineptness of democratic policy. Swampy

2000 236.4 Billion Dollar Surplus 290.772 Billion Surplus
2001 127.3 Billion Dollar Surplus 152.76 Billion Surplus
2002 157.8 Billion Dollar Deficit 186.204 Billion Deficit
2003 374 Billion Dollar Deficit 430.1 Billion Deficit
2004 413 Billion Dollar Deficit 462.56 Billion Deficit
2005 319 Billion Dollar Deficit 347.71 Billion Deficit
2006 248 Billion Dollar Deficit 260.4 Billion Deficit
2007 162 Billion Dollar Deficit 165.24 Billion Deficit
2008 455 Billion Dollar Deficit 455 Billion Deficit
2009 1416 Billion Dollar Deficit 1416 Billion Deficit
2010 1294 Billion Dollar Deficit 1294 Billion Deficit
2011 1650 Billion Dollar Deficit 1650 Billion Deficit

I see OD's numbers as triple the highest of GWB and he had surpluses the first two years. So you tell me how one can forcast further numbers out for OB and show OB with better numbers, must be creative mathamatics, or dreaming!!

 

[swampwater]

It's called creative mathamatics, or maybe the new math, taking numbers and manipulating them to achieve the goal you original sought. Tom bad the actual numbers show a different story. And I am no apologist for the Busch expenditures, he diid not hold the line and when he lost the congress he spent like a drunken sailor. Swampy

It includes projections...

Take it how you like.

Also note, these are "policies" not actual money spent or budget.

 

[ruffryder]

leave it to swampy to lead us down the bush did it vs obama did it path...

Were are the "start a new thread police"?

The debt problem we are in is from issues before Obama, before Bush, and before Clinton. Our debt problem is due to some fundamental problems in programs of social security, and medicare / medicaid (and our health system in general). Our massive amounts of money spent on defense and wars is a large part of the problem as well.

While it is very easy to get into the blame game, how about we start focusing on the future a little bit more? Or should I start a new thread for that? lol

 

[winter brew]

Some more numbers to look at.....

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/07/what_a_spending_solution_would_look_like.html

 

[ruffryder]

Some more numbers to look at.....

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/07/what_a_spending_solution_would_look_like.html

What is up with the defense spending per gdp numbers? If our country spent the same amount of money as a percentage of gdp that the article stated we did in the past, how much would that be?

 

[winter brew]

What is up with the defense spending per gdp numbers? If our country spent the same amount of money as a percentage of gdp that the article stated we did in the past, how much would that be?

I think the federal spending compared to GDP is a good comparison. The way I see it, this is similar to a person given credit based on their net worth/assets (collateral).

 

[ruffryder]

What explosion in entitlements is the editorial referencing?

 

[winter brew]

There are many .....here's one.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/10/the_real_entitlement_explosion.html

 

[winter brew]

Two..

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/05/good_news_another_trillion_dol.html

 

[snowmobiler]

blue cross went up 12% this week.cool.jumpstart that economy.change.

 

[ruffryder]

There are many .....here's one.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/10/the_real_entitlement_explosion.html

Two..

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/05/good_news_another_trillion_dol.html

Neither of those have anything to do with the situation we are in now, and the last one (your two) shouldn't have real changes as the govt already backs those loans.

From that article...

[FONT=times new roman,times]Shifting all lending authority to the government through its Direct Loan program would save $94 billion over 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Obama would use that windfall to expan[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]d the Pell Grant program, created in 1965 to cover most tuition costs for low-income students. [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times] So it is going to save the govt money, and the govt is then going to use that money for something else. Where did the 1 trillion increase in costs come from? Isn't this a good thing? Increased benefits to the population being paid for by the govt saving money?

So, I ask again, what is the explosion in entitlements? Where are they? What are they? Everyone says that entitlements are out of control, yet people seem to have a hard time even figuring out what they are and how much they actually are.

What gives?
[/FONT]

 

[swampwater]

Ruffy:
leave it to swampy to lead us down the bush did it vs obama did it path...

Were are the "start a new thread police"?

Do you even read all the posts? Or does your typing outrun your brain?
You might be surprised that my posting of the deficit chart was a response to MHA leading us down that path.

Originally Posted by milehighassassin


Policy Changes Under Two Presidents

Ruffy:
The debt problem we are in is from issues before Obama, before Bush, and before Clinton. Our debt problem is due to some fundamental problems in programs of social security, and medicare / medicaid (and our health system in general). Our massive amounts of money spent on defense and wars is a large part of the problem as well.

Who said it started with OB. The problem is he has tripled it and is trying to raise it more instead of doing what is necessary to attack the problem, and it ain't SS. Wasn't OB's campaign promise to end the wars and bring the troops home the first year?

Ruffy:
While it is very easy to get into the blame game, how about we start focusing on the future a little bit more? Or should I start a new thread for that? lol

I think that is exactly what the true conservatives and tea partiers are trying to do, or do you think reducing and capping spending and making the government stop deficit spending is the wrong way to fix the problem? Swampy