The Check Is In The Mail
by Big Dog on Nov 23, 2009 at 12:02 Political
The federal government is running a huge deficit and the national debt is more than 12 trillion dollars. The interest on that debt is expected to exceed 700 billion dollars a year or 500 billion more than last year. The interest on our debt is half a trillion dollars more than a year ago.
To put this in perspective, the NYT points out:
In concrete terms, an additional $500 billion a year in interest expense would total more than the combined federal budgets this year for education, energy, homeland security and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Our interest on debt is more than several budget items including both wars. When liberals tell you how much money there would be without the wars remind them how much more there would be if we did not have to pay nearly three quarters of a trillion dollars in interest (half a trillion more than last year).
The government is about to have a triple whammy in the not too distant future as Democrats under Obama rack up tremendous new debt, short term borrowing that comes due in the next few months and interest rates that will go up after this fabricated emergency passes.
Obama said he will halve the deficit by the end of his first (and I hope only) term but this will be nearly impossible. Look for him to blame Bush.
Americans are saving more but are still saddled with a lot of personal debt from years of care free credit buying. Many were devastated because they foolishly bought houses they could not afford and are now in real financial trouble. Unfortunately, the people with these kinds of problems are no different than our government which continues to spend as if there is no tomorrow.
Might not be if they don’t get a handle on it.
But that will mean raising taxes on everyone not just those who already pay almost all the taxes. Yes, as hard as it is to believe the so called tax cuts for the rich better helped those in the middle class as the wealthy already pay nearly all the taxes in this country.
But that will change if Obama wants to reduce the debt because there is simply not enough money available from the rich to take care of the problem. If we took 100% of their money we would still not be out of trouble. The money will have to come from everyone so those of you who believed Hopenchange when he said he would not tax you, you are in for a surprise.
He cannot reduce the debt without taxing you so he either lied about reducing it or he lied about taxing you.
Either way, he ran up the debt and the bill will come due.
How’s that Hope and Change working out for you now?
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: debt, lies, Obama, taxes, trillions
Bigd: The interest on that [12 trillion] debt is expected to exceed 700 billion dollars a year or 500 billion more than last year.>>
DAR
By 2019, according to your article.
Bigd:
The interest on our debt is half a trillion dollars more than a year ago.
DAR
Nope. Will be, maybe, by 2019.
Bigd: Our interest on debt is more than several budget items including both wars.>>
DAR
Wrong. The Iraq war alone will cost more like $3 trillion at least. Closer to $5 trillion.
The CBO (2007) estimated cost of $2.4 trillion, for Iraq and Afganhistan, $1.9 for Iraq along. And that’s only to 2017.
“…all on our credit cards with no accountability, with no plan to pay for it,… It will be just one more toxic legacy of this disastrous war we will have to leave our kids to clean up.” –Rep. James McGovern
Bidg: if we did not have to pay nearly three quarters of a trillion dollars in interest (half a trillion more than last year).
DAR
Nonsense! You read your source wrong. That’s an estimate for *ten years* from now.
Anyway, for a good visual of who racked up these debts, see here. Republicans have consistently been far worse for national debt. Not, even, close.
Bigd: “Look for him to blame Bush.>>
DAR
I hope so. Bush crapped the bed with his profound fiscal irresponsibility. Instead of saving during the good times and paying down debt, or borrowing to invest in infrastructure, he preferred to blow things up and kill people.
Observe:
“Public debt in dollars quadrupled during the Reagan and Bush presidencies from 1980 to 1992, and remained at about the same level by the end of the Clinton presidency in 2000. During the administration of President George W. Bush, the debt increased from $5.6 trillion in January 2001 to $10.7 trillion by December 2008,[6] rising from 54% of GDP to 75% of GDP.” Link
And leaving us in an economic ditch, -6% negative GDP and bleeding 700,000 jobs a month. Wow.
Bush legacy for the clean up crew: “The total debt has increased over $500 billion each year since FY 2003,…”
Bigd: he [Obama] ran up the debt>>
DAR
HE ran up the debt?
D.
—————–
“Over the last 75 years, Republican administrations have had an average annual deficit of $83.4 billion. The average for Democratic presidents is one fourth of that, only $20 billion.”
Link.
I think it is clear that I did not say that the debt will be that much this year in the first instance but the second sentence is worded in a confusing manner. And yes, the interest will be three quarters of a trillion and half a trillion more than last year. It is reported to be by 2019 but that will move up. When the Fed begins to raise interest rates the interest on debt will raise by 40 billion dollars for each point.
Combine this with the trillion or so he needs for health care, the trillion he spent on the stimulus and the trillion that 3,5 trillion in his budget and we will be paying a lot of interest a lot sooner than 2019.
You say maybe, I say it will be more. And the thing about budget items is clear that it is the cost as compared to the budget, not the entire cost of the war.
I doubt the war costs as much as you claim but it is expensive, and a Constitutional expense at that.
You keep giving these little items that are from BS sites and have little relevance. Here is something from a place that knows about money:
WSJ
Bigd: “the interest will be three quarters of a trillion and half a trillion more than last year.”>>
DAR
Oh for pity sake. Do I have to read it to you? Your own source:
“…the White House estimates that the government’s tab for servicing the debt will exceed $700 billion a year in 2019, up from $202 billion this year…” NYT
That’s an *estimate* for TEN years from now.
The interest is NOT going up half a trillion in one year. It’s not, as you say: “half a trillion more than last year.”
That’s ridiculous.
Apparently you suddenly lose the ability to read at the grade school level when it involves you being wrong.
D.
I never need you to read me anything. I can comprehend quite well.
The interest on that [12 trillion] debt is expected to exceed 700 billion dollars a year or 500 billion more than last year
Nowhere does it say THIS YEAR.
Is expected means in the future.
However, I did admit that I worded it incorrectly by not saying the interest in 10 years will be half a trillion more than it was last year. The way it was worded was misleading.
However, the interest will certainly rise with inflation. Each point in interest will add 40 billion. A 13% interest will be 520 billion which would be half a trillion. I bet that comes around second quarter (calendar not fiscal) of next year.
Barry has spent more in his first year than even Bush- and the “blame Bush” well ran dry six months ago. When are the liberals gonna grow a pair and accept the responsibility for their own failures, which includes the unemployment levels, the rising deficit, the failed stimulus, the failed cash for clunkers, the outlandish ObamaCare bill the insolvency of Medicare and Social Security, (which could have and should have been fixed first, without beginning a NEW bureaucracy)- This administration is so clumsy and amateurish, the rest of the world has to be laughing at Barry- I know I would be if he were not in control (for now) of MY country.
Yes, the blowback from the financial meltdown that started under Bush is the fault of Obama, just like the terrorist attack that happened under Bush is the fault of President Clinton. You got to love the insanity of it all…
Isn’t it a bummer when we hold your messiah to his words. He said with the stimulus the unemployment rate would not exceed 8.5% and without it it would go to 11%. He got the stimulus and now is at close to 10% (really closer to 17%).
He is now being held accountable. He made certain promises and failed to keep them. They change stories, we could go into a spiral that we might not recover from all the way to no one knew how bad it was. He lies. He has no clue and we are going to hammer him into the ground for his missteps.
I am proud that I am giving him the same chance you gave Bush.
BLK: “Barry has spent more in his first year than even Bush- and the “blame Bush” well ran dry six months ago.”>>
DAR
Your claim is not remotely true of course and, as I informed you before, the cost of Obama’s policy agenda (as opposed to the leftover Bush stuff he is allowing to continue) accounts for about 3%.
Again:
***
“The story of today’s deficits starts in January 2001, as President Bill Clinton was leaving office. The Congressional Budget Office estimated then that the government would run an average annual surplus of more than $800 billion a year from 2009 to 2012. Today, the government is expected to run a $1.2 trillion annual deficit in those years.
You can think of that roughly $2 trillion swing as coming from four broad categories: the business cycle, President George W. Bush’s policies, policies from the Bush years that are scheduled to expire but that Mr. Obama has chosen to extend, and new policies proposed by Mr. Obama.
The first category — the business cycle — accounts for 37 percent of the $2 trillion swing. It’s a reflection of the fact that both the 2001 recession and the current one reduced tax revenue, required more spending on safety-net programs and changed economists’ assumptions about how much in taxes the government would collect in future years.
About 33 percent of the swing stems from new legislation signed by Mr. Bush. That legislation, like his tax cuts and the Medicare prescription drug benefit, not only continue to cost the government but have also increased interest payments on the national debt.
Mr. Obama’s main contribution to the deficit is his extension of several Bush policies, like the Iraq war and tax cuts for households making less than $250,000. Such policies — together with the Wall Street bailout, which was signed by Mr. Bush and supported by Mr. Obama — account for 20 percent of the swing.
About 7 percent comes from the stimulus bill that Mr. Obama signed in February. And only 3 percent comes from Mr. Obama’s agenda on health care, education, energy and other areas.”
LINK.
Read it twice if it help Blake. You’ll learn lots.
Once again Blake, it is Bush’s fault.
Then again…
Thank you for mentioning the interest on the debt is going up. I see today the Saudi’s are contemplating taking only Euro’s for oil.
Somebody has better get a handle on this. Barry Soetoro is the Country’s first undocumented President and we are paying for it.
Adam, you do mean the financial meltdown that started during a Democrat controlled Congress that Bush warned nearly 18 times that trouble was ahead?
You do mean the meltdown that took place after Waters, Frank, Dodd and other DEMOCRATS told everyone that Fannie and Freddie were strong and that there was nothing to worry about.
You do mean the meltdown that took place as a result of years of market and interest rate manipulation by the Fed under both Democrat and Republican presidents, right?
Obama is going in the wrong direction. He is continuing spending policies that are unsustainable. You Dems complained about Bush’s spending and said we needed to bring the deficit down (B-Ho was one of the ones who said it) and now you are spending like there is no tomorrow. If spending money would solve the problem we would have no problem because we have spent too much already.
It is about Dems pushing an agenda that they want to control our lives. This all belongs to Obama now and you can’t keep pointing to Bush.
I recall that you and others said that 9/11 was Bush’s when I said it was the result of Clinton’s policies. You said that it happened on Bush’s watch and it belongs to him.
The over 10% unemployment and the huge deficit as well as the debt all belongs to Obama now. It is on his watch (and because of his policies) so it belongs to him.
You can’t blame Bush forever though I know you will try.
Yes, the same financial meltdown that Bush saw coming but was apparently so preoccupied with his illegal war that he wasn’t that dedicated to averting.
Yes, the same crisis you blame on whatever is politically convenient to you at the time such as Obama when it matters or others times the scary house buying black folks and ACORN.
“If spending money would solve the problem we would have no problem because we have spent too much already.”
Cute. Please don’t quit your day job for a career in economics. That one goes with the idea that it will snow this year so there’s no such thing as global warming.
I’m fine with Obama being held accountable for his successes and failures. I just want at least a kernel of truth to exist in there somewhere.
Your idea of holding Obama accountable was saying “Obama is a failure!” exactly 8 hours into his first day on the job and you’ve somehow managed to lose more credibility on the subject as we’ve gone on. By day 2 it was “Obama is a nazi!”
Your stuck in the silly world where you pretend that because unemployment is higher than what Obama one time estimated it would be then that proves he is a liar. But then again you spent 8 years ignoring the Bush lies so it’s no surprise you still don’t pick up on them correctly to this day.
The war was not illegal- get your head out of your rear-
And barry is a failure- if he had done it right, jobs would have been his first priority, instead of milking these crises to the detriment of at least 10.2% of the population, even though the true number is closer to 17%-
No- he has to back- load his projects, including the ObamaScare bill so we will be paying taxes on this for five years BEFORE this kicks in- that is dishonest on an EPIC scale.
I spent 8 years holding Bush accountable for what I thought he was doing wrong. However, unlike you I did not suffer from BDS where you accused him of wrongdoing with little or no evidence. The very same thing you accuse me of, you were actually doing.
You say Bush did nothing about the impending economic problems. The Congress, which was majority Democrat since 2006 failed to act. The DEMOCRATS voted against anything that even remotely tried to reign in Fannie and Freddie and Democrats kept getting rich and drawing huge salaries.
I think the continuing videos and stories of data dumps coupled with the voter fraud info has sewn up the loose ends and shown once and for all ACORN is a corrupt organization.
As for global warming, we don’t need lower temperatures to show it is a hoax, we only need the thousands of emails from the scientists which demonstrate that they deliberately manipulated data to show something that was not true and that they tried to skew things to manipulate policy.
They have shown what a hoax it is. All the so called settled science you and Darrel cite is phony. And keep in mind that this is from the scientists you all claim should be the ones listened to, not some hack that never met your definition of a climate scientist. The IPCC and all the stuff surrounding it is phony and contrived in order to push an agenda.
Not true science. I love it when the corruption is exposed.
When I said Obama was a failure he was in office a short time but he had a small record to run on.
I used your old Alinksy trick of marginalizing and attacking. He is a commie and we need to defeat him. It is evident that he is a failure.
BTW, you have called Bush the illegitimate president since he was legally elected in 2000. You and guys like Darrel still hold this phony Michael Moore view that the election was stolen (unlike say the Franken election which actually was) and you have called him an illegitimate president ever since so don’t give me your cry baby story because I won’t get in line to kiss Obama’s a$$ like the rest of you.
I don’t like him and what he stands for and I am entitled to that as much as you were entitled to your hatred of Bush. If you can’t see it that way too bad.
You held Bush accountable for what? How?
You don’t have to kiss Obama’s ass and I’ve said that a thousand times. I’m fine with your opposition as long as it’s accurate. If you stick to things like the Democrats’ inability to control spending, or to at least spend more on something that will create jobs, etc., you’ll be OK. If you keep straying into the Glenn Beck style insanity zone where you treat Democrats like they hate and want to destroy America then you have a problem.
If you think I had BDS then take a lesson from me and treat your ODS before it’s too late and you find yourself to be everything you hated about the opposition to Bush.
Immigration amnesty reform, spending, not sending a large military force to fight (if you are going to go, go big), failure to control the border and going out of his way to downplay Islam’s support of radical factions through its silence.
The funny thing is, when I attack the spending, the lack of job creation, the idea that a stimulus will help, the idea of health care takeover as a bad idea or that cap and tax will harm us I am attacked by you and others as a racist who should not quit his day job (though my day job is in medicine) and that I am a radical neo nazi.
It is no win. Because regardless of what you say, each time I attack any item I am portrayed as a racist who is out of touch.
Beck is closer to the truth than you are.
You are just imagining that I call you racist as a knee jerk reaction. Yet, when is the last time I called you a racist over something? We spend a good portion of our week arguing with each other here so if that were true it would have to be pretty recent. I don’t think you’re a neo nazi though, by the way. You’re not an ignorant moron, you’re just a partisan conservative.